Christopher Hitchens is visiting Lebanon, where he was his bold bad self and defaced a poster for the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, and was beaten up for the act. I don’t often agree with his politics, but the guy has massive brass.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
So the fundagelicals and religionuts finally get to feel the way I sort of did the day I heard Coulter’s jaw was wired shut…
Mr. Hitchens, do take care. Srsly.
I like his style, but for those kinds of shenanigans he needs to lose weight, quite smoking, cut way back on the sauce, get in shape, and learn some Krav Maga.
Hitch knows how to push the buttons. In that part of the world I would be treading pretty lightly.
Perhaps he should quit smoking. Quiteing smoking too much of a bitch.
a poster for the Syrian Social Nationalist Party
Any relation to the National Bocialists?
Massive brass? Hardly, this is nothing but stupidity in action. I hope Hitchens is fine and got nothing but a limp from the ordeal but what did he expect would happen by defacing these thugs property in their home turf? He’s lucky he’s still breathing.
I still don’t like the sound of these “boncentration bamps.”
re: the link. “Counterinsurgency,” eh?
Forget the smoking. Put aside any personal feelings about Hitches’ approach (outspoken” but non-violent – to others at least).
The man was assaulted for doing no more than speak out against thugs. It is this sort of violence that allows oppressive regimes to dominate nations with stand-over tactics.
This is how the nazi party got control of germany.
Why is it (just curious, not critical) that whenever Hitchens comes up, somebody uses the phrase “the sauce”? It’s like, you have to be Sinatra or Dino to talk about the guy. What kind of the sauce does Hitchens imbibe, anybody know?
His actions weren’t stupid they were unbelievably courageous. We need more people standing up and doing that.
@Paul Erm, vandalism isn’t just speaking.
Your godwin isn’t totally off the mark, the political parties are armed in Lebanon as was the Nazi party. But its mostly off the mark, in that the political parties of Lebanon recently finished fighting a 20 year civil war againist each other. The context is (as with most godwins) totally different.
May not have been vandalism. Where was the poster? If it’s one of those posters typically plastered on lampposts and walls, I would think the person who put it up loses ownership of it at that point unless they own the post or wall… and in fact THEY may be the vandals.
Here is a recent (4:40 PM EST) account from L. Osborne who is traveling with Hitchens. Posted at Forbes.
“But later that night, three of our “scoop” brigade–Jonathan Foreman, Michael Totten and Christopher Hitchens–got involved in a street brawl with some thugs of a Syria-loving skinhead party called the SNPN after Hitchens rather gallantly insulted their swastika flag. On our way to a meeting with Minister of State Nassib Lahoud, Hitchens showed me the gashed knuckles and bruises suffered during the punch up. The attackers had apparently come out of nowhere on posh Hamra Street, where they had gone to buy shoes. “I was on the ground,” Hitchens said, “and getting it in the head.” It was a miracle they didn’t pull Kalashnikovs.”
No doubt about it: he was an idiot. A drunk idiot, at that.
What’s to admire for Hitchen’s being such a belligerent alcoholic? It’s not so much that he has steel cajones, but more a typical alcoholic who spent the night with a mistress called gin. I’m sure he’d be fine with those Islamic extremists who practice Sharia Law spray painting anti-equality slogans on a billboard outside his home pub. He’s a visitor to a place, and if he wants to use words in print, or spoken through a valid medium, that’s acceptable, but when you deface things on other people’s soil, there are repercussions to your actions.
OT meanness:
I have tremendous respect for Christopher Hitchens; while not totally agreeing with all of his politics, I never have to wonder why he holds the viewpoints he does – it is always spelled out in exquisite prose. Perhaps being a member of his generation increases the affinity I feel for him.
I don’t know if he was being particularly courageous – I suspect it was just a case of Hitch being Hitch. That said, saying he should have been more cautious in that part of the world is basically blaming the victim. Hopefully he won’t suffer any permanent damage from the beating he took for expressing himself.
There’s a fine line between bravery and stupidity.
I thought Hitch gave up smoking last year. Did that not last?
To Tom, #15. It’s “cojones” not “cajones,” which are drawers, the kind you find in desks or filing cabinets. Not a spelling flame, just an FYI.
Next up on his tour is a stop in Zimbabwe, where he’ll deface a picture of Robert Mugabe.
I don’t like his style at all. I think he’s an arrogant you-know-what who acts out instead of actually having a style anymore.
Rode hard, put away wet, has only himself to blame.
MH @18
“There’s a fine line between bravery and stupidity”
Yes, its the same fine line as between:
Hero and casualty, Martyr and victim. Courage and cowering. Right and wrong.
If the sensible thing to do is keep your head down and your mouth shut when in the presence of fascistic bastards, then thank Monkey for idiots like Hitchens.
There’s a few here slagging him off that don’t have the balls to be half as stupid.
He’s made many public statements to that effect, iirc. I can’t be arsed to look them up right now though.
Hitchens is an interesting character. In general I agree with him although, like a number of you, don’t agree with all of his positions. I understand his wish to defend free speech against thugs, but I wonder if being killed under these circumstances would have qualified him for a posthumous Darwin award.
Cue the “I bet he was praying when he was on the ground getting it in the head…” foxholists in 5, 4, 3…
Hitchens’ offense of destroying someone’s poster was far milder than the response. I think that speaks volumes for what kind of people put that poster up in the first place.
@#11:
Is it honestly a Godwin when you’re talking about National Socialists? Isn’t the invocation pretty much over and done with?
on the other hand – our shared atheism aside – I’VE often wanted to smack hitchens upside the head.
#17
Sometimes it’s OK to blame the victim. A drunk driver wraps his car around a telephone pole and dies. It’s OK to blame the victim. An idiot dives into shallow water and breaks his neck. It’s OK to blame the victim. A belligerent Anglo Saxon visits a land that has fought civil wars on and off since Jimmy Carter was president, and defaces a poster of one of the combatant parties. I think some responsibility can lie with said Anglo Saxon. Stupidity needs to be called out for what it is.
That guy is hardcore.
“There’s a fine line between bravery and stupidity”
Yes but the line between Hitch and being sober is much less fine. It’s easier to be brave when drunk. And I speak from experience. As my brother used to tell me about his service in Vietnam, “The problem with being stoned all the time was that it made the war funnier than it should have been.”
Hitch recently said, “I drink because it makes other people less boring.” I could see why boring people would be problem for a “drink-sodden ex-Trotskyist popinjay,” as George Galloway once described him.
Hitch claims to have quit smoking as of early 2008.
Exactly. Just because he’s an atheist doesn’t mean we have to defend the guy. He did something extremely stupid (you might say brave) and was lucky the punks who responded didn’t kill him for it. His actions weren’t for a “higher purpose” or as a political protest (to anyone but himself and his present associates), they were because he’s an ass. Really, you don’t need to feel obligated to defend him. Just be glad he survived the encounter and chalk it up on the “dumb things done by Christopher Hitchens” list.
NickK @30
Do you think that Hitchens was over there for some tea party? Boston Tea Party maybe…..
I have no doubt he was trying to pick a fight (but could be totally wrong). The response was totally inappropriate (Cujo359 @27).
Toleration in silence is what leads to the problems and whilst Hitchens may have big ones now, by revealing these thugs for what they are we can hope that discussion and condemnation will prevent each of us from being the next victims. The provocation we would make would be our very existence.
by revealing these thugs for what they are…
This happened in Lebanon. Is there a person on the planet that doesn’t know that there are thugs in Lebanon? One might as well say that by pulling Madonna’s panties down, he revealed to the world that she is a woman.
I’m inclined to trust this account, from someone who is also in Syria and heard the story from Hitchens himself:
Oh, my. There’s also this:
Sven @ #9…
Johnnie Walker Black.
Given Hitchens was reportedly drinking right before this act, I’ll reserve my usual jubilee regarding people who stick it up to the man, at least until more details arise.
