By talking with them, as I am currently doing with you.
Perhaps you're right. However, the statement isn't useful in the least because the alternative(feudalism) is much much worse.
What statement?
What do you mean that feudalism is the only alternative?
The statement "taxation is theft" is like a child complaining that it's not fair he has to do chores to get an allowance. As the parent I'd say 'don't let the door hit you in the ass!'
How is "Taxation is theft" like that?
The kid wants the benifits of living in the household he was born in without any obligations. You want the benifits of the society you were born into with none of the trade-offs.
Being born into a society that organizes using theft validates that theft?
Is the taxation repealed when child matures?
Aren't families communistic?
Is everyone a perpetual child?
It's a limited analogy. You know that demanding perfect solutions is a socialist tactic? Gotta say I'm disappointed. I thought I'd learn from you but it seems you're just an NPC.
How am I demanding perfect solutions?
By taking an analogy farther than it was clearly meant to illustrate the point I was making.
What point were you illustrating?
Read it again. If you can't understand that I doubt you understand Murray Rothbard either.
So, you don't want to reiterate fit clarification.
Well, it was nice talking with you.
Have a good day.
Anarchism becomes feudalism because of the Pareto principle. A small amount of people will own most/all of the land. A monopoly on land ownership is feudalism by definition.
Why would a small amount of people in anarchy own most/all the land?
Haven't convinced me of anything other than that you blindly, dogmatically, definitionally believe to the idea that a tax is necessarily a violent violation of your property rights.
I don't expect to convince you of anything in one conversation. I don't understand how you're concluding that I'm dogmatic about taxation. Could you explain that?
