Taxation is Armed Robbery and So Can You!

You can be arrested for not paying your taxes. You can be thrown in a cage and beaten to death. In that scenario, there are crimes that are committed, but I don’t consider not paying taxes to be one of them.

The biggest criminal here is the state, the monopoly of ultimate decision making, with the power to unilaterally demand how much we have to pay and when.

The state’s power to use violence must be somewhat sedated. If the public ever got around to believing that law did not provide fairness and order, then they might start questioning their obedience. 

That money must be collected through taxes is itself illegitimate.

When society has problems with gangs, theft, murders, frauds, and all-around chaos, arresting someone for refusing to pay your law and security services does not solve the problem. 

It merely distinguishes one gang from another as forced collection is still armed robbery.

There is a precept that undermines the Western legal tradition. Where human rights are inherent in our being, not something decreed by the state apparatus and passed through the legislature.

A great many of people should be ashamed of themselves. It’s not enough to hide behind the mantra of “just following orders” or the “law is the law.”

It was once the law to round up Japanese citizens and put them in internment camps.

It was once the law to round up aboriginal children and indoctrinate them into residential schools.

It was once the law to round up homosexuals and stick them in cages just for displaying their sexual preferences.

It was once and in many places still the law to lock people up for cannabis plants.

The police mantra that, “we don’t make the laws, we just enforce them,” pins the blame solely on politicians instead of directing it where it also belongs.

All action is scarce, police prioritize the law and it is possible to focus on crimes other than tax avoidance.

Police can raid a Days Inn hotel. The owners of the hotel might have some rowdy guests, with nothing going on there being based on consensual relations whatsoever.

Men and women looking to fulfil this demand for a social order, can, like insurance companies, contract an arrangement.

Even if the Days Inns owner doesn’t have police insurance, neighbouring properties are going to get antsy. The bank is probably going to want to have a word, and who let this guy move into the neighbourhood without making sure he had insurance? 

Is that nobody’s job? Does it not get done anymore without the state? Good! Since it’s obviously in demand, I’ll just go ahead and start a company…

The legitimate use of force requires fairness, and for hundreds of years, laws originating from actual social disputes have been adequate.

But instead, when life is regulated by the democratic state, for your own safety, you get nearly every “service” you’ve never heard of or felt the need for.

Although the idea might have started with good intentions, the reality is all modern states operate on a Soviet-economic model.

There is no special blend of capitalism and socialism that we’re doing. At this point, it’s virtually all-around socialism.

Taxpayers can’t cease paying for bad law enforcement. 

Taxpayers can’t opt out of pension schemes.

Taxpayers can’t opt out of legal tender laws.

Taxpayers can’t cease paying for state schooling and it’s easy to send your kids there for 12 years of babysitting-indoctrination.

Taxpayers can’t cease calling themselves taxpayers. 

Most of them don’t want to.

But independent of their beliefs about the system, economic calculation in the market directs entrepreneurs to satisfy consumer demands through consensual, voluntary exchange.

Only governmental agencies and their cronies are exempt from this process. Society doesn’t spring up with modern states already in place.

Once people have reduced interpersonal violence enough to allow them to live together and trade and prosper, entities arise to provide fairness and order.

Today’s non-state enforcement services are just an example of what the market could provide.

Brink’s vans transporting currency and other valuable assets for private customers like banks.

Universities with their own private security, like shopping malls and gated communities.

Home security systems.

Lawyers arbitrating outside the courts because taxpayer-funded monopoly courts are incredibly slow and bureaucratic. 

Government is increasingly showing its ineptitude at reflecting the values of the people it supposedly represents.

Taxation is the reason why.

Legitimate businesses require physical contracts to be signed for them to be legally binding.

No one expects an insurance company to come knocking on your door demanding payment unless you’ve previously signed a contract with them and neglected to uphold your end of the bargain.

Some may argue that because of the special nature of the law and “public” services, only a government monopoly can provide fairness and order.

But does that hold up to scrutiny in the real world?

Do funds forcibly supplied to a politically controlled bureaucracy result in political or consumer interests?