Good to see the majority of comments are showing concern and support for Hitchens… but its always sad to see some atheists slag off the man just because he doesn’t conform to their politics.
So Hitchens is a drunk and none too bright… this is news?
I love this guy.
Probably the only conservative I can say that about.
I’d like to see an image of the actual defacement.
To see if it was clever or crude. Hitch is capable of both, and in either case one could conceivably make a case for him showing class.
Poor reasoning: in the first two cases mentioned, that of the drunk driver and the diver, it is not only “OK” to blame the victims, but necessary, since each victim directly caused what happened to himself (or herself).
In the case of Hitchens, although his actions may have been provocative, obviously he did not assume control of the thugs’ nervous systems and cause them to assault him. The response of the thugs was entirely their responsibility. The thugs chose to react in the fashion they did. Hitchens did not choose for them.
Hitchens rocks. (Even when he’s wrong.)
thanks, mk (@#37). Scotch, figures.
I’m with the ‘bravery’ folks. Or technically I see it as both, but I support the notion of bravery in such situations.
Right now I see two separate arguments in this thread.
– It’s stupidity if you’re just evaluating it on a personal health level. Yea, he’s going to get his ass kicked.
– But it’s pure bravery if evaluated from the willingness to thumb your nose at violent, oppressive authority.
It’s funny how all dissent is generally seen from these two angles – the purely pragmatic voice of individual self-interest versus the desire to speak for larger, collective interests in the face of danger.
Yea, so it’s Lebanon and we know its full of thugs (@#35), it’s fresh off years of war, and Hitch can be an ass. How does any of that excuse the violent reaction to a non-violent act of vandalism? It was 4 words scrawled on a poster versus potentially life threatening bodily harm. And the words incited no specific action, just a blunt (if crude) rejection.
Godwin is dead on. It’s the frick’n Social Nationalist Party for crying outloud, and they’re using violence to silence those who insult them.
It’s not the major acts of resistant that need our support. Those will always have mainstream support. It’s the everyday acts of dissent that need support the most.
Note to Hitch: Next time, have a bigger posse when you challenge punks on their own turf. That includes people who would normally not get involved and are so sick and tired of the intimidation that they find their courage.
Having seen Alexandra Pelosi’s latest (“Right America, feeling wronged”…), I don’t know that I’d walk the streets of small-town Alabama alone with a big Obama button on my T-shirt.
Matt H @39
I agree with you “its always sad to see some atheists slag off the man just because he doesn’t conform to their politics.” It’s even sadder to hear the argument that because he/she drinks and smokes (or does anything I don’t approve of) he/she deserves what he/she gets.
What does drinking or smoking have to do with what happened to Hitchens. Ad hominem!
Re: 35 “Is there a person on the planet that doesn’t know that there are thugs in Lebanon?”
There are thugs everywhere. Does the existence of thugs mean that no one should protest anywhere, ever?
Eric S,
Good points. Even if Hitchens did it for purely selfish, self serving reasons–and I don’t think he did–the act of standing up to fascists so publicly is important. Hitchens is fairly well known. Public reminders of what’s happening in Lebanon can’t be all bad.
In some ways, I feel a certain kindred spirit with Hitch: we’re both alcoholics, we’re both nicotine addicts, and we’re both unrepentant atheists. On the other hand, Hitch is ten times the writer I’ll ever be, and ten times the asshole I would ever want to be. Unlike most people, I’ve been reading Hitchens since his columns were appearing in The Nation, so he wasn’t an unknown quantity to me when he became the face of left-wing support for the invasion of Iraq.
But here’s the real kicker: Hitchens is a coward. 9/11/01 scared the shit out of him. (And not out of me, thankyouverymuch. So I win that round.) He betrayed everything he ever represented, and he called me (and most of you) a coward and a “fifth columnist” for not supporting a stupid war that was doomed to failure, historically and strategically. Hitchens isn’t ignorant; he knows about Alexander and the Assyrians and the Seljuks and the Ottomans and the British. He knows how the people of Mesopotamia have always dealt with foreign invaders, regardless of religion or ideology. Yet he willingly turned himself into a tool of the most irrational, anti-intellectual forces that have appeared in Western culture since the Enlightenment. (If Hitch were born Chinese, he would have been an architect of the Cultural Revolution, another anti-intellectual movement borne of fear.)
I drink rye whiskey; Hitch drinks a heady cocktail of arrogance, pride, and fear. He wasn’t just wrong; he was colossally wrong on an epic scale that reduces everything he has said since then to a pallid parody of an otherwise interesting man.
The man has never apologized for his support for the invasion of Iraq to a degree commensurate with the damage he has done to the country I call home. He’s a blowhard; he is foolhardy enough to get himself beat up for being insufferable, but lacks the courage of his convictions to tell the truth when the truth really matters. Hitchens knew that the invasion would be an unmitigated disaster. He knew it would fail. And he supported it anyway because he is, deep down, a chickenshit.
I’m a drunk — I’m drunk right now, if you can’t tell — but Hitchen’s “courage” is false courage. It’s easy to get beat up for being an ass. But supporting the invasion of Iraq was an act of sheer cowardice. Christopher Hitchens is a dick.
Meh. It was a street-stupid thing to do.
I abhor the living hell that the street gangs of Oakland and East LA have created in their communities, but I’m not going down to the Flatlands or Compton after dark and start defacing Crips graffiti right in front of their faces. I’m just sayin’…
Poor Hitch, but I’ll toast to him tonight (Scotch here too). Do you some of you guys honestly believe that people “deserve” violence? What he did was provocative, but people shouldn’t have to be afraid. Some times I think the man is a belligerent ass, but I’m always glad he’s there.
Yes he is. But in some ways, he’s our dick.
The man had balls enough to mouth off on the enemy’s home turf, even if they were drunk balls. “Fuck SSNP” is an admirable sentiment regardless of sobriety and, in principle, he should’ve been able to say it without fear of violent repercussions. If people were always too scared to speak in the face of danger then nothing would ever change. Blaming the victim is a ridiculously stupid idea, even in such a petty case as this.
Were his actions ill-advised? Probably. Were they admirable? Damn straight. I’d show the same support to anyone brave or stupid enough to get killed for defacing gang signs in Compton. Hitch is a better, or at the very least drunker, man than I.
Hitchens is a hell of a character, and the godless could use a character like that.
I’ve certainly wanted to smack him across the chops on occasion, but more often, I’ve wanted to kiss him square on those very same chops. Hell, I’d give him a sacktickle if he’d like.
He’s brought a lot of attention to our cause, and some of it even positive.
He’s got my respect.
P.S.
Careful with the drunkard talk. I’ve been fighting that battle since I was 15. It doesn’t mean that all my actions are worthless.
If you think that it does, come say that to my face. I’ll give you a brawl to make Hitchens proud.lol
I basically agree with most of what has been said. As to the argument over whether it was brave or stupid: the two are not mutually exclusive. It was stupid in the same way most civil rights lrotesters were stupid, or the way the colonists were stupid in the Boston Tea Party.
Personally, I don’t know that I have the big brass man-nuggets needed to do such a thing. But I’m glad someone does. (One thing to remember, though: a dead hero is no hero.)
Christopher quit smoking in 2007.
That’s horrible. I am glad he got out of the situation well enough to carry on with the business he was there for. I would guess that for Hitchens, desecrating their silly little dime-a-dozen flag really wasn’t a big deal. So what if it wasn’t street smart? After all, he is virulently anti-nationalist.
HP #50, I think you are totally wrong about Hitchens’ intention in defending the war in Iraq. He was good friends with many Iraqis who were being violently oppressed by Saddam, and that is what primarily blinded him to the incompetence of W. Hitchens “did it for the children.” It also didn’t help that he flipped from socialist to that one unmentionable political ideology. The entire time he was supporting the neocons, he never backed down from publicly defending atheism and secularism and free speech and human rights from Christian bullies. Give the man credit where credit is due, as it is today.
Way to go Hitchens! Of course the act was a seriously dangerous maneuver but the alternative of remaining silent because there could be physical repercussions is exactly what thug gangs such as the SSNP bank on.
Or has everyone forgotten Edmund Burke’s phrase?
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
If I ever run into Christopher I will be the first to buy him a round.
So, to recap:
Syrian Imperialism in Lebanon = BAD
British Imperialism in Northern Ireland and elsewhere = GOOD
American Imperialism throughout the Middle-East = HAY GUYS, CAN I JOIN UP?
Good show, Chris, for continuing to be a hypocritical twat.
To Benjamin: “(One thing to remember, though: a dead hero is no hero.)” Many people die during heroic acts.
I for one APPLAUD Hitchens and what he did. He only did what many others wish they could. To the people that say it was stupid because you shouldn’t do such things in “thug territory”, that is a huge attitude that is helping islam to spread like a disease.
Say what you will about Hitchens, how many people could pull this off?
Christopher Hitchens and Ralph Reed on Jerry Falwell’s death, on Hannity & Colmes.
Re #60. Can you cite where Hitchens has defended British imperialism in Northern Ireland? He wrote an entire book advocating the return of the Elgin marbles to Greece, which suggests to me that he’s not normally a big fan of imperialism, despite his insanity about the Iraq war.
I have to say that I loathe Hitchens these days, but, like MS, I have seen nothing in any of his writings to suggest that he supported Northern Ireland remaining part of the UK. I suspect that JDP sees that Hitchens is a Brit, therefore, he is automatically a Unionist.
The SSNP are Nazis. It may be a foolish thing to oppose them, the ‘sensible’ thing is to do a Ratzinger and go along without making a fuss. Fortunately some people have superior moral standards.
Wow.
That takes some cojones. Or a propensity for masochism. Maybe a little of both.
@ 51 :”Meh. It was a street-stupid thing to do.
I abhor the living hell that the street gangs of Oakland and East LA have created in their communities, but I’m not going down to the Flatlands or Compton after dark and start defacing Crips graffiti right in front of their faces. I’m just sayin’…”
And you’re just sayin’ exactly what I was thinking.
The thugs in Lebanon are no different than the thugs anywhere. Hey, maybe I should go to a war zone in the Sudan and traipse my slender, white female ass around holding a “take back the night” sign. I’m sure that I would prove a really relevant point by getting imprisoned and used as the warlord’s sex slave.
Wow, I love Hitchens so much. Full credit to him. Top bloke and one of the few people who regularly forces me to change my mind on political issues. Also one of the best writers alive. We need the odd person like him.
I find Hitchens (and my sentiments about him) complex. I disagree with his advocacy of the (most recent) war in Iraq. I agree with his tireless advocacy of critical thinking when it comes to superstition, the supernatural, and frequent fraud that accompanies those conditions. I don’t know that I have an opinion on his drinking or smoking.
It seems to me there’s a couple of issues here. On one hand, I think Hitchens made a worthy protest statement against an authoritarian organization. I also think, in the (non-supernatural) spirit of freedom of speech, it would have been perfectly acceptable for said organization to, in turn, counter-protest. They could march (hell, they do march), they could sing songs, they could get up a petition, they could print signs, all kinds of things.
What they did not need to do was resort to violence.
Hitchens didn’t protest by hitting someone first (at least not to my understanding – he may have hit in self-defense once the physical attack was underway). He appears to have defaced some property, and not in a way that threatened physical harm to someone (“defacing” something in a way that might weaken it structurally, for example, such that it posed a danger to passers-by, and so on).
We violently spring to action on all kinds of occasions, for all kinds of reasons, including defense of symbols. In this case, I don’t think violence was justifiable as a response by the organization.
Is Hitchens an ass? Frequently, as near as I can tell. Is that going to get him in trouble, especially far from friendly shores? You bet. That still doesn’t justify the “locals” turning it to violence, in my opinion, as a response.
Religious adherents of many stripes often speak ill of atheists, and defacement of atheist banners, and the like, happens periodically. So, counter-protest is in order, to voice the integrity of the atheist side, and also to expose the defacement to the wider public (not that the broader population is always on the atheist side, by any means). Would violence on the atheists part as a response be a justifiable response? In the case I hypothesize, I say no.
Of course, I also have the benefit of living in a country that (supposedly, and for the most part) operates under the rule of law, so that’s easy for me to say.
So when is violence acceptable? That’s always a tough answer, for me at least, and complicated (like Hitchens), and I’m too tired to wrestle with that tonight.
Gotta finish studying for my psychometrics test and go to bed. In the meantime, wishing you all safe sleep wherever you are.
No kings,
Robert
I don’t believe some of the comments I’m reading here.
Hitchens made a possibly rude, possibly insulting statement of opinion. The fact that he was beaten up for it proves that he was courageous and right. Stupid in terms of personal well-being or not – that is anyway completely irrelevant.
And what are these shitty excuses about him being in “that part of the world”? Quite a few of you seem to be rather apologetic about the reaction from the fascist thugs … Responding with violence in circumstances like this is never pardonable or understandable, no matter if it is Alabama or Lebanon – I wouldn’t have thought that this would have to be mentioned explicitly – yet some of you fuckers seem to imply exactly that.
Would being expelled from a university for walking out with a cracker during some religious sermony be pardonable as well, because his act was offensive and Florida is a predominantly Christian state too? His act was deliberately offensive, so he deserved it? Reaction wasn’t way over the top? He sure should have seen the reaction coming, so that makes it, kinda, his fault?
Hitchens “was beat off for being an ass”, HP#50? You may be drunk, but I seriously suspect your shoddy judgment goes deeper than that. It’s “OK to blame the victim”, NickK#30? Because we have to be tolerant of nationalsocialist Lebanese who use violence to quell “offensive” detractors? Because it is part of a Muslim culture? (Oh, I also notice your analogies – you’re either deranged or an asshole, so never mind – and Dustin#33; that goes for you as well). And Joe Max#51 – your comment just goes to show that Hitchens’ got way more balls than you do. Why do you have to assert it here? Several others in the same league apparently … what the fuck is up with you?
Am I the only person here who has loathed Hitchens since that Nation column where he proposed that if “we/Society” can draft men for the military, then “we/Society” should be able to draft women into carrying all pregnancies to term?
Human rights my fine fat female ass.
A punchingbag for fascists and torturers is as useful as he’s ever been.
Everyone on this thread now knows there’s a skinhead, fascist group behaving like wannabe brownshirts in Beirut. Makes a change from assuming everyone there is a religious fundamentalist. +1 for Hitchens.
Balls of pure neutronium.
Fucking Judean People’s Front… I mean Syrian Social Nationalist Party.
@G.D.,
I agree with a lot of what you’ve said, but your comment that the violence against Hitchens “proves that he was courageous and right” is not okay. If I were to scribble “fuck off, nigger” on an Obama poster in almost any inner city in America, I would be justifiably beaten up due to my actions. While Hitchens didn’t use such inflammatory language, and even though his sentiment and actions were on target from a socio-political point of view, the mere fact of violence done against him is not what makes him right.
That said, if a bully can be goaded into violence with words, there is a great chance that the bully’s underlying insecurity will be noticed by others, as it has been in Hitchens’s case.
HRRS, #71,
Without context, it’s hard to judge, but that sounds more to me like a statement against the draft, rather than being pro-women-as-broodmares.
I’m more of a Shiraz woman, and I strongly disagree with the conservative bent of his politics. But he’s clearly an outspoken atheist with balls of brass, so good for him for that. None of anyone’s business if he enjoys his scotch, as long as he doesn’t drive drunk.
I’m shocked at the reactions here. Hitch is one of the best weapons we have, because he can tackle even professional theologians on their home turf, and floor them. His lecture on The Moral Necessity of Atheism validates the entire cause.
All this puffing and blowing about his ‘arrogance’ seems strangely reminiscent of the same labels being applied to Dawkins – and as convincing. Sounds like the influence of those who despise him for all the wrong reasons has travelled beyond the walls of their churches.
