straight to the point – from different points of view

Charlie’s morons by Kevin Baldeosingh

Charlie’s morons by Kevin Baldeosingh

I’ve never felt like shooting a socialist but, according to socialists, I would be justified in putting a gun to their heads and pulling the trigger.

You see, many of these left-wing commentators have been arguing that the murders of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists were caused by the capitalist imperialist policies of the Western nations which make Muslims feel oppressed, enraged, and clean-shaven.  But this is the same way I feel about socialists when I hear them talk their tata, except that I started shaving many years ago. So I get very offended when socialists claim that their ideas are workable, even though every socialist government has been oppressive or economically disastrous or unbuttered. I also get quite annoyed when I hear them badtalking capitalism, which has helped raise more people out of poverty than any socialist rule. And I get positively tizzic when I see them eat soup.
All this shows that socialism is bereft of economic principles, historical support, and paper napkins. So, since the socialists’ argument is that Muslim militants have some justifiable basis for shooting cartoonists, they cannot object if I put a hole in their socialist skulls, especially since this would cause little or no brain damage.
But I will never do that, because, unlike socialists, I don’t think it’s justified to kill over ideology.
In similar fashion, I’ve also never felt like beating a feminist to death but, according to feminist principles, it would be understandable if I did so. Feminists blame all the world’s problems on men, and I am, for the most parts, a man. (According to tests, there is some doubt about my brain.) As a result, I feel oppressed and discriminated against, though not by women who like sex.
So some feminist spokesmen have asserted that the murdered cartoonists were homophobic racists who outraged Muslims with cartoons, like the one which showed a Muslim man and Charlie Hebdo kissing under the caption “Love is stronger than hate”.  On that basis, these feminists could hardly object if I beat them to death for arguing that real men only have real orgasms with a woman they love; or that rape is caused by car advertisements; or that shaving your legs is a capitalist plot.
But I will never do that, because I do not believe that feminists should be murdered just because their opinions are based on the premise that logic and evidence are male traits invented to make women look stupid.
Additionally, I have never had the urge to stab activist artistes, even though most of them are either socialist feminists or feminist socialists or equally confused. So, according to this set, the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists weren’t very good satirists: the logical inference being that you should only be outraged when leading artists or writers get assassinated by religious fanatics. This would mean that these activists shouldn’t mind if I stab them to death because I am offended by both their spoken-word poems and their continued pretence that a human being can live for nearly four months without food and water.
But I will never do that, because I don’t believe hypocritical stupidity is a good reason to kill anybody.
Moreover, I have never felt any need to behead even Muslim fundamentalists. Yet I am intellectually insulted by their belief that the Qur’an is the best-written book ever, and I am morally outraged at Islamic rules which say that wives who might horn should be beaten; that uncombed beards make Allah happy; and that roast pork is not absolutely delicious. Ergo, Muslims can have no moral objection to me going on an axe rampage against mullahs, muftis and imams who enforce such ignorance.
I will never do that, though, because I don’t believe arguments should be decided by murder or muzzles. Which is the disadvantage of being an atheist with naturally curly hair.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.