本文分成三大部分，不過共有五個主要標題。第一部分及第一個標題的內容，是駁斥以下觀點：我們應該設法從某種原始或原初的開端來理解人類生活與社群。這是以反向的邏輯來論證。我們不能從最初或最不完美的社群談起，而必須以最後也最完美的社群為起點。第二部分及第二個標題，筆者主張當我們從最後也最完美的社群談起時，就必須說人性基本上是社群性的，或本來就受到社群的嚴密束縛。因此社群主義學說是唯一適合人類存在之事實與目標的學說。本文的第三部分及第三到第五個標題主張，只要把國家（和普遍的假設相反）理解成主要和平常是作用在社群而非個人身上，無論最小政府或是大政府的形態，現代國家都很容易融入社群的社群主義學說。「社群與國家」、「社群權利」和「國家權利」這三個標題說明了這個理念的某些細節，尤其「國家權利」乃是處理國家代表社群裡的個人介入社群的問題。

The essay is divided into three main parts but according to five main headings. In the first part and under the first heading I argue against the view that we should try to understand human life and community in terms of some primitive or original beginnings. This is to get things logically back to front. We must start, not with the first or least perfect, but with the last and most perfect. In the second part and under the second heading I argue that when we do this we will have to say that human nature is essentially communal or essentially a matter of life in the close bonds of communities. Communitarian doctrines, therefore, are the only ones that are adequate to the facts and the goals of human existence. In the third part and under the third to fifth headings I argue that the modern state, both in its minimalist and its more extensive form, can nicely be fitted into a communitarian doctrine of communities if the state, contrary to prevailing assumptions, is understood as primarily and ordinarily acting on communities and not on individuals. Some of the details of this idea are worked out under the three headings of Community and State, Community Rights, and State Rights, where, in particular, the problem of state intervention in communities on behalf of individuals in those communities is dealt with.