Author, pundit Christopher Hitchens dies at 62

High culture, religion, science and esoterica.

Postby Ubu Hex » Wed Dec 21, 2011 2:22 am

Parody wrote:I thought this thread was about the death of somebody who may deserve a little RIP-ish respect, as does any person that died. Not that dogs mind pissing on Spengler's grave either.

Image


Another instructive and exemplary display of judeo-christian love and compassion?
User avatar
Ubu Hex
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:42 pm

Postby Booklady's Ghost » Wed Dec 21, 2011 2:30 am

Ubu Hex wrote:
Parody wrote:I thought this thread was about the death of somebody who may deserve a little RIP-ish respect, as does any person that died. Not that dogs mind pissing on Spengler's grave either.

Image


Another instructive and exemplary display of judeo-christian love and compassion?
Or another instructive example of a couple of atheists saying good-bye to grandpa?
Booklady's Ghost
 
Posts: 8681
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:12 am

Postby Parody » Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:28 am

Ubu Hex wrote:Another instructive and exemplary display of judeo-christian love and compassion?


Spengler is more into competition and accounting... me thinks. It's a Darwinian thing I'm afraid.
User avatar
Parody
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:08 am
Location: Always here

Postby Parody » Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:31 am

Booklady's Ghost wrote:Or another instructive example of a couple of atheists saying good-bye to grandpa?


Maybe the dog just misreads; Rest In Pee
User avatar
Parody
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:08 am
Location: Always here

Re: Why?

Postby Doc » Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:40 am

Ubu Hex wrote:
Spengler wrote:I ignore mainstream culture for the most part; except for one or two occasions at a dentist's office, I haven't held a copy of the New Yorker or Vanity Fair in my hands for thirty years (although people sometimes send me individual articles). I can't remember having read anything by Hitchens, although I must have seen one or two of his pieces in The Atlantic before I let my subscription lapse. None of the eulogies mentions any idea with which he was associated.

Why is everyone writing about him?


Herr Spengler: "Why isn't everyone writing about me, me, me?"


Why on earth would he say that when he has got you? :D
User avatar
Doc
 
Posts: 7996
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:07 pm
Location: khlōros

Re: Why?

Postby Ubu Hex » Fri Dec 23, 2011 5:02 am

Doc wrote:
Ubu Hex wrote:
Spengler wrote:I ignore mainstream culture for the most part; except for one or two occasions at a dentist's office, I haven't held a copy of the New Yorker or Vanity Fair in my hands for thirty years (although people sometimes send me individual articles). I can't remember having read anything by Hitchens, although I must have seen one or two of his pieces in The Atlantic before I let my subscription lapse. None of the eulogies mentions any idea with which he was associated.

Why is everyone writing about him?


Herr Spengler: "Why isn't everyone writing about me, me, me?"


Why on earth would he say that when he has got you? :D


Am I the one petulantly p*ssing on the recently departed?

Rather, Herr Spengler, has and has had you, no?
Last edited by Ubu Hex on Fri Dec 23, 2011 5:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ubu Hex
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:42 pm

Postby Ubu Hex » Fri Dec 23, 2011 5:05 am

Parody wrote:
Booklady's Ghost wrote:Or another instructive example of a couple of atheists saying good-bye to grandpa?


Maybe the dog just misreads; Rest In Pee


Not unlike the philospher whose life's work was the massive tome A Peek into the Future only to have the printer accidentally drop the "k".
Last edited by Ubu Hex on Fri Dec 23, 2011 5:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ubu Hex
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:42 pm

Re: Why?

Postby Ubu Hex » Fri Dec 23, 2011 5:06 am

duplicate.

[why does this board not have a basic delete function/]
User avatar
Ubu Hex
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:42 pm

Re: Why?

Postby Ubu Hex » Fri Dec 23, 2011 5:09 am

seriously.
User avatar
Ubu Hex
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:42 pm

Postby lzzrdgrrl » Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:42 pm

Actually, it does. It's in the upper right with the QUOTE and EDIT buttons after you post. But you hafta act fast because if some one replies to your posting, or you impatiently reply to your own posting, then that option goes away......
User avatar
lzzrdgrrl
 
Posts: 5741
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 8:30 pm
Location: only sour cherry in your fruit stand......

Postby Parody » Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:04 am

For those who love see the atheist die:

Atheists are Wrong and Evil!

8)

More sexy propaganda:

Faith is not evidence!

Food for thought...
User avatar
Parody
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:08 am
Location: Always here

Re: Why?

Postby Hockey Dad » Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:10 am

Spengler wrote:I ignore mainstream culture for the most part; except for one or two occasions at a dentist's office, I haven't held a copy of the New Yorker or Vanity Fair in my hands for thirty years (although people sometimes send me individual articles). I can't remember having read anything by Hitchens, although I must have seen one or two of his pieces in The Atlantic before I let my subscription lapse. None of the eulogies mentions any idea with which he was associated.

Why is everyone writing about him?



I don't think it's so much due to his articles in magazines, but rather his many colorful appearances on TV.

