. . . and for making them beneficial to the public[i]
Note: My apologies to Jonathan Swift (1667-1745), author and satirist, famous for Gulliver's Travels (1726) and A Modest Proposal (1729). This proposal, where he suggests that the Irish eat their own children, is one of his most drastic pieces. He devoted much of his writing to the struggle for Ireland against the English hegemony.
It is a melancholy object to those who walk through this great country, when they see the streets, the roads, and public parks crowded with beggars, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags and importuning every passer-by for a hand-out. These parents, instead of being able to work for their honest livelihood, are forced to employ all their time standing at freeway on-ramps or in busy intersections to beg sustenance for their helpless infants: who as they grow up either turn to crime for want of work or carry on street-begging as a way of life.
I think it is agreed by all parties that this prodigious number of “poor” children in the arms, or on the backs, or at the heels of their mothers, and frequently of their fathers, is in the present deplorable state of our society a very great additional grievance; and, therefore, whoever could find out a fair, cheap, and easy method of making these children sound, useful members of the republic, would deserve so well of the public as to have his statue set up for a preserver of the nation.
According to one who would dearly love to have such a statue of himself erected anywhere in America (Newt Gingrich), it has been suggested that child labor laws are "Truly stupid." Mr. Gingrich has suggested that younger children should at least work as janitors in schools and housing projects, though this week attempted to soften his child work proposal by referring to the effort as an "apprenticeship" plan, possibly a la his close buddy and would-be cohort and financial supporter and/or beneficiary, Donald Trump.
Mr. Gingrich – once a staunch support of turning such children over to State-run orphanages - wrapped his child work proposal around a claim that parents, mostly single mothers, living with their children in housing projects, don't provide a model for hard work.
But perhaps – just maybe - Mr. Gingrich’s intention is very far from being confined to provide only for the children of professed beggars; perhaps his ideas are of a much greater extent, and shall take in the whole number of infants at a certain age who are born of parents in effect as little able to support them as those who demand our charity in the streets.
It is well known that Mr. Gingrich has turned his thoughts for many years upon this important subject, and has maturely weighed the several schemes of other projectors. It is true, a child just dropped from its “dam” may be supported by her milk for a solar year, with little other nourishment; at most not above the value of a few dollars, which the mother may certainly get, or the value in scraps, by her lawful occupation of begging (or, in Mr. Gingrich’s vocabulary, the use of Food Stamps). That said, it is exactly at one year old that Mr. Gingrich might propose to provide for them in such a manner as, instead of being a charge upon their parents or the government [or the 1%], or wanting food and raiment for the rest of their lives, they shall on the contrary contribute to the feeding, and partly to the clothing, of many thousands.
During interviews, Mr. Gingrich has talked about babies in dumpsters. Abandoned children. And a "little four-year-old who was thrown off a balcony in Chicago [who] would have been a heck of a lot better off at Boys Town." In light of this, there is likewise another great advantage in the following scheme which may be of great interest to Mr. Gingrich: that it will prevent those voluntary abortions, and that horrid practice of women murdering their bastard children, alas! too frequent among us! sacrificing the poor innocent babes (likely more to avoid the expense than the shame), which would move tears and pity in the most savage and inhuman breast.
The number of souls in America being reckoned at 308,745,538 in the last census, of these there may be about 35-40% of couples whose wives are breeders; it has been estimated that 60.8 million Americans remain dependent on the government for their daily housing, food, and health care. Even if adjustments are made for those women who miscarry, or whose children die by accident or disease within the year, there still remains a large number of children of poor parents annually born. The question therefore is, how this number shall be reared and provided for? In accordance with the “truly stupid” child labor laws currently in effect in this country, we can neither employ them in handicraft or agriculture; we can neither employ them in construction nor in the cultivation of land.
Under our current child labor laws a boy or a girl before fourteen years old is basically a drag on society, and even then said laws prevent them from really ‘contributing’ to that society until they are sixteen; and even when they come to this age they will not yield above $4.25 an hour for the first three months of ‘work’, and only $7.25 an hour past that, which cannot repay either to the parents or the government the cost of their upkeep - nutriment and rags being at least four times that value, not to mention the cost of handheld mobile devices.
It shall now, therefore, be humbly proposed to Mr. Gingrich and his ilk the following solution, which no doubt will not be liable to the least objection.
It is widely known among natives of the Amazon jungles and in the rainforests of un-named, remote South Pacific islands that a young healthy child well-nursed is, at a year old, a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled, and no doubt it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout.
Perhaps Mr. Gingrich might therefore humbly offer it to public consideration that, of the children already computed, some few thousand may be reserved for breed, whereof only one-fourth part need be males (which is more than we allow to sheep, cattle or swine) the reasoning being that these children are seldom the fruits of marriage (a circumstance, according to most conservative, god-fearing repiglickins, not much regarded by the poor and undereducated) therefore one male should be sufficient to serve four females (Mr. Mitt Romney will no doubt be able to corroborate this as fact as he must be personally acquainted with members of his own sect who can attest to this). The remaining several thousand children may, at a year old, be offered in sale to persons of quality and fortune through the 1% - always advising, of course, that the mother allow them to suck plentifully in the last month, so as to render them plump and fat for a good table. A child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends; and when the family dines alone, the fore or hind quarter will make a reasonable dish, and seasoned with a little pepper or salt will be very good boiled on the fourth day, especially in winter.
A child just born will weigh about 8-10 pounds, and in a solar year, if tolerably nursed, should increase to 25 pounds, or about the size of a Thanksgiving turkey. Of course this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for CEOs, lobbyists, bankers, and any other gentlemen of fortune in our society who have any refinement in taste who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children. And the resulting cash flow will circulate among ourselves! - the goods being entirely of our own growth and manufacture.
Mr. Gingrich, in the sincerity of his heart, surely has not the least personal interest in endeavoring to promote this necessary work for his own monetary benefit (unless, of course, he writes a book about it), having no other motive than the public good of his country - by creating jobs, providing for infants, relieving the poor, and giving some small pleasure to the wealthy 1% (in return for their financial backing). At present Mr. Gingrich has young no children by which he can propose to get a single penny, and (unknown mistresses notwithstanding) his current wife is past child-bearing age.
I think.
No comments:
Post a Comment