But… carried his beliefs of the( non) existence of a deity higher than mere morals, to its total and final conclusion, we would not have St Peters Basilica nor the Borobudur or the Taj Mahal nor Istanbul. We might all be sitting around Revesby Workers club clapping to that big busted ageing American singer (forgotten her name) playing the pokies and wake up next morning looking a bit bewildered.and/or disappointed.
Azreal, gave a nice Eulogy about Hitchen’s massive reservoir of knowledge analytical skill and literacy, over on The ABC story, however missed out the critical point that he (Hitchens) came to the right later on.
Of course I empathise; having been born to a father who was a card carrying member of The Communist Party & a mother who sympathised, having worked in The Land Army in her teens.
However subsequently, I have come to the view that the human race is best served by advancement in thinking and arguing; being individual, rather than collective; propping up every shyster unionist in the world–even though I retain my respect and social values.
I am here Funston….so I shall nip at your offering.
Your father a “card carrying member of The Communist Party & a mother who sympathised” huh?
Well, that would explain your reactionary turn.
When did it occur Funston?
Was it when you handed over your dues to a “union shyster” or when you admired, from
afar, the wealth and power that comes from well, having wealth and power?
I see you your “union shyster” and raise you a greedy bourgeois social climber who can NEVER quite understand why he pays his workers SO much.
Unfathomable!
You know the type Funston, we have seen them all, we have been in their company; those born in suburban gutters who by sheer will, by scraping at the class wall by their very fingernails extract themselves from the dirt.
God bless them I say!
All the power of their minds and muscle to them I say!
Just don’t do it by forgeting what their father went through….by those hungry days, those uncertain looks on your mothers face…..sharing the butter, arguing over who took the last slice of bread…..
Climbing like that tends to erase the memory Funston….and erasing the memory is not something I can countenance.
One is never quite at respect with oneself if one forgets.
Anyway,
Hitchens.
I was like the rest.Stunned at his Bush/Iraq/Afghanistan apologia. But it moved me most profoundly. That his position, his arguments, even came to be used as Conservative rationale added a deeply ironic twist to things. I smiled when I first read it.
And it was, of course, brilliant; in form, substance and delivery.
And if I were of Conservative bent i too would have embraced this erstwhile Trotskyist with the passion of a true believer.
But I was not.
I thought he mistook purpose for fidelity, for benevolence.
I think it still.
And I have read every one of his arguments.
Anyway,
“I have come to the view that the human race is best served by advancement in thinking and arguing;” as individuals, within a collective, for a collective” .
And I too “retain my respect and social values.”
So, how’s your Mandarin?
Ni hao
Hao jiu mei jian le
Well put, JG, though, if I may give my apologia for Hitchens’ apologia is that a view on one issue, or even two or three does not make a person either Right or Left. These two are not physical but abstract concepts. Intellectual, moral, social, psychological, that sort of thing; and to try and pin them as physical entities, with walls, borders and inelastic fetters, is, I believe, a mistake.
I never took Hitchens as either of these concepts, even during the days when he was swearing black and blue that he was a Lefty. No one is either one or tother; no one is either Good or Evil and the Devil’s hand basket is carried by every single one of us.
He was wrong, as you correctly say, about war and particularly about Iraq. Many were, though, when one sees the likes of Bush, Blair and Howard gunning for it, one ought to be much more introspective, more cautious about being “one of us.”
Whatever was his political proclivity, he was fighting for it with his intellect, which was one of the most powerful tools on the political battlefield. Luckily, his opponents were also there, with equally, if not often more powerful intellects and grounding in social sensitivity. There’s no question now which of the two sides were in the wrong.
One can get quite a chuckle -disturbing though it might be- by juxtaposing the scene of that moronic nun trying to argue with Hitchens that there is a god, with a similar discussion, or any other, really, with Bush! He dismissed the nun as one dismisses someone who has puked on one’s silk tie, yet he (metaphorically) shook the hand of three other morons. Just a mere chuckle, that’s all.
Yes atomou, there is much to agree with in your post.
Let me add these two thoughts in light of your own.
One.
Perhaps it was Hitchens the Humanist that we saw…..that cut through the Left/right cant; with penetration and erudition and vigour he yanked back the veil……and rightly, truthfully, told us that which we did not wish to hear: that at every birthing there is blood………….that those lost hundreds of thousands, millions, are (but) the nutrients in a garden of Matter and Mechanics….that will yield an infinite number of souls who will experience and understand that which those sacrificed could not: justice, autonomy, consequence and equality.
One could argue, in this (Hitchens) case, that the shedding of blood is THE necessary condition for a coherent and robust ethics.
One could also argue that Hitchens having seen the frugal returns of a Leftist abstraction sought to place his mind in the service of a greater cause: neither the God of the faithful, nor the Money of the Classes, but in that end-game, the sum of all, Humanity.
I would call that, during those moments when I can shake off the Left/Right folly, a profoundly selfless instinct.
But those moments are rare.
I do expect that to change though……as I grow older.
The only consolation I have now is knowing that that will be the case 🙂
Two.
Many, many, years ago I sought to define the life of a man, his work and its meaning, using but one of those abstractions you mentioned.
At the time it seemed perfect. I had discovered a method by which all of his secrets couldn’t help but reveal themselves to me!
That definition was barely complete when it stared to unravel.
And along with it a primary foundation of my thinking. I can honestly and unashamedly say, that it took close to 10 years to re-work, to re-think.
I now consider ALL things essential. And as some of you may have read in my arguments with Mitor the Bold my feelings on the subject are quite strong.
What to leave in?
What to leave out?
How does one know which is the prime mover?
What trail of consequence is borne of each choosing?
That sort of thing.
Which is why I can construct no argument against God atomou.
And therein lies another tussle for another day 😉
Remind me of it when you remember it…….and have the time.
“greedy bourgeois social climber who can NEVER quite understand why he pays his workers SO much.”
What on earth is one of those?
So you despise the job creators? Ok. Understood.
I didn’t know about my father’s party membership, until my mother told me. I think that he was he was seconded from Egypt, to Fiji (or similar), and she was just a bit miffed about him missing out on promotion in his career: an aircraft engineer. It was in retrospect that she was telling me. If’n you can understand that.
It wasn’t relevant to my decision to be markedly individual. That, I think, came at the time I had to decide not to become confirmed, at a C of E boarding school–whaen I was about 13/14.
It was shit or bust really. I either kowtowed to something that seemed ludicrous, based on my travels, and having Moslem, Buddhist and Hindu friends, or risked expulsion, for taking a personal stand…I have never looked back.
As Atomou says, we are not ‘all’ bad, or ‘all’ good; just incited by inner personal mores, divined and sculpted by experience. Although I have to say at this point, that nature imbues, some intrinsic, indelible insticts, that vary from person to person. And not necessarily inherited from the previous generation, but possibly even two or three before.
Gawd ‘I’ am rambling now J. G. Not such a bad thing though, If’n one is able.
Hitchens, being above normal intelligence, strove (in my view) to emulate some of his heroes; Paine; Orwell Huxley ect. (My father named me after Aldous’s brother, being a great admirer of them both.) My father joined The UN*, in assistance to underdeveloped countries. Hence my packing off to boarding school, as I outgrew my curriculem at The International School in Jakarta. It was very American. Hiawatha was a legend there…although we learnt the basics of Bahasa, which helped my street lingo.
Actually, digressing there I remeber that Hitchens, was always of the opinion that Orwell fell foul of some bullying, or unwanted homosexual activity at school, causing him to despise homsexuals. Hitchens admits to a couple of affairs–in fact famously says; as one of his pillars (his invented euphemisms) of, off the cuff staements, “Anal sex, is not all that it is cracked upp to be, or something similar. Boarding school made me think of that!
I was never a victim, although bullied the first year, as was normal, I later found out, I never was approached. Too butch maybe. I dunno. I did fancy the capatin of the football team, who was also head prefect at our house. However, on reflection I think that it may have been, because was admired and I wanted some glory to rub off.
Looking at the broader picture, it seems to me obvious that Saddam had to go. I know that was not the reason cited—and I agree that we will never really know if that was partially the reason. But eqally, I cannot possibly agree with those, gerad included, that the war was based on a false premise. I don’t want to go too deeply into this, because I have covered it a hundred times in posts elsewhere, in discussions with book worms like ant.
Suffice to say on ythis subject. It simply was NOT possible for any living person, exceptig the devious Saddam to know if he had hidden weapons. He had severe form too. He regularly executed ( and watched) the execution of anybody in his way: Baath party members for instance. AND, as even you must know, some 3-400thou Kurds and marsh arabs. Here’s a Hitchens’ quote, “We already know his envoys were meeting North Korean missile dealers in Damascus before the threat of the coalition’s intervention caused the vendors to return hastily to Pyongyang. The latest leaks complete an important part of an important case.”
I agree with Hitchens here too.(sorry more rambling.) The subsequent deaths (after the invasion) simply cannot be blamed on The Coalition. The evil that has followed is the fighting factions; divided on tribal and religious grounds.
There is a fledgling democracy—and as we speak US troops are withdrawing.
You and atomou, obviously, would have left Hussein there???
I have noticed The Drummers’ views on Assange too. What a load of Phooey. There is a ‘chancer’ (and I’ve said so many times), cashing in on what? He is a usless do nothing opportunist. A do nothing, like the silly carbon tax.
Taxing Australians wont make International pollution disappear. And that’s another thing. I don’t despise this government, because they are ostensibly left wing. I despise them because they are not even that. They are useless and chicken hearted. They stared out as Metoos, and are now backflipping panderers, without a sense of values. Values in a social sense; and values in an economic sense.
And pleeeeease, if anyone say/writes, ‘but Abbott does this or Abbott says that’, I’ll vomit.
Anyways, good to talk to youse, I’ll just wtach some old black and white sixties videos of sixties, “TOP of the Pops”, that I recoded last night
To Funston – Thanks for the read Funston. You give more in one post than you have in ten. Let me try this way, on just two……my cup of tea is warm:
1. “What on earth is one of those” – Seen ’em Funston. Know ’em. They is alive and kickin’.
2. “You and atomou, obviously, would have left Hussein there??? ”
You see Funston that the funny, strange, thing about this whole Godawful,pigawful mess.
You left him there, Hitchens left him there, Saddam’s (former) buddies Bush Senior, and Cheney and Rumsfeld and the entire Washington set, on both sides, left him there. They even gave Saddam the green light for Kuwait…….they were pals, buddies, chums. The brass tacks Funston? He was their china plate.
So what I want to know is when, on what date, and what time, did THEY decide that those dead Kurds SUDDENLY mattered…that their deaths were no longer tolerable to the delicate sensibilities of Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. You see Funston, that’s where the Righties always get it wrong about us Lefties.I understand it’s easy for you guys to construct a false argument. It’s all bright and breezy, ham and cheesy isn’t it?
But it’s not.
And neither you nor Washington nor Hitchens (despite his succinct 4 point rationale) could ever explain it away.
Still can’t.
Even being named after a humanitarian (J.Huxley) you still can’t.
And it’s not your fault. It just can’t be done.
Assange and Carbon Pricing and Abbott are for another day Funston. This is far more
interesting……not the Saddam business…..but your life story 😉
Tea awaits.
Cheers old man, whenever your ready to write, I’m ready to read.
Seeing him on Q&A for the first time, he was very rude to a nice Muslim girl asking a question….
In the SMH Weekend Magazine interview he said ‘his wife did not NEED to work’…
The third time he was better, he was very humble and pleasant on Margaret Throsby interview…
Oh well no one is perfect, god only knows who/what we all will be thinking of on our deathbeds
🙂
Window Dresser's Arms, Pig & Whistle 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/dec/16/christopher-hitchens-appreciation-by-ian-mcewan
Worth a look.
LikeLike
It’s not political, BTW; just a note from his friend.
LikeLike
But… carried his beliefs of the( non) existence of a deity higher than mere morals, to its total and final conclusion, we would not have St Peters Basilica nor the Borobudur or the Taj Mahal nor Istanbul. We might all be sitting around Revesby Workers club clapping to that big busted ageing American singer (forgotten her name) playing the pokies and wake up next morning looking a bit bewildered.and/or disappointed.
LikeLike
Azreal, gave a nice Eulogy about Hitchen’s massive reservoir of knowledge analytical skill and literacy, over on The ABC story, however missed out the critical point that he (Hitchens) came to the right later on.
Of course I empathise; having been born to a father who was a card carrying member of The Communist Party & a mother who sympathised, having worked in The Land Army in her teens.
