cross-posted from: https://kbin.earth/m/[email protected]/t/2771990
As data centers are shut down by angry mobs and AI surveillance cameras are ripped from their poles, the world’s tech billionaires and CEOs are waking up to the reality that the masses are, broadly speaking, not on board with their plan to automate the world with AI.
Classic neolib playbook. Defund public services so much that they barely function, claim that the government can’t do anything right and/or that public services are “net negative”, then privatize everything and enshittify it even more while extracting as much value from people as possible.
But am I wrong though? We have to form new governments that actually listen to people and has their consent before we give them taxes. Any other kind of government is just a mafia.
Not paying taxes because you don’t like the government or what the tax dollars are spent on is problematic. It’s a subjective judgement. If you are justified in not paying taxes for what you don’t like, someone else is justified in not paying taxes when the government does things that you like just because they don’t like it.
The purpose of democracy is to find some kind of consensus. If you don’t like what the government is doing, find like minded people and work to change minds and the government.
The only way to justify not paying taxes is to argue that you are being denied the ability to participate in the government system and have no legitimate recourse. Honestly, we are at that point now that the government is transparently corrupt. That’s just not the angle you were arguing.
Genocide.
I don’t like it. Some do. Am I morally obligated to fund it with my taxes?
You don’t fund Genocide with your taxes. You pay taxes to the government and the government chooses to fund the genocide.
If you vote for a candidate who wants to vote against genocide but that candidate loses and the winner votes in favor of genocide… did you support genocide by simply casting a vote?
It’s a democracy (in theory). We pay taxes and we collectively decide what to spend one money on. It doesn’t matter how terrible the cause is. It changes nothing beyond how vigorously you need to oppose those who want to do terrible things.
If there is no way to forcefully avoid our government from participating in evils, why should I participate? Why should I not dedicate my every waking moment to dismantling that which aids evil? Do you feel that we, we the people, actually decide what our government does? Do you actually believe that the choices are free and open and reflective of the beliefs of the common American? That is the promise given in the contract that says I am to pay the government, and if the government is not going to fulfill its side, why should I?
What other mechanism does the populace have to voice their displeasure with the actions of the people voted in? Because nothing stops people from doing an about face once in office.
At this point in time, no and no. I’m not arguing against doing whatever it takes to stop the transparent corruption and greed that has taken power over the American government through the Trump administration. I’m arguing against the notion that, generally, not paying taxes is justified because you don’t like what those taxes fund.
This is what I said earlier:
So, we fund genocide with our taxes. The least you could do is acknowledge it.
Paying money into a pool from which good and bad things may be funded and having a specific bad thing (SBT) get funded is not the same as funding a SBT.
If I refuse to pay my $1000 tax bill and the government decides to cut food aid to needy children by $1000 to compensate while still funding that SBT… was I funding the SBT or was I feeding needy children?
If I pay my taxes to a government that doesn’t do the SBT, and they decide to start doing the SBT that fiscal year… did I fund the SBT?
It’s simple - I was paying my taxes. The government chose to allocate some of that to do the SBT.
Yes, we have no legitimate recourse. We never did. For example, the US constitution wasn’t legitimately ratified and even if it was, that was 250 years ago. Did we agree to be under it? And even if 99% did agree to be under it, what is the recourse of the 1%? Their only recourse is find another country. But every country is like this and none of them have the consent of the governed. It’s an oligopoly of power-hungry countries. True recourse would be the ability to form your own country. Secession, not only by states but by any group or even an individual. Without that we just get a choice between which prison we prefer.
Lets explore a hypothetical. A theoretical person, who I’ll randomly call Ronald Drump, loves raping and torturing. He does it every chance he gets. Can’t get enough of it. Men, women, children - all are fair game in his eyes. He’s got enough money for body guards to make sure he isn’t interrupted by peasants. He doesn’t like the law of the land. The law says he must not do what he wants to do and have a good time. Jerking off in the middle of the street to the tortured screams of his victims is apparently against the law! They send Police to stop him!
He didn’t agree to these laws. He never consented to be governed by them. Everywhere he goes, the government tells him to stop. He can’t escape it! Is he justified in refusing to comply? He has no recourse! He’s not welcome anywhere. Is the freedom to choose what tyrannical government he wants to live under really a choice at all? Why can’t he just establish the Republic of Ronald on main Street and be free from the unjust system?
Edit: We live in a society. Democratic rule of the majority over the minority in its simplest form is not ideal, but most of humanity has been moving away from that simple method bit by bit. Laws established by the majority that try to protect the rights of those in the minority, to shield them from such outcomes. Its not perfect, but it’s a work in progress. Without consensus of some kind society regresses to might makes right and tyranny of the powerful.
You don’t choose where or to whom you are born. That’s just life. It sucks, but there is no way to change that especially since you have no concept of any of these things or what you believe until years after the event. Raging against the unfairness of these facts seems… silly to me?
Of course you’re wrong. That’s just Libertarian/Ancap nonsense…
Forming governments is ancap? Sure, dude.
Not paying taxes because ‘government is wrong’
I said bad governments don’t deserve taxes. Do you think every government is justified to take as much taxes as it wants however it wants? No? Then shut up! :)
These are two separate things. Do bad governments deserve taxes? How else will roads, transit, schools, parks, etc be paid for? So yes, I believe even bad governments not only deserve taxes, but require taxes to function. Are governments justified in taking as much tax as they want whenever they want? Of course not. Especially since those taxes often don’t fund roads, schools, parks, etc but rather imperialist wars and genocide.
Unless you’re working towards the goal reforming or establishing a new government, your actions are purely performative. It sounds like you simply don’t like paying taxes (who does really?). This is pure Libertarianism.
Do you go to local meetings to vote on tax codes? Do you vote in progressive candidates who have a more favorable tax code? Are you fighting billionaires and corporations who pay virtually ZERO taxes? Are you protesting wars and genocide in the streets? Are you fighting ICE and their bloated, unlimited budget for killing and kidnapping? Are you going to town council/board meetings and protesting AI and Data Centers?
No? Then shut up!
I’m a Socialist and I’m actively working towards all those goals, and more. You are individualistic. You think individual actions will achieve whatever it is you think your goal is. It will not. We need collective action of the working class, united in a fight against the Capitalist class, who (and you’re right, here!) do not represent us.