Anarchism And Property Rights

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340061412' post='2446037']
[url="http://www.lewrockwell.com/kinsella/kinsella15.html#ref"]http://www.lewrockwe...ella15.html#ref[/url]
[/quote]I got it. Realism is redefined as pessimism. Pessimism is the work of parasprites, therefore Ponies are happily Anarchists because you never see a Pony POOP!!!.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1340066027' post='2446060']
I got it. Realism is redefined as pessimism. Pessimism is the work of parasprites, therefore Ponies are happily Anarchists because you never see a Pony POOP!!!!!!.
[/quote]
Not really what I get out of it.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1338731570' post='2440238']
Statism is the belief that an entity may claim a monopoly on legalized violence within a given area. That's rather loose. I think with Statism also comes the belief that the State should control economic activities, and that this control will (or can) result in a better economy. There is also some belief in legal positivism (Well, we have to stop completely at this stop sign, because STOP SIGN! (yes, that's a rather vulgar example, but I wanted to take a dig at the people who obey traffic laws simply because they are there)). Statists often believe in the social contract, a document that we apparently all signed, and that governments possess in a locker. It gives them the right to raise money whenever they want by increasing taxes or decorating slips of paper which we are compelled by force to accept in exchange for real goods. Statism doesn't just make the assumption that this is the lesser evil, but that the State is actually justified in these actions. These actions are actually good. It is possible that such an entity is necessary in a fallen world. This necessity would not make the State good, just as lying to the Nazis about a Jew hiding in your house would not be "good".

Obviously, there are degrees of Statism. The Tea Party seems less Statist (in many ways) than Mayor Bloomberg, who wants to outlaw sodas of an arbitrarily chosen size (which seems an innocuous enough manifestation of the belief in total control of a special group of magical human beings who know best, and are empowered to force that best on others).

And then there are most Americans, who will describe their rights as "Granted by the Constitution". Yes, this formulation might not be well thought out. If pressed, they might accept that rights exist prior to the State and its laws. But I think this is an example of how deeply we are infected with Statism.
[/quote]


Comparing the State to lying implies that the existence of the State is immoral even if it is a necessity. Is that what we should believe, or close to what we should believe? Is its claim to authority immoral if it does not have the express permission of ever single individual it claims authority over? Is it immoral for it to raise taxes, is taxation theft?

I'm not sure most Americans believe are rights come from the Government. Whatever the case Rights are derived from God, but so to is Authority.

[Winchester]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1340066852' post='2446067']
Comparing the State to lying implies that the existence of the State is immoral even if it is a necessity. Is that what we should believe, or close to what we should believe? Is its claim to authority immoral if it does not have the express permission of ever single individual it claims authority over? Is it immoral for it to raise taxes, is taxation theft?[/quote]
How many people have to get together before they gain the power to command others to give them money?
[quote]
I'm not sure most Americans believe are rights come from the Government. Whatever the case Rights are derived from God, but so to is Authority.
[/quote]
Power =/= authority.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340068033' post='2446075']
How many people have to get together before they gain the power to command others to give them money?[/quote]

That's a dodge. My not being able to give a number does not invalidate the State has the justification to taxation for the common good of the people.

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340068033' post='2446075']Power =/= authority.
[/quote]

Not quite...


Definition of POWER
1
[color=#696969]a (1) : ability to act or produce an effect (2) : ability to get extra-base hits (3) : capacity for being acted upon or undergoing an effect[/color]

b : legal or official authority, capacity, or right
2
a : possession of control, authority, or influence over others

b : one having such power; specifically : a sovereign state

c : a controlling group : establishment —often used in the phrase the powers that be

[Winchester]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1340069851' post='2446084']
That's a dodge. My not being able to give a number does not invalidate the State has the justification to taxation for the common good of the people.[/quote]
Establish that harming some people is for the common good. That's a serious assertion that requires a lot of argumentation. Some economists have made use of utils in the attempt. I feel they've been unsuccessful.

Apart from that, If I could make us all better off by taking money from you, would that justify it? You're arguing that taxes are justified by an outcome. Even without proving that outcome, I think there's a problem, with that. Does stealing depend solely upon your intent?



[quote]Not quite...


Definition of POWER
1
[color=#696969]a (1) : ability to act or produce an effect (2) : ability to get extra-base hits (3) : capacity for being acted upon or undergoing an effect[/color]

b : legal or official authority, capacity, or right
2
a : possession of control, authority, or influence over others

b : one having such power; specifically : a sovereign state

c : a controlling group : establishment —often used in the phrase the powers that be
[/quote]
Which dictionary is that?

Rapists have power.

The question of how one forms a state has to be resolved, and yes, you need to come up with the number of people that represent such a critical mass. You've yet to explain how taking the property of others by force ceases to be stealing.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340070537' post='2446085']
Establish that harming some people is for the common good. That's a serious assertion that requires a lot of argumentation. Some economists have made use of utils in the attempt. I feel they've been unsuccessful.

Apart from that, If I could make us all better off by taking money from you, would that justify it? You're arguing that taxes are justified by an outcome. Even without proving that outcome, I think there's a problem, with that. Does stealing depend solely upon your intent?[/quote]

Here's the problem I'm trying to get at that you keep dodging, anarchists often state that "taxation is theft" and thus immoral ultimately is that or is that not true?

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340070537' post='2446085']
Which dictionary is that?[/quote]

One which has not yet been approved by the Anarchist movement?

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340070537' post='2446085']
Rapists have power.[/quote]

That power, is not legitimate, is not just and is not derived from God.

