JUSTICE  OF  THE  SINGLE  TAX

119
the  absence  of  artificial  discord.  We  speak  paradoxically ­
  of  the  socialisation  of  ground  rent  as  though  it
were  something  to  be  artificially  done.  How  can  we
socialise  that  which  by  its  very  nature  socialises  itself,
and  can  never  be  naturally  anything  but  socialised?
A  Puzzling  Question  and  a  Simple  Answer
What  are  the  obstacles  that  to-day  so  impede  a
thorough  consideration  of  the  basic  economic  principle
of  the  single  tax  by  pulpit,  press,  and  legislator?
The  answer  to  this  apparently  puzzling  question  is
after  all  a  simple  one:
First  is  the  notion  that  the  single  tax  contemplates
public  ownership  of  land,  which  is  not  true;  second,
the  impression  that  it  would  disturb  present  land
titles,  which  is  not  true;  third,  the  charge  that  it  would
take  for  the  community  what  belongs  to  the  individual,
which  is  not  true;  fourth,  the  poisoning  misapprehension ­
  that,  right  or  wrong,  it  would  amount  to-day
to  taxing  into  the  public  treasury  practically  the  whole
rental  value  of  one  species  of  property.
All  men  are  agreed  as  to  the  ethics  of  the  single  tax,
that  the  earth  was  made  for  all  men  and  not  for  a  few.
This  is  what  Mr.  George  calls  an  instinct,  an  intuition
of  the  human  mind,  a  primary  perception  of  the  human
reason.  If  we  were  to-day  starting  anew,  the  single
tax  would  be  manifestly  wise  as  a  method  of  taxation;
if  it  could  to-day  be  put  in  operation  without  injustice
to  any  one,  it  would  still  be  a  manifestly  wise  plan  of
taxation.  Can  it  be  done?
The  single  taxer  is  firmly  of  the  opinion  that  it  is
no  part  of  God’s  economy  that  justice  to  one  man  can
work  injustice  to  another;  that  for  every  alleged