Taxation = theft: Correspondence with Larken Rose

Sept 16, 2002

Larken Rose

Box 653

Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006

Dear Mr. Rose,

A friend from Oregon told me about your website and work against the federal direct income tax. I applaud your stand and efforts.

I am sure you get all kinds of junk mail, but I hope you have the time and interest to read my enclosed newsletter [No. 105: "Is Taxation Theft?"].

In it, I question-not the constitutionality or political legality of income taxation, but rather-the moral propriety of all taxation. If (federal income) taxation is theft [by deception, as you put it], it is stealing. Stealing is wrong regardless if that practice is sanctified by the Constitution or by Congress passing laws making it politically legal.

And whether or not the government would shrivel up and die without taxation is beside the point. The essence of my argument is that it is not morally proper to steal from people, even for a good cause. And if the cause is truly a good one, people (or at least some) will voluntarily contribute their own money to fund it.

Sincerely,

Carl Watner

Date: 9/23/02 2:48:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time

From: GrandDelusion@erols.com

To: inmanfeedmill@alltel.com

Dear Mr. Watner,

I just received your letter. To jump to the punchline, you are absolutely right about the fact that "theft" cannot become legitimate or moral by way of "legislation." By coincidence just yesterday I sent a message to my update list (which deals with the tax issue), and it included this:

"A lot of people tolerate, or even LIKE, being "taxed." Some think it's just their "dues" for living in a prosperous country (which economically is akin to believing that flushing money down the toilet is what makes the plumbing work). Some think it's the "price we pay for civilization." I can't think of anything nice to say about that, so I won't say anything at all. (Hi, Mom.) Some think it's just a "fact of life"... whatever that means. But I have yet to hear anyone say "I LIKE to be robbed!" Americans of ALL stripes, in all income brackets, of all religions (or lack thereof), of all political persuasions, of all ages, etc., do not want to be lied to, tricked, robbed, extorted, defrauded, etc. While I personally don't see much (or any) moral difference between "legal" theft ("taxation") and "illegal" theft*, most people do. They might put up with or even endorse the former, but they resent and despise the latter."

(* The asterisk led them to a suggestion that they read THE LAW by Bastiat.)

So I agree entirely, and this country would be in infinitely better shape if the people understood individual freedom, and why ANY theft ("legal" or not) is illegitimate. Unfortunately, most people never get around to thinking about such things. The reason I harp on what the "law" itself says-which may seem odd since I don't believe the "law" has ANY legitimacy anyway-is because almost everyone else DOES believe in the legitimacy of "law," and the insane idea that politician scribbles ("legislation") can actually ALTER right and wrong, and make something bad into something good.

In short, I want freedom to win. Oddly enough, I be lieve the "law" can be used to accomplish that. Literally THOUSANDS of people who fervently believe that we are all obligated to surrender whatever politicians demand via "law," are nonetheless now actively working to tear down the IRS. Why?

You and I don't think "law" changes morality Most people do, mostly because they never thought much about it. But NO ONE wants to be robbed, extorted, and defrauded. To most people, there is a HUGE difference between being "taxed" and being TRICKED. I can show them that they were just plain FAKED OUT into thinking they owed income taxes, when the law itself shows that they didn't. Yes, I would rather the country resist such extortion on principled moral grounds, but at the moment, they aren't going to.

Ironically, I think the "legal" issue will ultimately result in more people considering the more important MORAL issue. Once they see how they have been defrauded via "legislation," I believe a whole lot of people will start to reconsider whether "legislation" is even legitimate to begin with. (And I have seen numerous examples of people going through that thinking process already.) For now, I want to get their support based on what they ALREADY believe ("illegal" extortion is bad), and later hopefully we can get them to understand the deeper issue (ALL extortion is bad).

Thanks for your note, and if you have further comments or questions, let me know any time.

Sincerely.

Larken Rose

9 26 02 email

Dear Larken,

Hope you got my last email in which I asked if I could publish our correspondence, requested a copy of the Theft by Deception video, and in which I offered a free copy of my newsletter anthology, I MUST SPEAK OUT.

Have you ever seen the Emma Goldman quote about means and ends?

There is no greater fallacy than the belief that aims and purposes are one thing, while methods and tactics are another. This conception is a potent menace to social regeneration. all human experience teaches that means cannot be separated from ultimate aims. The means employed become, through individual habit and social practice, part and parcel of the final purpose; they modify it, and presently the aims and means become identical.

There are very few people with whom I correspond who "don't believe the 'law' has ANY legitimacy," as you put it. As I said before, I applaud you on grasping that point.

However, I don't believe that you can use the "law" to bring about freedom.

Your rebuttal to that would be that by showing people how they have been tricked and deceived by the "law," they are apt "to reconsider whether 'legislation' is even legitimate to begin with."

Nevertheless, it really doesn't make any difference if they have been duped or if the law honestly requires them to pay taxes. And until you get them to understand that point, we'll never get rid of taxes because they must question the moral propriety of taxation, not its legality. But you understand all this.

I hope, at the very least, that my contact with you will prompt you to make a formal proviso to every presentation and statement that you make: Something to the effect that although you are challenging the income tax law (so-called) on the basis of its legality, you even more strongly challenge and call into question its morality and legitimacy. I hope you see the need to get that message out (explicitly), too. It is far more important than showing people how they have been deceived and duped.

On another note, I have two questions:

1. Why did the writers and promoters of the income tax legislation resort to fraud and chicanery? What did the people of the early 190Os believe that the 16th amendment actually authorized? Was the population duped from the very beginning of the income tax amendment or did the deception occur later (if so, when, and why then)?

2. Why don't the current legal authorities make the necessary changes to the "law" (so-called) to remedy the deficiencies that you (and others) point out? Is there any impediment to their creating new legislation that openly and honestly authorizes direct personal income taxation?

I hope you have time to respond.

Sincerely,

Carl Watner

"I represent the United Muggers, sir. Give me all your money, you'll receive one of our 'I was mugged' buttons, and you'll not be expected to give again until next year."

Copyright Voluntaryists Fourth Quarter 2003
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved