Christopher Hitchens on Ron Paul

[Suzu]

Has anyone heard this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovJog62CfsI

[Suzu]

Let me ask again: Has anyone listened to the above clip? Have any of the 70+ people who've clicked on this thread actually listened? If you have, I wish you'd share your take on it. Seems to me that Hitchens entirely misunderstands RP. I didn't read all the comments but glanced through the first few pages of them and didn't see anyone mention the erroneous ideas about our guy.

I think it's rather important when one of the most listened-to intellectuals of our time - one who's garnering lots and lots of attention right now due to his illness - so gravely mistakes the facts.

[low preference guy]

i listened for a bit and got bored. don't remember anything he said.

[Petar]

Let him blather, at least he'll be dead soon...

[trey4sports]

I couldn't really make out what he was saying to well. I think he said something about non-interventionism being different today than it was when TJ was around.

[Danke]

I think it's rather important when one of the most listened-to intellectuals of our time...

Really?

I thought he was discredited a long time ago.

[Suzu]

Turn up the volume and listen one more time.

[Suzu]

Really?

I thought he was discredited a long time ago.

He was on 60 minutes tonight.

He may be "discredited" among some, but lots and lots of people pay attention to him and take what he says at face value.

[Suzu]

Let him blather, at least he'll be dead soon...

And when he is, viewership of that interview will skyrocket, and the misconceptions will spread much farther.

[Petar]

And when he is, viewership of that interview will skyrocket, and the misconceptions will spread much farther.

And then we can argue about it with people on youtube I guess, I dunno...

[ibaghdadi]

I honestly tried to get through this, but I couldn't. A combination of intellectual disgust and pure boredom.

[Suzu]

I honestly tried to get through this, but I couldn't. A combination of intellectual disgust and pure boredom.

I think he only talks about RP in the first 3 minutes, so no need to listen to the whole thing.

[emazur]

I listened to the first 3 minutes, he makes these points:
- b/c Jefferson negotiated w/ France for the Louisiana Purchase, Jefferson wanted empire (I think I recall Paul saying the Louisiana Purchase was unconstitutional the way it was done but I don't know if he opposed doing such a purchase)
- free trade is good (that's Paul's position. Paul opposed NAFTA which is not free trade but managed trade but Hitchens doesn't mention NAFTA - I don't really know why he brings up trade w/ Iran. In any case Paul seems pretty open to trade w/ "adversaries" such as Cuba and I highly doubt he would call for any kind of trade restrictions with Iran)
- bringing Islamic nations "into the fold" = Drumbeat for war according to Paul, supposedly (I don't know what the hell he's talking about here)

[Dave Aiello]

I will listen to hitchens in regard to philosophy and atheism, not in regard to US foreign policy.

[Sola_Fide]

As James White says, people who think Christopher Hitchens has sound arguments are people who are dumb enough to think an English accent equals intelligence.

[Suzu]

As James White says, people who think Christopher Hitchens has sound arguments are people who are dumb enough to think an English accent equals intelligence.

Regardless who says what about who, the fact remains that this is one of the most influential writer/thinkers of our day, millions upon millions of people buy into his ideas, and if he's got his facts wrong about RP, he could spread those inaccuracies far and wide.

I've listened to several interviews now and it seems he mainly agrees with RP and yet *thinks* that he has a different opinion than RP on those very issues where they seem to agree. IOW, Hitchens has apparently been misinformed about RP, otherwise he'd probably like the man as much as we all do!

[AlexMerced]

Most people who've I met who follow hitchens religiously *pun intended* are vehement atheists (I'm not religious, but the Hitchens type Atheists can be as in your face as the most zealous zealot)

And a good church of those atheists are full blow members of the communist part... like I met one person who has a bust of lenin, all of lenins writings and books by hitchens in his apartment.

I'm not sure if Hitchens followers are salvageable, if I had to target the followers of a leftist intellectual it would be Nader and Chomsky, cause there is a lot of overlap except on economics.

Hitchens is a means justify the ends kind of guy.

[AlexMerced]

Regardless who says what about who, the fact remains that this is one of the most influential writer/thinkers of our day, millions upon millions of people buy into his ideas, and if he's got his facts wrong about RP, he could spread those inaccuracies far and wide.