I wonder if any of those expressing beefs about Hitch’s views would be able to last a round with him debating them. So he wrote a column once that you disagreed with – how many others has he written that you would give your left nut to have done yourself?
G.D.: Hitchens called me a “fifth columnist.” I was right; Hitchens was wrong. The motherfucker called me a fucking fifth-columnist. I was right; he was wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Fuck him. He singled me (and millions like me) out. I’m not in a forgiving mood. (And as I’m not a Christian, I feel no obligation to forgive shitheels like Hitchens.)
His assholishness is entirely separate from the violence he suffered. This is the nature of the world. Sometimes innocent people suffer. Sometimes assholes suffer. There’s no necessary relationship between getting beat up and being an asshole. Reality is not just. The Just World hyphothesis is a fallacy. There’s an equal likelihood that Hitch would’ve gotten beat just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. People suck.
Let the framers like Nisbet bitch and moan about PZ and Dawkins. We don’t need Hitchens, because he’s a shitty human being. Do shitty things happen to human beings? Of course they do. They happen to decent humans and to indecent humans, regardless. I am an Atheist, and I don’t need Christopher Hitchens.
None of this justifies the violence he suffered in Syria. None of it. I’m not justifying what happened to him. But he is, and will remain, an asshole.
I don’t particularly care for Hitchens’s act, but I am relieved to learn that this episode didn’t leave him in an emergency room.
I am appalled, however, to read comments about ‘Hitch being Hitch’ and such, as if he is just an Innocent Abroad. Please! As I’ve remarked on other threads, he proves that a person can be unusually cultivated while still being totally uncivilized–and spectacularly, cluelessly wrong about what the West should do to preserve civilization.
RE: Pony
Hitchens is pretty unabashed about his misogyny, and cloaks it in wannabe evopsych pseudoscience. For example:
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2007/01/hitchens200701
“There are more terrible female comedians than there are terrible male comedians, but there are some impressive ladies out there. Most of them, though, when you come to review the situation, are hefty or dykey or Jewish, or some combo of the three. ”
Man, that’s someone that I really want to stand behind as a paragon of the enlightened atheist community, lemme tell you.
JDP,
Nobody asked you to “stand behind” Hitchens “as a paragon of the enlightened atheist community”.
Some of the commenters here have simply said, and most of them have included some sort of acknowledgement that Hitchens is a great big asshole, that Hitchens’s actions in this particular case were commendable.
He made his statement, and was willing to stand behind it, which meant getting beaten up.
Free speech 101.
Lotta big mouths with small nuts in this thread.
First, was it dumb to do that? Yes. But it’s also the right thing. You all talk big games about justice, but when someone takes a stand, a stupid one, a minor one, you immediately attack him. You’re all just talk without action. We don’t need your kind, thank you.
Second, to the person acting like disliking Hitchens for his politics is bad because he’s also an outspoken atheist, shut the fuck up. I agree with Sean Hannity that the Phelps Klan is a bunch of damn idiots, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to go out and buy the Manatee’s books. I disagree with Hitchens’ politics pretty much all the time, but I can agree with his atheism. People are complicated. You don’t go agreeing with someone whole hog just because you agree with part of their thinking. That’s some Ron Paul bullshit, there, and it’s exactly how good people get roped into stupid, stupid things.
Bunch of panty-pissing chair-jockeys ’round here. My grandfather would spit on almost all of you.
RE: Kevin:
By painting the Troubles as a religious conflict, you avoid blame for British colonialism. Hitchens has both engaged in this sort of historical revisionism as well as offered his name in support of other authors who have done the same.
Regardless, my point is that Hitchens is an imperialist through and through. He has a very specific idea of who should and should not be allowed to engage in empire-building, and applies that filter pretty liberally to his political essays. There is no doubt at all that the SSNP are a bunch of radical fascist bastards, but there is really very little reason to exclude Hitchens from that category.
We shouldn’t praise the cajones of a fascist just because his jackboots are cut to our specifications.
So you are saying that you and I should go to Compton, or Philly, or Oakland, and deface gang graffiti, and when we get our asses kicked, whine about the government not enforcing freedom of speech?
Any American knows damn good and well that if Hitchens were in a Blood neighborhood in LA, and he wrote FUCK THE BLOODS on a gang poster, he would be dead dead dead fucking splattered!!!
Hitchens has had his impact and spent his load, I say we turn him over to the highest bidder and see him hanged in Mississippi, Alabama, or Texas.
He wants to be an American, let’s show him what it is really like to be an American with a big mouth and unpopular opinions.
Anybody want to fund a Hitchens Speech in Vidor Texas?
People on this blog seem to think his balls are all brass.
I think he is a bedwetting cowardly piece of Imperialist shit, and why can’t we get this turd down here in Texas, where we don’t leave people walkin and talkin after an ass kicking.
like anybody would notice the difference with that turd wheel.
The SSNP are fascist douchebags.
Hitchens is a fascist douchebag.
The SSNP kicked Hitchens’s ass for being a twat.
Hitchens justified invasion of a sovereign nation and massive human rights abuses because he’s a twat.
So I guess the question is one of whether it’s more acceptable if you’re one of the guys who carries a gun, or whether you’re one of the guys who carries a pen. But fascism is still fascism.
The issue is not that he has unpopular opinions. The issue is that he has VERY popular opinions.
Additionally, I find your support for lynching rather disturbing.
JDP,
Okay, I retract my objection, that DOES sound like something he would say.
I can still appreciate his work as a virtuoso of snarky language, I just don’t have to necessarily agree with all his views.
And beating someone up for writing on a poster, no matter what they wrote, or where they wrote it should never be the justification for violence. Would you punch someone who drew a moustache on a campaign poster of (insert favourite elected representative here)? I wouldn’t. I might tut, or comment on the childishness, but not smack them around. It’s so massively out of proportion. Like bombing a country for sending spam emails.
Hitchens has been waterboarded. Do you think he will fear a beatdown after that?
There are many kinds of assholes.
There is the kind of asshole who crashes your party, drinks all your beer, pisses in the kitchen sink, vomits all over your dog, and picks a fistfight with your grandmother.
Then, there is the kind of asshole who writes a whole series of propaganda articles defending war crimes, human rights abuses, and torture campaigns.
I get the impression that most people in this thread are classifying Hitchens in the former category, when he’s actually firmly in the latter.
There’s folks who think that “speaking truth to power” means wearing pink and marching in Pelosi’s home district while carrying a sign equating George W. Bush with Hitler, knowing full well that Bush’s goons aren’t going to come after them for it, not then and there, not ever.
Then there’s Hitch, who understands that what it really means is insulting theocratic Nazis on their home turf where they will beat you up right there in the street in broad daylight.
Hitch may be a lot of things, but stupid isn’t on the list. He knew the risks and spoke the truth, and the power beat him up. I dare say that even sober he counted it worth the cost, because it got noticed, even here amongst those who do not understand what liberty and freedom of speech are really about, how precious they are, and what it costs to defend them.
Understand, folks: The religious fanatics who beat up Hitch want to beat up you, too, on your home ground. They want to convert you, enslave you, or destroy you, just like their holy book says they should, and frankly they’d be disappointed if you converted.
All over Europe, all over England, and right next door to the USA in Canada, governments are afraid, pissing their pants afraid, to let people criticize savages like those that beat up Hitch. If enough people do it anyway, liberty lives another day. Sit down, shut up, submit to demands that you speak not against Allah and his Prophet, and liberty dies in your heart.
Stand up for Hitch, right now — or kneel down, press your face to the dirt, and submit to Allah, as loudly as you can. Those are your choices. Pick one. Time’s running out.
===
@ Autumn #74: “If you can’t say ‘fuck’, you can’t say ‘Fuck the government!” — St. Lenny the Bruce
I can’t believe how exactly your comment reflects that, and worse, how you seem to think that not being able to do that is a good thing, when the man in power is your man. Do you truly not understand that writing “Fuck Off Nigger” on an Obama poster is exactly the same as a BusHitler protest sign?
