Dear Dr Swift, After reading your perturbing viewspromoting institutionalised cannibalism, I am aghast at this facetious approachto a critical matter occurring in Ireland. I find it farcical and candidlyludicrous that one could present this deplorable “proposal” in suchan audacious manner. I feel your writing is highly irreverent and sardonic, andthe cavalier attitude is abhorrent. You have no right to diminish the potentialof one’s life. It is exceptionally inhumane; the way in which you refer to the “rearing”of young children for food – encouraging anthropophagy. I was utterly revoltedand disturbed at your descriptions of landlords devouring children, as well aswhen I was reading about the “carcass of a good fat child”.
In your6th paragraph, you irrationally suggest that cannibalism is preferred toslavery – not to demote slavery, but merely to elucidate that cannibalism iseconomically beneficial, as money is generated efficiently. The most nauseatingmoment was reading about “buying the children alive”. Children are not pigs – anotherflabbergasting idea.
I strongly oppose your views and find them scandalous,disparaging and provocative. Although it is appalling how you talkabout how young children would, “equally serve in a fricasie, or aragoust”, what sickens me most, is your seemingly judicious andsuperficially eminently practical tone. I feel this adds a depraved aspect toyour already disreputable beliefs. Dr Swift, you present your frivolousconcepts in an ostensibly acceptable fashion. It is unendurable for you toassume the air of a man who is acting pragmatically and astutely. In no way areyour notions realistic, logical or rational; but instead, hyper-rational,sadistic and atrocious. I feel disgraced by how you could see your ideas assagacious, and display them in a cogent, data-driven method, with strongpersuasion. It is clear to me, that common-sense and rationality are not highin priority to yourself.
Not only does this passage grotesquelycompare children to “wholesome, nourishing food”, it is incrediblymisogynistic, likening women to “breeders”. Mankind is not a guineapig in your computed and scientific experiments, (as suggested by yourreprehensible tone) and should be dealt with appropriate respect. Women arenot, and so should not, be treated as cattle, with no say in their decisionsand futures. The ideas you tranquilly put forward about women (such as thatthey are only of use for bearing children) are preposterous, and it isunbelievable that any person should have such scandalous opinions. I find ittraumatising, how you can possibly expect amorous mothers to care for theirbabies for only 1 year, before giving them up to be made into “fricasie”or “ragoust”.
It is frankly immoral and deeply unethical to expresssuch dire views. I have never experienced such unscrupulousness in a personever before. Conversely, as I perused on; to the depictionof children likened to “roasting pigs”, it ultimately dawned on me, the ironyin your tone. I grasped the absurdity of your outwardly “plausible” ideas,which were instead intended to lampoon. Dr Swift, your overture successfullyconvinced me, as the verisimilitude was extraordinarily effective. I discernedthe target of your satire to shift – from the poor and deprived, to the richand idle; the satirical tone becoming evident.
The premeditated humour arisesvisibly to the surface, during your supposed “encouragement” of euthanasia andthe callous Malthusian view – essentially highlighting that, the old are indispensableand should be respected. Your target appears to deviate once more, when commencingyour attack on the “papists”, endorsing their genocide, annihilation and”ethnic cleansing”. This, you say, provides an additional “advantage” to yourproposal – the eradication of the Catholics, by their consumption.
But, as Icomprehended, the genuine target of this satire and mockery, are not theCatholics in the least, but the “absentee landlords”, who are depicted as suckingthe prosperity out of humankind. In your subsequent paragraph, youingeniously delineate the struggles of women in everyday life, and how men seemto be “superior”; treating them like animals. Chauvinism is opposed here, byreferring to women as “mares” – a sordid representation, used to satire the misconceptionsof men and the harsh realities in the generation. You finally return to yourfundamental moral, generating a remarkable illustration of “a fat yearlychild”, at a “Lord Mayor’s feast”. This is used as a vivid metaphor for theestablishment devouring the poor. The hilarity is overtly unmistakable when yousuggest the picture of guests gorging “infant’s flesh” at christenings andweddings – the literal symbol of human life, causing despondency to transformto amusement.
Dr Swift, we need you now. We need youhere, to satirise our ideas of society, our obsessions and our threats; rangingfrom the derisory fixations on celebrity culture to the imperative issues ofracial discrimination and misogyny in the world today. How could these celebrities have become our idols? Our supposedly goldenstandards? Our hopes and our dreams? There is a disparity between appreciationand obsession, and our generation seems to have lost sight of the border. DrSwift, we need you to satire this culture. Society’s interest surrounding celebrityculture is not predominantly varied from that of a religious cult, seeking theextremes of their beliefs. Our present is filled with us seeking ideals; butsearching in all the wrong places.
