2 ms·

your right ends where it takes away others. Forcing taxes on people is not that. I cannot violate others, and anyone who would give themselves the rights to do

your right ends where it takes away others. Forcing taxes on people is not that. I cannot violate others, and anyone who would give themselves the rights to do so, are bandits, oftentimes having formed a gang

vidarh 3y ago
> your right ends where it takes away others. This is exactly Proudhon's argument for his infamous "property is theft" - property rights limits the freedom of others by restricting them from e.g. making use of the land you arbitrarily fence off - and why Dejacque, the father of libertarianism [1], and a firm anarcho-communist, agreed with him. The right-libertarian property fetishism is founded on ignoring the restrictions property rights places on the rights of others; something every legal system on the planet recognises to various degrees. As such, while none go as far as Proudhon and Dejacque wanted in stripping away property rights, the default of human society is to see property rights as inherently and necessarily limited for the protection of the rights of others. (I'd be all for giving you the opportunity of opting out of taxes, as long as society gains the freedom to refuse to deal with you if you opt out, up to and including freedom to deny you the use of everything funded by said society; freedom is a two-way street) [1] On the Human Being, Male and Female, Joseph Déjacque, is the first use of "libertarianism" as a political ideology. Dejacque accuses Proudhon of being a "moderate anarchist, liberal, but not libertarian". Dejacque went on to publish "Le Libertaire" (The Libertarian), the first libertarian periodical. On the Human Being, Male and Female, can be found here: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/joseph-dejacque-on-the-human-being-male-and-female https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/joseph-dejacque-on-t...
- tfourb 3y ago
  Technically, you can probably opt out of taxes in return for opting out of using tax-funded services and infrastructure, especially in the U.S. and other countries with vast tracts of wilderness: just hike a few days into the woods/mountains, vanish into public lands and do not interact with society anymore. Of course, no libertarians actually go that far, because if they admit to it or not, they are pretty happy to accept the benefits of taxation (roads, police, emergency medical attention, the military, courts, etc.) even if they publicly decry any attempt at funding it. My impression is that libertarianism is basically an attempt by pretty well-off people to create a pseudo-scientific reason for them to free ride on the contributions of others to society.
  - vidarh 3y ago
    Yeah, this is why I find bringing it up as a two way street to be the most productive way of dealing with right-libertarians, because the problem is not that they want to be free to do as they please per se, I have every sympathy with that, but how quick they are to gloss over that the rest of society has rights too, and if they are made as expansive as they want their own property rights to be, they'll find themselves without rights of access to all kinds of things they just presume they'll retain access to very quickly - incidentally a large part of the reason why the rejection of property rights is such a large part of left-libertarianism.

vidarh 3y ago

> your right ends where it takes away others. This is exactly Proudhon's argument for his infamous "property is theft" - property rights limits the freedom of others by restricting them from e.g. making use of the land you arbitrarily fence off - and why Dejacque, the father of libertarianism [1], and a firm anarcho-communist, agreed with him. The right-libertarian property fetishism is founded on ignoring the restrictions property rights places on the rights of others; something every legal system on the planet recognises to various degrees. As such, while none go as far as Proudhon and Dejacque wanted in stripping away property rights, the default of human society is to see property rights as inherently and necessarily limited for the protection of the rights of others. (I'd be all for giving you the opportunity of opting out of taxes, as long as society gains the freedom to refuse to deal with you if you opt out, up to and including freedom to deny you the use of everything funded by said society; freedom is a two-way street) [1] On the Human Being, Male and Female, Joseph Déjacque, is the first use of "libertarianism" as a political ideology. Dejacque accuses Proudhon of being a "moderate anarchist, liberal, but not libertarian". Dejacque went on to publish "Le Libertaire" (The Libertarian), the first libertarian periodical. On the Human Being, Male and Female, can be found here: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/joseph-dejacque-on-the-human-being-male-and-female https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/joseph-dejacque-on-t...

tfourb 3y ago
Technically, you can probably opt out of taxes in return for opting out of using tax-funded services and infrastructure, especially in the U.S. and other countries with vast tracts of wilderness: just hike a few days into the woods/mountains, vanish into public lands and do not interact with society anymore. Of course, no libertarians actually go that far, because if they admit to it or not, they are pretty happy to accept the benefits of taxation (roads, police, emergency medical attention, the military, courts, etc.) even if they publicly decry any attempt at funding it. My impression is that libertarianism is basically an attempt by pretty well-off people to create a pseudo-scientific reason for them to free ride on the contributions of others to society.
- vidarh 3y ago
  Yeah, this is why I find bringing it up as a two way street to be the most productive way of dealing with right-libertarians, because the problem is not that they want to be free to do as they please per se, I have every sympathy with that, but how quick they are to gloss over that the rest of society has rights too, and if they are made as expansive as they want their own property rights to be, they'll find themselves without rights of access to all kinds of things they just presume they'll retain access to very quickly - incidentally a large part of the reason why the rejection of property rights is such a large part of left-libertarianism.