Taxation is NOT Theft

Back in March, I tried to best articulate my political philosophy. In that blog post, I also alluded to my criticism of the extreme libertarian position that "taxation is theft". Part of my problem with arguing against people who are more extreme than me is simply the fact that we agree on just about all points. The other part of the problem which I find frustrating in just about every discussion is that the shortest argument tends to win even if it is devoid of context or nuance.

It does seem like a double standard

For those who have never heard of "taxation is theft" or don't understand it, I think the image to the right does a pretty decent job illustrating the philosophy. I first heard of the concept with the story of a robber about to be executed by none other than Alexander the Great. The story was slightly different since Alexander was a conqueror, but the questioned remained. Why is it ok -or perhaps even right- when the forceful taking of property is done en masse versus on an individual level?

I don't think people actually think of taxes as a use of force although I'm sure people pay their taxes because they do not want to deal with the consequences of failing to pay. I highly doubt people pay their taxes simply thinking about what they get out of it. Regardless, failure to pay will inevitably lead to loss of freedom.

Is this a good rebuttal?

The meme to the left seems to be the most common rebuttal I've found to "taxation is theft". It's short. It's witty. It seems to totally debunk the entire notion. But is it good enough?

While simplistic, it addresses Hobbes' notion of the social contract. To put it simply, without the state, humanity would exist in a "state of nature" or anarchy where rape and plunder would be rampant. By submitting to a contract with society, men gain security. Now this society could be ruled by a sovereign (one person) or some assembly of men, but the point is that a social contract is a voluntary submission to a government even if the government uses force to establish itself. Of course, I'm curious how many people read this meme and fully grasp all of the philosophical underpinnings behind it?

Why is this a decent rebuttal? Because a contract implies a choice. You are ultimately choosing to pay taxes. How can taxes be theft if you are inevitably choosing to pay them? After all you could simply leave civilization if you didn't want to pay taxes.

The main point of the Communist Manifesto

While the social contract is a compelling argument, I think the bigger issue is false equivalency and confirmation bias. To the right is essentially the Left's critique of capitalism. Perhaps on the surface they are correct in calling capitalism a form of slavery, but if you think about it, you can easily see the flaws. I think the problem with these short arguments all are a result of confirmation bias. A person on the Left is more likely to believe the slavery meme because it reinforces their view of the world. Likewise, a person on the Right, is more likely to believe in the mantra of "taxation is theft" without thinking critically of it.

The slavery meme is wrong because people inclined to believe in it are not taking into account the initial risk of starting a company and then running it. Plus a worker is not being forced to work in a factory which is antithetical to the definition of slavery. Likewise, libertarians don't like paying taxes (who does?), and seeing "taxation is theft" helps reinforce their disdain for taxes.


The truth is that libertarians and others who spout "taxation is theft" are playing a word game with themselves. Many prominent libertarians such as Congressman Ron Paul advocate for flat taxes and making them as small as possible. Not because they are trying to strike a balance between order and chaos, but because they find the current tax system immoral. It's not theft because the government has legitimacy in the social contract that we all knowingly or unknowingly agree to, but that doesn't mean we don't find it to be wrong. Progressive taxes (specifically ones that target rich people) are immoral -and perhaps even the closest to stealing- because you are taking money away from somebody in order to fund a social program that benefits another person with no benefit towards the person paying for it. With a flat tax and a smaller government, more people would be happy with their government and actually get more out of their taxes versus a tool for redistributing wealth. Of course this is a separate complaint from the complaint "taxation is theft".

In short, taxation is NOT theft because it is drawing a false equivalency between a thief selfishly taking another's property for their own sake and a government taking another's property in fulfillment of a social contract. The argument should really be about how do we fine tune the social contract to maximize freedom while not succumbing to anarchy and our "state of nature". As with any other political discussion, the problem is figuring out the balance versus going towards an extreme.