Political Theory

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

idol — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 03:05:53 GMT

Well, the difference is that using the roads does not actually come at a cost to anyone else. You also paid partially for the road through taxes.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

QuisCustodiet — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 02:57:07 GMT

Or maybe it's clearer to say "working for the government", specifically in the capacities mentioned above (teaching, attending parks, etc.).

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

QuisCustodiet — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 02:55:30 GMT

@Idol

I agree with you. But if you say that, you also have to say that working for the state isn't stealing. I see no difference in getting a check from the state and using the state's goods and services.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

idol — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 02:30:29 GMT

Using the roads cannot be considered stealing. Maybe building them, but not using them.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

QuisCustodiet — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:58:31 GMT

Nobody forces you to use the public roads.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

Anenome — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:38:15 GMT

Anyone receiving an income from the state is different than having the state monopolize certain services and forcing you to pay for them.

The latter is generally not optional. The former is optional.

Thus taking a job with a park, the salary of which paid out of tax coffers, I would say is participating in theft, as you are being paid with unjustly taken money.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

QuisCustodiet — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:19:18 GMT

@Anenome

What if a 60-year-old retires from the private sector and then lands an easy job at a public park? He's paid into having that park open all of his life via taxes. So he's not a thief, right?

Also, did you conceed the point you made with A? If so, the question of whether or not you "paid in" is irrelevant in the case of public sector employees.

@Clayton

Thanks for the clarification.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

Clayton — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:11:09 GMT

The State is the ruling class. The State is a fuzzier term than government. The government has many employees, including people who do jobs that really do need to be done and would be done even in the absence of a government - think of road maintenance, powerlines, game wardens, etc.

The State, however, is the corrupting principle within all of this. It is the redistributive kernel, the complex of ideological arguments and real social networks which combine together to legitimize and systematize the political means, the means of coercion. Trying to tackle the State by shouting down postal service employees as "parasites!" is as fruitless as trying to stop Genghis Khan by attacking the cooks and camp-attendants.

This is the spirit of striking-the-root - the jugular vein of the State is its revenues streams: taxes, debt and inflation. Delegitimize the systematic fleecing of the populace, and the organs of the State will whither automatically.

But the State is like an ideological fortress... its greatest vulnerability (taxation, revenues) is also its most closely guarded. No subject is more difficult to tackle than taxation. Try it and you will find out just how busy the State has been in constructing a labyrinth of ideological and real defenses. As pointed out in some other thread, one of the books that is actually illegal in The United States of America, Land of the Free, Home of the Brave with a First Amendment that guarantees that SouthPark-can-spray-animated-diarrhea-all-over-the-screen is Irwin Schiff's book on how to legally avoid paying taxes. I mean, how much simpler do we have to make it?

Clayton -

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

Anenome — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:06:34 GMT

I don't think you're a thief for using that which you pay for.

Like I said, we pay for roads at the gas pumps and in taxes.

There's no way that I'm a net tax consumer on the basis of my use of roads.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

QuisCustodiet — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:00:31 GMT

I suppose that's @Wheylous, too.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

QuisCustodiet — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 23:59:39 GMT

@Anenome

In response to A- You do have a choice with roads. You can choose to build your own roads not subsidized by the government. The point is it's very difficult because the government dominates the road industry.

Not unlike how the government dominates the park industry. So if you, like Wheylous, maintain that employees of the public parks are thieves, then you must also admit that you are a thief for using roads, as it's possible to work for a private park, but pretty difficult to find one.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

Anenome — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 23:28:42 GMT

A, you don't have a choice with roads.

B, you do pay for roads already through gas taxes, only your probably pay way too much and get poor service in return. Los Angeles has the worst road-care ever.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

QuisCustodiet — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:00:54 GMT

@Andris

Great point! If you're a thief for accepting money from the state, then aren't you a thief for accepting any of the goods and services provided by the state, like the roads?

Ah, but you don't really have a choice but to use the public roads, do you?

Well, you don't really have a choice but to be a public park attendant if you want to be a park attendant. Same thing with being a teacher, or fighting off the forces of the British Empire in the Revolutionary War!

So then we're all "thieves".

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

AJ — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:40:30 GMT

I personally find the "gang of thieves" view 100% useless, except as some kind of hypothetically-effective rhetoric to "shock" someone out of their statist mindset.

The Internet is bringing us out of the age of propaganda, where the game was to simply bombard people with facts, arguments, and rhetoric that make your side look good, in hopes of drowning out or at least raising doubts about the opposition. The game was to win followers; people who believed what you said more or less unconditionally.

Now it's different. You cannot really drown out the opposition, and if you make an argument that is less than accurate, it can and often will backfire because people talk outside isolated social circles far more often and easily. Bad arguments for libertarianism were perhaps helpful in that restrictive past, but now a person who becomes a libertarian because of a bad argument is liable to later reject it when he turns around and tries to employ this flawed understanding in debate and gets his ass handed to him.

Re: Who in the state is a "thief" (alluding to Rothbard's dictum)?

Andris Birkmanis — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 08:56:48 GMT

That's not -everyone- tho. I don't receive any of those things.

But you drive on the public roads! ;)