RSS 2.0 FeedQuote Of The Day
by Doug MataconisMurry Rothbard on taxation:
The first great lesson to learn about taxation is that taxation is simply robbery. No more and no less. For what is “robbery”? Robbery is the taking of a man’s property by the use of violence or the threat thereof, and therefore without the victim’s consent. And yet what else is taxation?
Those who claim that taxation is, in some mystical sense, really “voluntary” should then have no qualms about getting rid of that vital feature of the law which says that failure to pay one’s taxes is criminal and subject to appropriate penalty.
Read the whole thing.
To examine the fallacy contained in this rather trite quote, we need to examine this phrase – “a man’s property”.
Unfortunately, Americans – particularly so-called ‘libertarians’ – suffer from a ‘year zero’ problem; they imagine that the rights and privileges, and the economic structures, which existed in 1776 were The Natural State of Things – ignoring the centuries of effort which had created them.
In 1776, and for some time before, British society was in the throes of inventing a new economic order, replacing feudalism and the Commons. This wasn’t because the Commons system had failed. On the contrary, it had worked well for five hundred years (economically speaking).
As part of this process, a new concept of property was being invented – with the specific purpose of legitimising theft.
This theft was the Enclosure movement, in which a string of magnates stole the Common land (with the help of corrupt Parliament) – and they needed a way to ensure that someone couldn’t come along, and do to them, what they had done to others. The answer was Title. No longer was possession enough, nor industrious use, nor time-honoured association. Now, a piece of paper could say ‘this is mine’ and, magically, it was so.
Not surprisingly, this approach became very popular in the Americas, where the colonists were in the process of stealing an entire continent.
But this concept of property can only exist with the consent of society (with the state as its proxy). That piece of paper is worthless if no-one recognises its magic. It cannot be enforced without a legal system, backed up by force – state force. WHat pays for that force? Taxes, of course.
Ergo, ‘Property’ cannot exist without taxes.
But it goes much deeper than that; what we’re really talking about is ‘wealth’ – that which allows us, individually and severally, to act upon the world (and make it a bit more comfortable & secure).
Where does wealth come from? Has any man (or woman) in all of human history, ever created any wealth on their own? Of course not. A pile of gold is just something else to trip over – unless I can trade it with other people, protect myself from theft (legal or otherwise) and enforce the contracts I make with those people.
A modern society adds much more complexity – markets, exchange, definitions (of what constitutes ‘gold’, for instance). All of these require society’s blessing.
In a reall sense, all wealth is commonwealth – but the strong (or lucky) have carved out more than their fair share of that commonwealth. Just as with ‘property’, the concept of individual wealth’ has been firmly legislated into reality(by the rich and powerful) – and we’re stuck with it.
I, for one, have no particular wish to stir up this disposition (much) – it works tolerably well, most of the time – but let’s not have this claptrap about ‘a man’s property’, as if we were all born yesterday.
Comment by David Craig — April 14, 2007 @ 8:37 am