“PARETO ON THE RULING CLASS AND PLUNDER”

By David M. Hart

[Created: 4 February, 2026] [Revised: 4 February, 2026]

This is part of a collection of Papers by David M. Hart

Abbreviations:

• ATS / AST = Un’applicazione di teorie sociologiche / An Application of Sociological Theory (1900)
• CEP = Cours d'Économie politique / A Course in Political Economy (1896-97)
• FT = Fatti e teorie / Facts and Theories (1920)
• MEP = Manuelle d'Économie politique (1909) / Manuale di economia politica (1907) / A Manual of Political Economy
• SS = Les Systèmes socialistes / Socialist Systems (1902-3)
• TD = Trasformazione della democrazia / The Transformation of Democracy (1921)
• TSG = Trattato di sociologia generale (1917) / Traité de sociologie générale (1917-19) / A Treatise on General Sociology

Opening quote

… il metodo di tosare le pecore è stato perfezionato (ATS (1900), p. 436) [1]	the method of shearing the sheep has been improved
… la pecora sarà mangiata dal lupo ; rimane solo che chi sa e può non si faccia pecora. (AST, p. 433) [2]	the sheep will be eaten by the wolf ; the only thing left is for those who know and can, not to become sheep)

Pareto wrote this in July 1900 after having witnessed first hand for 20 years how the recently unified Italian state set about "shearing its sheep". He had been one of those sheep as an engineer and manager of several firms in the railway and iron foundry business before his retirement and move to academia in 1893. He then spent the next 30 years observing and writing about the process of "shearing the sheep" in a more scientific and abstract manner in a handful of significant works of economic and sociological theory which were peppered with historical and often acerbic insights into the origin, development, and probable future course of the "shearing industry." This essay from 1900, roughly half-way into this long intellectual journey, is a good place to start reading about his theory of elites, class rule, exploitation, and plunder, or what I will call simply his "theory of class".

Pareto's "Problem"

The American sociologist Christopher Adair-Toteff has argued that Pareto had a "problem" in that the sociology profession (and I would argue also the economics profession as well) ignored his work for a long time for many reasons. [3] Primarily in Toteff's view it was because of his strong individualist methodology. Pareto was interested in how individuals thought, acted, and made choices between alternative courses of action, whereas academic sociologists were more interested in the bahaviour of groups. Although Adair-Toteff does not discuss this, I think another key reason is his very strong liberal abhorrence of coercion and violence which, even though he said he tried to keep such moral judgements out of works of "pure economics" and "scientific" sociology, he could not help making his position on this topic very clear to the attentive reader. Only a handful of scholars have appreciated the role coercion and violence (and importantly "plunder") played in the thought of Pareto, such as Christopher Adair-Toteff, [4] Silvano Belligni, [5] and the Austrian economist Murray Rothbard. [6]

Concerning the specific issue of class, I believe there are five problems the reader faces in trying to understand Pareto's theory of class. The first is the fact that he was bilingual and wrote in both French (his mother tongue) and Italian, thus the terms he uses are different according to when he was writing, for what audience, and in what language. Another problem is that his ideas evolved over time and at times he would give preference to one term over another, such as happened in his use of the related terms "aristrocacy", "elite," and "class." A third is that he often claimed to be developing a value-free social and economic theory which could be expressed in his "logico-experimental" format using mathematicial expressions, graphs, and set theory but would undermine this by also using many terms which were brimming full of value judgements, such as "plunder", "exploitation," coercion", "fraud", "privilege," "parasitism", and "illegitimate," or by inserting clearly value-laden assessments and observations about people and events which were buried deep in his copious footnotes. A fourth difficulty lies in the complex terminology which he created to describe his theory of how ideas influence human behaviour; namely his disinction between "residues" (deep-seated and often unarticulared reasons why people think, say, and do things) and "derivations" (the reasons people give afterwards in a more articulate form to explain or justify what they thought, said, or did). This can be both confusing and distracting to the reader and so it is something we will leave aside for the moment in order to focus on his theory of class. The fifth difficulty is that Pareto never brought together his scattered and ever expanding thoughts on class and exploitation into one volume where he could methodically and coherently set forth his theoretical and historical arguments. They are either split up into parts which were published in different books at different times, or when they are concentrated in one book (such as the TGS) the discussion is split across lengthy footnotes over hundreds of pages which are often hard to follow in spite of his complex system of numbering the sections and the cross-references between them.

These difficulites have not served him well. Economists who were interested in his theory of equilibrium and efficiency were not interested in spending time trying to follow his theory of class analysis and so ignored it (even though he thought it was an integral part of his overall broader economic theory). And sociologists throughout the 20th century largely ignored the more "economic" and radical liberal aspects of his socological theory in order to focus on only one aspect, namely his theory of "the circulation of elites". They completely ignored the long liberal tradition of thinking about class of which Pareto was an important member. [7] Marxist theories of class came to dominate the profession, even though Marx "choked" when it came to writing the chapter on class in his magnum opus. [8] He was not able to reconcile the many contradictions within his own economic theory and the chapter was never finished. Pareto was one of several liberal economists at the end of the 19th century who criticised at some length these logical contradictions and errors of Marx. [9] Another very important critic of Marx who was a contemporary of Pareto's was the Austrian economist Böhm-Bawerk who also interestingly wrote a piece on economic sociology at roughly the same time as Pareto. [10]

On the other hand, in one sense Pareto probably wrote too much and never organised his thoughts in a way which others could follow easily. Some later sociologists tried to rectify this situation, like Bucolo and Finer, whose anthologies of some of Pareto's key writings on class were published some time ago (1966 in the case of Finer, and 1980 with Bucolo) the latter under the title of "The Other Pareto", as if to suggest, correctly in my view, that there was another side to Pareto which scholars had unjustly neglected. [11] Fortunately more recently there has been considerable work done in the field of "economic sociology" by scholars like Richard Swedberg in Sweden and the United Sates, [12] Christopher Adair-Toteff also in the United States, [13] and Philippe Steiner in France, [14] where the work of Tocqueville, Durkheim, Weber, Pareto, and Schumpeter are getting some attention. Unfortunately, the older French liberal and free market tradition of which Pareto was a part (Say, Comte, Dunoyer, Bastiat, and Molinari) is still largely ignored or misunderstood except for a handful of sociologists, such as Robert Leroux [15] and the present author, [16] who are sympathertic to and knowledgable about this "other tradition." But recent surveys of the field continue to ignore or downplay the liberal contribution and give far too much attention to the Marxist and anti-free market traditions of thinking about political power, class, and exploitation. [17]

Even within the free market camp most Public Choice and mainstream free market economists are not familiar with this older classical liberal tradition of thinking about class. There recently has emerged a school of thought which is concerned with what is called "political captialism" or "crony capitalism", [18] which is quite similar in many ways to this older liberal school but they do not refer to any of the classic works such as those by Pareto, let alone earlier works by Bastiat or Molinari. There have been a few tentative steps taken by some in the Austrian school to apply Austrian insights to the study of sociology [19] but its application to the study of class still seems to be a bridge too far. [20]

It is the hope of the editors of this volume that this misperception and neglect will be at least partly rectified by the publication of the works collected here.

An Overview of Pareto's Theory of Class and Plunder

Introduction

The classical liberal tradition, of which Vifredo Pareto was a member, believed that there were only two ways of acquiring wealth, either by means of peaceful and voluntary production and exchange with others (known as the "industrial" or "economic" means), [21] or by means of the use of force to take wealth which had already been produced by others (known as the "militant" or "political" means). [22] The former was "primary" in the sense that wealth had to be created or produced first before it could be taken or "plundered" by someone else.

A second key idea was that the state, if it had any function at all (and some radical liberals believed that it had no legitimate function), was strictly limited to that of the "nightwatchman state", i.e. to protect the life, liberty, and property of the citizens and to provide the legal framework in which production and exchange could take place. [23] When the state went beyond these very minimal and limited functions it was no longer the defender of the people's rights to life, liberty, and property but had become one of the criminals it was supposedly created to prevent from attacking the people. Pareto was a supporter of the latter liberal view of the proper role of the state.

However, he was also a realist who understood that historically the state had rarely been limited in its powers and for sound economic reasons which he was at pains to explain to others. The main reason was the fact that producing and exchanging things were costly activities (in time, effort, and the use of raw materials) and taking the things which others had already produced was thought to be less costly (although it was not costless as Pareto also realised and discussed). The existence of a "government machine" [24] which could also be used as "une machine à spoliation" (a machine for plundering) [25] was too tempting for some individals not to use for their own benefit. Thus, over time a small minority of individuals, an "elite" or "aristocracy", were able to take control of this "machine" and formed "la classe governante" (the governing or ruling class) which was able to exploit or "plunder" (spolier, spogliare, dépouiller) "la classe governata" (the governed class). We will discuss Pareto's theory of class and the governing elite in a section below. First, we will discuss Pareto's theory of plunder on which his theory of class rested.

Plunder

Pareto referred to plunder many times in his journalism but he only began to formalise his ideas in the lectures on political economy he gave at the University of Lausanne in the 1890s which he also published as a series of books: Cours d'Économie politique (A Course in Political Economy) (1896-97) and Les Systèmes socialistes (Socialist Systems) (1902-3).

According to the orthodox view of the origin of the state it was orignally established to protect the lives, liberty, and propety of the citizens living under its jurisdiction. If it sometimes strayed from this important task it was an aberration which could be corrected by removing any "bad elements" which had entered the government, either by appealing to the king (if one lived under a monarchy) or by voting for a new government (if one lived in a democracy). However, as a realist Pareto understood that the two different aspects of the state, the protective state and the plunderous state, had arisen and continued to live side-by-side. The problem for him was how to limit the predatory side of the state to as small a size as possible. As we will argue below, having lived through the rise of the democratic state in the newly unified Italy, the ravages of the First World War, the Bolshevik revolution, and the rise of fascism the likelihood of limiting the size and power of the predatory state was slim and so Pareto was rightly very pessimistic about the future.

Pareto thought there were two different types of plunder: "la spoliation directe " (direct plunder) [26] by which the state (or individuals) used outright violence to take the property of others (confiscation or taxation), to engage in war, or to force others to work for it (as in slavery or serfdom); or "la spoliation indirecte " (indirect plunder) by which the state used its coercive power to pass legislation to enact tariff protection, the granting of monopolies and other privileges to private industries, and by debasing the currency (which robbed people of the value of the money in their pockets).

Another related pair of types of plunder were "illegal plunder" (private individuals who were thieves and robbers) and "legal plunder" (or groups or individuals who were "permitted" to engage in plunder with the aid of the law). This pairing of types of plunder was first developed by Frédéric Bastiat in the 1840s [27] and was taken up and revised slightly by Pareto fifty years later.

In his theory of plunder the modern world was evolving away from a state in which direct plunder had been the norm and towards one in which indirect plunder was becoming the norm.

In his major works written between 1896 and 1917 Pareto referrred to "plunder" in its various word forms over 60 times in the CEP (1896), 50 times in SS (1902), and in the TSG (1917) over 30 times. In his shorter essay ATS (1900) he referred to it 11 times. He also used similar words mulitple time, such as "approprier" (appropriate), "voler" (steal), and "dépouiller" (pillage, plunder).

Here we can only summarise some of his ideas about plunder given the limitations of space.

• the acquisition of another person's property by means of force is plunder, whether it is done outside the law ("la spoliation contre la loi") or with the help of the law ("la spoliation au moyen de la loi") [28]
• economists have avoided studying plunder even though it is a universal phenomenon which has costs and benefits for both individuals and society as a whole [29]
• governments have become a "une machine à spoliation " (a machine for plundering) [30]
• plunder is a cause of "la lutte des classes" (class strugle or conflict) as the plundered class resists having its property taken and the plunderers wish to maintain or expand the benefits they enjoy from it [31]
• those who do the plundering hide their activities under a cloak of legitimacy, as being necessary for law, order, morality, and religion [32]
• in a democracy plunder by a few for the benefit of a few is replaced by "la spoliation réciproque " (reciprocal plunder) of the many by the many as he predicted would happen in a democracy and under socialism [33]
• plunder will not come to an end because people accept the economic arguments about its costs and inefficiencies, or the moral arguments aginst its injustice, but, since Marx was right in Pareto's opinion, [34] only as a result of the struggle of the plundered classes to stop it
• one of the most insidious forms of plunder is the debasement of the currency because it is hard to see and effects the poor the most [35] . In some of the harshest words he could muster, he denounced inflation of the currency as "une spoliation directe et violente d'un certain nombre d'épargneurs, souvent choisis au hasard, uniquement en considération de leur richesse ; elle correspond en quelque sorte à la chasse des animaux sauvages" (direct and violent plunder of a certain number of savers, often chosen at random, soley because of their wealth; in some ways it is like hunting down wild animals) [36]

His conclusion was that the people who did the plundering and benefited personally from it comprised the "plundering class" who were also the "ruling class". Those who were plundered comprised the "plundered class" and thus the "class who were the ruled".

