"A MODEST PROPOSAL"
It has become clear to all patriotic Americans that too many people in this country are alive who have not earned the privilege ...
Translating Jonathon Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” (1729) into accessible English is not my cup of tea, and news happens too fast. However! Sometimes we observe fiction in real life, and vice versa, as you know. And for whatever reason, I found myself thinking about Jonathan Swift today. Weird. I thought it would be interesting to use Swift’s approach regarding the extremes of the GOP and Trump by asking AI.
Why not?
For this project, I think AI did a bang up (if lengthy) job - em dashes and all - lol
The GOP’s Modest Proposal for a Great American Future
(By a concerned citizen with no children of reproductive age and no financial stake in the public good)
It has become clear to all patriotic Americans that too many people in this country are alive who have not earned the privilege. Our cities, hospitals, and schools overflow with unproductive bodies—single mothers, migrant workers, children with no measurable return on investment, and the elderly poor. They contribute little and demand much. These people still cling to the fantasy that food, education, and health care are rights instead of optional perks for those who deserve them. Do not be fooled: they deserve nothing, and are, if fact, violent criminals and a pox on our society.
Just this morning, our President took a bold step toward restoring order in our Nation’s capital. Declaring Washington, D.C. overrun by “crime, chaos, bedlam, and squalor,” he federalized the Metropolitan Police Department and deployed 800 National Guard troops—100 to 200 patrolling the streets at any given time. Violent crime in D.C. is actually at a thirty-year low, but raw numbers pale beside the political beauty of soldiers in formation. This is how serious leaders work: with speed, spectacle, and the right lighting for prime-time coverage. And if it works here, imagine the efficiency of applying it to any city whose voting patterns we find undesirable.
It is time, then, for a more comprehensive approach—one rooted in merit, loyalty, and compliance with the dominant narrative. Citizens who fail to meet the standard will forfeit their right to protection under the flag they have not served.
Let’s start with women. For too long, women have evaded the natural consequences of reproduction. In the good old days, a pregnant woman carried the burden without complaint. Now, having grown addicted to bodily autonomy, they demand abortions even when the state has made clear that the fetus outranks the mother. Yet, we must admit that this has created an unforeseen crisis as some women, especially poor women, are surviving pregnancies they were never intended to survive.
To restore balance, we should eliminate abortion access except in the most politically useful cases. If a woman dies, her death will be remembered as a patriotic offering. If she lives, she will raise a child she cannot feed, educate, or protect—thus ensuring fresh recruits for the prison labor pool or the low-wage economy.
As for children, our leaders have already perfected the guiding principle: their lives matter until birth, and not a day longer. Why waste money on public schools when Christian academies and TikTok can provide more ideologically consistent training? Why regulate food safety, when a malnourished child is less likely to question authority? Why vaccinate, when disease is nature’s built-in sorting system for the weak?
Once we accept this logic fully, we can dismantle public education, gut health regulations, and shut down the social safety net. The budget will breathe easier, and the survivors will find useful roles—some as propaganda props in campaign ads, others as unpaid interns for think tanks, and the luckiest as organ donors for the wealthy.
Now to immigration. Too long have we tolerated the arrival of people who, unlike the original settlers, show up poor and uninvited. The solution is simple: reclassify all undocumented immigrants as “resource units.” Their children can be adopted by white families looking for cultural flavor. Adults can work indefinitely without pay, provided they smile for the cameras. Any who resist can be detained, repurposed, or disappeared—whichever is most cost-effective.
Critics may mutter about historical parallels. Let them. This is not slavery; it is economic optimization. This is not cruelty; it is national hygiene. The left insists on empathy, shame, and responsibility. But feelings are luxuries for those who can afford them. We offer something better: the freedom to dominate, consume, and discard.
There is, finally, the greatest benefit of all: by removing women, children, immigrants, the sick, and the poor from the equation, we strengthen the foundation of the Republic—white Christian men of property. These men, having borne the heavy load of authority for generations, deserve not just respect but relief. Why should they pay for roads they don’t drive on, schools they don’t trust, or hospitals they can fly over in private jets?
Let us call this what it is: a moral cleansing. Not of bodies, necessarily—though that day will come—but of the cluttered, sentimental, compassion-soaked politics that have weakened this nation for too long.
Some moderates will wring their hands and propose alternatives: universal health care, progressive taxation, renewable energy, humane borders, racial equity. But let’s be honest—no one in power has the will to make those happen. They are boring. They are slow. They require the winners to give something up. Why struggle toward equality when you can legislate dominance?
And to the critics I say: Are you prepared to house the hungry? To heal the sick? To educate the poor? Or will you, like the rest, post a hashtag, like a photo, and get back to brunch?
As for me, I have no personal stake. I do not profit from oil, prisons, or hedge funds. I am merely a citizen, committed to efficiency, order, and national rebirth.
And I write this not out of cruelty, but clarity.
The future we are building has already arrived.