I've listened to several interviews now and it seems he mainly agrees with RP and yet *thinks* that he has a different opinion than RP on those very issues where they seem to agree. IOW, Hitchens has apparently been misinformed about RP, otherwise he'd probably like the man as much as we all do!

I've seen many hitchens interviews, that guy is stubborn and stuck in his ways. There is no way he'll change his views on RP as long as he has a R next to his name. We should of course try to clear the record but Hitchens isn't as influential as many think, he really only has a following among atheists, most people find him depressing.

I just find him stubborn, should we ignore him now, but he's no big fish and the chances of catching him are slim.

[Sola_Fide]

Hitchens: another proud foreign interventionist atheist.

[outspoken]

Hitchens and his followers/disciples would benefit from reading the works of Krishnamurti. All tracks of thinking be it, following the teachings of one great spiritual leader in name of Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, etc have the propensity for the religious aspect of it to trump the spiritual aspect as is the case with Atheism. You can be so hellbent on the worship of no worship that it becomes your religion. When you understand our inherent egoic/sinful nature to do so, you understand why no religion can become an unconscious religion in and of itself.

[Eric21ND]

I love Hitchens. He's funny and well-read. He's wrong on foreign policy, but other than that he's a very intelligent person. You guys should not disparage atheists, the vast majority are highly educated libertarians and a great many support Ron Paul, including myself.

[JohnEngland]

I think it's rather important when one of the most listened-to intellectuals of our time - one who's garnering lots and lots of attention right now due to his illness - so gravely mistakes the facts.

LOL, don't let our British accents fool anyone into thinking that we're smarter than we actually are, as I've heard many people say with regards to our accent. If intellectualism is judged by how correct one is on the issues, Christopher Hitchens is a dunce. And an arrogant and repugnant one at that.

[AlexMerced]

I love Hitchens. He's funny and well-read. He's wrong on foreign policy, but other than that he's a very intelligent person. You guys should not disparage atheists, the vast majority are highly educated libertarians and a great many support Ron Paul, including myself.

I'm not disparaging atheists, I'm agnostic for the most part, I just get upset when people are intolerance of institutions, I'm not religious but I respect the role it plays, in the same way I respect the role of institutional skeptics and atheists in keeping discussion alive. When people like Hitchens and Maher just dismiss religion as irrationality I think that undercuts a lot of discussion that need to be had on WHY religion has been so pervasive and just relegates into a cultural warfare.

I've listened to Hitchens talk a lot, and he seems overly pre-occupied with judging people he doesn't find "intellecual" enough instead of trying to understand WHY this may be the case.

Again, I'm not really religous, but I think there is a lot to learn from religion as in learning how to structure a cultural institution in a way that'll survives and has longevity and a lot of that wisdom we can use into turning liberty into such an institution.

[t0rnado]

I'm not disparaging atheists, I'm agnostic for the most part, I just get upset when people are intolerance of institutions, I'm not religious but I respect the role it plays, in the same way I respect the role of institutional skeptics and atheists in keeping discussion alive. When people like Hitchens and Maher just dismiss religion as irrationality I think that undercuts a lot of discussion that need to be had on WHY religion has been so pervasive and just relegates into a cultural warfare.

I've listened to Hitchens talk a lot, and he seems overly pre-occupied with judging people he doesn't find "intellecual" enough instead of trying to understand WHY this may be the case.

Again, I'm not really religous, but I think there is a lot to learn from religion as in learning how to structure a cultural institution in a way that'll survives and has longevity and a lot of that wisdom we can use into turning liberty into such an institution.

Are you fucking retarded? Religions have had longevity because their leaders have used fear and force.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

You guys should not disparage atheists, the vast majority are highly educated libertarians...

Actually, most of them voted for Barack Obama in November 2008.

[Indy Vidual]

Regardless who says what about who, the fact remains that this is one of the most influential writer/thinkers of our day, millions upon millions of people buy into his ideas...

Christopher Hitchens
About 1,980,000 results (0.11 seconds)

Charlie Sheen
About 505,000,000 results (0.10 seconds)


Perhaps you are either over estimating the influence-and reach-of Christopher Hitchens, or over estimating the intelligence of millions upon millions of people.