If so, I weep for you, child, I weep for us all.
I toss Chick tracts and other fundie propaganda that I find in public places into the nearest trash can or recycling bin. Would a Jesus freak be justified in assaulting me for it?
I was in Lithuania in 1988, and we left anti-Soviet and pro-independence graffiti everywhere we could. We asked lots of inconvenient questions. We demanded people speak to us in Lithuanian, not Russian. We smuggled books and money in for our relatives. We could have gotten our asses kicked. We could have gotten arrested and Monkey knows what else. They were small sticks to poke the the Soviet beast with, but we felt the responsibility to do what we could.
Hitch may occasionally be an ass, and I may disagree with him as often as I agree, but at least he has the nads to stick up for his beliefs regardless of the environment.
Provocative, unwise and childish? Sure. Ballsy and (in this instance) right? Yup.
Congratulations, HP! Because of your comment, this thread is already in the top five for a google of “Hitchens fifth columnist.”
Obviously. And I’m not claiming it is. Beating someone up for defacing a political poster is fascist bullshit.
The point I’m making, though, is that Hitchens may have been expressing a political sentiment, but that the ideology behind that sentiment was just as toxic as the ideology that led the SSNP assholes to beat the shit out of him.
Hitchens is a fascist espousing violence. The SSNP are fascists espousing violence. The only difference in this case is that the SSNP members who kicked his ass had the will and wherewithal to use violence to enforce their specific brand of fascism, whereas Hitchens did not.
Might as well join the Nazis so that we’re not all stuck saluting Stalin and sitting in line for bread, right?
Fuck that shit.
Just because Hitchins is an articulate atheist doesn’t give him a pass in the politics department. That’s a game the theists play. The thugs that roughed him up were un-redeemable tribal goons, but Hitchins stood on the sideline and cheered on the murder of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians from the air for little or no purpose. Without politicos like Hitchens there would have been no invasion of Iraq.
I can’t believe how many are bitching about Hitchen’s alleged problems with alcohol or the fact that he may have defaced a poster for a neonazi party!
Do none of you recognise that if you don’t stand up to these groups, they take over?
Well done Mr Hitchens, if I’m ever in that situation I hope I have half as much chutzpah.
Once again, specify the type of ass. Are we talking “my freshman roommate was an ass” or are we talking “Goebbels was an ass”? There is a difference.
The fact that it was wrong for the SSNP goons to kick Hitchens’s ass does not mean that it was right for Hitchens to go to a foreign country and be an imperialist douchebag.
JDP
How in the hell can you possibly state that Hitchens has VERY with CAPS popular opinions, while Hitchens describes himself as a contrarian.
All animate objects above cockroaches qualify their agreements with Imperialist fucks like Hitchens.
Additionally, I find your support for lynching rather disturbing.
Additionally, you can kiss my ass. The Iraq invasion has killed more human beings than thirty years of rule and savagry by Sadaam and I think having Christopher Hitchens hanging from a branch in my back yard would be good for morale, and send a message to those wannabee Teddy Roosevelts who would throw on a pair of Jodphurs and bloviate over the white Man’s burden with Kiplinesque rhetoric, andtough love for brown people.
I think Hitchens, hanging from a tree in my back yard, eyes bulging and tounge fully protruding would be an appropriate political statement, and far from your pathetic leftard protestations of hangings, as lynchings.
We all gotta go sometime, but hanging hitchens would not be complete without burning Kissinger alive, doncha think?
I’m sorry that you have a reading impediment. Let me spell this out for you.
Hitchens is a fascist. He spent 5 years writing essays supporting a violent and criminal religiously-motivated regime that, during that interval of time, invaded a sovereign country, tortured civilians, engaged in repulsive war profiteering, and so on and so forth. I shouldn’t fail to mention that this religious regime was not democratically elected, but rather came to power as a result of a nepotistic judicial coup.
I could give a shit if he gets drunk and spits on nuns.
The ideas espoused by Hitchens, that it’s okay to commit torture, invade sovereign countries, commit war crimes, etc., are very popular in the US, which is extremely depressing and scary. The fact that he claims he is a contrarian makes no difference. I am addressing his ideas, not his self-aggrandizing description.
I have no problem with executions of war criminals, even if they are extrajudicial.
I have a problem with extrajudicial executions that are carried out by angry mobs.
A large majority of Americans are Imperialistic fucks like Hitchens.
McCain lost the election not because Americans largely believed that the Iraq War was wrong, but because they believed that the Iraq War was mishandled.
Something to think about.
Looks like the early reports of Hitchens’ Legendary Brawl may have ever-so-mildly exaggerated his heroics:
http://exiledonline.com/christopher-blubber-jaw-hitchens-picks-a-three-against-one-fight-with-a-syrian-nerd-and-still-gets-his-ass-stomped/
“So rather than getting stomped while fighting bravely against a gang of Syrian fascists, we have Hitchens plus two sidekicks deliberately provoking Syrian thugs in a foreign city…and then fleeing like bitches when one lone Syrian nerd came after them. And even with their three crusading Western selves versus one lone Syrian nerd, Hitchens STILL got thrashed. The offended Syrian fascist even followed Hitchens into the back of the taxi and rag-dolled him in the backseat!”
“Even the one impressive detail first reported about the fight via Hitchens’ supporters–that he got stomped in the middle of the night, in a dark empty Beirut backalley, after getting famously drunk in a bar, fighting alone against a gang of Syran fascists–was an inversion of the truth, a very sad slapstick truth. In reality, Hitchens was stomped in broad daylight in a “posh shopping district” by a lone Syrian twerp fighting against Hitchens and two friends after they set him off. As the aforementioned neocon blogger (who thinks he’s doing a favor for his buddy Hitchens) notes:
It didn’t happen in a bar. It happened mid-day on the street. It wasn’t a drunken brawl. I have no idea if Hitchens had drank at all, but if he had, it was like his typical lunch-time bloody mary. (I’m not saying he didn’t get drunk– just not then.)
Thufferin’ thuckutash. Hitchens’ buddies tried to warn him before the stomping that if he defaced a Syrian fascist poster, it would everyone cause problems. Naturally, Hitchens didn’t listen and instead took a tough moral stand…before fleeing like a bitch and getting his ass kicked, even though with two backups he should have stomped the Syrian. Sorta stands out as a metaphor for Hitchens during the Bush years.”
JDP
You opinionated bastard.
You are my favorite blog poster of the day.
I Salute you, you magnificent sunuva bitch!!
carry on, beer is gone, I’ll retire and leave this discussion in good hands.
-scooter
This whole blaming the victim thing reminds me a bit of muslims who would blame women for being are raped.
How the hell was he defacing someone’s property if he wrote on a poster someone had plastered on an abandoned building?
If anything, he was responding to their defacement. Someone posted what is essentially a graffito, he posted an opposing graffito in response. How terrible of him.
Thanks Doug for the heads up.
A fitting tale of a typical bedwetting coward of the Daddy state
After reading his writings, he managed to convert me on a few issues, Specially the Iraq war.
@JDB #93
Yeah, that bit wasn’t aimed at you, or anyone in particular. Just a general sentiment.
And Doug, #102,
That’s as biased a report as the first one. Try this one for yet another viewpoint.
I believe the expression the kidz use is “FTFY”
I think he was a tad stupid but hey, at least he’s never boring. I disagree with a lot of his politics but I do admire him for being so bolshy and not taking any shit.
If that was what I was saying at all, then your analogy would be reasonable. All I’m saying is that one fascist picked a fight with some other fascists. Just because one fascist got the short end of the stick in this confrontation does not mean we should share our sympathies with him.
The issue is not that “Hitchens was askin’ for it.” The issue is that Hitchens went and expressed an imperialistic sentiment in someone else’s country and in doing so, was being an all-around shitbag.
