the sword and the lie

The only difference between the taxing state and a robber is that the former, through its apologists (ancient priests, modern experts, etc) makes you think its for your own good, and subjects you to a greater variety of injustice. In fact, the comparison makes the profession of robbery look downright benign.Lysander Spooner said it best…

The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you. He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villainies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.¹

¹Lysander Spooner, No Treason No. 6, The Constitution of No Authority, part 3

There is a moral code written in our nature.  When we take up an unused piece of nature and begin to use it, we instinctively think of it as our property.  We take instinctive affront when our person or our property is assaulted by others.  We feel instinctive outrage when we see the person or property of others assaulted.  And we feel instinctive guilt when, or at least after, we assault the person or property of others.  This instinctive moral code is only shoved aside when we enter conditions of extremity, in which circumstances have forced the human community to devolve into a war of all against all.  In those cases, we instinctively cast aside our communal moral feelings for the sake of extreme short-term selfishness.  We morally allow ourselves “necessary evils”.The state has deceived the bulk of humanity into believing that society is inherently in perpetual extremity, and that its own acts of murder, plunder, and enslavement are necessary evils.  This is a lie.  Society does not require for its survival, or even for its flowering, that certain men be above natural morality.  Far from it; the murderers, plunderers, enslavers, and liars who comprise the state are simply parasites who cripple society and threaten to destroy it.