Charlie has #tiger blood and he is #winning. :p

[marc1888]

Has anyone heard this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovJog62CfsI

Hitchens is a very intelligent guy. Hitchens is also very honest. When i say honest he is the most honest neocon there is because he clings to his trotskyism and doesnt hide behind a veneer. Like a true trot he has no problem with interventionism for the greater good. His love and support of the Kurdish people meant that invading Iraq was for him the greater good and it helped the Kurds. Someone like Ron Paul screws with his worldview that the west has an obligation to nation build and bring enlightenment to the world. He basically is a very intelligent Bill Maher.

[Suzu]

Christopher Hitchens
About 1,980,000 results (0.11 seconds)

Charlie Sheen
About 505,000,000 results (0.10 seconds)


Perhaps you are either over estimating the influence-and reach-of Christopher Hitchens, or over estimating the intelligence of millions upon millions of people.

Charlie has #tiger blood and he is #winning. :p

Sheen's pretty smart, too, in a different way. Don't be fooled by a search engine. Big news on Sheen doesn't mean no one listens to Hitchens.

[trey4sports]

the amount of search results for a particular topic mean nothing. The stat you should pay attention to is S-E-T search engine traffic which shows how many times people search for a keyword.....


Amount of searches for Charlie Sheen = 673,000

Amount of searches for Christopher Hitchens = 246,000


these numbers are rounded and averaged via Google over several months so I would imagine the number for Charlie Sheen is much higher with him "trending" right now.

[Indy Vidual]

the amount of search results for a particular topic mean nothing...

You're right, I stand corrected, but...
Even my local sports-radio station is talking about Charlie Sheen today; Christopher Hitchens is not a famous name or 'household-word.'



...Big news on Sheen doesn't mean no one listens to Hitchens.

I Agree with you there, Suzu.


Sheen's pretty smart, too, in a different way...

Not too bad for a "wild man", I don't actually know too much about the 'real Charlie Sheen.'


Hitchens:
Yes, his strong support for military intervention is disturbing, for me the opposite seems so obvious.


Hitchens has a following among intellectuals.
Intellectuals have an above average chance of thinking for themselves, and learning the real facts about Ron Paul, so...
Chances are that Hitchens opinion won't change any time soon, and for many people it doesn't matter. :)

[CUnknown]

Hitchens says that Jefferson wanted America to be an empire. Interesting ... I've never heard that one before. He points out the Louisiana Purchase and the general western expansionist mentality of the time as something that he supports, but wasn't sure if Ron Paul would or not.

It's interesting to think about what would have happened if we had been more fair with the native Americans and treated them more as equals instead of inferiors who were in the way of our expansion.

I guess Hitchens thinks that all of American history has been a noble endeavor of expansion and bringing enlightenment to the savages, at gunpoint. He then goes on to re-frame Afghanistan as the birthplace of empires, but lamenting still that no one has ever been "successful" there ... at educating the inferior people who live there how to grow their government, I guess.

It's a very imperialistic, elitist attitude that contrasts with Ron's greatly. Ron has even more principled integrity than did Jefferson, I think, because it's true that he did some things that Ron wouldn't approve of.

Maybe it's time to reflect that our government has never done a good job at protecting people's rights, whether those people are native American, black, arab, or white. I think Hitchens approves of this, as long as the government does a good job at conquering new territory, or something?

[CUnknown]

I've been looking a little deeper into this guy (okay, just his Wikipedia page), and I've come across these quotes:


His numerous editorials in support of the Iraq War caused some to label him a neoconservative, while Hitchens insists he is not "a conservative of any kind."

Um.... exactly.



Hitchens commented on his political philosophy by stating "I am no longer a socialist, but I still am a Marxist".[49] In a June 2010 interview with the New York Times, he stated that: "I still think like a Marxist in many ways. I think the materialist conception of history is valid. I consider myself a very conservative Marxist".

My apologies to anyone who likes this guy, but I think I pretty much hate his guts now. He seems like a textbook neocon... yes, definitely not a conservative of any kind.

