He aims to show that government ownership of the means of production and central planning of the economy would lead to shortages, not abundance as the socialists claimed.

Written in the form of a diary by a Socialist Revolutionary and former political prisoner who comes to see the horrors his Party unleashes after taking power, the narrator begins by applauding expropriation, the use of lethal force to prevent emigration, and the reassignment of people to new tasks, all the while assuring doubters that an earthly paradise is just around the corner.

He also argues that Richter held, unlike some thinkers critical of socialism, such repression is inherent with its actual practice, rather than a defect.

[5] Anti-semitism was prevalent in the 1870s in Germany, but when the historian Heinrich von Treitschke and the Court Preacher Adolph Stöcker endorsed it in 1879, what had been a fringe phenomenon gained national attention.

A petition to the Reich Chancellor Otto von Bismarck called for administrative measures banning Jewish immigration, and restricting their access to positions in education and the judiciary ("Antisemitenpetition", German Wikipedia).

[6] On 20 November 1880 the Progress Party brought the issue before the Prussian Landtag, asking the government to take a stand on whether or not legal restrictions were to be introduced ("Interpellation Hänel").

Rudolf Virchow complained in the ensuing debate:[7] Well, meine Herren (Sirs), even if I have called the reply given by the Royal state government correct, I cannot deny that on the whole it could have been somewhat warmer.

The small gradual differences completely cede into the background, that is what is particularly insidious about the whole movement, that while the Socialists only turn against the economically better-off, here racial hatred is nourished, that is, something the individual cannot alter and that can only be ended by either killing him or forcing him out of the country.He concluded his speech with the words: Exactly to give the government the opportunity to speak its mind, how it stands on the matter, including the Reich Chancellor, that is why we have introduced this interpellation, and we are pleased about the success and wish that from now on throughout the country a sturdy reaction will crush this anti-semitic movement, which truly does not confer honor and adornment on our country.Responding to an anti-semitic meeting on 17 December 1880, the Progress Party invited all electors for the Prussian Landtag to a meeting in the Reichshallen on 12 January 1881 to demonstrate that the citizens of Berlin did not support anti-semitism.

Eugen Richter referred to these words, which the Crown Prince confirmed two days later: One day, it will not be the smallest leaf of laurel in the wreath of our Crown Prince that already at the first stirrings of this movement, something that our deceased colleague Wulffsheim overheard with his own ears and which has also been confirmed otherwise as trustworthy — he declared to the president of the Jewish corporation of Berlin that this movement is a disgrace for the German nation!

)He rejected the claim that the anti-semitic movement had grown from the ranks of craftsmen, workers, and businessmen: It confers honor on the German craftsmen, workers, and businessmen that this movement, which is supposed to be in their interest, did not arise from their circles, (Vigorous applause), just like the corn tariff propaganda did not arise from peasant circles.

Furthermore, from people who in positions of trust as officials obtain their salaries from the public coffers and often cannot have any idea of how a businessman sometimes feels who struggles to earn his daily bread and to pay the obligatory taxes!

Indeed, here it shows again that superior mental culture if it is not aligned with a culture of the heart and true religiosity — not a religiosity that has God on its lips, but the devil in its heart — often only leads to nothing more than barbarity in a more refined form!In his concluding words, he called upon his audience: In this vein, let us also fight against the depravity of this movement in a league without party distinction, and let us feel united in this resolution — drawing on the New Year's Address of the city councilors to the Kaiser and his reply — that only if all powers of national life, before which no distinction of denominations is justified, working peacefully together, can the welfare of the German Reich and her individual citizens prosper.