The Development of Pareto's Theory of Class

Pareto the Businessman and Free Trade advocate

Pareto became a theorist of class analysis by a series of gradual steps. He began commenting on political and economic affairs when he was a businessman during the 1870s and 1880s. He was involved in local Florentine politics and wrote articles for the press on the political corruption and economic favouritism he saw all about him. This naturally got him thinking about who benefited from government intervention (especially tariffs), subsidies to well-connected businessmen, and government contracts. It is not clear when he first came across the writings of Frédéric Bastiat who had been the leading advocate for free trade in France in the late 1840s but it was probably during this period in Pareto's life. Bastiat's best selling work was the two volumes of his collected Economic Sophisms in which he debunked the arguments of the protectionists and laid out his theory of plunder. [37] In Bastiat's view society had been ruled for centuries by "la classe spoliatrice" (the plundering class) over "la classe spoliée" (the plundered class); that domination by a "ruling class" was a universal feature of society, and that this domination and plundering had evolved over the centuries through various stages such as war and conquest, slavery, theocracy, monopoly, bureaucratic government, and soon socialism (if the socialist revolutionaries of 1848 had had their way). One group of plunderers would become dominant for a period of time and then would be replaced by another group as economic conditions changed. [38]

This "plundering" (la spoliation) was achieved by a combination of the direct use of coercion and "la ruse" (trickery and deception) which was an indirect form of coercion in his mind. The outright use of coercion to acquire wealth by means of plunder still took place in the modern world (Bastiat had in mind the activities of Napoléon Bonaparte) but it was overshadowed by another form which he called "la spoliation légale" (legal plunder). By this he meant the use of the state's coercive power by a small group (such as privileged landowners, favoured industrialists, those who lived off state contracts and pensions) to have laws passed in their favour to acquire the wealth of others "legally" (such as tariffs and subsidies voted on by a legislative body). Bastiat died in 1850 before he could finish his planned multi-volume "History of Plunder". A small number of political economists followed in Bastiat's footsteps, most notably Gustave de Molinari who would go on to write his own multi-volume history of the evolution of the state and the privileged classes who fought to control it for their own benefit. [39] Pareto mentions both Bastiat and Molinari very favourably in a handful of footnotes, which shows clearly that he knew and admired their work on class and plunder, [40] but for some reason historians have not followed these leads in their analysis of Pareto's thinking on these topics.

Pareto's clearest statement on this key topic was in CEP (1896) in the chapter on "La physiologie sociale" (The Physiology of Society) where he used a slightly different pair of terms to Bastiat's. He makes the disinction between "la violence légale" (legal violence) and "la violence illégale" (illegal violence) but the use of this violence is for the same purpose, namely the "transfer of wealth from certain individuals to other individuals" or "the appropriation of wealth".

Perhaps in this period of his life Pareto thought that he might emulate Bastiat by writing popular free trade pieces for the press and running for political office. He was able to do the former, but he failed to achieve the latter. He eventually tired of running a business and sought the life of an academic where he could pursue his ideas at greater depth.

Pareto the Academic Economist

In 1893, at the age of 45, Pareto accepted a position at the University of Lausanne to replace Léon Walras (1834-1910) as professor of political economy, a position he held for 16 years until he resigned in 1909. He used his mathematical talents to formalise economics by the careful use of equations, graphs, the close examination of economic data, and the rigorous logical categorisation of concepts. He called this "pure economics" or "experimental economics" as opposed to the older form of "political economy" which was more philosophical and discursive in its approach. It was during this "academic period" that he published his lectures as formal treatises, such as Cours d'Économie politique (A Course on Political Economy) (1896-97) [41] and Les systèmes socialistes (Socialist Systems) (1902), [42] a shorter introductory summary of his work Manuale di economia politica (A Manual on Political Economy) (1906 - a French version was published in 1909), [43] as well as many more formal papers. He also wrote a regular column or "Chronicle" for the leading academic journal Giornale degli Economisti (52 were published between 1893 and 1897) in which he commented on economic events. It should be noted that he wove his theory of class into his more formal writings from the very beginning suggesting that he saw it it as being a key component of his larger theory of economics, or what we call today "economic sociology".

For example the early work Cours d'Économie politique contained a 50 page concluding chapter "La physiologie sociale" (The Physiology of Society) where there was a lengthy discussion of plunder and the struggle between various classes to get control of this plunder. [44] It is similar to the important chapter on plunder which Bastiat included at the beginning of his second series of Economic Sophisms which he published at the beginning of 1848 called "La Physiologie de la Spoliation" (The Physiology of Plunder). [45]

He did the same five years later in his extended critique of the theory of socialism and the likely outcome of socialist policies if they were ever to be implemented, Les systèmes socialistes (1902). [46] One of the key points he made in this work was the fact that ALL political systems, even a future socialist one, would result in rule by a small elite or ruling class which would use the power of the state to further its own interests at the expence of ordinary taxpayers and workers. He had made the same argument in his discussion of democracy which was spreading across Europe as the new nation states which were emerging in Germany and Italy, as well as in the more established states such as Britain, where the franchise was gradually expanded and mass political parties (such as the Labour Party in Britain and the Socialist Paties in France and Germany) became active in politics. This was repeated in his more popular "Manual" (1906, 1909) where he discussed his theory of elites at some length in the opening two chapters. [47]

Also during his time in academia he wrote more narrowly focussed articles in which he discussed the history and theory of elite exploitation and rule in considerable detail. Since he had been well educated in the classics he made many references to Greek and Roman history. [48] He also drew upon his deep reading in more contemporary legal and political history such as the work of Sumner Maine and Hippolyte Taine which was unusual for an economist then or now. The most important of these articles was “Un’ applicazione di teorie sociologiche” (An Application of Sociological Theory) which he published in July 1900 in a professional sociology journal rather than an economics journal, a translation of which we include in this volume. [49]

Retirement and his Magnum Opus

After inheriting some money Pareto decided in 1909 to retire and move to an estate outside of Geneva in order to write a treatise on sociology. This proved to be a massive undertaking and the result was a very long 1700 page work of 1.1 million words with elaborate and lengthy footnotes and other Notes, and analytical tables of contents, all of which had a precise system of section numbering (some 2,612) and hundreds of cross-references between them, which was the product of his mathematical engineer's mind. The project was delayed because of the outbreak of WW1 and the Italian language version eventually appeareed in 1917 (Trattato di sociologia generale (1917) ) and a French one between 1917 and 1919 (Traité de sociologie générale (1917-19)). [50]