However subsequently, I have come to the view that the human race is best served by advancement in thinking and arguing; being individual, rather than collective; propping up every shyster unionist in the world–even though I retain my respect and social values.
LikeLike
That’s all very well, Jules, however the sniglets are Christmas shopping ! You’ll have to go elsewhere for a discussion.
Why don’t you walk into Surfers and stare at all the holidaymakers? Take your Chinese and NZ phrase book.
LikeLike
I am here Funston….so I shall nip at your offering.
Your father a “card carrying member of The Communist Party & a mother who sympathised” huh?
Well, that would explain your reactionary turn.
When did it occur Funston?
Was it when you handed over your dues to a “union shyster” or when you admired, from
afar, the wealth and power that comes from well, having wealth and power?
I see you your “union shyster” and raise you a greedy bourgeois social climber who can NEVER quite understand why he pays his workers SO much.
Unfathomable!
You know the type Funston, we have seen them all, we have been in their company; those born in suburban gutters who by sheer will, by scraping at the class wall by their very fingernails extract themselves from the dirt.
God bless them I say!
All the power of their minds and muscle to them I say!
Just don’t do it by forgeting what their father went through….by those hungry days, those uncertain looks on your mothers face…..sharing the butter, arguing over who took the last slice of bread…..
Climbing like that tends to erase the memory Funston….and erasing the memory is not something I can countenance.
One is never quite at respect with oneself if one forgets.
Anyway,
Hitchens.
I was like the rest.Stunned at his Bush/Iraq/Afghanistan apologia. But it moved me most profoundly. That his position, his arguments, even came to be used as Conservative rationale added a deeply ironic twist to things. I smiled when I first read it.
And it was, of course, brilliant; in form, substance and delivery.
And if I were of Conservative bent i too would have embraced this erstwhile Trotskyist with the passion of a true believer.
But I was not.
I thought he mistook purpose for fidelity, for benevolence.
I think it still.
And I have read every one of his arguments.
Anyway,
“I have come to the view that the human race is best served by advancement in thinking and arguing;” as individuals, within a collective, for a collective” .
And I too “retain my respect and social values.”
So, how’s your Mandarin?
Ni hao
Hao jiu mei jian le
🙂
LikeLike
Well put, JG, though, if I may give my apologia for Hitchens’ apologia is that a view on one issue, or even two or three does not make a person either Right or Left. These two are not physical but abstract concepts. Intellectual, moral, social, psychological, that sort of thing; and to try and pin them as physical entities, with walls, borders and inelastic fetters, is, I believe, a mistake.
I never took Hitchens as either of these concepts, even during the days when he was swearing black and blue that he was a Lefty. No one is either one or tother; no one is either Good or Evil and the Devil’s hand basket is carried by every single one of us.
He was wrong, as you correctly say, about war and particularly about Iraq. Many were, though, when one sees the likes of Bush, Blair and Howard gunning for it, one ought to be much more introspective, more cautious about being “one of us.”
Whatever was his political proclivity, he was fighting for it with his intellect, which was one of the most powerful tools on the political battlefield. Luckily, his opponents were also there, with equally, if not often more powerful intellects and grounding in social sensitivity. There’s no question now which of the two sides were in the wrong.
One can get quite a chuckle -disturbing though it might be- by juxtaposing the scene of that moronic nun trying to argue with Hitchens that there is a god, with a similar discussion, or any other, really, with Bush! He dismissed the nun as one dismisses someone who has puked on one’s silk tie, yet he (metaphorically) shook the hand of three other morons. Just a mere chuckle, that’s all.
LikeLike
Yes atomou, there is much to agree with in your post.
Let me add these two thoughts in light of your own.
One.
Perhaps it was Hitchens the Humanist that we saw…..that cut through the Left/right cant; with penetration and erudition and vigour he yanked back the veil……and rightly, truthfully, told us that which we did not wish to hear: that at every birthing there is blood………….that those lost hundreds of thousands, millions, are (but) the nutrients in a garden of Matter and Mechanics….that will yield an infinite number of souls who will experience and understand that which those sacrificed could not: justice, autonomy, consequence and equality.
One could argue, in this (Hitchens) case, that the shedding of blood is THE necessary condition for a coherent and robust ethics.
