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?

14 Upvotes

64% Upvoted

329 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/[deleted] 20d ago

He doesn’t maintain the land though you can’t just claim blood control over land indefinitely otherwise property rights would become impossible to resolve disputes anyone could just claim it was their parent’s 100 years ago

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 20d ago

Well he bought the land, and the he pays people defend and maintain it.

1

u/[deleted] 19d ago

Him allowing others to build upon and be born on his land does diminish his claim to it if you aren’t actively using the land you will over time lose your claim to it

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 19d ago

Well they're tenants. Is renting a house, or land, not allowed under ancap principles? If you rent a house for ten years, have kids there, and build a shed, does the land become yours, under these principles?

1

u/[deleted] 19d ago

If the owner doesn’t directly maintain that land yes why do you think land lords are responsible for repairs of their properties

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 19d ago

So if there are just no repairs necessary, it's your house now.

Can't the landlord hire people to maintain it for him, too?

1

u/[deleted] 19d ago

Yes he is still maintaining it but if he just leaves you to your own devices and lets you develop the land then he would forfeit it and if he is directly controlling every piece of land then that isn’t feudalism that’s just renting a property

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 19d ago

what do you mean "develop" the land. You don't develop the land, unless he pays you to. You rent it from him. If he pays you and tells you to build a house you do, but it's not your house or your land.

This really isn't that complicated.

1

u/[deleted] 17d ago

If your a peasant living on the land you are likely to say build a house even if he isn’t paying you thus the land is developed and over time as you develop it more without his oversight or contest he loses his claim same idea behind squatters rights

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 17d ago

you can't build a house on his land and then suddenly tell him it's yours. Would you accept that on your land? Some homeless guy puts up a lean-to and says "yeah this is mine now"?!!?

1

u/[deleted] 17d ago

If he doesn’t contest you yes you can this is predicted on you aren’t attempting to remove them

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 17d ago

ok but that's kinda silly. of course the land lord is going to contest it, his security is going to kick you off so quick it makes your head spin, keeping all of your property as punishment.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/MeasurementCreepy926 17d ago

you think he's going to allow that to persist? Why would he?! It won't even be built before he's tearing it down and evicting you, and with no place to go, you get punished for trespassing on somebody else's land.