Pareto was disappointed by the reception his treatise received. Of course, the timing of its publication could not have been worse with the war and the chaos and political turmoil which followed in the war's aftermath. The economics profession did not know what to make of his very lengthy discussion of the role of ideas in human action ("residues" and "derivations") and his detailed historical and sociological observations about class exploitation and rule by elites. Some reviewers accused him of having abandoned economics for the newer discipline of sociology; wheras Pareto thought he was deepening and broadening the study of economics by engaging in what has now become the field of "economic socology" or "sociologial economics". [51] There was also the problem of language. As academic economics shifted both its geographic location and the primary language in which it was written from multi-lingual Europe to the mono-lingual English speaking Great Britain and the United States during the interwar period the lack of an English translation until 1935 restricted the spread of Pareto's ideas.

Another factor was the publication of two collections of his previous writings just before his death, Fatti e teorie (Facts and Theories) (1920) [52] and Trasformazione della democrazia (The Transformation of Democracy) (1921) [53] which many readers falsely associated with an attack on liberalism and support for the emerging Fascist movement in Italy. The latter was rather a critique of the "transformation" of democrcacy into a new form of class rule and exploitation and not a rejection of the basic principles of liberalism which Pareto held throughout his life, even though his hope for a liberal future had dramatically waned in his last years.

Key Aspects of Pareto's Theory of Class

The Extence of an "Aristocracy" or "Elite" is a universal phenonemon; and there are two kinds of elites: one based on the use of coercion and the other on voluntary interactions among people

I popoli, salvo brevi intervalli di tempo, sono sempre governati da un'aristocrazia, intendendo questo termine nel senso etimologico e volgendolo a significare i più forti, energici e capaci, così nel bene del resto come nel male. (ATS, p. 408) [54]

People, except during brief intervals, are always governed by an aristocracy, understanding this term in its etymological sense and using it to mean the strongest, most energetic, and capable individuals, both for good and for ill. (AST, p. 408) [55]

Another quote:

… on peut distinguer dans une société l'élite, la partie aristocratique, au sens étymologique (aristos = meilleur) et une partie vulgaire; mais il faut toujours se rappeler qu'on passe insensiblement de l'une à l'autre.

… in society one can make a distinction between the elite or the aristocratic part, in the etymological sense (where "aristos" means better) and a common or vulgar/popular sense; but one must always keep in mind that it moves imperceptibly from one to the other.

La notion de cette élite est subordonnée aux qualités que l'on recherche en elle. Il peut y avoir une aristocratie de saints, comme une aristocratie de brigands, une aristocratie de savants, une aristocratie de voleurs, etc. Si l'on considère cet ensemble de qualités qui favorisent la prospérité et la domination d'une classe dans la société, on a ce que nous appellerons simplement l'élite. (MEP (1909)) [56]

The idea of this elite depends upon the qualities that one is interested in. There can be an aristocracy of saints, just as there can be an aristocracy of robbers, an aristocracy of scholars, an aristocracy of thieves, etc. If one thinks about the collection of qualities which promotes the prosperity and the domination of one class in a society one has what one can simply call an elite.

The central claim in Pareto's theory of class is that the existence of an "elite" or an "aristocracy" in almost every area of human activity is a universal phenonomenon. The evidence for this comes from observation of exisiting human socieites and the study of history. Pareto draws upon his classical education, his study of European history (especially the Renaissance and early modern period on which people like Machiavelli wrote), and his observations of the society in which he lived.

He oscillates between using the two terms which is a source of confusion as both terms imply that there exists a small group of people who are "better" ("aristos") at doing something and will be sought out by others because of their better skill or knowledge or experience in doing that thing. They thus form an "elite" within that group. The difference in the terms comes about because of the way those "elite" individuals use their better skill or knowledge and profit from it. One elite group might "rise to the top" because other people voluntarily seek them out to pay for their advice, the services they provide, the things they make, and so on. On the other hand, another elite group might "rise to the top" because they have other skills such as their ability to use coercion ("the lions") or to deceive others ("the foxes"). They thus form a true "aristocracy" in the sense that they are able to create a system of "rule by those who are better".

Here Pareto is using a dichotomy of means which is central to the classical liberal tradition of which he was a part which goes to Jean-Baptiste Say and his followers Charles Comte, Charles Dunoyer, Frédéric Bastiat, and Gustave de Molinari. Similary for Pareto there were two means by which "those who were better" (the elites) might rise to prominence, either voluntarily and peacefully, or by force and deception. In any given society there would exist both kinds of elites at the same time. In Pareto's terminology there were "the governing elite" (“la classe dirigente”, “la classe dominante", "la classe eletta di governo") who had access to political power and were good at using it, and "non-governing elite" ("la classe eletta non di governo ") who might be at the top of their given profession or trade but who did not have access to political power, either because they were excluded for the time being (but sought to be included at some time in the future), or because they refused to seek and use political power for moral reasons.

The Composition of an elite is fluid and changes over time: elites rise and fall; they "circulate"; they "christallise"

Pareto is most interested in the composition of the "ruling elite" or the "ruling class", how it came to be in a position of power, how it overcame its rivals for power, how it adjusts (or not) to changing circumstances, how it rejuvenates itself (or not) by absorbing new members, and what happens to it over time if it does not adapt or change.

This is interest to him because he was living through a period of great change in European societies which had to be understood and explained. The dark shadow which lay over Europe was of course the changes brought about by the French Revolution and the rise of Emperor Napoleon. These changes involved the rise of nationalism as a binding and unifying force for societies like the fragmented states of the German and Italian speaking parts of Europe (most German states were "unified" under Bismarck and Prussian militarism by 1871; Italian unification took place between 1861 and 1871); the expansion of the franchise to include most males; the rise of new democratic and socialist parties with their own poltical agendas which were radically different from the traditional elites who had controlled the political assemblies previously; and the increase in wealth of both the middle and working classes as a result of increased international trade and industrialisation. All this meant demands by new groups to control the institutions of the state so they could divert spending and other benfits to themselves and away from the traditional elites who currently ran the state. Pareto had observed that these new groups, whether middle class or working class, had produced their own "elites" which had risen to positions of leadership within the political parties, the trade unions, and other organisations like the press.