[Eric21ND]

Actually, most of them voted for Barack Obama in November 2008.
Not the atheists I know. Every single one supported Ron Paul in some way. But 99% of people who voted, either voted for McCain or Obama. I don't think that really tells you much when those are your only choices. I was cheering the Obama victory on election night and almost voted for him because I knew the disaray it would cause within the GOP and how that would benefit RP and allow us to bring our philosophy to the forefront. The enemy of my enemy is my friend or something like that :rollseyes:

[Dave Aiello]

Not the atheists I know. Every single one supported Ron Paul in some way. But 99% of people who voted, either voted for McCain or Obama. I don't think that really tells you much when those are your only choices. I was cheering the Obama victory on election night and almost voted for him because I knew the disaray it would cause within the GOP and how that would benefit RP and allow us to bring our philosophy to the forefront. The enemy of my enemy is my friend or something like that :rollseyes:

I'd put good money on betting that the percentage of atheists who support Ron Paul is much higher, if not double what he polls natinoally. Understanding Ron's principles requires a degree of independent thought in order to think beyond what you may have been taught or indoctrinated with. The same is true with atheism in most cases.

[Xavi1990]

I love the pseudo egalitarians like Hitchens. I also love the way people like him can admire Lenin and Trotsky and yet present themselves as a men of peace and humanity and associate all bad with religion....... and I'm a hardcore Atheist.

I am still waiting for him to ask for an invasion of Pakistan because we all know Al Qaeda is there. His main justification for the Iraq war is Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia - debunked by Ray McGovern - yet what about Al Qaeda is Islamabad?

[crazyfacedjenkins]

Hitchens is fun to listen to with regards to atheism, but as far as politics goes he's a neo con.

[crazyfacedjenkins]

Actually, most of them voted for Barack Obama in November 2008.

Most of them didn't vote. They weren't foolish enough to have faith in American elections.

[ExPatPaki]

Whenever someone mentions Hitchens, I always recall how he got his ass deservedly kicked by the SSNP in Beirut.

[anaconda]

Has anyone heard this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovJog62CfsI

I am humbled to say that I just discovered Hitchens tonight and then decided to see if he had commented on Ron or Rand and that led me to your post. I am both amazed and humbled at how well spoken and knowledgeable this man is. I am also profoundly curious as to how someone this bright is essentially a neocon, and how he can justify early preemptive war. So I will likely be reading up on this fellow. And I am saddened to hear on this thread that he is ill and I guess that was what they were alluding to a the beginning of the video. If you're curious, here was the youtube that served as my Hitchens introduction earlier tonight (I watched all 5 parts and was on the edge of my seat the whole time):


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDkG9fY5pZQ

With respect to his Ron Paul comments I would appeal to each on their prescribed methodology. What Ron Paul says is, in my opinion, anything but empty. Ron does not believe that rampaging into another country and sacrificing innocent lives is justifiable to liberate free trade from the shackles of what Hitchens calls "a fetid theocracy." I would press Hitchens on the morality of this from both an individual and state perspective. I would ask Paul to clarify the mechanism for his oft referred to example of Vietnam that evolved from war foe to mutually beneficial trading partner. I would come to the defense of Paul and ask Hitchens if his "incomparable" Persian civilization is perhaps not yet up to the task of liberating itself from Islamic repression. Hitchens criticizes the U.S. for not being in things for the long term yet turns around and says they waited too long to quash petty dictators of no consequence, like Saddam Hussein. He suggests in the video I linked to that the WWII was something that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, so he seems willing and able to identify political evolution in a longer context. So I would ask him why his impulsiveness with Iran? And I would suggest that Obama's demands and threats on Iran are indeed saber rattling of the highest order. The idea that Obama is some messenger of peace is ludicrous. Nonetheless, I am utterly enamored with this guy and want to study him some. Soon.

[anaconda]

bump

[militant]

I will listen to hitchens in regard to philosophy and atheism, not in regard to US foreign policy.

Exactly. That's pretty much all I have to say on Hitchens.

[ivflight]

Hitchens is a hoot and I love listening to him debate religion. I wish we had more characters like him.

Like others have said, once he starts talking about something other than religion I tune out. I watched the first 3min of the OP's video and have little to no memory of what he said or was trying to say. I just remember him referring to Ron as an isolationist, which is about as meaningful these days as calling someone a racist.