It should also be pointed out that the SSNP, along with being fascistic and imperialistic, are also extreme secularists. This is one of those things that are not being discussed here. They advocate extreme separation of mosque and state, and barring the clergy from government.
Proof that Hitchens is dangerous, right here ITT.
# 11,
> Your godwin isn’t totally off the mark, the political
> parties are armed in Lebanon as was the Nazi party.
Godwin’s law doesn’t apply when dealing with a political party that uses the swastika as its official flag.
> but when you deface things on other people’s soil, there
> are repercussions to your actions.
# 15,
Other people’s soil? The SSNP doesn’t actually owns Lebanon, the KKK doesn’t own Alabama, either
# 60,
The problem with the SSNP is not that tey are Quislings or collaborate with Syrian imperialism. There are other parties in Lebanon that do the same. The relationship between the SSNP and the Syrian Baathist regime is actually not the best, partly for sectarian reasons, the SSNP is predominantly melkite (greek orthodox) Christian, the Baathists are Alevites, and partly because Baathists are theoretically pan-Arabist, while the SSNP considers Egyptians to be subhumans. The problem with the SSNP is that they are Nazis.
> that is a huge attitude that is helping islam to spread
> like a disease.
> or kneel down, press your face to the dirt, and submit to > Allah, as loudly as you can.
# 61, 90
The SSNP is not an Islamic party. Most of them are Christian, and they practise secular rather than clerical Fascism.
> None of this justifies the violence he suffered in Syria.
# 78,
That was Lebanon, not Syria. I doubt Syria will let Hitchens in, and if they do, he probably would not get out alive.
# 83,
> There is no doubt at all that the SSNP are a bunch of
> radical fascist bastards, but there is really very little
> reason to exclude Hitchens from that category.
There is a difference between imperialism (bad), fascism in general (worse) and the Nazi kind of fascim (worst); just ask those Chinese who were “liberated” from western imperialism by the Kwantung army, or those Ukrainians who were “liberated” from Russian Stalinist imperialism by the Nazis.
# 102
That’s Ames. He is there to ENTERTAIN us, not to inform us. I like my war nerd as much as anybody else does, but I don’t take this “I have a crush on Pat Buchanan becuse it’s so edgy and will provoke those pinko lefties” stuff too serious.
@Johannes
I purposely did not append a value judgement to his story.
Me and Friday, we’re just after the facts (ma’am)./dragnet
Agreed, but one should remain aware of the US government that Hitchens supported and wrote propaganda for.
Heh. After reading the title of this Post “Hitchens Assaulted” several times, I thought “Well, he’s already marinated, so all he needs now is pepper…”
…
sorry
scooter @103
You really need psychological help. Just because you have an axe to grind, does not justify murder. What are you, some low-life redneck yokel? Unlikely. I have many “redneck yokel” friends and they have far higher moral standards than you do.
Doug Sharp @102. So what is your point? He made his point and got his arse kicked. Shit happens (but point definitely made). Regardless of what you think of the guy, defacing a FUCKING poster does not justify assault.
JDP @100. You missed the whole point. If you don’t like his politics, oppose them. Are you advocating that people should be beaten up because he wrote a FUCKING article or two you didn’t like? Are you a fucking looney? Any other journalists you think should should be beaten up, by nerds like you?
He spent “5 years writing essays” (JDP @199). ooohhhh ahhh. Did you feel threatened? Did someone upset your poor, poor knife edge balance? Did you kick your cat? WAAAAAAAH. L.O.S.E.R
scooter @98 GET FUCKED you murderous psychotic wannabe fuctard.
JDP @97 J.ackbooted D.ouchebag P.rick – L.O.S.E.R.^2
JDP @95 idiot. NO kings, get it?
JDP @93. I thought you nearly had it figured out in your last paragraph, but then I realised it slipped passed you like a car driving past a moth. You see the light, you just don’t understand cars, humans or those funny little scented things hanging from the rear vision mirror. You think the problem is because he didn’t have the balls to punch them first instead of writing expletives on their propaganda? Life must be amazingly blissful for you in your abject ignorance.
Ragutis @91. Someone else that has actually seen what goes
on!!! Thank you.
DJMoore (numerous post) another light in this darkness. Ditto on the Lenny Bruce quote to Autumn’s post @74
JDP @89 you are like a scratched vinyl – “grunt, snort, he deserved it, grunt, snort, kick him in the head…”
JDP post @86 – but don’t lynch him. Such compassion!!! At what point should should the beating stop – paraplegia?
JDP @85. I think this may be where you started listening to scooter:
scooter @84.
“So you are saying that you and I should go to Compton, or Philly, or Oakland, and deface gang graffiti, and when we get our asses kicked, whine about the government not enforcing freedom of speech?”
So what are you scooter – Blood or Crips?
For the record, no. If you had some sort of civil society you should be able to walk into those neighbourhoods, buy a coffee, maybe go see a movie and go home feeling good. You have lost parts of your city because you cower in fear with your shrivelled testicles withdrawn into your abdomen. And if as DLMoore mentioned @90 someone like yourself defaced an obama poster with “Fuck off nigger” anyone seeing it would just shake their head, realise that the individual was suffering from some form of mental illness and you would be picked up by caring health professionals and treated.
Scooter, one of your wheels is missing. Put down the crack pipe and seek help. (I’m serious here. You have real anger management problems). Beer obviously isn’t your best look (@103) – and it doesn’t mix with whatever self administered medication you are on. Seek PROFESSIONAL help.
— Family have turned up (refugees from Victoria). I may be offline for up to 12 hours, I will recheck the thread when I can tomorrow.
Many on this site have been sensible, others like scooter and JDP need to think long and hard about why they are here, but I suspect will not make much headway. Here is a hint – check how many you have on your “hit list”. If you even have one, then you are most of the problem. Throw it away.
Scooter is enough to turn me Catholic.
Richard from Red Deer @59 –
Or has everyone forgotten Edmund Burke’s phrase?
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
Bugger a drink, Christopher “balls of pure neutronium” Hitchens gets a bottle from me. :) (kudos to theinquisitor @73)
(note, not all posts between my previous and 103 covered. Nothing after 103 – I got dragged away mid-post)
God, you people are pussies. We get it, you disagree with his position on Iraq, so now he’s in the “enemies” category. I don’t agree with him either, but I understand why he feels the way he does. Even PZ, will give Hitchens his props when he deserves it. And you know why? He’s not a pussy.
I’m also curious as to which part of “fuck the SSNP” contains the hidden imperialist propaganda.
I’m curious as to how many of the people denouncing the SSNP as “Nazis”, “thugs” etcetera had ever actually even heard of them before this incident.
I like to think I’m reasonably well informed about middle eastern affairs and I hadn’t.
But based on the behaviour of two or three of their members and Hitchens assertion people are quite happy to engage in invective about a group about which they no essentially nothing.
My first impulse on reading this story on another site was to go look up the SSNP on Wikipedia. At the very least, this saves me the embarrassment of denouncing a bunch of Orthodox Christians as Islamists.
“That takes some cojones. Or a propensity for masochism. Maybe a little of both.”
Or a lot of booze.
Maybe Hitchens wasn’t making a bold political statement but was simply drunk and obnoxious and forgot where he was.
“And if as DLMoore mentioned @90 someone like yourself defaced an obama poster with “Fuck off nigger” anyone seeing it would just shake their head, realise that the individual was suffering from some form of mental illness and you would be picked up by caring health professionals and treated.’
Why don’t you go down to South Central or Harlem on a Saturday night and put that theory to the test?
Ian Gould @121
I did not say this could be done. I am saying that civil order no longer exists in areas like South Central or Harlem if they are run by gangs.
I have wandered down around the train station behind Broadway NY late at night and it seemed pretty quite. Harlem may look like a warzone in parts, but seems *not too bad* (albeit from a car and not at night. A friend had 3 shots fired at him in LA (Wiltshire Blvd) and was robbed of 2 bags of dirty linen at 3am. A friend’s teenage son was murdered because he wouldn’t join one of the gangs. I know these areas, and many many more around the world. They are dangerous areas. You really need to get control of violence in your cities.