The question to be solved in the near future was how willing the old elites (the large land-owners, favoured industrialists and commercial interests, the church, and the military) were to allow the new elites to participate in drawing up legislation, setting taxation and spending policies, and curbing the most egregious examples of their special privileges. Based upon his study of the past there were examples of elites which were "open" and willing to admit new members, thus diverting the pressures for radical change. Pareto called this process "the circulation of elites" (“la circolazione della classe eletta”, "circulation des elites"). Other examples, like France on the eve of the French Revolution were both "closed" to accepting new members, and "decadent" in that their privileges were both excessive and garish. These societies eventually suffered from what he called "christallisation" of the elites, [57] where the lack of movement of elites resulted in stagnation, resentment on the part of those excluded from exercising power, and the possibility of overthrow, either by disgruntled would-be new elites from within, or military defeat and conquest by more dynamic foreign elites from outside.

The more "open" elites could maintain their power for centuries and if they did not drain too much of the surplus wealth away from the broader society but promoted economic development so that other classes might also benefit then they in fact served a positive social purpose.

Elites are not homogeous: there are different kinds of elite depending on the stretegy they adopt to get into and stay in power (lions or foxes); there is a hierarchy within elites who jostle for power and postion

Pareto was also aware that the ruling elite was not homogeous in its composition, that in fact there were several layers with the ruling elite. In a sense the "elite" had its own "elite" within itself, a smaller number of top key leaders, "un capo" or "un chef" or a "committee", [58] who set the overall direction the government would take and appoint some of its members to key positions of power and influence. Beneath the leadership group there were many more "subalterns" who benefited from having jobs within the bureaucracy which were relatively well paid and with good working conditions. They were the "clientele" of those with real power. Then there were all the recipients of government contracts, special legal privileges (such as monopolies), or subsidies of various kinds. As Pareto was writing his essays, the political parties and the state bureaucracies were developing sophisticated procedures for "processing" the ever growing number of requests by individuals, corporations, businesses, and other groups for special treatment, exemptions, privileges, grants, contracts, and jobs for themselves and their children. This created a kind of "pyramid" of graft and privilege only the very peak of which might be truly considered to be the "ruling elite".

At the bottom of the pyramid were an itinerant group of thugs who could be called upon to "rough up" political opponents during elections or intimidate strike breakers (on behalf of the unions) or business competitors (on behalf of favoured businesses with political connections).

At the top of the pyramid there were at least two significant sub-groups who contended for control of the main body of the elite. There were divided according to Pareto's schema into "the lions" and "the foxes". The "lions" were those who were more ruthless in their approach to seeking and keeping power. [59] They, like a ferocious meat eating lion, were prepared to use violence to achieve their goals and were prepared to fight to stay in power. They were also prepared to take risks if the stakes (pun = steaks??) were high enough. The other group, "the foxes", were more cautious in their approach. They were prepared to make deals with other groups to get what they wanted, and to lie, cheat, and deceive others instead of using outright force. At any given time, a ruling elite would consist of people from both groups but with one group predominating over the other according to the particular circumstances. In periods when threats to their rule were greater for example, the "lions" might predominate over the "foxes." Pareto was also aware of the danger faced by an elite if they got out of the habit of using violence to stay in power, and were unable or unwilling to use it when faced by an existential threat. They could be swept aside and be replaced by a new elite which was willing to do so.

Elites justify their existence on ideological grounds

A theme which became more prominent in his later writings, especially the TSG, was the important role that ideas (or "ideology") played in human behaviour. We can see the beginnings of this new emphasis in the AST with his comments on "religion". Exploitation of one group by another was not just a matter of economic self-interest or love of power for its own sake. It was also a product of the ideas people held about themsleves and the world (material or spiritual) in which they lived and worked. These ideas were not "rational" (in his terminology) but the result of "non-rational" and deep "residues" (underlying customs, practices, and traditions) which were only later justified more formally by supposedly "rational" and coherent arguments and philosophical systems of thinking which he called "derivations". He came to appreciate this in his study of the role played by one powerful set of ideas, namely religion, in the beginning of organised Christianity under the Romans and the Protestant Reformation. Religious ideas were both used to oppose existing class rule and exploitation (say by the Romans over the early Christian Church, or rule by the Catholic Church over religious dissenters in the 16th century) and to justify new kinds of class rule and exploitation (say by the new Protestant states which emerged after the Reformation over their dissenters).

Using this as a model, Pareto expanded his analysis of the importance of ideas to include democracy and socialism, which he regarded as new kinds of "religion" which served very similar functions as the "old religion" did. It gave its supporters a certain purpose and fervour to bring about change in the nature of government rule; it provided justification and legitimacy of rule by a new elite; and it gave this new elite a new energy which the older elites may have lacked as they became "decadent" over time. He explored the religious nature of the "socialist system" of thought in much more detail in his two volume work Les Système socialistes based on his lectures at the University of Lausanne in 1902 soon after he wrote the TSG.

Yet, like all rule by elites, the new democratic and socialist elites would inevitably follow the same path as the elites which they had replaced. Once in power they will eventually compromise their original ideals , giving way to bureaucracy, opportunism, hypocrisy, exploitation, and oppression. And like other religions he predicted that the broader socialist movement (and most likely the democratic one as well) would break down into warring sects, break away churches and factions, and have its own dogmas and martyrs.

Elites form alliances with other groups to get into power and stay in power

For Pareto, the ruling elite was not a monolothic entity but a complex structure of component parts with links between each other and with other groups outside as well, all of which were in constant motion. This gave Pareto's theory of class considerable flexiblity in how it handled historical examples of class rule, as well as the new forms which were emerging as he was writing in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. We know of only one graduate student whose work he supervised and who wrote on a particular historical example of elite rule, that is France before the Revolution by Marie Kolabinska in 1912. [60]

Because it is impossible for a small minority, such as a band of warriors, to rule over a large number of people they had to forge alliances with other groups and offer them incentives to share power and not to defect to another powerful group or to rebel against them. Having been trained in the classics Pareto drew upon the Roman example of "patrons" and "clients". Roman generals would offer land and booty from war to reward their soldiers and win over their allegiance; politicians would pay their "clients" to vote for them in plebiscites, and rough up political opponents. In his own day Pareto used the example of the American party system, especially in the big cities like New York and Chicago, to show how political "bosses" did much the same thing. Furthermore, the American system provided the example of what became an important concept for Pareto which he applied to Italy, the alliance between democratic political bosses and "plutocrats" in a new kind of class rule called "democratic plutocracy" which he saw as also the future of democracy in Europe. [61] The similarity of thinking with the contemporary American classical liberal sociologist William Sumner Maine on this matter is striking. [62]

In very general terms, Pareto was concerned with the broad movement of people in and out of the ruling elite over long periods. He called this constant movement the "circulation of elites" using the metaphor of the circulation or flow of water in a river, or flowers in a garden which bloom and then fade as they age. Sometimes the "river" would overflow its banks in times of upheaval (like the French or Russian Revolution) but most of the time the replenishment would be a slow and steafy one. [63] If an elite was "open" and forward looking they would seek out and admit as new members energetic individuals to replenish and reinvigorate the existing elite; if they were "closed" and backward looking the elite would instead resist change, "christalise", and become decadent over time. They were then ripe for overthrow by new elites who would push them aside and take over ruling the country and plundering its occupants.

