taxation based on democratic consent
By that, I assume you mean the majority consenting to tax the minority?
No - back then it was the minority taxing the majority. Its only recently that the franchaise has been extended enough to include those without class or property. By recently I mean the 1800s.
Then you meant to say "taxation based on
the illusion of democratic consent," which is still going strong.
No I meant what I said. People fought to the death for this stuff - you may regard them as having been deluded fools but that doesn't mean it makes sense to re-write history so that only people who lived in the 1600s but had a 2103 perspective come out OK.
Then perhaps you are using a non-standard definition of "democratic"? Or maybe "consent"?
300 Trojans died at Thermopylae for freedom. You could say it was for the "illusion of" freedom. But that tells us nothing about them and a lot about you. Likewise, over 100,000 Britons died for the right to have taxation based on the consent of the Commons. What exactly is the point of saying they died for "the illusion of" freedom. Do you seriously imagine the concept of freedom in 350 years will be the same as it is today? Are you arguing for the "illusion of" freedom yourself?
We're not talking about freedom. We're talking about taxation, democracy, and consent. Sparta (not Troy, btw) was anything but a democracy. I suspect the non-standard definition you're using is in deed "democratic," given that you keep referring to representatives and monarchies as your examples of "democratic consent." Let me correct that:
de·moc·ra·cy
/diˈmäkrəsē/
Noun
A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state
If you're looking for a Classical example, Athens would be your best bet.
But even then, Democracy is based on a logical fallacy: The idea that because an idea is popular, it is the best.