Hitchens just made this plain – suburbs of London, Paris and Melbourne are being overtaken by stealth by thugs and gangs and religious fanatics. I’ve been to Soweto, and lived behind the most violent pub in Australia for 5 years (in Kings Cross, Sydney) don’t lecture me on violence. Ive seen whores fighting with knives for territorial rights to a patch of a street corner. I’ve shared the streets with known murderers. Do not lecture me on what is dangerous.
Your cowering IS the problem. Please note previous entry re shrivelled testicles in abdomen.
(phone call received re family arriving, must go)
Bit late in the thread but… @ budinabudcan
I was just thinking that some of the comments on this thread are getting dangerously close to the kind of creepy justification people use when apportioning a certain amount of blame to rape victims. No, ‘parading your white ass’ would not necessarily be a sensible thing to do but it would not mean that the enslaving warlord was not 100% responsible for said enslavement. Disregard for personal safety (regardless of how effective you or anyone else thinks a form of protest is going to be) != deserving of blame for the consequences.
“You really need to get control of violence in your cities.”
I’m Australian.
“Your cowering IS the problem. Please note previous entry re shrivelled testicles in abdomen.”
That means so much to me coming from a proud member of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists.
There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.
A pen, a scotch, a beating and wooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!!!! The world is on fire!!!!!!!
The best I ever did was to have my room blown up at Uni which just made the local rag.
Hitch did support the Iraq war, which puts him in line with the conservatives… Do the rest of his views conform to that label? From reading him I get the impression that he hasn’t really abandoned the Communism he supported years ago, which is hardly conservative… (although, being that Marx’s ideas are 150 years old, the identification of that ideology as radical and liberal is a bit odd to me).
Ian Gould – “At the very least, this saves me the embarrassment of denouncing a bunch of Orthodox Christians as Islamists.” You’re confusing a totally legitimate bandwagoning gripe with an illegitimate gripe about criticising thugs. It is not necessary to know what group thugs belong to or what that group stands for or represents or, in fact, anything about it, because attacking someone for scrawling something on a poster whether drunk, sober, smoking a cigarette, dancing the samba, or wearing a hat shaped like a penis (all these things are NOT RELEVANT) is a Bad Thing To Do.
“God, you people are pussies. We get it, you disagree with his position on Iraq, so now he’s in the “enemies” category. I don’t agree with him either, but I understand why he feels the way he does. Even PZ, will give Hitchens his props when he deserves it. And you know why? He’s not a pussy.
I’m also curious as to which part of “fuck the SSNP” contains the hidden imperialist propaganda.”
How about the part where a fat white British goon gets his ass smashed over a hastily scrawled, twattish “political statement” against a political party of which he knows little about other than the hearsay of his compatriots, who are probably neo-con fuckers like himself, and therefore suspect in their derision of any supposed quasi-“Nazi’s” in the first place.
If this SSNP be truly as vile and evil as the Nazis of yore, then Hitchens is a total, and I mean total, idiot, and deserved every punch and kick for his juvenile, self-righteous graffitto.
I’m surprised taht some people would defend Hitchens.
It’s very simple.
1. Hitchens used free speech to say something that offended people who won’t tolerate it
2. They beat him up.
Therefore: Hitchens was wrong and stupid.
If you’re not sold on that completely yet, also consider that he sometimes gets drunk and I disagree with him on some issues which are completely irrelevant to this particular situation.
Understand, folks: The religious fanatics who beat up Hitch want to beat up you, too, on your home ground. They want to convert you, enslave you, or destroy you, just like their holy book says they should, and frankly they’d be disappointed if you converted. – Some ignorant idiot, I can’t be bothered to look back and find the nym
Whatever the SSNP are, they are not religious fanatics. They’re Arabs, so they must be, eh? Wrong: they are secular Syrian-nationalists, who advocate a “greater Syria”. Here are their five “Reform Principles”:
First Reform Principle: Separation of religion and state.
Second Reform Principle: Debarring the clergy from interference in political and judicial matters.
Third Reform Principle:Removal of the barriers between the various sects and confessions.
Fourth Reform Principle: The abolition of feudalism, the organization of national economy on the basis of production and the protection of the rights of labour and the interests of the nation and the state.
Fifth Reform Principles: Formation of strong armed forces which will be effective in determining the destiny of the country and the nation.
Not difficult to find this out – took me 2 minutes – but why bother with the facts, eh? I wonder if Hitchens knew who they are – or just saw their vaguely swastika-esque symbol and assumed he knew what they stood for. Like most parties in Lebanon (including the US and Saudi-backed groups apparently hosting Hitchens) they have armed thugs; but while their ideology is strongly nationalistic and expansionist (and pretty unpleasant), it also seems to be inaccurate to call it nazi or fascist – terms from European politics just don’t map neatly onto Arab politics.
goon – “If this SSNP be truly as vile and evil as the Nazis of yore, then Hitchens is a total, and I mean total, idiot, and deserved every punch and kick for his juvenile, self-righteous graffitto.”
Opposing Nazism is a silly, bad idea now? What is going on in here! Those stupid, self-righteous, wanna-be-hero people who hid Jews in their houses and got killed for it, they should have known better and deserve every bullet they got!
And because the level of stupidity in here seems to be rising I will make it clear – no, Hitchens’ graffiti is not an /equivalent/ example but I don’t think my comparison is unreasonable here any more than my earlier one regarding placing blame on rape victims for wearing skimpy outfits.
Marc Abian @130 – <3 4eva
Silly cursor keys. That should have said love 4eva.
said here already, but worth saying again. Code Pink could learn a little from Hitch about bravery.
FWIW, Hitchens support of the Iraq war was anything but ‘conservative’.
Funny how Hitch all of the sudden became an out of control drunk about the same time he started differing with a certain political party on War.
Who here thinks the man drank less Johnny Walker in his forties?
goon – “If this SSNP be truly as vile and evil as the Nazis of yore, then Hitchens is a total, and I mean total, idiot, and deserved every punch and kick for his juvenile, self-righteous graffitto.”
Opposing Nazism is a silly, bad idea now? What is going on in here! Those stupid, self-righteous, wanna-be-hero people who hid Jews in their houses and got killed for it, they should have known better and deserve every bullet they got!
You’re equation of Hitchen’s grafitto with Jewish freedom fighters and sheltering is asinine.
The question posed was “how is this an example of imperialism,” you dink.
The answer, for those not blinded by their own sloping brows, is written all over Hitchen’s smashed in face.
If he wants to make a political statement, he outta stick to the safety of his soap-box, as street war is obviously not his forte.
By the way, if a person sheltering Jews in Nazi Germany similarly decided to grafitto a NSP poster, they would be an imbecile too.
Hitchen’s didn’t act heroically. He acted rashly, childishly, and reaped the fruit of his posturing BS.
It’s not an equal example, goon, as I stated in the comment itself, it was an attempt to illustrate with an obvious example that everyone should be able to agree with that what Hitchens did was not worthy of a physical smackdown and therefore the fruit that he reaped was not, in fact, fruit that he reaped, it was insane overreaction from a bunch of yahoos whose actions cannot possibly be supported as reasonable by any person ‘not blinded by their own sloping brows’.
massive brass?
Massive stupidity is probably closer to the truth.
Clare Sputtered:
“It’s not an equal example, goon, as I stated in the comment itself, it was an attempt to illustrate with an obvious example that everyone should be able to agree with that what Hitchens did was not worthy of a physical smackdown and therefore the fruit that he reaped was not, in fact, fruit that he reaped, it was insane overreaction from a bunch of yahoos whose actions cannot possibly be supported as reasonable by any person ‘not blinded by their own sloping brows’.”
Sorry Clare, you can’t make a comparison and then take it back a moment later. You raised the comparison. Either retract it or own it.
