这次讲座全面概述了美国的反税运动，追溯了其起源、关键人物以及对美国政治的影响。讲座首先重点介绍了格罗弗·诺奎斯特这位关键人物和他提出的“不加新税”承诺，这已成为共和党政客的试金石。讲座认为，反税运动是20世纪最成功的社会运动之一，其对政治和经济格局的变革性影响堪比民权运动。 该运动的起源可以追溯到20世纪70年代初，尼克松政府倒台后，保守派试图重新思考共和党的议程。这一时期见证了像传统基金会和卡托研究所这样的有影响力的智库的崛起，这些智库由富有的个人和组织资助，旨在挑战罗斯福新政和伟大社会共识。这些智库专注于为小政府和亲市场政策提供意识形态上的理由，以应对他们所认为的大学中的自由主义偏见。 第二个关键来源是1978年加利福尼亚州的13号提案，这是一项由霍华德·贾维斯领导的投票倡议，该倡议大幅降低了房产税。这件事被描绘成一场反对大政府和过度支出的革命，引起了各党派选民的共鸣。贾维斯的民粹主义言论，将政府描述为充斥着“强盗和游手好闲的人”，助长了反税情绪，为更广泛的全国性运动奠定了基础。 讲座随后深入探讨了公投政治的动态，并以英国脱欧为例。通过关注单一问题，公投允许选民表达偏好，而无需考虑捆绑式政治平台中固有的更广泛的成本或权衡。这使得减税特别有吸引力，因为选民很容易支持减税，而不必考虑其对政府服务的潜在影响。反税运动成功地利用了这种动态，将减税定位为一个独立的问题，与其他政策考虑因素无关。 讲师强调，1994年，纽特·金里奇和他的“与美国有约”是美国政治的关键一年，标志着反税情绪推动的众议院控制权转向共和党。讲座随后考察了废除遗产税的案例。这是通过两党合作，利用策略，理解利益，运用叙事实现的。共和党政客利用这一点发挥了自己的优势，尤其是弗兰克·伦茨使用的术语“死亡税”。 此外，他还谈到了乔治·W·布什于2001年签署了《经济增长和减税协调法案》，该法案将取消遗产税。未来十年，将损失1.3万亿美元的收入。 遗产税有一项日落条款，该条款将废除遗产税一年。许多民主党人对此并不认真。人们会用一些故事来说明一个家庭在缴纳死亡税后被迫出售自己的房产。在随后的几年里，遗产税被废除了并得以维持。这是为了避免因全面废除的战斗口号而产生分裂。 分析强调，反税议程与种族策略相一致，迎合了对政府支出主要惠及非白人人口的不满情绪。然而，减税也可以通过给予每个人一些东西来团结共和党联盟内的各个派别，从而避免了你争我夺的游戏，在这种游戏中，一个群体的收益是以牺牲另一个群体为代价的。 最后，讲座评估了反税运动在缩小政府规模方面的有效性。尽管在减税方面取得了成功，但政府支出并没有显著减少。相反，政府依赖于增加债务。他谈到减税并没有饿死野兽。讲座的结论是，反税运动深刻地改变了政治格局，优先考虑减税和债务，而不是通过税收为政府提供资金。

This lecture provides a comprehensive overview of the anti-tax movement in the United States, tracing its origins, key figures, and impact on American politics. It begins by highlighting Grover Norquist, a pivotal figure, and his "No New Taxes" pledge, which has become a touchstone for Republican politicians. The lecture asserts that the anti-tax movement is one of the most successful social movements of the 20th century, comparable to the civil rights movement in its transformative impact on the political and economic landscape. The origins of the movement are traced back to the early 1970s, following the Nixon administration's collapse, where conservatives sought to rethink the Republican agenda. This period saw the rise of influential think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute, funded by wealthy individuals and organizations, aimed at challenging the New Deal and Great Society consensus. These think tanks focused on ideological justifications for smaller government and pro-market policies, addressing what they perceived as a liberal bias in universities. A second key source was Proposition 13 in California in 1978, a ballot initiative led by Howard Jarvis, which drastically reduced property taxes. This event is portrayed as a revolt against big government and excessive spending, resonating with voters across party lines. Jarvis's populist rhetoric, characterizing government as filled with "looters and loafers," fueled the anti-tax sentiment and laid the groundwork for a broader national movement. The lecture then delves into the dynamics of referendum politics, using Brexit as an example. Referendums, by focusing on single issues, allow voters to express preferences without considering the broader costs or trade-offs inherent in bundled political platforms. This makes tax cuts particularly appealing, as voters readily support them without necessarily accounting for the potential consequences on government services. The anti-tax movement successfully leveraged this dynamic by framing tax cutting as a standalone issue, independent of other policy considerations. The lecturer highlights 1994, with Newt Gingrich and his Contract with America, as a pivotal year in American politics, marking a shift in control in the House to the Republicans, fueled by anti-tax sentiment. The lecture then examines the repeal of the estate tax as a case study. It was achieved through a bipartisan effort, by using strategies, by understanding interests, using narratives. The Republican politicians played it to their advantage, especially with the term "death tax" by Frank Luntz. Furthermore, he talked about the George W Bush signed the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act in 2001, which would get rid of the estate tax. A $1.3 trillion bill was going to be lost over the next decade in revenue. The estate tax had a sunset clause that would repeal it for a year. Many of the democrats weren't taking it seriously. People would use stories that a family was forced to sell their estate after paying death taxes. The tax was being repealed and sustained in the years following. This was to head off division with having the rallying cry of total repeal. The analysis underscores that the anti-tax agenda aligns with a racial strategy, appealing to resentment against government spending perceived as benefiting primarily non-white populations. However, tax cuts can also unite various factions within the Republican coalition by giving something to everyone, thus avoiding the divided dollar game where gains for one group come at the expense of another. Finally, the lecture assesses the effectiveness of the anti-tax movement in shrinking the size of government. Despite the success in cutting taxes, government spending has not significantly decreased. Instead, government has relied on increasing debt. He talks about how tax cuts has not starved the beast. The lecture concludes that the anti-tax movement has profoundly shifted the political landscape, prioritizing tax cuts and debt over funding government through taxation.