You probably disagree — and that’s exactly who this is for. We’re not going to lecture you. We’re going to hand you the strongest objections, one at a time, and follow each one honestly until you decide where it lands.
Pick the rebuttal that feels most obvious to you. We’ll steelman it, test it against a single fixed definition, and flag any fallacy along the way — including our own.
theft (n.) — taking another person’s property without their consent, under threat of force.
Agree to that? Then the only question left is whether taxation fits it.
Each click opens that branch and fills the dossier on the right — the Socratic turn, the reasoning, the sources, and the fallacy to watch for. Follow it as deep as you like, or jump to a different objection anytime.
Not a reading list to win arguments — a reading list to make sure you’re right. Every title below is free to read in full — just click it. The fourth column is the Australian record: this argument has been made here before, on a ballot paper and on national television.
“There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.”
— HENRY DAVID THOREAU
If you followed the map to the end and the conclusion held, the honest next step isn’t cynicism — it’s organisation. There is now an electoral arm of that conviction in Australia, and a movement behind it that reaches well beyond one country.
The two halves are one argument. Taxation is how the state funds itself; war is what it spends on. “War is the health of the state” — Randolph Bourne’s line is why we refuse to treat either as normal. And we don’t do “left” or “right” libertarianism: the principle is just consent before aggression, applied without exception.
We’re working to put the party on the ballot at the next Federal Election. Registration takes names — real ones, in numbers. Yours is the difference between a slogan and a candidate.
Sign up to register your support and get on the ballot at the next Federal Election. No spam — only what moves this forward.