wagner@uw-june (Dave Wagner) (03/28/85)
> The Con$cience and Military Tax Campaign is an organization which provides > counseling and other services to conscientious objectors to military taxes. > > Please note that conscientious tax objectors are not tax dodgers; they don't > object to paying taxes, only taxes which in turn pay for war. > > Some of the projects of the CMTC are: > > -- the Peace Tax Fund Bill, legislation which would give conscientious tax > objectors the right to specify that none of their taxes would be used > for military purposes. > Unfortunately, although this idea may sound very appealing, if you truly believe that you have the right to do this then you must also allow that any individual may specify ANY government expense that he does NOT wish to fund. In other words, the pro-lifers could stop funding abortions for poor women, the rich could stop funding welfare, and members of white-supremacy groups could stop funding equal-opportunity programs. Is this the kind of society you want to live in? I'm not in favor of the present rate of military expenditures, but the proper place to attack it is at its source, i.e. the legislature should not approve the budget in the first place. Dave Wagner University of Washington Comp Sci Department wagner@{uw-june.arpa|washington.arpa} {ihnp4|decvax|ucbvax}!uw-beaver!uw-june!wagner
mjk@tty3b.UUCP (Mike Kelly) (03/29/85)
>From: wagner@uw-june (Dave Wagner) >Unfortunately, although this idea [war tax resistance] may sound very >appealing, if you truly >believe that you have the right to do this then you must also allow that >any individual may specify ANY government expense that he does NOT wish >to fund. In other words, the pro-lifers could stop funding abortions for >poor women, the rich could stop funding welfare, ... I've argued exactly this point before -- that the proper way to change the military policies of the U.S. is with collective, not individual, action. But I think I can see the point of the war tax resistors, too. They do not claim a "right" to resist war taxes, at least not in the legal sense. They claim a moral obligation to do so. One cannot stop people, no matter what their political motivations, from making such individual moral statements. Perhaps Dave's point is the same one I would make: one should not confuse such individualistic moral statements with effective political action. Effective political action (a) is collective (b) speaks to people where they're at (c) exerts pressure on those able to change the situation you seek to change. In the case of military policy, that is clearly the Federal government. Since it is unlikely that Reagan will change his misguided policies, the place to exert pressure is on the Congress. It, after all, must approve every penny that is spent by the Administration. Mike Kelly