|
The Constitution of N0
Authority - Lysander Spooner
Establish a Family Foundation to obtain the tax savings, transfer tax
liability, create a lucrative retirement income, and establish a
legacy
...
here |
|
Does
Paying Taxes Imply Support of the Pretended "Constitution"?
The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no
evidence that anyone voluntarily supports the pretended "constitution" (or
any supposed "government" under it), as the following considerations
show.
- It is true that the the theory of our
pretended "constitution" is that all our taxes are paid voluntarily; that
our terrocrats operate a "mutual insurance company," voluntarily entered
into by the people with each other; that each man makes a free and purely
voluntary contract with all others who are parties to the pretended
"constitution," to pay so much money for so much protection, the same as
he does with any other insurance company; and that he is just as free not
to be protected, and not to pay tax, as he is to pay a tax, and be
protected. But this theory of our terrocrats is wholly different from the
practical fact. The fact is that our terrocrats, like highwaymen, say
to a man: "Your money, or your life." And many, if not most, taxes are
paid under the compulsion of that threat.
Terrocrats do 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 and 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 "jurisdiction," 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.
The proceedings of those tyrants, robbers, and
murderers, who call themselves "the government," are directly the opposite
of these of the single highwayman.
- Still another reason why the payment of taxes
implies no consent, or pledge, to support the pretended "constitution" or
the pretended "government," is that the taxpayer does not know, and has no
means of knowing, who the particular terrocrats are, who have taken upon
themselves the title of "the government," and who assume to "protect" him,
and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract with
them. To him "the government" is a myth, an abstraction, an incorporality,
with which he can make no contract, and to which he can give no consent,
and make no pledge. He knows it only through its pretended agents. "The
government" itself he never sees.
- Not knowing who the particular individuals are, who
call themselves "the government," the taxpayer does not know whom he pays
his taxes to. All he knows is that a man comes to him, representing
himself to be the agent of "the government" - that is, the agent of a
secret gang of tyrants, robbers, and murderers, who have taken to
themselves the title of "the government," and have determined to jail or
kill anybody who refuses to give them whatever money they demand. To save
his life, he gives up his money to this agent. But as the agent does not
make his principals individually known to the taxpayer, the latter, after
he has given up his money, knows no more who are "the government" - that
is who were the robbers - than he did before. To say, therefore, that by
giving up his money to their agent, he entered into a voluntary contract
with them, that he pledges himself to obey them, to support them, and to
give them whatever money they should demand of him in the future, is
simply ridiculous.
- All political power, as it is called, rests
practically upon this matter of money. Any number of scoundrels,
having money enough to start with, can establish themselves as a
"government" (pretended); because, with money, they can hire soldiers, and
with soldiers extort more money; and also compel general obedience to
their will. It is with pretended "government," as Caesar said it was in
war, that money and soldiers mutually supported each other; that with
money he could hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort more money. So
these villains, who call themselves "governments," well understand that
their power rests primarily upon money. With money they can hire soldiers,
and with soldiers extort money. And, when their "authority" or
"jurisdiction" (pretended) are denied, the first use they always make of
money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more
money. For this reason, whoever desires liberty, should understand these
vital facts, viz.:
(a) That every man who puts money into the
hands of terrocrats (who masquerade as "government"), puts into their hands
a sword which will be used against himself, to extort more money from him,
and also to keep him in subjection of their arbitrary will.
(b) That those who will take his money,
without his consent, in the first place, will use it for his further robbery
and enslavement, if he presumes to resists their demands in the future.
(c) That it is a perfect absurdity to
suppose that any body of men would ever take a man's money without his
consent, for any such object as they profess to take it for, viz., that of
protecting him; for why should they wish to protect him, if he does not
wish them to do so? To suppose that they would do so, is just as absurd as
it would be to suppose that they would take his money without his consent,
for the purpose of buying food or clothing for him, when he did not want it.
(d) If a man wants protection, he is
competent to make his own bargains for it; and nobody has any occasion
to rob him, in order to "protect" him against his will.
(e) That the only security men can have for
their political liberty, consists in their keeping their money in their own
pockets, until they have assurances, perfectly satisfactory to
themselves, that it will be used as they wish it to be used, for their
benefit, and not for their injury.
(f) That no criminals (whether they call
themselves "government" or not), can be trusted for a moment, or
reasonably be supposed to have honest purposes in view, for as long as they
depend on extortion, rather than voluntary support.
These facts are all so vital and so self-evident, that it cannot
reasonably be supposed that anyone will voluntarily pay money to the
terrocrats who masquerade as "the government," for the purpose of securing
their protection, unless he first makes an explicit and purely voluntary
contract with them for that purpose.
It is perfectly evident, therefore, that neither such voting, nor such
payment of taxes, as actually takes place, proves anybody's consent, or
obligation, to support the pretended "constitution." Consequently we have no
evidence at all that the supposed "constitution" is binding upon anybody, or
that anybody is under any contract or obligation whatever to support it.
And nobody is under any obligation to support it.
Next - Contracts
Must Be Signed and in Writing
|
