Left-statists use the word profit as if it were a curse word. Right-statists do the same thing with the word pleasure. And both sides use The State to impose these prejudices on others…
- Left-statists devise dictates designed to punish or prohibit wealth-creation
- Right-statists create dictates intended to tax or prohibit various pleasures
Of course, no left-statist is opposed to his or her own profits. Likewise, no right-statist objects to his or her own pleasures.
- Most left-statists routinely argue for more taxes on wealthy people but rarely argue for more taxes on their own income bracket.
- Most right-statists routinely seek to slap prohibitions on the preferred pleasures of others, while being left alone to enjoy their favorite pleasures, be it a cocktail, cigar, soda, high-calorie meal, or sex act.
- But both sides are equally eager to initiate state violence against other people’s profits and pleasures.
In other words…
The left-statists and right-statists are united in a shared self-contradiction.
They do not treat other people’s profits and pleasures in the same way they treat their own. Thus, there are not two separate problems here. There is no profit problem for the left and pleasure problem for the right. There is instead one shared P-P Problem.
The P-P Problem is anti-life.
It leads to aggression against those things people most benefit from — profits and pleasures. The solution to the P-P Problem is the Zero Aggression Principle…
Don’t initiate force personally or politically.
In others words, don’t use politics and The State to impose your prejudices about profits and pleasures on other people. Use persuasion instead, if you’re really determined to have others prefer what you prefer.
If one is willing to take the risk, knows court procedure and the various court decisions thereupon, it is possible to defeat the state in various situations.
You have to be be prepared to go to prison for a long time, but if you are pleasurable about it, ie non-combative, you just might pull it off. I know a couple folks who walked from one of those “pleasurable” taboo situations. They actually entertained the judge in the process, no easy task.
So I don’t recommend it, just pointing out judges know the score: they know they are not pushing “the law,” rather they seek to keep the sheep in line by making the occasional example of the poor sot who got caught.