There were also differences if how members of the elite got their income through the exploitation of others. He divided them into "rentiers" who earned a steady income by means of rent, annuities, interest, pensions, and other forms of fixed income (usually guarateed or granted by the state); and the "speculators" [64] who were more willing to take risks in order to gain higher returns. The latter might be active in business or industry where large profits were to be made. Unlike in the free market, the "speculators" sought and got government protection from losses in the form of monopolies, tariffs, subsidies, guarateed returns, government contracts and other such means. Pareto thought this kind of class rule and exploitation was preferable to the former if their economic activity enlarged the economic pie as a whole so that ordinary workers would also be better off. It would not be ideal (which would be the absence of class rule and exploitation) but it was better than being ruled by a "closed" and backward looking elite.

Pareto's Pessimism

By the time he wrote TSG in 1917 Pareto had reached a point of considerable pessimism. In the penultimate chapter where he sums up his general observations concerning class rule and exploitation he concludes that, no matter what form government takes, or what particular ruling elite is in power, or what their particular political, national, or sectatian passions might be, all governments and politicians share a number of things in common, which are the following: they will use their power “per mantenersi in sede” (to keep themselves in the saddle) (TSG 2267) in order to to secure personal gain and advantage over others; that they will take other peoples’ property both to further their own interests, but also to share it with those members of the subject class who can be paid to defend the state and safe-guard its rule; that the use and abuse of power is proportional to the amount of power that governments have to intervene in the economy and to regulate the affairs of others; and that all this will be done in the name of furthering and defending the national interest and the welfare of the people.

His pessimism is deep and without any exceptions. It seems unlikely in his view that even a radical liberal government could avoid these pitfalls and the temptations of power. Here he differs from Gustave de Molinari who died ten years before he did. Although he did not live to see the dire effects the First World War would have, Molinari did predict a future of war, economic depression, and rule by an oppressive state for some decades in the coming 20th century. [65] But once this period had run its course he believed there would be a renaissance of classical liberalism and the restoration of free markets and limited government. Pareto did not share this view. Who will be ultimately proven to be right is still a matter of conjecture.

Conclusion

The essay on "An Aplication of Sociological Theory" which we include in this anthology is only a taste of the rich and ever expanding theory of class which Pareto developed over a period of about 25 years. His contributions have not yet been fully appreciated by scholars, especially his contribution to a classical liberal theory of class. It is hoped that this translation well help rectify this omission.

Endnotes

[1] Vilfredo Pareto, “Un’applicazione di teorie sociologiche,” Rivista Italiana di sociologia, (Luglio 1900), p. 401-456. Quote p. 436. Online. The essay was translated into English in 1968 with an introduction by Zetterberg: The Rise and Fall of the Elites: An Application of Theoretical Sociology, Introduction by Hans L. Zetterberg (Totowa, N. J: Bedminster Press, 1968).

[2] ATS, p. 433 Online.

[3] Christopher Adair-Toteff, "Pareto’s Problem: An Analysis of Human Behavior", The Journal of Mind and Behavior, Autumn 2022, Volume 43, Number 4, pp. 323–338.

[4] Christopher Adair-Toteff, "Pareto on Violence", in Vilfredo Pareto’s Contributions to Modern Social Theory: A Centennial Appraisal. Edited by Christopher Adair-Toteff (London: Routledge, 2024), pp. 161-175; and the section on "Force and Persuasion (Or Lions and Foxes)" in Christopher Adair-Toteff, "Pareto on Cunning and Deceit", Histories 5:11, 2025. Online elsewhere.

[5] Silvano Belligni, "Arte dei governi, spoliazione e democrazia. Le teorica della corruzione in Vilfredo Pareto," in Economia, sociologia e politica nell'opera di Vilfredo Pareto . A cura di Corrado Malandrino e Roberto Marchionatti (Firenze: Leo S. Olschki, 2000), pp. 329-61.

[6] Murray Rothbard, "14.5 Vilfredo Pareto, pessimistic follower of Molinari", An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought. Volume II: Classical Economics (Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1995), pp. 455-59.

[7] See the survey by David M. Hart, the chapter on "Class" in The Routledge Companion to Libertarianism. Edited by Matt Zwolinski and Benjamin Ferguson (Routledge, 2022) , pp. 291-307; and the introduction to the anthology Social Class and State Power: Exploring an Alternative Radical Tradition, ed. David M. Hart, Gary Chartier, Ross Miller Kenyon, and Roderick T. Long (Palgrave Macmillan, 2018).

[8] Karl Marx, Das Kapital. Buch III: Der Gesammtprocess d. Kapitalist. Produktion. Kapitel XXIX-LII. (Hamburg, 1894). "Zweiundfünfzigstes Kapitel. Die Klassen", p. 421 Online.

[9] See his long introduction to a French translation of parts of Marx's Das Capital (1897) and the longer treatment of socialism in general in his published lectures on Les Systèmes socialistes (1902-3)

[10] Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, "Zum Abschluss des Marxschen Systems" in Staatswissenschaftliche Arbeiten. Festgaben für Karl Knies zur fünfundsiebzigsten Wiederkehr seines Geburtstages in dankbaren Vehehring. Otto v. Boenigk (Hrsg.) (Berlin: O. Haering, 1896), §. 87-205. Online. Translated as Karl Marx and the close of his system, a criticism. Translated by Alice M. Macdonald with a Preface by James Bonar (London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1898). Revised slightly by Paul M. Sweezy (1949) and David M. Hart (2018). Online. See also Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, “Macht oder Ökonomisches Gesetz?” (Power or Economic Law), Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft, Sozialpolitik und Verwaltung. Band 23 (1914), S. 205–271. Online.

