This is the third in a series evaluating Gary North’s book, Christian Economics in One Lesson. North’s work is a spin-off of Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson, which is itself based on Frederic Bastiat’s analogy of the broken window. Before reading this article, I suggest reading the introduction and first article.


In this article, I’m evaluating the chapters on public works and taxation. Taken together, these chapters show that the monopolistic nature of publicly-funded projects diminishes wealth. Hazlitt’s comparison of the lesson of the broken window with taxation is two-fold:

1. Our society thinks that government spending is the universal cure for our economic plight.
2. The means of financing such spending (taxation) decreases society’s overall wealth.

North’s Economic-ethos

North also has a two-fold lesson:

1. People who are in ethical rebellion prefer tyranny over liberty.
2. It’s difficult to persuade such people that taxation diminishes wealth.

North’s moral lesson is that the allure of government spending produces covetousness in the heart which then results in stealing through taxation. Covetousness may or may not be the problem in this case, but what definitely is a problem is the net loss of wealth via theft, which is against the moral will of God. For North, this creates a moral quandary for property owners. North correctly connects ownership with personal responsibility, but he does so by appealing to Reconstructionist ethics and soteriology. He believes that those who embrace a system of taxation will bring condemnation upon themselves at the final judgment, while those who reject taxation are contributing to their own sanctification. In other words, North actually connects our personal economic responsibility with salvation, which ties into his problematic views of soteriology. For North, taxation is not merely immoral; he thinks that by supporting taxation, we inhibit our individual sanctification.

Reconstructionism is difficult to square with libertarianism, but setting aside the broader Reconstructionist framework, let’s simply evaluate the morality of taxation.

Read More

Join Mere Liberty

My content is free and audience supported. Members enjoy premium access. Click here to learn more.

Become a Member!

Thanks!

Join Mere Liberty

My content is free and audience supported. Members enjoy premium access. Click here to learn more.

Become a Member!

Thanks!

Kerry Baldwin 

Thanks for visiting my website! Add your thoughts and comments by contacting me below, or you can interact with me and my patrons by becoming a premium member at mereliberty.com/membership.

Follow Me

Amazon Goodreads Apple Podcasts Google Podcasts Spotify Feedly YouTube

  Gift Jar

w

In lieu of a comments section

I welcome and encourage your thoughts, comments, and questions through email.


Related Posts

Harm or Aggression: How do Libertarians Establish What is Crime?

Harm or Aggression: How do Libertarians Establish What is Crime?

Some libertarians confuse the non-aggression principle (NAP) with the harm principle. It’s not that hard to see why; aggression can cause harm. So, some non-libertarian Christians have misconstrued what our non-aggression principle means. This often leads to confusion...

A Paradigm Shift on Abortion?

A Paradigm Shift on Abortion?

A Paradigm Shift on Abortion? Kerry Baldwin Makes a Libertarian Case for a New Perspective Lions of Liberty Podcast| Show Notes In today’s flagship Lions of Liberty podcast, host Marc Clair is joined by Kerry Baldwin of MereLiberty.com and the Dare to Think podcast to...

The Great Abortion Debate: A Chat With Kerry Baldwin GodArchy #33

The Great Abortion Debate: A Chat With Kerry Baldwin GodArchy #33

The Great Abortion Debate: A Chat With Kerry Baldwin GodArchy #33 GodArchy Podcast | Show Notes Few issues are as binary and divisive as abortion. But the standard “pro-life” and “pro-choice” positions in American politics have utterly failed to adequately deal with...

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This