3 ms·

In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of i

In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it. We are unable to give consent (consent implies choice), so it is theft through coercion (prison). See "group fund" for a voluntary form of taxation: http://groupcurrency.org http://groupcurrency.org

rhino369 11y ago
Guess who defines who the rightful owner of property is? Government.
- itistoday2 11y ago
  > Guess who defines who the rightful owner of property is? Government. A compelling argument. In that case this appears to be a non-story, and I'm not sure what the fuss is about.
vidarh 11y ago
I always find this line of discussion amusing, given that most forms of property only meaningfully exists in the presence of coercion or violence to restrict others access, yet in my experience the people who gives the "tax is theft" line tend to be right wing libertarians who also tend to want strong enforcement of private property laws and tends to be totally humourless about it if Proudhons "property is theft" is brought up as a counterpoint.
- itistoday2 11y ago
  I've lived long enough to be called "right wing" for the first time in my life... that is a first (I think). As far as Proudhon (first time hearing this), it seems he was referring to land only, and that "property did not extend to exclusive possession of labor-made wealth." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft! It's unclear to me how someone can "own" a piece of land which they did not create but stumbled upon. To me it just seems like a situation where the person with the biggest gun wins, and has nothing to do with "property". So in that sense, perhaps, yes, claiming ownership over something you did not create (Earth) might very well be interpreted as theft. However, the notion of "land property" is a potentially convoluted rabbit hole that is very different from a straightforward discussion about taking money people earned with their own labor under the threat of force.

rhino369 11y ago

Guess who defines who the rightful owner of property is? Government.

itistoday2 11y ago
> Guess who defines who the rightful owner of property is? Government. A compelling argument. In that case this appears to be a non-story, and I'm not sure what the fuss is about.

vidarh 11y ago

I always find this line of discussion amusing, given that most forms of property only meaningfully exists in the presence of coercion or violence to restrict others access, yet in my experience the people who gives the "tax is theft" line tend to be right wing libertarians who also tend to want strong enforcement of private property laws and tends to be totally humourless about it if Proudhons "property is theft" is brought up as a counterpoint.

itistoday2 11y ago
I've lived long enough to be called "right wing" for the first time in my life... that is a first (I think). As far as Proudhon (first time hearing this), it seems he was referring to land only, and that "property did not extend to exclusive possession of labor-made wealth." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft! It's unclear to me how someone can "own" a piece of land which they did not create but stumbled upon. To me it just seems like a situation where the person with the biggest gun wins, and has nothing to do with "property". So in that sense, perhaps, yes, claiming ownership over something you did not create (Earth) might very well be interpreted as theft. However, the notion of "land property" is a potentially convoluted rabbit hole that is very different from a straightforward discussion about taking money people earned with their own labor under the threat of force.