Eight Thoughts on Charlie Hebdo

1) The basic philosophy informing Charlie Hebdo (having deep roots in French culture) is misanthropy. Those who produce it are misanthropes: they hate all members of our species.

2) A subset of our species are those belonging to marginalized and oppressed races, religions and ethnicities.

3) It logically follows from 1) that Charlie Hebdo hates those denoted in 2).

4) It follows from 3) that Charlie Hebdo is racist and those looking for it will be able to find plenty of evidence to that effect. But

5) According to another definition, given that Charlie Hebdo’s hatred it indiscriminate, i.e. not directed to any particular segment but all segments of humanity, it is not racist.

6) It follows from 1) that Charlie Hebdo is fundamentally suspicious of the capacity of humans to act decently towards each other, to accept responsibility for their own actions or to be trusted with state power.

7) It follows from 6) that whether or not it is racist, Charlie Hebdo is objectively reactionary.

8) All mistanthropes-and a lot of self-identified leftists are misanthropes-are reactionary and they should be viewed by the left as such.

Spread the News

One thought on “Eight Thoughts on Charlie Hebdo”

  1. Thank you, John.

    I don’t consider taunting to be exercise of free speech.

    Taunting, rather than being praised as free speech, is penalized in the National Football League. As if these big strong men had emotions more powerful (and they do) than their ability to control them.

    The US has been waging a crusade against Muslims–as George W. Bush unwisely uttered and retracted after an inappropriate spate of truth-speaking–for decades. And as Obama has continued without a stutter.

    The inability or unwillingness of Muslims to avenge their millions of dead over the decades of crusades results in what amounts to a futile striking back at a taunt after taking a humiliating beating.

    I don’t find it wise or charitable in the least to taunt someone who has reason enough to hate and yet is precariously balanced enough by reason to use restraint.

    Martin Luther King Jr. never thought law could make whites love people of color, but hoped law could make whites refrain from their hatred inspired activities against them.

    To see these protests one would think that the all world was at peace until these few who responded in anger to taunting spoiled the joyous, freedom inspired celebratory mood.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *