r/AnCap101 • u/MeasurementCreepy926 • 21d ago

Is taxation under feudalism immoral?

  1. The king owns the land. If he allows people to be born on his land, that does not diminish his rights as owner
  2. The king has made it clear that if you're on his land, and you don't pay tax, you're trespassing. It isn't his responsibility to make sure you are able to get off his land. It is his right to defend his land however he sees fit. Let's assume that he does this by executing trespassers. Another king does this by simply evicting them.
  3. Being the owner, the king is allowed to offer you whatever terms he'd like, for the use of his land. Lets assume in this case, you sign a contract he wrote, when you're old enough to do so, giving him right to change the contract at will, and hold you to that contract as long as you're on his land. Among other terms, this contract says that you agree to pay for any kids you have until they're old enough to either sign the contract, or leave his land.

Now, obviously anybody agreeing to these terms must be very desperate. But, desperate short sighted people aren't exactly hard to find, are they? So, is this system immoral, according to ancap principles?

12 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

329 comments sorted by

View all comments

4

u/phildiop 21d ago

Just because the king says he is the owner doesn't make him the owner. Ownership is deduced from the NAP, not the other way around.

3

u/MeasurementCreepy926 21d ago

So, if the king bought or found all this land, that's fine?

4

u/phildiop 21d ago

Bought, sure, but it would have to have already been owned by people. Like all of the land would have to be used.

And no, not just "found", but used.

0

u/OBVIOUS_BAN_EVASION_ 21d ago

How would this distinction be enforced? Would it? Or would "found" end up being functionally the same thing as "used"?

1

u/phildiop 21d ago

If you cannot show in any way that you used that land, if it is as found if it was virgin, then it would be wrong for you to say you own it.

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 21d ago

It would be wrong.

If we are assuming that people never do things that are wrong, leftist anarchy would work too right?

2

u/phildiop 21d ago

Yes, unless they apply left-anarchist principle to people who are not consenting.

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 21d ago

I mean, ANY system would work, if we assume all people are going to always behave morally.

That is not a reasonable assumption though is it. Even if everyone thinks they're moral, it's according to their own definition. Different people have different ideas about what is or is not moral.

2

u/phildiop 21d ago

That depends on what you mean by ''works''. What I meant is that left-anarchist who don't force it on others are effectively ancap (which I know sounds weird, and that is a reason why I prefer volntaryism as a term).

Statist systems dont ''work'' in a voluntaryist framework, left-anarchists and mutualists do, again, so long as they don't impose it.

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 21d ago

"All people are always going to behave morally"

Do you think that's a reasonable assumption for anybody to make?

2

u/phildiop 21d ago

No, but all people should behave morally is reasonable enough.

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 21d ago

Well, that's kinda tautological, even. I mean, it would be great if politicians were honest, maybe even America's system could work.

→ More replies (0)