Paul Mckeever

[Miles White]

I found this video on youtube about Paul Mckeever (who's the leader of the Freedom Party of Ontario and Canada), discussing some of the political philosophy of Objectivism. However, what caught my interest was the end of the video were he claimed to justify taxation by saying that since techiniquly it would be moral to go out and hunt down a criminal who violated your rights, it's not recommended because of the risk that you would be taking in accedently hunting down an innocent man, and for that reason, we need to establish a government and for that same reason we need to pay taxes in order to maintain it. However, I still do not see how that example sanctions the initiation of force in order to generate revenue for the government, I found it interesting none the less and thought it was worth making a post about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2zNn6p2r68

[DarkWaters]

I just wanted to begin my response with the caveat that I did not watch the video yet (I cannot do so on my work station) but I think I can offer a helpful response anyway.

I still do not see how that example sanctions the initiation of force in order to generate revenue for the government

I think you need to evaluate this statement in the context of today's society. In my opinion, being subjected to mandatory taxation for a legitimate function of government is probably one of the last things a rational individual should get angry over. Sure, an ideal capitalist society would have the government be voluntarily financed. However, even Ayn Rand describes the voluntary financing of government as one of the last steps to progressing towards a free society, I believe in her essay: Government Financing in a Free Society. In other words, if the U.S. began to gradually transition to where the government would be restriced to its proper functions as defined by Ayn Rand but they were to be funded through mandatory taxation, this would be an overwhelmingly good improvement over the present system.

Given that North American governments subject their citizens to finance government schools, government health care programs, a postal service, social welfare benefits, foreign aid to third world countries where the typical denizen hates the United States, faith-based initiatives, bridges to nowhere in Alaska, pointless farm subsidies, corporate welfare and the like, getting furious that you are forced to pay taxes to fund a court system, the armed forces and a local police force seems to miss the bigger picture.

On another note, I have perused some of Paul McKeever's videos before and I think he does a wonderful job promoting Objectivism on Youtube.

Edited February 8, 2008 by DarkWaters

[intellectualammo]

On another note, I have perused some of Paul McKeever's videos before and I think he does a wonderful job promoting Objectivism on Youtube.

I've only seen his youtube on the Peikoff-Kelley debate:

but found it accurate and correct according to my knowledge of the split.

[Miles White]

In my opinion, being subjected to mandatory taxation for a legitimate function of government is probably one of the last things a rational individual should get angry over.

I had no intent upon making a post with an angry feel to it. Perhaps it was the use of the word "claim" that produced a bitter tone in the post but I honestly had no intention upon making a critical post. I was making the post because I thought the argument he had was rather good even though I still beleive that taxation is an unecessary evil. I wish we could have a Freedom party over here in the United States that didn't have the word Peace preced it.

Edited February 9, 2008 by Miles White

[aleph_0]

Does anyone else think an interview on politico-philosophy while driving is at least a little bit worse than talking on a cell phone while driving? I wonder if the people in his home town ever say, "G*d d*mn*t*, Paul McKeever just cut me off again! I wish he'd find some other place to do his interviews."

Anyway, I agree that we have a moral obligation, in most circumstances, to donate to a capitalist government. But since when does a capitalist government enforce any moral code?

Moreover, just a couple situations I can think of off the top of my head in which one would not have a moral obligation to donate to a capitalist government: One finds evidence of corruption that is not being solved, or the police are not effectively dealing with crime in all areas (say, they only place police stations in areas from which they derive most of their money). The freedom to withhold taxation would be a minimally effective means of protesting these ills.

Edited February 9, 2008 by aleph_0