At first glance, the scene with the chicken farmer brutally murdering his chickens out of annoyance appears out of place. In-universe it seems nonsensical and cruel, since not only should a chicken farmer be used to chickens making lots of noise, but now he's gonna lose a bunch of money since he just killed off his livestock. From a story-telling perspective, it just seems like violence for the sake of violence, which is weird, since all the other adult content in the film was used because they were directly commenting on the counterculture movement of the 1960's. But then you realize something: what else during the 60's CCM was largely considered nonsensical, cruel, and "pointless violence"? The Vietnam War!
Of course then this loops into Fridge Logic, because then the scene does have a point, and thus becomes an Oxymoronic Being, but maybe you shouldn't think too hard about it...
Y'all are both overthinking it massively. It's making a comment on other animation, not on the broader culture of the time. The act of violence itself resembles something out of a more traditional cartoon of the era, yet the movie goes out of its way to depict it as horrifying rather than cute, focusing on the aftermath of the bloody chicken carcasses. It's Bakshi's little middle finger to Looney Tunes. The fact that you're actually thinking about the implications, rather than dismissing it as a sight gag, is the point.
