What's new

Christopher Hitchens on the war against Islam

MosquitoMan

Debutant
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Runs
27
When asked about the 'clash of civilisations' theory:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3V9XxxDs3kI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Maybe I'm naive but I was taken aback for how vociferous he was in saying this was a war against Islam. Fine, he was no politician and I agreed with his observation over the Danish cartoon affair, it was a contemptible reaction by Muslims. But to then argue with glee of more killing in the Middle East (and how that all ends up with civilian deaths top of the bad guys he wanted dead), even as a fan of the Hitch, this clip (which I've only just seen) creeped me out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For many people, including the opposition, this is a clash of civilisations, and that's certainly how it's presented in the media so I would imagine most people probably share that view.
 
Sure cancer had nothing to do with it?

There are lifestyle factors to some cancers it's not simply genetic. His parents lived to a good age and his brother is still going strong. Seems he was particularly weak runt of the family or literally 'consumed by hatred'
 
Hitchens was a heavy smoker and a particularly massive drinker. He was reportedly drunk as a skunk by lunchtime most days, mainly because (in his view) it helped him write. Moreover there was no motivation for him to give up because he was a high-functioning alcoholic, in the sense that he never got hangovers and could comfortably appear in public, meet all of his diary engagements, and generally go about his daily business with ease whilst drunk. That is why he contracted cancer in the end.
 
Denmark is a Nice country to live overall. The politicians are misusing the Media. Everyday there is some anti-muslim news in the Media. The politicians are claiming muslims are taking all Danish social welfare. 5% muslim taking All benefit. By claiming muslim are costing so much money. The hospital staff, School teacher and staff and kinder staff have been set to minimum. I dont know What the agenda is i dont know. devide and rule is actually making Denmark a very Rich country and making muslim work harder I feel and making a lot muslim depressed too. Future is interesting and also quite scary
 
I'm not really sure what to think about Hitchens. Clearly he was an important voice at some stage, but it seems now he is being defined by his pronouncements on Islam. I'm sure he must have contributed a lot more to the world in reality.
 
I like Hitchens cause he is really entertaining. But his hypocrisy towards Islam especially for the Iraq invasion is as Galloway said, " the transformation of a butterfly back into a slug ".
 
Galloway and Hitchens were once close friends when they were both men of the Left. One of the all time great orators and one of the all time great scribes. After Hitchens moved to the Right they fell out big-style.

"The only case in history of a butterfly metamorphosising into a slug" was one of the many Galloway quotes on Hitchens post-9/11. Also "a bloated drink-soaked popinjay". And my personal favourite, due to its begrudging respect: "He wrote like an angel but spoke for the devil".

Hitchens did produce many good pieces of work however. One of the best things that he did was voluntarily get waterboarded to prove to the Bush administration that it should be defined as torture instead of enhanced interrogation.
 
.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XLKQGwVkczg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
One of the greatest intellects of his generation. Didn't much like him though. Went from leftist to conservative, as many do with age. His comment about Jihadists - "We are not killing these people fast enough" was scary. He thought that because they had abandoned reason, they cannot be convinced, and so the only recourse is to kill them before they kill us.
 
Hitchens was a heavy smoker and a particularly massive drinker. He was reportedly drunk as a skunk by lunchtime most days, mainly because (in his view) it helped him write. Moreover there was no motivation for him to give up because he was a high-functioning alcoholic, in the sense that he never got hangovers and could comfortably appear in public, meet all of his diary engagements, and generally go about his daily business with ease whilst drunk. That is why he contracted cancer in the end.

Makes sense.
 
For many people, including the opposition, this is a clash of civilisations, and that's certainly how it's presented in the media so I would imagine most people probably share that view.

But would they say it's a fight against the entirety of Islam (which to me can lead to the idea that Muslims wherever they are, are fair game) or a fight against Islamic extremists? If it's the prior, there's a problem, especially given that there are millions of Muslims living in the West.
 
I'm not really sure what to think about Hitchens. Clearly he was an important voice at some stage, but it seems now he is being defined by his pronouncements on Islam. I'm sure he must have contributed a lot more to the world in reality.

Well he wasn't afraid of making enemies even before 9/11, whether it be Bill Clinton, Henry Kissinger, those who idolised Mother Theresa. I agreed with a lot with what he said on religion. Heck he was extremely measured when it came to what he described as the great evil of the world without resulting into bigotry. Surprisingly he was a defender of multi-culturalism, which has become a dirty word here in the West. He felt that this was only being challenged by extremists of one faith, Islam. Fair point perhaps.

Which is why I found this clip surprising personally where he's willing to put forth a war against the entire Islamic 'civilisation'. Funnily enough he was back to his more measured self discussing Islam with Tariq Ramadan a few years later. Perhaps it would've helped that he didn't look like he was off his dead with drunk and the fact that he was frail in his last year.
 
But would they say it's a fight against the entirety of Islam (which to me can lead to the idea that Muslims wherever they are, are fair game) or a fight against Islamic extremists? If it's the prior, there's a problem, especially given that there are millions of Muslims living in the West.

I always interpreted it as against Islamic extremists and not against Islam as a whole. But that is just my interpretation and there may also be some clips that I haven't encountered yet. Equally the definition of extremism differs from person to person - one man's extremist may well be another man's moderate.
 
Last edited:
I always interpreted it as against Islamic extremists and not against Islam as a whole. But that is just my interpretation and there may also be some clips that I haven't encountered yet. Equally the definition of extremism differs from person to person - one man's extremist may well be another man's moderate.

Well to a lot of the new Right/Alt Right, they wouldn't care to distinguish moderations of religion (since these are the people who advocate for Muslim bans, face veil bans, internment etc), it's all bad. That to me is one sign of a 'war against Islam' at least on the domestic front in the West. Would Hitch have supported that as part of his fight against Islam? I don't think so. But that clip of him was dangerous rhetoric nonetheless.
 
I think if Hitch had still been alive and well to see the rise of Trump and the reemergence of the white supremacist hard right in the US, he would have been the first person to stand up against them. He would definitely have fought against the Muslim / immigration bans, because he often wrote favourably from a liberal perspective of the Constitution, Founding Fathers, Bill of Rights etc and the Muslim ban did not fit in with these directives - which is why it keeps getting challenged in the courts.
 
But would they say it's a fight against the entirety of Islam (which to me can lead to the idea that Muslims wherever they are, are fair game) or a fight against Islamic extremists? If it's the prior, there's a problem, especially given that there are millions of Muslims living in the West.

I'm not sure that's something that we can lay at the door of Hitchens because of one or two speeches. When the national media is blowing up anti-Muslim headlines almost every day then quotes can be taken out of context to add fuel to the flame.

I gave the example of the Tory councillor who was sacked last week for tweeting “You’ve clearly not experienced the Pakistani hospitality, having a daughter raped by men who think she’s ‘white trash’." This shows how when a negative story about a community is constantly promoted, it must have an effect on the general perception of the public. So how much of that is down to Hitchens alone?
 
Say what you want about the guy but Im sure even his most ardent haters would agree that he was a brilliant orator and one of the best minds of his generation.
The world needs more people like him right now.
 
I'm not really sure what to think about Hitchens. Clearly he was an important voice at some stage, but it seems now he is being defined by his pronouncements on Islam. I'm sure he must have contributed a lot more to the world in reality.

Oh he did.Its sad to see his name being mentioned only during the conversations involving islamophobia when in fact he became vociferous anti theist much later in his career.
 
Back
Top