Comment: The Rule of Law is important.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Not done (see in situ)

The Rule of Law is important.

The Rule of Law is important. But it is not sufficient for a free society.

Again ancaps do think that if statutory laws are going to be forced on people, they should apply to everyone equally. If we have to have masters, we would prefer masters that are at least bound by the same laws we are. We are with you on this.

But we do think that is not sufficient for a free society. The Rule of Law does not try to prevent you from having to act on your rights.

IE a progressive income tax is a violation of the rule of law, because it treats people differently per income. I think you would agree with that?

A flat or capitated tax is not a violation of the Rule of Law because it treats everyone the same. You could argue that a flat tax isn't consonant with the rule of law either, which is why I suspect the Constitution only allows capitated taxes on people. But today people generally accept that a flat tax, is 'equal treatment by the law' because it's a fixed percentage, so we'll stipulate this.

So flat taxes or capitations are ok by the standard of the rule of law.

However ancaps have a problem with them, because they are a violation of rights. They conflict with your natural right to protect your property. They thus depend on ethical asymmetry. The rule of law is not an aegis vs ethical asymmetry. Someone is taking and someone is receiving even though the law in question does abide the Rule of Law.

Further ancaps have a problem with taxes, even when they conform to the rule of law, on the grounds that you cannot delegate to others a power you do not have. Ie you don't have individually a right to steal. Put better you have zero right to steal.

No matter how many people you get together, no matter how many zeroes you add together, you always end up with ZERO right to steal.

There is no morality imputed to government that doesn't derive from the individual. This is necessary due to ethical symmetry, which is the basis of any just moral system. The basis of all collectivist political philosophies is moral asymmetry.

They are all convoluted because they are trying to hide the fact that they ultimately say the same thing. What is moral for one man is not moral for another.

I'm a fan of the rule of law. We're on the same team so far as that goes.

Ancaps just don't pretend that moral asymmetry is ever ok. Probably most of us would not trouble ourselves any further if we at least had the Rule of Law back, in the form of a re-legalized Constitution. There would still be government predations, but they would be minimized to the extent most of us would likely just try to live our lives. That's not an admission that society would not still be immoral, just the remaining immorality might not be worth the trouble to extinguish.