Please apply the following definition to the blogpost that follows the definition.
satire |ˈsaˌtīr| nounthe use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.• a play, novel, film, or other work that uses satire: a stinging satire onAmerican politics.• a genre of literature characterized by the use of satire.• (in Latin literature) a literary miscellany, especially a poem ridiculing prevalent vices or follies.
A Modest Proposal
A modern homage to Jonathan Swift’s
original satire
It is lamentable that we live
in a time of so much prosperity and yet we as a nation cannot seem to control
our debt. It is estimated that by the end of 2015 the national debt will have
surpassed eighteen trillion dollars, a staggering sum that seems almost
impossible to pay back.
I have often found myself
pondering upon a solution for eliminating this onerous burden from the current
generation, and from future generations, if at all possible. After much
consideration and inward deliberation, I have a proposal to combat the tide of
red ink and save future generations from this overwhelming financial burden.
I propose that we legalize
murder.
Now I don’t mean that we
should legalize the brutal crime of passion or even the premeditated form of
eliminating an enemy without warning. We are an advanced society that is
capable of a much more sophisticated approach. I propose that we legalize
murder in a fashion that fills the public coffers, and provides ample
governmental control and regulation to ensure proper decorum and fair treatment
of all.
Allow me use an example to
explain how we can capitalize on legalized murder.
Let’s say that your boss is
making your life miserable and you feel like you would be doing the world a
favor by dispatching him or her from this life to the next. First, you must
file a motion with the government-run exchange advertising your intent to
murder your boss. This of course would require a filing fee set by the
legislature and adjusted for inflation from time to time. Once the motion to
murder is filed, the potential murder victim will be properly notified of the
motion. They in turn have twenty-four hours to file a counter motion, provided
they have sufficient funds to pay the appropriate fees. The
government-sanctioned motion and counter motion will start the clock towards an
amicable murder.
Once the motions are properly
filed and annotated with government regulators, a scrip is created in the murder
marketplace (similar to crowd sourcing sites) and capitalism takes over from
there. You use your influence among family, friends, and coworkers and advise
them of your intent to murder your boss. They in turn participate in the
exchange by buying shares of your scrip for this legal, and civilized, murder. On
the opposite end, your boss likewise solicits support from people within his or
her sphere of influence and they in turn buy shares of the scrip supporting the
counter motion. The scrip and counter scrip will remain in play for a specified
time prescribed by government regulators (appointed of course by honestly
elected officials).
At the end of the prescribed
time the scrip worth the most money in the exchange wins. If you have solicited
more monetary support in the marketplace than your boss, then you have
seventy-two hours to carry out the legal and amicable murder of your boss. If
your boss manages to rally more monetary support for his or her scrip, then he
or she is protected by law, and you cannot legally carry out the murder.
Of course, a person sentenced
to murder by the exchange does not have to willfully submit to the event. He or
she has the right to evade the exchange-endorsed murder, if he or she can
successfully keep from getting murdered during the legally-dictated window of
opportunity. No matter what the outcome, all monies remain in the public
coffers to pay off the national debt.
Imagine the possibilities and
benefits of such a program! First and foremost it would most likely bring in
millions of dollars each year that could be used to eliminate the national
debt. Over ten thousand people are murdered illegally in the US each year.
Under my proposal the exchange would most likely raise an average of one hundred
thousand dollars per murder. (I admit that I have no concrete evidence for this
number but my presumption is that most people know at least one hundred people
that would pay one thousand dollars to keep them alive.) Likewise, since most
people want to continue living and avoid being murdered, another hundred
thousand could presumably be raised by those opposing the murder.
If my math is correct, that
would raise approximately two billion dollars per year to eliminate the
national debt! Of course I envision that once the exchange begins the number of
legal murders would outpace the current number of illegal murders at least ten
to one. Again I have no empirical evidence to support this except for the
current number of legal abortions in the US (over one million per year) and my
personal experience with raging drivers in rush hour traffic, but I think my calculations
are not an over exaggeration.
Second, this would also allow
us to unburden society with those too weak to contribute to it. Imagine the
resources that could be reallocated if families were allowed to amicably murder
disabled children, comatose adults, parents with dementia, family members with
chronic addiction, etc. Since these weaker members of society would most likely
not be able raise any money for an opposing scrip in the murder marketplace,
they could be dispatched with even the most limited of funds by family members
seeking personal freedom from the overtasking and heavy burden of caring for
someone that can never contribute to the productivity of society. Likewise,
government resources currently allocated to care for this burdensome segment of
society could then be freed and applied to reducing the national debt. It would
be a win-win.
Third, it would provide
voters relief from corrupt and inefficient politicians without waiting for the
next election cycle. If a politician is not properly performing his or her
duties, a concerned voter, preferably trained in the art of murder, can go to
the exchange and file a motion to murder said politician on behalf of the
constituency. The process could play out as it would for any other citizen,
except that politicians are often very good at raising money, particularly when
it involves their own safety and well being. This skill at raising money would
bring billions into the public coffers and keep the politicians more beholden
to their voters, especially those voters with means, motive, and opportunity.
Lastly, a beneficial program
of legalized murder would reduce the need for so many homicide detectives and
policemen. Granted, some of them would have to be retrained to handle the
paperwork, but that clerical job would require much less skill and intelligence
than the job of a skilled detective and would not require the same compensation.
No doubt many of the former detectives could become freelance advisors helping
those who win a bid for murder see it through to a successful end. The overall
cost for law enforcement would be greatly reduced.
One other possibility that I
am cautious about mentioning because of my limited knowledge with parimutuel gambling,
is the revenue that might also be captured by allowing people to bet on winners
and losers in the murder marketplace. I think it also has the potential of
dramatically increasing revenue, but I leave that subject to someone more
versed in the field of gambling and keep my suggestions strictly to those
surrounding legalized murder.
So you can clearly see the
benefits of legal murder for our society. Imagine the revenue we could bring in
to eliminate the national debt! Imagine the Darwin-like effect of trimming our
society of those not fit to survive! Imagine the lawlessness it could eliminate
from our everyday lives!
You may say that my proposal is
preposterous and has no legal precedent since we have never allowed for legal
murder, but in the eyes of the law, multiple precedents are available for
legalizing murder. The government has a history of legalizing things previously
illegal, provided that said government gains control of the activity and
benefits monetarily from all future activity in the process. I would refer the
reader to previous illegal (or at least controlled) items such as abortion,
gambling, lotteries, prostitution, alcohol, and marijuana. These have all become
mainstays of governmental involvement and have provided a great deal of revenue
for the local, state, and the federal governments directly, not to mention the
indirect gains for enterprising politicians or private contractors. My proposal
only strives to follow this same precedent and make murder another form of
revenue and control for our burgeoning federal government.
When you consider the logic
we have used to legalize a number of other behaviors that were previously
illegal all in the name of revenue, it is easy to make the same argument for legalizing
murder.
For the sake of future generations, it’s time to legalize murder.
For more information about the original work of Jonathan Swift visit -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal
