[dane-pgp]

You only have "a right to [your] property" because the voting majority agreed that that right should exist.

Also, if democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner, what do you think would happen in that situation if the wolves abandoned voting?

[vecplane]

Not so - property rights are a large part of human rights, inherent to being human.

Others may ignore your rights and abuse your freedoms, but that does not make it acceptable, and it doesn't mean those rights and freedoms don't exist.

The wolves and sheep are aggressors and prey. Your hypothetical is an analogy for theft - the majority 'taking' what it wants by disregarding the rights and freedoms of the minority.

[dane-pgp]

> property rights are a large part of human rights

"Human rights" isn't an excuse to not pay taxes, nor do they even forbid progressive tax policies.

> Your hypothetical is an analogy for theft

(For the avoidance of doubt, I am against theft and in favour of democracy, so I agree that my hypothetical of the wolves abandoning democracy was not something I thought would lead to a better societal outcome.)

A society which accepts the principle of private property might agree that certain "taking" is theft, but a society can equally decide that the "taking" of tax payments is not theft. Just because a group is a minority and strongly opposes what the majority want, doesn't make the minority's desire inherently more moral than that of the majority, even if they express their desire in terms of "rights and freedoms".