I found Hitchens a very welcome breath of fresh air and political incorrectness both on television and radio during his Clinton-bashing and Saddam Hussein-bashing, Iraq-war-supporting campaigns.

But then of course he supported Obama!

Nobody's perfect.

RIP, you Lagavulin-swilling firebrand.

:cry:
User avatar
Hockey Dad
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 5:25 am

Postby Hocketing Dad » Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:19 am

^^^

Victor Davis Hanson writes an interesting and touching piece about Hitchens, here.
User avatar
Hocketing Dad
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 1:01 am

Postby CD » Wed Jan 04, 2012 2:21 am

Hocketing Dad wrote:^^^

Victor Davis Hanson writes an interesting and touching piece about Hitchens, here.

^ Thanks for that.
User avatar
CD
 
Posts: 5134
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 11:13 am

Postby Hocketing Dad » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:06 am

CD wrote:
Hocketing Dad wrote:^^^

Victor Davis Hanson writes an interesting and touching piece about Hitchens, here.

^ Thanks for that.


You are welcome, as ever. The longer story about the suicide of his mother and her lover in Athens is a terrible thing to read.
But I don't recall where I came across it.
User avatar
Hocketing Dad
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 1:01 am

Postby Hocketing Dad » Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:31 am

A couple of paragraphs from an article by Christopher Hitchens, May 5, 2008:

...
Liberal comment on (the Rev. Jeremiah) Wright, and on the incredible damage that this conceited old fanatic has done to the Obama campaign, tends to dwell on the negative effect that black chauvinist rhetoric has on white working-class voters. Fair enough, I suppose. But why should a thinking black member of the working class want any truck with a Farrakhan fan or with a moral idiot who thinks that the drugs and disease in the black community are imposed by an outside conspiracy? I don't need any condescending liberal to explain to me why black Americans are inclined to be touchy about the way their forebears were treated any more than I require a patronizing former Harvard law student to guide me through the anxieties of the gun-owning and hunting community. I can quite easily understand these points without pedagogic assistance. What I won't be told is that Tawana Brawley was right, or that AIDS is the fault of the government, or that Jews were behind the slave trade, or that there is a secret Masonic code in the dollar bill. And the apologist for murder "Minister Farrakhan" and his big-mouth Christian friends flirt with this kind of half-baked garbage every day.

-snip-

What can it be that has kept Obama in Wright's pews, and at Wright's mercy, for so long and at such a heavy cost to his aspirations? Even if he pulls off a mathematical nomination victory, he has completely lost the first, fine, careless rapture of a post-racial and post-resentment political movement and mired us again in all the old rubbish that predates Dr. King. What a sad thing to behold. And how come? I think we can exclude any covert sympathy on Obama's part for Wright's views or style—he has proved time and again that he is not like that, and even his own little nods to "Minister" Farrakhan can probably be excused as a silly form of Chicago South Side political etiquette. All right, then, how is it that the loathsome Wright married him, baptized his children, and received donations from him? Could it possibly have anything, I wonder, to do with Mrs. Obama?

Is Michelle Obama responsible for the Jeremiah Wright fiasco?
User avatar
Hocketing Dad
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 1:01 am

Postby ellens » Tue Jan 17, 2012 2:00 am

That is a nice piece of writing you quoted from Hitchens. A pity that other white liberals (although Hitchens wasn't really a liberal) couldn't write something with that moral clarity about the whole rather repulsive Rev. Wright episode and what that said about Obama's morals and selective sense of indignation.

Anyway, it is very timely now that he will be trying to get the votes of white folk once again on this go-round. Although, news reports suggest that he and David Axelrod have already written off the white working class vote.
ellens
 
Posts: 2361
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 8:42 am

Re:

Postby Hocketing Dad » Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:48 pm

ellens wrote:That is a nice piece of writing you quoted from Hitchens. A pity that other white liberals (although Hitchens wasn't really a liberal) couldn't write something with that moral clarity about the whole rather repulsive Rev. Wright episode and what that said about Obama's morals and selective sense of indignation.

Anyway, it is very timely now that he will be trying to get the votes of white folk once again on this go-round. Although, news reports suggest that he and David Axelrod have already written off the white working class vote.




Thanks. But as to it being a pity that other white liberals can't write as well as Hitchens; be careful what you wish for!

- - - -


Somehow it hasn't been mentioned in this thread for over a month, that there was a well-written obituary about Hitchens, here in the Asia Times Online.

It is much better than the title would suggest!

Christopher Hitchens 1949-2011:
A man worth naming a dog after
By David M Lenard


A couple of quotes from it:

... He was a man of principle who defended positions even when they were extremely unpopular - often, it seemed, especially when they were extremely unpopular. Once, when asked "were you considered a contrarian as a teenager?" he answered, "I wouldn't have known the word contrarian as a teenager, I was considered by my friends and family to be a pain in the ass." ...

