a direct effort to reduce military spending.
The preparatory document
With these words we would like to pass on some opinions we have heard about peace tax fund and war tax resistance in order to open a debate during our next workshop in Hondarribia.
We have realised there are different positions referring to this matter. With this introduction we would like you to start thinking about it.
- There are people who mean the State should legislate the possibility to pay peace taxes instead of war taxes (Armed Forces).
- They are seeking for respect to their personal conscientious objection to military taxes. This should be guaranteed by our State so every citizen should be offered the possibility to choose between paying taxes for peace or for war.
- Other people, on the other hand think they are willing to reach the abolition of any violent methods to solve conflicts and therefore their aim is the disappearance of the Armed Forces.
- Many war tax resisters do not support the idea of peace tax legislation. For them war tax resistance is as much a political strategy as an issue of conscience .
- Solidarity, justice and peace must be the rule of action for all non-violent ministries and only under these terms could they finance the State.
Both positions might be further discussed. We will try to structure the ideas through some questions which we are supposed to answer, with your contribution, in our workshop.
- Do you think that military taxation is an individual or a collective matter of conscience?
- What kind of resources can you find in your country to change the current tax legislation system?
- Is, in your opinion, non-violent defence a real alternative to the military system?
- Are States which promote wars reliable to administrate a peace tax fund?
- Under your point of view, who could negotiate the use of the peace tax fund?
- Which choice is available for people who cannot divert their war taxes because they do not get the opportunity to file their own tax forms?
- What kind of alternative proposals do you have to use the money from the peace tax fund? Could the cancellation of the external debt of the so-called
under developed
countries be a financiable project? - Do you think the peace tax fund would set up a dangerous precedent allowing other people opt out paying taxes they do not like?
- Is disobedience a licit way to you to change law?
- Would the moment we reach Peace Tax Legislation be the end of our protest?
The list of questions remains open. Perhaps you find some more which can enrich the debate, do not hesitate to send them
We apologize for all the mistakes and we hope you are interested in taking part in the workshop. Any further information you might have about the matter we would be very grateful to receive it.
Gabriela and Yolanda
The report
The topic of this workshop was the relation between peace tax campaigns on the one hand, and war tax resistance an other acts of pacifist civil disobedience on the other.
The discussion centred on peace tax campaigns, and there were front criticism of such campaigns, on the grounds that they leave military budgets untouched and give a false impression of hope. But from these criticisms there emerged a clearer and sharper picture of what such campaigns actually can accomplish, as instrument of education.
Towards the end of the discussion, as people told stories about their own lives, it was possible to see in our lives, if not always in our opinions, a continuum between actions of conscience and actions of politics, and between acts of lobbing and civil disobedience.
Next we are going to write down some of the opinions expressed in the workshop. We cannot reproduce all of them. We were not able to take notice of all, but we hope they can give you an idea of the discussion:
- Both opinions, War Tax Resistance and Peace Tax Campaigns are correct. I find myself very identified with both.
- In Holland the second point of view has grown up from the first one.
- If the process is legalized more people will join the idea because they do not want to pay for war. Illegal ways are not very attractive.
- In my opinion the dichotomy that separates both ideas is absolute and that forces us choose between the individual way and the social one. To state the problem in this way is a big mistake.
- If a nuclear war breaks out we are not going to have time to protest. That is why we have to finish with the armies before.
- Legislation is only a step. The disappearance of the army is the next one.
- In Spain, after conscientious objection was legislated, the number of conscientious objectors has decreased. It is possible that legislation is not the cause of this.
- The State usually responds integrating resistance and protest. It is not easy to get an answer from the State that can make us happy.
- We cannot leave the decision power to the government. We cannot rest passive. We must offer active resistance.
- There are many right ways and the legal way is one more. I do not think the State is going to accept it.
- In Holland we have the experience that some laws, about strange matters, have been approved. In Holland and in the USA religious matters have as well influenced some laws.
- In Italy a law will increase the number of objectors who believe in the importance of popular non-violent defence. Non-violent people give a strong importance to laws. The most important strategy is to give ourselves the right to object.
- Right?, What does right mean? It means to respect people and not to put them to do something they are not allowed in conscience to do.
- Laws should offer you real possibilities, this offer cannot be false. On the one hand the State allows you to object so on the other hand they have to reduce military wastes to respect the will of non-violent citizens.
- And after the law, what?
This is only a step. We must go further.
This is only a way and there are many others:
- Financial institutions like the World Bank use the money from the North to control the South.
- I have been educated in a conservative way. I decided to go to the army. Then I became a Christian and a military tax objector. To me it would be very important to be able to choose the legal way to stop paying for war. We must take the initiative in stopping wars. It goes further than being non-violent, we must do our politics with the truth, love and conscience.
- I have been a military tax objector for 12 years and I have the feeling than the State is going to use our dissidence in their own benefit.
- Tax war resistance is not an objective in itself. Our aim is peace through the reduction of military spending and increasing social spending. As there are not many of us we have to be very careful to choose the best way to change State decisions.
- There are many ways to change things, for instance to build a defence army and that is not an utopia.
- We have to meet each other more often and we should meet other ways of thinking to became more creative. Perhaps we can enrich our points of view by talking to people who represent other ways of resistance. At the moment we find it difficult to walk because we always open the same fridge.
- We are trying to build a new world using the shell of the old one and this is wrong. We should really be building a real new world.
- If the right to pay taxes for peace is legislated, perhaps other people are going to demand the same right, for instance people against abortion.
- The answer is, we are for legislation knowing that other people can demand the right for them as well.
- Not to be able in conscience to do it and not to want to do it is not the same thing. It is not that we do not like to pay taxes for war is that we cannot pay in conscience for war.
- It is difficult to think that governments which are for war, organizing them or being in favour of them, as in Haiti or Panama, are going to respect the reduction of military spending as many objectors are proposing.
- Disobedience is a licit way to change laws and politics. Not every disobedience is licit but civil disobedience in totally licit.
- We should try to get what we think that is right. The biggest effort the State is going to make is to stop resistance. If they legislate military taxes we should look for another way to resist. We could use the peace tax legislation to educate ourselves and to continue in our struggle so that we can get a step forwards.
- The question is not to fight against the State. We believe in our State. There are no good and evil because we can find both in all of us.
- State manipulation on the citizens is clear. They ask us:
do you want freedom?
so, then we have to invade Haiti. History tells us that we have lived wonderful ideas of peace and freedom and all we have lived is a culture of militarism. - We feel ourselves war tax objectors and we are fighting to legislate taxes for peace. To us there is no dichotomy.
- To me there is not a dichotomy either. I have been in prison for being a military tax resister and at the same time I would like to have peace tax legislation.
- I think there are two possibilities, some people see it personal problem they have to solve and others think it is a political and social problem.
- To legislate would be to legitimate the ones who opt to use violent ways to solve conflicts.
Reported by Gabriela and Yolanda