We should not be seeking gold at waterfalls.Similarly, we should not be seeking idols in celebrities. Idols should be thosewith genuine accomplishments in life. Not those who smile for the camera ahundred times a day. Our lives are incessantly rotating around celebrityculture. Around media. Fake news.
Gossip. We want what they have; and we eatwhat they feed. On their Instagram accounts.
Snapchat. Facebook. Liking theirpictures; where they are standing near a colourful wall wearing the latestlooks, by a swimming pool with their designer sunglasses arranged fashionablyon their head, on a beach with the sun in their newly dyed hair of the most”fabulous” colour. Day and night. A rota. A lifestyle.Ifcelebrities are only idolised for their image and not their veritable talent,then anyone can slide into fame – into that “celebrity culture” that is muchdesired and craved.
Dr Swift, I would like to attain yourlevel of satire through my proposed cartoon, followed by text; and cause theefficacious irony which you expressed memorably throughout your own, “ModestProposal”, in my writing below – mocking the concepts of celebrity culture. My cartoon wouldcomprise of a row of people, ogling into their mobile phones, captivated.Overhead, two planes would be approaching the twin towers – an illustration ofthe atrocious attack: 9/11. The people on the ground, however, would beoblivious to this, and would not attempt to hear the cries of “Help!” from thevictims above.
Below this image, my text would express the following satiricalsentiments. “Is Kylie Jenner pregnant? Does Kim Kardashian want a fourth child?Who is Ed Sheeran’s fiancé? Him, her, me and you; are riveted by such juicyspeculations. They are much more appealing than difficulties we have no controlover – terrorism, violence…. Etcetera.
Etcetera. Why fret? Why should we bemesmerized in affairs without answers? Instead, support the Utilitarian view.The greatest good for the greatest number, by the principles of Jeremy Bentham.If we submerge ourselves into celebrity culture, everyone is content. There areno complications to divert us. We feel happy. Others talk about the latestgossip and feel happy. We should not parley about death, inhumanity, crime – whatbenefit could that possibly achieve? It would only concern and distress; posingas anxieties in our lives.
No. A life without worry: the appealing life is whatto seek.” Another crucial concern, which I deem is in desperate want for your incomparablesatire, is racial prejudice – a vital matter occurring for centuries. America is a prime example of this ascending animosity of miscellaneousraces. America: a country alienated by race. African Americans comprise of only13% of the US population and 14% of the monthly drug users, but 37% arearrested for drug violations. In 2010, the US Sentencing Commission testifiedthat African Americans receive 10% longer sentences than whites for identicalcrimes; both statements emphasizing the unjustness in the method in which humanityfunctions.
The foundation for this racial discrimination is unpretentious.People learn what their society teaches them. People are effortlessly steeredby those round them.
People are perspicacious, inclining towards the majority.Examples of a religious extremists in America are the Klu Klux Klan, aterrorist group who promote Christian supremacy and attack other cultures,especially the African-Americans. But all humans are the same. We are all one.We are all equal. Being black or white does not change that. Asians, blacks andwhites, all have the same skin pigment, but darker skin contains more melanin.Is this a reasonable vindication for the appalling separation of mankind? Once again, my cartoon would aim to satire – representing a black policeman,being arrested by a member of the Klu Klux Klan, for the crime committed by awhite robber, who is absconding the scene.
The black policeman would portrayhis emotions through a speech bubble, saying, “Is this because I’m black?”. Thehooded figure of the KKK, would reply mockingly, “Stop using the race card!Maybe you wouldn’t be in this position if you just lightened up!” Underneath, Iwould try to ironically juxtapose my views about racism. “Non-whites. Alwaysusing the race card. Always assuming everything is about race. Why can we not get a job? Race. Why are we punished for crimes? Race.Race is not the reason.
It is not even a factor. Races must be separated, keptapart. They do not belong together, because every race has different ideals andbeliefs – they cannot coexist together in society without conflict.
Differentraces have different mental states. Different levels of intelligence;comparison between them is impossible. Nations should be divided; the worldwould be much enhanced this way. It would be better off, with scarcertribulations and complications. Segregation is the riposte to solve ourproblems.
Solutions must be recognized at last.”Lastly, finishing on a low note, I would like to express my views on misogyny,a struggle that women have had to face throughout the ages, and is stillconcurrent in their daily life.