... One such instance is Hitchens' opposition to anti-Americanism. Not only was Hitchens one of the precious handful of British intellectuals who understood and loved America, he demonstrated that affection in the most legally emphatic way possible, by becoming a US citizen in 2007, with a customized citizenship ceremony held at the Jefferson Memorial, no less. (This ceremony was arranged with the help of former director of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, who Hitchens had encountered at a Washington cocktail party the previous year.) ...
User avatar
Hocketing Dad
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 1:01 am

Re: Author, pundit Christopher Hitchens dies at 62

Postby ellens » Sat Jan 28, 2012 12:56 am

I enjoyed Hitchens as one of the top essay-writers in the English language. His command of the language and of multitudes of books written in this language was virtually peerless. As a speaker, he was also entertaining and erudite, a combination rarely found these days in our debased cultural world. Entertaining these days usually is understood to mean vulgar and dirty, not intellectually stimulating.

On the other hand, an ideologue must have a compelling ideology that he believes in to really leave a mark on the world, after he is gone. As a previous poster pointed out, he does not leave this world with any credible belief system that anyone will remember him by, and thus will fade from memory fairly quickly. After abandoning the ludicrous world of the left, to which he contributed a fair share of the ludicrousness in his early career, he simply became a contrarian, with no particular beliefs except that everyone else was evil, corrupt or stupid. This may be amusing to some, but it leaves him looking rather cynical and hollow. He was, in the end, a rather hollow man, with inconsistent views on a whole host of subjects including Israel and the Jews (about which he had much to say, like most European intellectuals).

His views on Israel were the litmus test that one can use to show a moral and consistent man from a hypocritical and hollow man, and he ended up in the latter camp, as even some of his eulogizers had to admit.

So, his long-term influence will be minimal.
ellens
 
Posts: 2361
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 8:42 am

Re: Author, pundit Christopher Hitchens dies at 62

Postby waxwing001 » Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:19 pm

".....The late Christopher Hitchens provides the most obvious example, a celebrity atheist as famous for boosting wars as for baiting clerics.

Liberal admirers often mentally separated the atheistic Hitchens from the political Hitchens but in reality the two personas were inseparable. When, notoriously, he lauded Bush’s cluster bombs, he did so – typically – by combining his two passions. ‘Those steel pellets will go straight through somebody,’ he chuckled, ‘and out the other side and through somebody else. So they won’t be able to say, “Ah, I was bearing a Koran over my heart and guess what, the missile stopped halfway through.” No way, ’cause it’ll go straight through that as well. They’ll be dead, in other words.’

Because Hitchens was so rhetorically intemperate (recall his attack on the Dixie Chicks as ‘sluts’, his description of the war widow Cindy Sheehan as a ‘sob sister’ and so on); because, as Corey Robin says, he often evinced ‘a cruelty and bloodlust, a thrill for violence and apocalyptic confrontation, an almost sociopathic indifference to the victims of that violence and confrontation’ (witness, for instance, his reaction to the Fallujah offensive, his cry ‘the death toll is not nearly high enough … too many [jihadists] have escaped’); he was treated indulgently, even by liberals, as New Atheism’s mad uncle, whose uglier outbursts could excused on the grounds of his very eccentricity.

But his weaponised atheism was no anomaly.

Attendees at the convention can, after all, hear much the same thing from Sam Harris, another of the so-called ‘Four Horsemen’. Harris, like Hitchens, thinks that atheists have a special insight into the war on terror, which should, he says, understood as a conflict against ‘a pestilential theology and a longing for paradise’. Most liberals, he continues, fail to understand ‘how dangerous and depraved our enemies in the Muslim world are’. Indeed, ‘the people who speak most sensibly about the threat that Islam poses to Europe are actually fascists.’

Harris calls himself a liberal but his positions on Islam are to the Right of any Australian parliamentarians, with the possible exception of Cory Bernardi, a notorious conservative crank.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, another conference speaker, carves out similar territory.

‘We are at war with Islam,’ she says bluntly. ‘And there’s no middle ground in wars.’

Elsewhere, Hirsi Ali, a fellow at the neonconservative American Enterprise Institute, explained the home front consequences of that total war.

‘All Muslim schools. Close them down. Yeah, that sounds absolutist. I think 10 years ago things were different, but now the jihadi genie is out of the bottle.’

Again, it’s the sort of stuff you’d expect to hear from Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer or other sinister representatives of the so-called ‘counter-jihad’ movement.

Such is weaponised atheism: arguments for war and state repression, tricked out as scepticism.

Obviously, not all speakers at the Global Atheist Convention are Hitchensian warmongers. Many denounced the invasion of Iraq. Some oppose the worst excesses of Islamophobia and have the grace to find the polemical excesses of Harris et al somewhat embarrassing.

Nonetheless, the fact remains: leading representatives of the movement express ideas that otherwise we’d associate with the hard Right – and are celebrated for doing so. This is a phenomenon that requires some explanation....'
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/04/09/ ... f-atheism/
waxwing001
 
Posts: 10001
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:33 pm

Previous

Return to Literature, arts, and philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

  • SIDEBAR
  • Latest Forum Topics