The common assertion that Plato has no regard for the artisan class, then, is unwarranted.[274] The entire _Republic_ is built upon the opposite principle, to prevent exploitation of the lower by the upper classes; and his comparison of good and evil rulers to shepherd dogs and wolves[275] is a precursor of the famous passages of Milton and Ruskin on the same theme. All classes of citizens in the state are brothers.[276] The rulers are saviors (σωτῆρας), allies, shepherds (ποίμενες), nurses (τροφέας), paymasters, and friends.[277] This happy unity (ὁμόνοια), or harmony (ξυμφωνία), of all classes is to Plato the highest goal toward which the true statesman should strive,[278] and the point of next highest importance to the communism of the guards is the proper regulation of wealth and poverty for the artisans.[279] The mere fact that he does not believe the artisans to be capable of political independence by no means indicates that he is indifferent to their social or economic welfare. It is to conserve this that he would put the government into the hands of the most capable,[280] and, in any event, the artisans are not to be held in subjection so much by external force as by their own free self-restraint.[281] This, in itself, is sufficient evidence that Plato intended to include the third class in his lower scheme of education, a fact borne out also by other passages.[282] It must be admitted that a somewhat different spirit pervades the _Laws_, where he seems to have despaired of the lofty ideal of the _Republic_. He relegates the working classes to non-citizenship. But here, also, he is still anxious that they shall have the sort of education that befits their station,[283] and that justice be done them.[284] He also provides against the existence of beggary in the state.[285] Whatever may be said of his aristocratic spirit, therefore, he cannot be justly accused of the gross indifference of the early nineteenth-century economy and of modern capitalism toward either masses or public, in their concern for material wealth.[286] COMMUNISTIC AND SOCIALISTIC IDEAS The Greek theory of distribution was employed chiefly in the criticism of the institution of private property, and in the suggestion of more or less communistic systems to succeed it. This tendency, however, was not like the modern either in motive or in general type. Modern socialism aims to be scientific, and professes to build a scientific system on a basis of economic laws. Greek socialism had no such aim. It did not lay claim to any relation to economic law, but frankly presented itself for what it was, a politico-moral sentiment. Other points of distinction will be observed as we proceed, but this primary one must not be overlooked, if either the spirit or the meaning of the Greek social theory is to be understood.