tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5709186309949871746.post2137980998068852626..comments2023-12-10T06:09:13.423-07:00Comments on Sparks Commentary: In defense of John Locke: The need for private propertyJeffrey Sparkshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18299214695725128905noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5709186309949871746.post-42381550706061948652020-09-17T22:36:46.320-07:002020-09-17T22:36:46.320-07:00Thank you for your comment. Locke is indeed saying...Thank you for your comment. Locke is indeed saying that there is a place for taxation. As Locke argues in some of the passages above, people have consented to pay taxes if they have a say in the government that is levying those taxes. Even if they would rather that the government not tax them personally, their ability to vote on who will hold their society’s taxing power is understood as consenting to what their government is deciding to do with that power. This is true, even if the individual is opposed to that particular tax, and voted against those who decided to levy it.<br /><br />In Locke’s opinion, living in a democratic society means (at least some amount of) submission to majority rule, even if we do not need to submit to the majority in every case. The United States Constitution, for example, guarantees certain rights (as in the Bill of Rights) which are not up for majority vote. Nonetheless, some amount of submission to majority rule has to happen, in order for there not to be chaos in the society. Thus, we cannot use our being outvoted as an excuse not to obey particular laws, such as the tax laws being discussed here. I believe that this is the response that Locke would probably give you, if he were still alive today.<br /><br />Thank you for your excellent question. It shows that you’re engaging in critical thinking about the issues raised in this post. If those being taxed are represented in the body levying the external tax, I totally agree with you about the need for external taxation – and so (I believe) does John Locke.Jeffrey Sparkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18299214695725128905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5709186309949871746.post-91642897343905703452020-09-17T09:25:20.554-07:002020-09-17T09:25:20.554-07:00I am confused, is Locke saying that taxation is, s...I am confused, is Locke saying that taxation is, specifically property, is part of the system? But the government can not take it without his consent? Can you help me clarify this? I hold the opinion that a external tax seems to be the best route. Or a voluntarily system, something most folks don't even talk about. The voluntarily would help back up the external. ThanksAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12727161978623327850noreply@blogger.com