this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2026
372 points (98.9% liked)
Anarchism
3125 readers
475 users here now
Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.
Other anarchist comms
- !anarchism@slrpnk.net
- !anarchism@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- !anarchism@hexbear.net
- !anarchism@lemmy.ml
- !anarchism101@lemmy.ca
- !flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
He makes about $150,000,000 a day, passively from his assets.
Wealth tax now.
Fucking nauseating
You folks hate theory, huh.
It's okay to be nuanced about this. In a system where one person can "make" this much, things are so obviously out of whack that it's not contradictory to want that kind of wealth to be heavily taxed, while still holding the view that in an anarchist system taxation is not desirable.
Yeah, it’s also worth noting that “wealth tax” is the compromise. It’s the starting point for a good faith negotiation, which works within the bounds of the current systems. Because the alternative is “storm the compounds. We’d only need to livestream a mob eating like a dozen of the richest before the rest get the message and fall in line.”
Nuance about larceny gets you Sweden. Larceny is the wrong approach to horizontalidad. You want to compensate workers for yields, not rob’m.
I don't disagree in principle. But pragmatically, while a wealth tax is an imperfect system for wealth redistribution, it's still realisable on meaningful timescales. It can be done while working to achieve true horizontalidad.
How?
By removing the financial power that people who hoard wealth hold.
That can happen while building new, non-heirarchical systems.
That financial power is lobbying, enabled by taxation (us anarchists righteously call it «larceny»), that hoards wealth for the state…
How…
Yes, I've seen you keep using the word "larceny". Taxation serves multiple functions, including maintaining the stability of the currency.
Right now Elon Musk has more personal wealth than the projected 2026 GDP of 197 nations (as found on the Worldometer page of GDP by Country). In absolute terms he has more lobbying power than a majority of nation states. This is not desirable, equitable or justifiable under any ethical framework I can think of.
Do I think taxation is desirable? No, especially not in financial systems not based on fiat money. Would I support a wealth tax that would result in removing this power from Musk, or any other person with inordinate personal wealth, while we operate in a financial system that is based on fiat money? Yes.
As an action in parallel with other activities that actively build horizontal systems, I consider it beneficial to remove that power from the few individuals that hold it.
Backed by debt, which is theft…
The wealth he obtained through subsidized projects with
’s taxes… Taxing him, through his lobby, is only going to making him richerer…
… … How do you think those few individuals hold lobby power?
Fine, we have established your opposition to a wealth tax in order to remove the power Musk holds via his wealth.
How would you recommend dealing with the specific threat that Musk having this financial power represents?
Total assets, bonds, loans, stock and subsidies forfeiture, and reminting coins by Congress, and only Congress.
I am still unsure how
will ever pay the debts owed to the Federal Reserve. Maybe make usury illegal again?
That link is far too specific. This one gets the point across much more clearly.
you forgot to append the #Against anchor.
it should be depressing many people still don't comprehend the problem with compulsory larceny.
Oh I just now realized that you're calling taxes, "compulsory larceny". Literally just "tax is theft" with a pseudointellectual patina.
Lol ok bud. Go live on SeaLand or some shit
Wait, taxes can now be voluntary?
’Cause mutual aid is something we praxis, but being threatened with violence for not complying to your burglary is “pseudointellectualism”?