Monthly Archives: November 2011

The State versus the Highwayman – Lysander Spooner

It is true that the theory of our Constitution is, that all taxes are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily entered into by the people with each other.

But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact. The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: “Your money, or your life.” And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat.

The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful.

The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you. He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villainies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.

via reddit

Flattr this!

Should libertarians/anarcho-capitalists vote?

Many anarchist libertarians claim it immoral to vote or to engage inpolitical action-the argument being that by participating in this wayin State activity, the libertarian places his moral imprimatur upon theState apparatus itself. But a moral decision must be a free decision, and the State has placed individuals in society in an unfree environment, in a general matrix of coercion. The State unfortunately exists, and people must necessarily begin with this matrix to try to remedy their condition. As Lysander Spooner pointed out, in an environment of State coercion, voting does not imply voluntary consent. Indeed, if the State allows us a periodic choice of rulers, limited though that choice may be, it surely cannot be considered immoral to make use of that limited choice to try to reduce or get rid of State power.

Ethics of Liberty by Murray Rothbard, pages 186-187

Flattr this!

Ett tydligt exempel på varför statens makt bör begränsas


Hur hade du reagerat om detta hade hänt dej? Dina barn blir kidnappade av staten och du blir falskeligen anklagad för sexuella övergrepp mot dina barn. Domstolen kan inte hitta några bevis för anklagelserna. Men du får inte tillbaks dina barn! Staten behåller dem, trots att du friats.

68 dagar senare får du tillbaks dina barn. Men rättsprocesserna/statens trakasserier fortsätter.

Välkommen till Sverige år 2011. Detta kan hända dej. Det är tillräckligt för att få mej att koka av ilska. Hur i helvete kan folk förespråka MER makt till staten när sånt här händer redan nu?

Flattr this!