Ron Paul’s “10 Percent Solution”

Sherlock Holmes took his bottle from the corner of the mantel-piece and his hypodermic syringe from its neat morocco case. With his long, white, nervous fingers he adjusted the delicate needle, and rolled back his left shirt-cuff. For some little time his eyes rested thoughtfully upon the sinewy forearm and wrist all dotted and scarred with innumerable puncture-marks. Finally he thrust the sharp point home, pressed down the tiny piston, and sank back into the velvet-lined arm-chair with a long sigh of satisfaction.

“It is cocaine,” he said, “a seven-per-cent solution. Would you care to try it?”

The Sign of Four

Ron Paul, at the conclusion of his CPAC speech, threw out a rather extraordinary proposition: the ability to opt of the State at a per annum cost of 10% of one’s income. However, the definition of “opting out” was unclear. Are we talking about merely opting out of State services or actually opting out of the State entirely? The latter would really mean that one would be paying bribe money to be left alone; and “left alone” would mean that one would be free to form or participate in alternative collective action institutions for such things as currency,security,transportation, communications. We would call this the “LALL Addendum”1.

Without “LALL,” Paul’s proposition would amount to little more than flat out robbery, and I have no idea why any so-called libertarian would ever propose such a thing. Even with “LALL,” one wonders how long the rate of bribery would remain at 10%. Not long…

Of course, in reality, Paul’s proposition is neither here nor there. But it does have some marginal propaganda value in that it yet again exposes the cognitive dissonance of the “DoubleThink tards”. If:

(1) in the context of a “deregulation argument,” you blame government failure on the pernicious influence of “laissez faire”
(2) in the context of an “opt-out” argument, you mock “laissez faire” as impossible and claim everything is a product of government

you may be a “DoubleThink Tard.” If you find no cognitive dissonance between (1) and (2), then you are one.

And another distinction between libertarians and statists is brought to light. Statists view civilization more or less as a product of the State; libertarians discount that sentiment, instead viewing the State more or less as something that free-rides off civilization.

1 Live and Let Live. That’s the libertarian law “lall”.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s