One could also argue that Hitchens having seen the frugal returns of a Leftist abstraction sought to place his mind in the service of a greater cause: neither the God of the faithful, nor the Money of the Classes, but in that end-game, the sum of all, Humanity.
I would call that, during those moments when I can shake off the Left/Right folly, a profoundly selfless instinct.
But those moments are rare.
I do expect that to change though……as I grow older.
The only consolation I have now is knowing that that will be the case 🙂
Two.
Many, many, years ago I sought to define the life of a man, his work and its meaning, using but one of those abstractions you mentioned.
At the time it seemed perfect. I had discovered a method by which all of his secrets couldn’t help but reveal themselves to me!
That definition was barely complete when it stared to unravel.
And along with it a primary foundation of my thinking. I can honestly and unashamedly say, that it took close to 10 years to re-work, to re-think.
I now consider ALL things essential. And as some of you may have read in my arguments with Mitor the Bold my feelings on the subject are quite strong.
What to leave in?
What to leave out?
How does one know which is the prime mover?
What trail of consequence is borne of each choosing?
That sort of thing.
Which is why I can construct no argument against God atomou.
And therein lies another tussle for another day 😉
Remind me of it when you remember it…….and have the time.
Anyway, I’m rambling……:)
LikeLike
Did he bat or bowl? Can’t quite remember?
LikeLike
Who? Ato or Mitor the Bold.
LikeLike
“greedy bourgeois social climber who can NEVER quite understand why he pays his workers SO much.”
What on earth is one of those?
So you despise the job creators? Ok. Understood.
I didn’t know about my father’s party membership, until my mother told me. I think that he was he was seconded from Egypt, to Fiji (or similar), and she was just a bit miffed about him missing out on promotion in his career: an aircraft engineer. It was in retrospect that she was telling me. If’n you can understand that.
It wasn’t relevant to my decision to be markedly individual. That, I think, came at the time I had to decide not to become confirmed, at a C of E boarding school–whaen I was about 13/14.
It was shit or bust really. I either kowtowed to something that seemed ludicrous, based on my travels, and having Moslem, Buddhist and Hindu friends, or risked expulsion, for taking a personal stand…I have never looked back.
As Atomou says, we are not ‘all’ bad, or ‘all’ good; just incited by inner personal mores, divined and sculpted by experience. Although I have to say at this point, that nature imbues, some intrinsic, indelible insticts, that vary from person to person. And not necessarily inherited from the previous generation, but possibly even two or three before.
Gawd ‘I’ am rambling now J. G. Not such a bad thing though, If’n one is able.
Hitchens, being above normal intelligence, strove (in my view) to emulate some of his heroes; Paine; Orwell Huxley ect. (My father named me after Aldous’s brother, being a great admirer of them both.) My father joined The UN*, in assistance to underdeveloped countries. Hence my packing off to boarding school, as I outgrew my curriculem at The International School in Jakarta. It was very American. Hiawatha was a legend there…although we learnt the basics of Bahasa, which helped my street lingo.
Actually, digressing there I remeber that Hitchens, was always of the opinion that Orwell fell foul of some bullying, or unwanted homosexual activity at school, causing him to despise homsexuals. Hitchens admits to a couple of affairs–in fact famously says; as one of his pillars (his invented euphemisms) of, off the cuff staements, “Anal sex, is not all that it is cracked upp to be, or something similar. Boarding school made me think of that!
I was never a victim, although bullied the first year, as was normal, I later found out, I never was approached. Too butch maybe. I dunno. I did fancy the capatin of the football team, who was also head prefect at our house. However, on reflection I think that it may have been, because was admired and I wanted some glory to rub off.
Looking at the broader picture, it seems to me obvious that Saddam had to go. I know that was not the reason cited—and I agree that we will never really know if that was partially the reason. But eqally, I cannot possibly agree with those, gerad included, that the war was based on a false premise. I don’t want to go too deeply into this, because I have covered it a hundred times in posts elsewhere, in discussions with book worms like ant.
