Chris Frandsen wrote: > > On Aug 10, 2009, at 8:40 PM, John Williams wrote: >> The politician pretends to be acting >> altruistically while still behaving in a self-serving manner. >> >> But the politicians take your money by force and THEN give it to the >> businesses. > > John: > > These two sentences are the problem with people accepting your arguments. > > The first is a gross generalization. Most of the politicians that I > have personally met are not 'self-serving" , rather they are making a > great effort to serve. > > The second is not true! We live in a constitutional republic which > allows us to vote for representatives at every level of government and > have given those representatives the right through the constitution and > the courts to tax us to maintain the societal infrastructure required to > support a civilized way of life. This is not "taking your money by force". > > This is the system that our fore-fathers left us. If it is not working > for you then you have options, that is what free speech is all about. > Getting on the internet and ranting is one of them. However I must tell > you that generalizing and sarcasm usually code zero in a classroom which > means they will not win you much support. > > learner
States have a monopoly on coercive force. If they don't, they don't meet the definition of a sovereign state. States collect taxes by the implied threat of coercive force. If you don't pay taxes, you go to jail. John Williams is absolutely right. The government of a sovereign state takes taxes by force. Most of us believe that is right and necessary. J.W. doesn't. More fundamental is his objection to the U.S. Government. In effect, he is saying that the U.S. system of government is inherently illegitimate, largely because it is run by politicians. By John William's standards ALL representative democracy is illegitimate precisely because a representative democracy REQUIRES professional politicians. The problem is that we have "representatives at every level of government" and they are all necessarily politicians. Being politicians they are inherently incapable of representing the commonweal. The problem is that the judges are appointed by politicians. The problem is that it is the inherent nature of politicians to cause government to use tax money for largely illegitimate and immoral ends. ====================== So there questions we want John Williams to answer. * Is government undesirable? That is, is less government better? This is a heuristic based on pragmatic considerations. * Is government inherently evil? This is a moral principle. * Is government necessary? * Does government have the right to levy taxes? * What kind of politician-free government does he propose? Eventually all of us in the debate may need to clarify who qualifies as a "politician" since the category politician seems particularly salient in John William's world view. _______________________________________________ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
