THE ROLE of the government in American society today is dramatically larger than it was a century ago. Public education, health care, welfare and social security are but a few earmarks of the state's massive expansion in size and power over the last few generations. This expansion has accompanied a gradual but significant shift in American citizens' attitude toward their government. Legislative action has come to be accepted and even expected at the slightest sign of any social problem, with partisans of both the left and right demanding ever more from Capitol Hill.
This current government-friendly attitude rests upon a foundation of ignorance. Most advocates of government programs misunderstand the fundamental workings of the state and base their political outlook upon a falsely idealized concept of the relationship between the government and individuals. They completely overlook the coercive basis of political power, and blind themselves to the threat of violence that inheres in every act of the state. They do not understand that, in the words of George Washington, "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force!"
Before the passage of the 16th Amendment in 1913, there was no national income tax. While the amendment was still being debated in 1909, a New York Times editorial argued harshly against it, warning, "When men get in the habit of helping themselves to the property of others, they cannot be easily cured of it." Although one can't imagine the same publication expressing a similar sentiment today, this prophetic admonition captured the essence of taxation -- the taking of other peoples' stuff.
But taxes don't just involve theft -- they rely on a hefty dose of violence, as well. As the legendary John Marshall put it bluntly: "The power to tax involves the power to destroy." By instituting a tax, lawmakers not only assert the right to "help themselves" to other peoples' property, but they also grant themselves the legal ability to initiate the use of violence against other human beings. The "legal action" of the IRS would be meaningless were it not backed by force. I pay my taxes because if I did not, uniformed men with guns would come looking for me. If I tried to protect myself against them, they could shoot me, and the law would be on their side. Perhaps if more people appreciated this simple fact, fiscal policy would not be discussed with today's level of detached nonchalance.
Government programs function by taxation, and taxation functions by coercion. This should be a central consideration in any discussion regarding the morality of a government program. With every tax dollar levied, an additional threat of violence is made against the life of another human being. Free health care and social security benefits sound good, but do they justify armed robbery? It's nice to have a public broadcasting service and a national space program, but at what price? These are the types of questions that citizens cannot afford to ignore.
Today, however, politicians ignore the coercive nature of the state quite aptly. In an incredibly perverse twisting of language, federal programs are identified with "compassion," and advocates of limited government are pigeonholed as heartless reactionaries. Even more ironically, those who frequently claim to value peace and nonviolence are often the most vocal advocates of tax increases and expanded state spending projects. Every day, thousands of noisy hypocrites march in anti-war protests in D.C. They decry the use of force against civilians in Iraq, but remain silent in the face of the tax collector's threats at home. Absolutely no violence, they say, unless it's against the rich.
The acknowledgment of the coercive nature of the state doesn't necessarily mean the abandonment of all government programs. It simply requires an honest look at the dirty details of legislative proposals that are invariably billed as "progressive" and presented to the public without mention of their adverse consequences. If people want to think reasonably about the proper role of government in society, they must first understand how it is that government functions. People must rid themselves of the pleasant fiction that state funds are voluntarily contributed out of some noble sense of social altruism. The power to tax truly is the power to destroy, and it is a power that must be used wisely.
(Anthony Dick's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at adick@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 2 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
