Let's get this one thing straight up front:  There will always be taxes.  As long as there is government, money will have to be collected and spent for national defense, upkeep of public buildings, etc...  The real argument is HOW the revenue is collected.

The most democratic way of collecting tax is through apportionment, which is what the US Constitution originally demanded. ^[1]  Our national defense, our economy, and our government were extremely successful with this type of taxation.  Dividing the tax burden equally among all citizens worked, and never failed to generate enough revenue to fund government.

In 1910, a small group of bankers met, in secret, to discuss the creation of a centralized bank that would control credit and monetary policy for the country. ^[2]  An income tax was to be implemented as the best way to fund this bank.  This concept had been long though of as anathemic to democracy and freedom, being defeated several times before ^[3] (see Andrew Jackson quote at bottom.) ^[4]   Nevertheless, through a rather convoluded series of then-legal discussions and transactions between the bankers and a set of congressmen, an income tax act was passed in 1913, altering the Constitution and making it legal to tax a percentage of a person's income. ^[5]

Outraged citizens, when they realized what was being done, began to raise the alarm.  Congressmen who previously supported a central bank, when they realized their huge mistake, began speaking out openly against the back-door tactics of the bankers.  Just when the public awareness was reaching critical mass, World War I broke out.  The attention of the citizenry was drawn elsewhere, and the central bank was allowed to take root. 

After WWI, with the attention of the public returning to domestic affairs, criticism of the central bank concept began to rise again.  The artificial credit created by the central bank resulted in a large economic bubble, simulating prosperity.  For a decade, the country grew in debt, while spending dollars that only existed on the ledgers of banks.  When the voice of dissent began to reach a fevered pitch, the FED pulled the rug out from under the economy, calling in debts for which they knew there were no real dollars to pay, thus popping the bubble.  The country entered a depression. ^[6]

Again, concerns were drawn away from the central bank.  Families worried more about feeding their children and loved ones than what was going on in Washington.  Ironically, government grew to an unprecedented size as socialist programs were instated to help the poor that the Federal Reserve created with it's economic policies. ^[7]  Almost instantly, reliance on government assuaged most strong dissent.

Yet there were still those who argued vehemently against the income tax and Federal Reserve.  They continued their arguments against the unprecedented, cancer-like growth of the central government.  By the end of the 1930's, many people recognized the role the Federal Reserve played in creating the Great Depression. In response to this threat, the FED created the FOMC ^[8], which was almost instantly seen as an appeasement tactic that appeared to create a governmental check on the privately owend and run Federal Reserve system, but did no such thing.  In fact, the FOMC made the FED more invasive than ever.  Before anything could be done about it, however, war broke out again in Europe. 

As WWII raged, government continued to grow in size and scope.  With the collective attention of the country drawn to faraway lands, monetary policy was virtually unchecked.  Defeating the Axis powers was the goal, and anything done that could even be perceived as contributing to acheive this goal was allowed.

With the end of WWII, again the public scrutiny turned towards the Federal Reserve and IRS.  Then came Korea.  After Korea, Vietnam.  Following Vietnam, however, a new public awareness was created.  The public ire raised by Vietnam was great enough that leaders like Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan were allowed enough time to attack the bloated government bureacracies created over the last 4 decades. ^[9]

But the FED and IRS were so rooted, their tentacles so deep into government, that by the time Reagan was elected, little reform could be accomplished in the 8 years of his presidency.  The tax 'simplification' reform of 1986 was so influenced by big money that it became a farce, and grew to a size that dwarfed the original code. 

Today, most people are so confused that they believe the Federal Reserve and IRS are institutions as old as the country.  The bank-controlled media will do nothing to correct this misconception, either.  Most of the media outlets, and their employees, will promote this deception, either willfully, or through ignorance. 

If you are one who still believes this to be the case, I'll leave you with the words of Andrew Jackson as he dismantled the 'Federal' bank that tried to control our country's money supply when he was President:

"If Congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given to be used by themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations."

"I am one of those who do not believe that a national debt is a national blessing, but rather a curse to a republic; inasmuch as it is calculated to raise around the administration a moneyed aristocracy dangerous to the liberties of the country."