While it's easy to dismiss such a statement ("Taxation is theft") as rather vacuous reframing of an act in moralizing language, I actually do appreciate the point of view and believe it is an important one.

The question of how, that is by what process, can an act be considered intuitively vile when performed by an individual and yet good and indeed natural when performed by that particular corporation we call the government, nags incessantly at my mind.

Is it a function of group size? Where does the phase transition occur? Or is it a discontinuous process and possible only when we've sublimated from mere mortals into the holy categories of "sovereignty" and "legitimacy?" Oh sure, the replies to your comment are full of the old "argumentum ad pragmaticum" (excuse the poor latin), but their emotional volatility reveals it is anything but pragmatism driving their convictions. There's some deep, primal, psycho-spiritual shit going on here!

So yes, while I would not count myself amongst their ranks, I really do sympathize with the anarchists, but I've got to ask you: What did you hope to achieve with this comment? Do you really think you are going to change anyone's mind here?

P.S.

More questions for you!

Given the putative measures the government would levy against coinbase should they refuse to cooperate, do you _really_ think that they are acting immorally? Why should _they_ have the moral obligation to put themselves and their business at risk because of something being done to them against their wishes?