[11] See Vifredo Pareto, Sociological Writings. Selected and introduced by S. E. Finer. Translated by Derick Mirfin (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1966); and The Other Pareto. Edited by Placido Bucolo. Translated by Placido and Gillian Bucolo with a preface by Ronald Fletcher (London: Scholar Press, 1980).

[12] See for example, Richard Swedberg, Schumpeter: A Biography (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991) ; Max Weber and the Idea of Economic Sociology (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998); Tocqueville's Political Economy (Princeton University Press, 2009); The Handbook of Economic Sociology. Second edition. Neil J. Smelser and Richard Swedberg eds. (Princeton University Press, 2005); and The Economic Sociology of Capitalism. Edited by Victor Nee and Richard Swedberg (Princeton University Press, 2005).

[13] Christopher Adair-Toteff, "Pareto Introduction. Vilfredo Today" in Vilfredo Pareto’s Contributions to Modern Social Theory: A Centennial Appraisal. Edited by Christopher Adair-Toteff (London: Routledge, 2024), pp. 1-10; Max Weber And The Path From Political Economy To Economic Sociology (New York: Routledge Studies in Social and Political Thought, 2022); “Max Weber and Economic Sociology.” In The Routledge International Handbook of Max Weber. Edited by Alan Sica (London: Routledge, 2022); “Economic Sociology.” In The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory. Edited by Bryan S. Turner. (Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Son, 2018). Vol. II. 673–687.

[14] See for example, Jean-Jacques Gislain and Philippe Steiner, La sociologie economique (1890-1920): Durkheim, Pareto, Schumpeter, Simiandi, Veblen et Weber. (Paris: Presse Universitaires de France, 1995).

[15] See the work of the French-Canadian sociologist Robert Leroux, Robert Leroux, Antoine-Augustin Cournot as a Sociologist (Cham: Palgrave, 2019); History and Sociology in France. From Scientific History to the Durkheimian School (New York and London: Routledge, 2018); and The Foundations of Industrialism: Charles Comte, Charles Dunoyer and Liberal Thought in France (New York: Peter Lang, 2016).

[16] David M. Hart, Class Analysis, Slavery and the Industrialist Theory of History in French Liberal Thought, 1814-1830: The Radical Liberalism of Charles Comte and Charles Dunoyer (Cambridge University, PhD Thesis, 1994). Online.

[17] See for example, The Palgrave Handbook of Political Elites. Eds. Heinrich Best and John Higley (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018); The International Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology. Edited by Jens Beckert and Milan Zafirovski (New York and London: Routledge, 2006, 2011); and Re-Imagining Economic Sociology. Ed. Patrik Aspers and Nigel Dodd (Oxford University Press, 2025). Unfortunately, their "re-imagining" seems to be confined to intellectual traditions which are hostile to free markets.

[18] Randall G. Holcombe, Political Capitalism: How Economic and Political Power is Made and Maintained (Cambridge Universaity Press, 2018).

[19] Alexis Sémanne, "Toward an Austro-Libertarian Sociology," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 84: 781-796, (2025). Online elsewhere.

[20] The group of libertarians in New York City who attended Mises' seminar at NYU in the 1950s and 1960s, the so-called "Circle Bastiat" - especially Ralph Raico, Leonard Liggio, and Murray Rothbard - did much to explore and develop the theory of class developed by Comte, Dunoyer, Bastiat, and Molinari in many works. Mises himself dismissed the idea of "class" (at least in its Marxist version) but did use another term "caste" to describe much the same thing in "The Clash of Group Interests" (1945), republished as The Clash of Group Interests and Other Essays. Richard M. Ebeling, Editor. The Center for Libertarian Studies Occasional Papers Series # 7 (June, 1978). More recently there is Jayme S. Lemke , "An Austrian Approach to Class Structure," New Thinking in Austrian Political Economy. Eds. Christopher J. Coyne and Virgil Storr. Advances in Austrian Economics. Vol. 19. (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2015), pp. 167-192.

[21] Robert Leroux, The Foundations of Industrialism: Charles Comte, Charles Dunoyer and Liberal Thought in France (2016). Franz Oppenheimer made the disinction between the "das politisches und ökonomisches Mittel" (the economic means and the political means) of acquiring wealth in Der Staat (Frankfurt am Main: Literarische Anstalt. Rotten & Loening, 1907). Online; English translation: The State: Its History and Development viewed Sociologically. Authorized Translation by John M. Gitterman (New York: Vanguard Press, 1914, 1922). Online.

[22] Herbert Spencer made the distinction between two very different types of society based upon how wealth was created or acquired in his multi-volume Principles of Sociology (1874-96, volume II, Part V. Political Institutions, chapters XVII "The Militant Type of Society" and XVIII "The Industrial Type of Society". Herbert Spencer, The Principles of Sociology, in Three Volumes (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1898). Authorized third edition. Online.

[23] See my essay on "Classical Liberals on the Size and Functions of the State," Reflections on Liberty and Power (10 August, 2021) Online.

[24] "La machine gouvernement", TSG, §. 2267 Online.

[25] "(U)ne machine à spoliation" in CEP, vol. 2, p. 386 § 1054.

[26] SS, vol. I, p. 155 Online; and also SS, vol. 1, p. 116 Online.

[27] David M. Hart, “Frédéric Bastiat On Plunder, Class, And The State” (October, 2021) Online. And the accompanying anthology of texts: La Spoliation, la Classe, et l’État (Plunder, Class, and State): An Anthology of Texts (1845-1851). Edited and with an Introduction by David M. Hart (Sydney: The Pittwater Free Press, 2023).

[28] SS, vol. 1, p. 116 Online.

[29] SS, vol. 1, p. 117 Online

[30] "(U)ne machine à spoliation" in CEP, vol. 2, p. 386 § 1054.

[31] CEP, vol. 2, p. 386, §. 1053.

[32] CEP, vol. 2, p. 392, §. 1065.

[33] SS, vol. 1, pp. 120-21 Online.

[34] SS, vol. 1, p. 54 Online.

[35] SS, vol. 2, p. 284 Online.

[36] TSG, § 2316. Online

[37] The first series: Sophismes économiques. Par M. Frédéric Bastiat, Membre du Conseil général des Landes (Paris: Guillaumin, 1846). The second series: Sophismes économiques. Par M. Frédéric Bastiat. Membre correspondant de l’Institut et du Conseil général des Landes. Deuxième Série. (Paris: Guillaumin, 1848). Online.

