I take every effort possible to keep the state from dispossessing me of my property. It is not up to me to exact justice on the state for its wrongs caused to people who either voluntarily submit, or who are lacking the desire to recoup their property.

Things being what they are in the world, you have to pick your battles. Even though the state has stolen from me in the past by way of income tax, social security tax, and other myriad means of acquiring my property, I chalk those instances up to my fault and write them off as a lesson in ignorance and fear. Now that I know the difference, I take proactive measures to keep my property out of the hands of the state.

I believe in paying my way for any cost incurred upon an individual or entity for my benefit. That is a voluntary act. I do not subscribe to any claim being made for what others perceive me to owe for what they perceive to be a benefit to me.

There is a difference between stealing, and recovering that which you have been involuntarily deprived of. If I take something which I have not justly come to possess or produce by way of my industry, then I have acted lawlessly. Anarchy is not about lawlessness, it is about needing no authoritative compulsion to act lawfully. Of course, that law is the higher law of nature which respects other’s rights and treats them as equals.

When we start justifying the capricious or unlawful acquisition of the fruits of the labor of others, regardless of whether or not they believe or know they support the state, we have removed the line of morality and justice which separates us from them; and further justify their presumption that society is in need of an external conscience and coercive obedience.

When all else fails, recover what is owed, but do so where no other bears the burden who had not contributed to your loss.

So what you’re saying is that we should always pay for it twice, once through taxes and once through the tickets?

“If you don’t pay for your ride, the government ends up having to pay for it. The $2 that you pay for the subway is $2 that the government doesn’t have to forcibly expropriate from someone else.”

Preaching free transport is not a support of government expropriation. We are not responsible for the crimes of the government. All we can do is try to make the situation more bearable for everyone.

I had reservations about making a personal statement regarding who I am and what relationship, if any, exists between myself and that fiction; and doing so by the rules set forth by that fiction. I reasoned that since I was assimilated into the State, as opposed to freely, and with fully-informed consent, pledging my allegiance and support to same, nothing occurring during that relationship could morally or lawfully bind me since the axiom goes, “Non videntur qui errant consentire” (Those who are mistaken are not deemed to consent).

After reviewing the renunciation documents and process I became particularly bemused by the “Statement of Understanding Concerning the Consequences and Ramifications of Relinquishment or Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship”. Some points of contention were numbers 7 and 10. They are still retaining some lingering nexus for not releasing the individual from their jurisdiction. I believe that for me to be bound to the authority if a State, I had to voluntarily accede to its authority, just as dissolving that relationship involves a voluntary and intentional act.

Instead, I crafted my own document, identifying who I am and the grounds for my no longer aver to that authority having any control over me. I named my document “Public Declaration of Sovereignty, Expatriation, and Dissolution of all Previous National and Political Allegiance”. It is intended to forestall any action taken by government against me under the presumption that I submit to the subjugated status of a U.S., or State, citizen. Copies were sent to the U.S. Department of State, the State where I presently live, as well as the neighboring State where I was born, and the city government where I live.

I have receipts from all entities, as well as my filing the document with the county recorder of deeds since there were pending legal issues for my transgressing codes and ordinances for which I did not submit to the jurisdiction of the State. Governments, being paper-driven fictions, cannot proceed with the barrier of a “legal” document of which its contents they cannot overcome. All actions against me has appeared to cease. Even the city where I live had considered passing a resolution, upon reviewing my Declaration, identifying me as a “danger” to the City and barred from any public functions. Only one council-woman refused to sign because she understood what I was really saying, and since a unanimous vote was required I was not officially identified as a “danger” to the city.

Since then, my drivers license has expired and I still travel the roadways in my property, I refused to procure a business license and publicly challenged such authority at a city council meeting where I asked to be arrested and tried (they did not arrest me), and an outstanding warrant for my arrest has not been acted upon despite me being within arms reach of the police dozens of times.

I am left largely, alone. Some say that I have reached the stage of “being more trouble than what I’m worth” for government, which is fine with me. In my opinion, government is more trouble than what it is worth. I, like you, out of principle do not accept “employment” from the State, because to do such means that I am enjoying the privilege of receiving the stolen and extorted wealth of other people, regardless of whether or not I can use it for my own ends. The taking of such monies implies a strong presumption that I submit to the benefits, pains, and penalties tied to engaging the fiction for my own benefit.

I would ask you to review my declaration and give me your honest opinion as to whether you believe it one of many possible ways people can confront the beast peaceably and morally by putting it on the defensive of overcoming an individuals public renunciation based upon moral and philosophical grounds.

I applaud you for your efforts and successes. I am not at the point, yet, where I will abandon this stronghold of ignorance and servitude, but it is on my horizon.

Kudos, sir, kudos.

Mark McCoy

…which is why government is evil, no matter whether it is local, state, federal, or global. The Ring is what it is. Bilbo had it for decades. He continued to be a nice Hobbit. But in private moments, he betrayed an evil deep inside, to Frodo and Gandalf at least. Local government is still a monopolization on the use of force and violence. Evil is evil.

Granted, a parent who is sarcastic towards his children is less evil than a parent who beats on his children. A government that only steals a little money locally is less evil than one that steals a lot at the national level. But in the end, abuse is abuse, theft is theft, force is force, violence is violence, and evil is evil.

The government steals from me. I will hide what I can from them. The government may be inept, but there is no telling when they will come after you. The local, state and federal governments have all come after me rather suddenly and threateningly, for money in the past. I will continue to pay taxes and file income tax returns until I have learned how to hide all of my money from these bastard fucks, even the cute little local bastard fucks that Mr. Smith tries to rationalize.

You seem to be falling into a false binary opposition here, though, saying “he’s supporting the State as much as the others”. That’s simply not true. There is a continuum here, not an either/or. That said, I’d be overjoyed to find the society with the attitude toward tax collectors you describe.

@Steven: Thanks for piping up here, finally! Now what do I have to do to cure you of the last of your minarchist fantasies, hmmm?

We may differ and my views continue to evolve but I hold that it is or may be possible, if you’re going to have any sort of government at all (and that is quite an assumption here) to have reasonably just and decent government at a local level if the people are vigilant and engaged. I will not begrudge every person who chooses to serve his or her community through local government. Local corruption is commonplace and of course local police can be abusive and injustice can be perpetrated but it usually does not result in the mass death, ridiculous misallocation of resources and large scale waste of human life that a massive central state does. I would argue that a massive central state decreases the quality of local government too by discouraging the civic participation of decent people and by encouraging dependence and reliance on the central state.

Paying tax to the state is a personal decision each person must make regarding how much they are willing to go along to get along and that calculation may change throughout the course of ones life. Thus far, I have paid my taxes and I will not judge another man for paying tax and certainly his payment of tax does not justify aggression against him.

The correct agorist solution to the State is to develop free market alternatives to the State, rather than directly stealing from the State or damaging State property.

The on-the-books small business owner can’t claim the moral high ground over the Wal-Mart CEO or a direct State employee, because he’s supporting the State as much as the others.

I read somewhere that in certain historic periods, *ANYBODY* who paid taxes was treated as an outlaw, and tax collectors were routinely met with violent resistance by all. A known tax collector could not go into any store and purchase food or lodging.

I’d certainly like to live in a society where anyone who violates the non-Aggression principle against free market workers is unable to purchase anything in the free market (unless restitution is paid).

Any on-the-books business is a branch of the State.

Hogwash. Poppycock. Balderdash.

By such logic, the business owner who pays even one cent in tax to his masters in the government house should face unlimited expropriation where the expropriators would face no penalty enforced against them by right-thinking people.

You wanna live in that world? Fine. Count me out, please. Now, where’s my gun…