In 2008, Canada’s House of Commons extended the military mission in Afghanistan (from 2009 – 2011) even though 60% of Canadian taxpayers (funders) were opposed. (Learn more)

There are at least four (or more) reasons for people to become “unwilling to fund” a war, or a particular part of a war:

1. they oppose all war on principle – regardless of cost
2. they oppose some wars, or parts of some wars, on principle – regardless of cost
3. they want to see their taxes redirected to purposes other than to that particular part of that war
4. they would rather keep those tax dollars

All of these above taxpayers face the following issue:

Their government was using their tax money for lethal purposes without their express permission. In that part of that war (Afghanistan, from 2009 – 2011), did these taxpayers have the right to refuse to kill (ie pay for killing)? Similar to soldiers being drafted (“conscripted”), or forced to participate in a war, there is also likewise “tax conscription“.

Links related to the above discussion:

• The taxpayers who did not want the 2009-2011 extension to Canada’s military mission in Afghanistan.
• Canadian Peace Alliance – Campaign: “Peace & Prosperity; NOT War & Austerity”
• Conscience Canada (includes strict pacifists)

—————————–

A Clarifying Footnote: When discussing these issues it’s important to make the following topic distinctions:

- Tax conscription
o Some oppose all war (Conscience Canada)
o Some oppose only some wars (60% of Canadians on the Afghanistan mission extension of 2009-2011)

- Tax redirection: Some prefer to redirect taxes to other uses such as healthcare, etc. (eg. Canadian Peace Alliance – Campaign: “Peace & Prosperity; NOT War & Austerity”) (Some “Conscience Canada” people are amongst this group who prefers “tax redirection.”)

- Tax savings