Suffice to say on ythis subject. It simply was NOT possible for any living person, exceptig the devious Saddam to know if he had hidden weapons. He had severe form too. He regularly executed ( and watched) the execution of anybody in his way: Baath party members for instance. AND, as even you must know, some 3-400thou Kurds and marsh arabs. Here’s a Hitchens’ quote, “We already know his envoys were meeting North Korean missile dealers in Damascus before the threat of the coalition’s intervention caused the vendors to return hastily to Pyongyang. The latest leaks complete an important part of an important case.”
I agree with Hitchens here too.(sorry more rambling.) The subsequent deaths (after the invasion) simply cannot be blamed on The Coalition. The evil that has followed is the fighting factions; divided on tribal and religious grounds.
There is a fledgling democracy—and as we speak US troops are withdrawing.
You and atomou, obviously, would have left Hussein there???
I have noticed The Drummers’ views on Assange too. What a load of Phooey. There is a ‘chancer’ (and I’ve said so many times), cashing in on what? He is a usless do nothing opportunist. A do nothing, like the silly carbon tax.
Taxing Australians wont make International pollution disappear. And that’s another thing. I don’t despise this government, because they are ostensibly left wing. I despise them because they are not even that. They are useless and chicken hearted. They stared out as Metoos, and are now backflipping panderers, without a sense of values. Values in a social sense; and values in an economic sense.
And pleeeeease, if anyone say/writes, ‘but Abbott does this or Abbott says that’, I’ll vomit.
Anyways, good to talk to youse, I’ll just wtach some old black and white sixties videos of sixties, “TOP of the Pops”, that I recoded last night
LikeLike
*Just glanced through and saw my asterisk.*
I had meant to note, that , Julian Huxley (my namesake) was a founding member of UNESCO, a UN entity.
Getting tired .
LikeLike
To Hung and Algernon – cut it out you two!! 🙂
To Funston – Thanks for the read Funston. You give more in one post than you have in ten. Let me try this way, on just two……my cup of tea is warm:
1. “What on earth is one of those” – Seen ’em Funston. Know ’em. They is alive and kickin’.
2. “You and atomou, obviously, would have left Hussein there??? ”
You see Funston that the funny, strange, thing about this whole Godawful,pigawful mess.
You left him there, Hitchens left him there, Saddam’s (former) buddies Bush Senior, and Cheney and Rumsfeld and the entire Washington set, on both sides, left him there. They even gave Saddam the green light for Kuwait…….they were pals, buddies, chums. The brass tacks Funston? He was their china plate.
So what I want to know is when, on what date, and what time, did THEY decide that those dead Kurds SUDDENLY mattered…that their deaths were no longer tolerable to the delicate sensibilities of Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. You see Funston, that’s where the Righties always get it wrong about us Lefties.I understand it’s easy for you guys to construct a false argument. It’s all bright and breezy, ham and cheesy isn’t it?
But it’s not.
And neither you nor Washington nor Hitchens (despite his succinct 4 point rationale) could ever explain it away.
Still can’t.
Even being named after a humanitarian (J.Huxley) you still can’t.
And it’s not your fault. It just can’t be done.
Assange and Carbon Pricing and Abbott are for another day Funston. This is far more
interesting……not the Saddam business…..but your life story 😉
Tea awaits.
Cheers old man, whenever your ready to write, I’m ready to read.
LikeLike
Seeing him on Q&A for the first time, he was very rude to a nice Muslim girl asking a question….
In the SMH Weekend Magazine interview he said ‘his wife did not NEED to work’…
The third time he was better, he was very humble and pleasant on Margaret Throsby interview…
Oh well no one is perfect, god only knows who/what we all will be thinking of on our deathbeds
🙂
LikeLike
let me echo Gerard – the first time I saw Christopher Hitchens he was arguing, smoking, drinking….and sweating.
And that’s how it should be!
Vous revoir!
LikeLike
He suffered fools not gladly.
But now he’s choofed off, sadly.
If he goes to meet his maker,
He’ll think “I should have been a Quaker”
LikeLike
What Lehan said…
😦
LikeLike
Blast! How can there be a God?
I’m upset. He had more to say.
LikeLike
He stuck by his beliefs. He loved his ciggies and a drink. Who can argue against that?
LikeLike
Whilst I might disagree with Hitchens. I agree with your sentiments, gerard.
LikeLike
One of the best thinkers of my time.
Very sad, indeed!
LikeLike
Rest in Peace
LikeLike