Non-libertarians can understand the immorality and wrongfulness of private robbers forcibly taking people’s money and giving it to others. Unfortunately, however, many of them are unable to see that the same principle applies to the government.
The core principle of the libertarian philosophy is what is known as the non-aggression principle. It holds that it is morally wrong for one person to initiate force against another person, either directly or indirectly through the use of government. Libertarians understand the critical importance of the non-aggression principle and subscribe to it … mostly.
Let’s assume that I rob you of $10,000. I take the money and give it to the poor, needy, and disadvantaged. I don’t keep any of the money for myself. By robbing you of your money, I have initiated force against you. Under the libertarian non-aggression principle, my action is considered immoral even though I have selflessly given the money to others who need it.
The same principle applies to the government. If the government taxes you $10,000 and gives it to the poor, needy, and disadvantaged, the government has engaged in an immoral action. That’s because taxation is based on force. The government forces you to pay taxes. If you refuse to pay your taxes, the government will initiate force against you in the form of arrest, prosecution, conviction, incarceration, fines, liens, attachments, and garnishments. There is nothing voluntary about the government’s requirement to pay taxes. The fact that the government has given the money to others who need it does not change the wrongfulness of what the government has done.
Libertarians apply the non-aggression principle not only to the private robber but also to the government. Just as it is morally wrong for a private robber to take a person’s money and give it to others, it us just as morally wrong for the government to do it.
Non-libertarians can understand the immorality and wrongfulness of private robbers forcibly taking people’s money and giving it to others. Unfortunately, however, many of them are unable to see that the same principle applies to the government.
Unfortunately, however, some libertarians have carved out an exception to the non-aggression principle. They hold that it is okay to violate the libertarian non-aggression principle if one is gradually reducing a welfare-state program.
For example, consider Social Security, which is the crown jewel of America’s welfare state. It is based on the initiation of force because it relies on the IRS to forcibly seize through taxation the income of younger people in order to give the money to older people.
Be seeing you
MCViewPoint 