[38] See an anthology of 13 items on the topic of plunder and class analysis with a lengthy introduction by me: Frédéric Bastiat, La Spoliation, la Classe, et l’État (Plunder, Class, and State): An Anthology of Texts (1845-1851). Edited and with an Introduction by David M. Hart (Sydney: The Pittwater Free Press, 2023). Texts Online and my Introduction Online.

[39] Molinari began writing on class with a series of entries in the Dictionnaire de l'Économie politique (1852-53) on "Nations" and "Noblesse" (The Nobility), and then a lecture on "Les Révolutions et le despotisme envisagés au point de vue des intérêts matériels" (Revolutions and Despotism considered from the Perspective of Material Interests) (1852) before writing four large books on the political and economic sociology of class and the state in the 1880s and 1890s: L’évolution économique du XIXe siècle: théorie du progrès (1880), L’évolution politique et la Révolution (1884), Grandeur et décadence de la guerre (1898), and Esquisse de l’organisation politique et économique de la Société future (1899).

[40] There are 22 references to Bastiat in CEP, 2 in his essay on Marx, 56 in SS, and 31 in TSG. Many of these are not favourable because Pareto rejected much of what Bastiat said about capital and interest (especially in his debate with Proudhon). However, he agreed with much of what he said on plunder, class, and exploitation. There are 8 references to Molinari in SS, 41 in CEP; 6 his essay on Marx, but only 2 in TGS.

[41] Vilfredo Pareto, Cours d’économie politique. Professé à l’Université de Lausanne (Lausanne: F. Rouge; Paris: Pichon, 1896-97). 2 vols.

[42] Vilfredo Pareto, Les Système socialistes. Cours professé à l’Université de Lausanne (Paris: V. Giard & E. Brière, 1902, 1903). 2 vols. Online.

[43] Vilfredo Pareto, Manuale di economia politica (Milano: Societa Editrice,1906); and Manuel d’économie politique. Traduit sur l’édition italienne par Alfred Bonnet (revue par l’auteur) (Paris: V. Giard & E. Brière, 1909).

[44] CEP, Volume II, Livre III. Chap. II. "La Physiologie social", pp. 347- 96.

[45] "La Physiologie de la Spoliation" in Sophismes économiques. Par M. Frédéric Bastiat, Membre du Conseil général des Landes (Paris: Guillaumin, 1846), pp. 1-27. Online.

[46] SS, vol. 1 chapter 2 "Les Systèmes socialistes en général" (Socialist Systems in General), pp. 108-38.

[47] Chap. I "Principes généraux", pp. 1-39; and chap. II "Introduction à la science sociale," pp. 40-144 in Manuelle d'Économie politique (A Manual of Political Economy) (1909). The Italian version was Manuale di economia politica (1906).

[48] On Pareto's use of history in his writings see Bernard Valade, "La place de l’histoire dans la pensée de Pareto," Revue européenne des sciences sociales 51-2, 2013, pp. 83-101. Online elsewhere.

[49] Vilfredo Pareto, “Un’applicazione di teorie sociologiche,” Rivista Italiana di sociologia, (Luglio 1900), p. 401-456. Online. It was translated into English in 1968: The Rise and Fall of the Elites: An Application of Theoretical Sociology, Introduction by Hans L. Zetterberg (Totowa, N. J: Bedminster Press, 1968).

[50] Vilfredo Pareto, Trattato di Sociologia Generale (Firenze: G. Barbera, 1916). 2 vols; Traité de sociologie générale. Édition française par Pierre Boven. Revue par l’auteur. Volume I (Paris: Librairie Payot, 1917). Volume II (Paris: Librairie Payot, 1919). The French version is available Online. This was only translated into English in 1935: Vilfredo Pareto, The Mind and Society. Edited by Arthur Livingston. Translated by Andrew Bongiorno and Arthur Livingston with the advice and active cooperation of James Harvey Rogers (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1935). 4 vols.

[51] See the comments by Michael McLure in Pareto, Economics and Society: The Mechanical Analogy (Routledge Studies in the History of Economics, 2001), p. 191.

[52] Vilfredo Pareto, Fatti e Teorie (Firenze: Vallecchi, 1920). Online.

[53] Vilfredo Pareto, Trasformazione della democrazia (Milano: Studio Editoriale Corbaccio, 1921). Online. This has been translated into English: Vilfredo Pareto, The Transformation of Democracy. Charles H. Powers. editor. Renata Girola, translator. (Routledge 2017. 1st published by Transaction Publishers).

[54] ATS, p. 408 Online.

[55] AST, p. 408 Online.

[56] MEP (1909), §. 103, p. 129.

[57] On "la cristallisation des sociétés" (the christalisation of societies) or their increasing social and economic inflexibility and rigidifacation leading to stagnation and collapse, see SS §. 2607 Online.

[58] See TSG, §. 2254.

[59] There are many references to "lions" in TSG (62) and fewer to "renards" (foxes) (15). They are mentioned together as different types of members of the ruling elite in §. 2178, then again in §. 2187, and in a long footnote S2480-1. Other animals in Pareto's menagerie were the sheep whose fleece was shawn, the goose (or chicken) that laid the golden egg, and honey bees whose honey was plundered by the bee keeper, and the savers who were hunted down like wild animals during periods of inflation.

[60] Marie Kolabinska, ⁨La circulation des élites en France; étude historique depuis la fin du XIe siècle jusqu'à la grande révolution (Lausanne : F. Rouge & cie, 1912).

[61] See his discussion of "plutocrazia " (plutocracy) and "plutocrazia demagogica " (demogogic plutocracy) in TD.

[62] See Willaim Graham Sumner, "Democracy and Plutocracy," The Independent, 1888 November 15; and "The Conflict of Plutocracy and Democracy," The Independent, 1889 January 10. Reprinted in Earth-Hunger and Other Essays, ed. Albert Galloway Keller (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1914), pp. 283-289 and 296-300. Online.

[63] See TSG § 2056 Online.

[64] There are many references to "les spéculateurs" in TSG (some 193). This word might betranslated a "speculator" or perhaps "opportunist". See §. 1498-99, 1697, 2139 for the first few references; and also §. 2254-2257 for a more extended discussion.

[65] Gustave de Molinari, Thoughts on the Future of Liberty (1901-1911). The English language edition. Edited by David M. Hart (The Pittwater Free Press, 2025). It contains three items: The Achievements of the 19th Century - "Le XIXe siècle", JDE (Jan. 1901); The Prospects of the 20th Century - "Le XXe siècle", JDE (Jan. 1902); Molinari's "Last Words" (1911) - extracts. Online.