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340070537' post='2446085']
The question of how one forms a state has to be resolved, and yes, you need to come up with the number of people that represent such a critical mass. You've yet to explain how taking the property of others by force ceases to be stealing.
[/quote]

No, I don't believe I have to give a certain number. The ultimate question is whether or not taxation in and of itself is theft. Does the Church state that in and of itself taxation is stealing? Hasn't the Church approved of taxation for the common good? Doesn't anarchism go futher than the Church when it declares taxation to be theft?

Edited June 19, 2012 by KnightofChrist

[Anomaly]

Coercion of some sort is mandatory if people live in groups and have a society. Anarchy is a utopian myth because society can't function without some ideas or wants being subjected to the will of a majority. The only question is the natal limiting of coercion. Coercion is always present even if you choose to leave a societal group if you don't agree with the majority of a group you find yourself in, whether you're a rapist or anti-statis.

Live with it, change it, or leave it for another like minded group.

Edited June 19, 2012 by Anomaly

[Winchester]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1340071575' post='2446093']
Here's the problem I'm trying to get at that you keep dodging, anarchists often state that "taxation is theft" and thus immoral ultimately is that or is that not true?[/quote]
Insofar as tax is an involuntary taking of property, yes.



[quote]One which has not yet been approved by the Anarchist movement?[/quote]
I was mocking you resorting to a dictionary definition of "power".



[quote]That power, is not legitimate, is not just and is not derived from God.[/quote]
But you feel taking money is. Come on, just quote the render unto caesar verse. I know you're dying to.



[quote]No, I don't believe I have to give a certain number. The ultimate question is whether or not taxation in and of itself is theft. Does the Church state that in and of itself taxation is stealing? Hasn't the Church approved of taxation for the common good? Doesn't anarchism go futher than the Church when it declares taxation to be theft?
[/quote]
The statements in Church documents on that position are not binding upon the faithful, and the assumption that it is for the common good is yet to be proved. No document I know has rejected the notion of some of the late Scholastics that a king may not raise taxes without approval from the people.

What criteria do you set for someone claiming this right to tax? You must have some distinction between the warlords in Somalia and the US Congress.

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1340073525' post='2446122']
Coercion of some sort is mandatory if people live in groups and have a society. Anarchy is a utopian myth because society can't function without some ideas or wants being subjected to the will of a majority. The only question is the natal limiting of coercion. Coercion is always present even if you choose to leave a societal group if you don't agree with the majority of a group you find yourself in, whether you're a rapist or anti-statis.

Live with it, change it, or leave it for another like minded group.
[/quote]
http://www.lewrockwell.com/kinsella/kinsella15.html#ref

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340070537' post='2446085']
Establish that harming some people is for the common good. That's a serious assertion that requires a lot of argumentation. Some economists have made use of utils in the attempt. I feel they've been unsuccessful.

Apart from that, If I could make us all better off by taking money from you, would that justify it? You're arguing that taxes are justified by an outcome. Even without proving that outcome, I think there's a problem, with that. Does stealing depend solely upon your intent?[/quote]According to the Catholic Church, taxation is a privilege of a legitimate government.

Assuming that such a government exists, do you believe it has the right to tax citizens?

[Winchester]

[quote name='qfnol31' timestamp='1340074222' post='2446129']
According to the Catholic Church, taxation is a privilege of a legitimate government.

Assuming that such a government exists, do you believe it has the right to tax citizens?
[/quote]
Not binding upon the faithful, but show me a legitimate government, and then the method of taxation of which the Church speaks. The documents to which you are referring never define the composition of government.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340074730' post='2446130']
Not binding upon the faithful, but show me a legitimate government, and then the method of taxation of which the Church speaks. The documents to which you are referring never define the composition of government.
[/quote]Never spoke of any documents. All I said is Church teaching.

As far as the teaching goes, it is in fact binding on the faithful insofar as it's taught by the magisterium, particularly the Holy Father. I believe a similar binding document says something about a "religious submission of mind and will," but I haven't read it recently.

I'm really just asking about the principle of taxation. Now would the Church have to define what type of taxation is appropriate or does that fall within the government's purview?

[Winchester]

[quote name='qfnol31' timestamp='1340074879' post='2446131']
Never spoke of any documents. All I said is Church teaching.

As far as the teaching goes, it is in fact binding on the faithful insofar as it's taught by the magisterium, particularly the Holy Father. I believe a similar binding document says something about a "religious submission of mind and will," but I haven't read it recently.

I'm really just asking about the principle of taxation. Now would the Church have to define what type of taxation is appropriate or does that fall within the government's purview?
[/quote]
That teaching wasn't handed down orally. There are documents. Don't get snippy. Do you have anything describing a legitimate government?

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340075002' post='2446133']
That teaching wasn't handed down orally. There are documents. Don't get snippy. Do you have anything describing a legitimate government?
[/quote]I'm just want to be as precise as possible about where I get this information since I want the teaching to be the focus rather than the sources for the teachings.

Gaudium et Spes is fairly clear on what determines a legitimate government:
[quote]It is clear, therefore, that the political community and public authority are founded on human nature and hence belong to the order designed by God, even though the choice of a political regime and the appointment of rulers are left to the free will of citizens.(3)
[/quote]

The Church Constitution says that citizens have the right to establish a legitimate authority and political regime.

[Winchester]

[quote name='qfnol31' timestamp='1340075544' post='2446135']
I'm just want to be as precise as possible about where I get this information since I want the teaching to be the focus rather than the sources for the teachings.

Gaudium et Spes is fairly clear on what determines a legitimate government:


The Church Constitution says that citizens have the right to establish a legitimate authority and political regime.
[/quote]
Well, I didn't establish this government.

That looks suspiciously like voluntaryism.