Libertarians are often split on the issue of how to respond to government requests like the Census. It is plainly obvious that taking money from the people by force in order to engage in this glorified demographics survey is unjust, and many worry that the questions we are required to answer are far too intrusive. Therefore, many libertarians have chosen to refuse to participate in the census in one form or another – some tossing out their census forms entirely and others responding only to questions they feel are permitted to be asked by the Constitution (namely, the question regarding the number of persons living in the household).
Others argue, though, that while the census is surely unjust, one should follow the law anyway because, after all, it does not really do harm to anyone and you are unnecessarily exposing yourself to additional aggression by refusing to cooperate. I find this response persuasive – after all the taxation is a sunk cost and the aggression has already occurred, indeed, the money has already been spent to pay for the census, so the libertarian who responds to the census is in no way contributing to the aggression inherent in the process. Further, the threat of additional aggression is good reason to follow the law. Given that one does not contribute to aggression and that one can avoid additional aggression against oneself by filling out a similar form, this is a very powerful argument in favor of compliance.
However, as the title of this post suggests, I have chosen to be noncompliant with the census. But why, given the strength of the argument in favor of compliance?
{ 2 comments }