The question is not whether beating somebody down for poster-defacing is a good thing to do. It’s whether a belligerent, feeble old Westerner scrawling a childish, offensive comment on a poster which represents a group of nutty nationalistic thugs, in their home turf, is a stupid or a heroic thing to do.
Whatever his public protestations or posturing, I am quite positive Hitchen’s would privately agree with the former.
Good ganesh man, I’m not taking it back. You said it was asinine – which it is if I was claiming that opposing Nazism by harbouring Jews is on a par with defacing posters. I don’t, however, think it’s an unreasonable extrapolation of what you and some other commenters are suggesting. At what point is it NOT stupid to oppose right-wing ideology? Would you cheer from the sidelines if I were to right a big NO, SCREW OFF JACKASSES on a UKIP poster and got beaten up by the violent elements of that vile party?
His belligerence and feebleness are irrelevant. His alleged childishness is irrelevant. All these things are completely beside the point – it is quite clearly not a smart thing to do as far as personal safety is concerned, it is quite clearly an heroic thing to do as far as opposing lunatic nationalism is concerned – perhaps especially if one is aware that doing such a minor thing might invite someone to punch you in the face for it.
You said: “If this SSNP be truly as vile and evil as the Nazis of yore, then Hitchens is a total, and I mean total, idiot, and deserved every punch and kick for his juvenile, self-righteous graffitto.”
I am saying that claiming he deserves that is vile and repulsive attitude. I am also saying that the more vile and repulsive the group and its ideology the more of their posters should be ripped down and pissed on by decent people. Perhaps then fewer people would have the crap kicked out of them for it.
Apologies for overuse of the word vile. Monthly quota exceeded.
Yeah, he was a moron, just like all the people that dare express the truth.
Fucking cowards.
> against a political party of which he knows little about
> other than the hearsay of his compatriots,
goon,
You can say what you want about Hitchens, but nobody ever doubted that he is well read, and you can bet that Hitch knows quite a bit about the party that brought suicide attacks to the middle east
> who are probably neo-con fuckers like himself,
Because there are so many neo-cons in Britain.
> it also seems to be inaccurate to call it nazi
> or fascist – terms from European politics just
> don’t map neatly onto Arab politics.
Knockgoats,
Where do you think the inspiration for both the Party and its svastika symbol came from?
I go on dKos and find people standing up for the proposed ban on speech that some religious types might feel is insulting. I go on here and see people saying other people should be put to death for what they write. What a wonderful world this is.
Cliff, was the dKos thread about Wilders?
@Cliff Hendroval
Who here said that “other people should be put to death for what they write”?
@Goon
You’re anti-free speech if you claim that someone deserves to be beaten for what they write on some poster. I’m hoping you misspoke.
Marc – scooter, for one.. well, sort of – I’m not sure it was solely because of the poster graffiti but no less disturbing for his additional ‘reasons’. I’m not sure that’s surprising but then that’s the clincher isn’t it? The general gist seems to be that unsurprising results, however violent and unjustified, are in fact justified simply because they’re unsurprising.
Doh! Just spent 2 hours that I couldn’t really afford reading about Lebanese politics.
I have to say, that this was a really fucking weird choice of party for Hitch to single out for defacing. They seem to be a small party similar in beliefs to the Baathists but with there base amongst the Christian minority (and talking about Greater Syria rather than Pan-Arabism). You’d think Hezbollah would be more natural targets. Or even Kataeb, who have much more explicitly fascist ancestry.
Matt @ 147:
No, I was referring to this and this. Read the comments.
Marc Abian @ 148:
This, from scooter @ 98:
See scooter @ 97
> who are probably neo-con fuckers like himself,
Because there are so many neo-cons in Britain.
Hitchens is a US citizen.
I like watching Hitchens debate. His wit makes for lively conversation.
IMHO, defacing a SSNP poster in view of SSNP thugs is just asking for it. This may qualify him for one those Darwin awards. It also gives credibility to the argument that atheists tend to be sadomasochists.
Knockgoats,
Where do you think the inspiration for both the Party and its svastika symbol came from? – johannes
From the NSDAP, presumably. That doesn’t necessarily mean much. In the Lebanese Civil War of 1975, they sided with the Lebanese Communist Party and other leftist forces (and against the Phalangists – recognise the derivation there?), after an ideological shift within the party in the 1960s, after which it had a raprochment with the Syrian Ba’athists. That’s what I mean by saying European political terminology doesn’t map neatly onto Arab politics. Hitchens seems to have aligned himself with the anti-Syrian factions in Lebanon – but by doing so, he has also aligned himself with the Saudis. There really aren’t a lot of good guys in the Lebanese elite.
goodness, I hope he’s since lost the “limp”. he did prove one thing though, those people *are* thugs and reprehensible.
(and I can’t freaking stand Hitchens)
Hitchens is a US citizen. – goon
And seems to be a good example of what Orwell called “transferred nationalism”: the USA can do no wrong, anyone who’s allied with it is a good guy, anyone opposing it is evil.
Such hate on this thread. Ewww.
“Christopher Hitchens hanging from a branch in my back yard would be good for morale”
Then you have no business pretending not to support torture or war in Iraq. Clearly you have the same mindset, the only difference is who you think deserves it.
Also, fuck you. I’m from Texas.
Well, I think people are saying that he was stupid to do it, not that the thugs were justified in beating him.
I feel that the former opinion is just cowardice masquerading as pragmatism.
Wow, as a unionist from Northern Ireland I’ve just discovered that I’m also an imperialist.
Why didn’t anyone take me aside before this and explain to me what my politics were?
By the way, does this mean that all Americans are automatically imperialists as well?
Or is this another one of those rules that just applies to foreigners?
“gashed knuckles” Makes me think he hit back.
Hitchens ALWAYS hits back.
Cliff, thanks for the links. I only skimmed the comments, aside from the wanker promoting a harmonious society over free speech I didnt see too much egregious stuff. Funny though, not too many people (over on Kos at least) make the connection between hate crime laws and shrinking free speech.
Cruithne: You know that isn’t a like-for-like comparison, right? I mean “unionist” is a belief; “American” is a nationality. Saying Ulster-Scot’s were automatically imperialists would be a closer parallel to saying Americans are. (Not that I think Unionist implies imperialist in any sense that’s not a silly word game; just pointing out that your logic was a bit wonky).
I’d like to say that I am surprised that half of the commentators here have turned this into a “bash Christopher Hitchens” thread, but I’m not.
Fortunately, a man with the guts Christopher Hitchens has can take it.
*Spray paint*
“Fuck off, Hitch-hating Pharyngulites!”
Marc: “Well, I think people are saying that he was stupid to do it, not that the thugs were justified in beating him.”
Yes, I think most people ARE saying that, but unfortunately some are explicitly saying that his stupidity means that he deserved what he got – perhaps I’m unfairly conflating a supposed ‘deserved consequence’ with a ‘justified response’ – but they’re a little too close for comfort for me if so.
Cowardice arguably is pragmatic under certain circumstances (and I think this counts if not getting a limp is your primary concern) but the question really is about one’s priorities and I think what really smacks of cowardice is criticising somebody else (or worse) for exercising their free speech muscle when they themselves would choose not to do so. That or I’m now drowing myself in the minutiae.
Oops. I’m not doing well with tidy comments today. I hope those italics don’t carry on. To be on the safe side I will attempt to contain the beast!
Actually Matt, Unionism is also a term of ethnicity.
And I stand by the point that unless Americans think parts of their country ought to be handed back to Mexico immediately, they are just as much imperialists as any Brit..
Another addition to the self-contradictory Hitchens legend.
It does seem odd how many people here want to paint CH as either all-good or all-bad. Face it, y’all, the sumbitch is complex.
Very minor point of fact, probably never to be clarified: was/were the partisan(s) who smacked Hitchens able to read English and comprehend his commentary on the SSNP street art?
I agree with a lot of Chris’s politics, including the war and atheism. =) Makes me a rare bird, I know…
For the people who were saying it was vandalism – you’re not the only ones saying it. People on the right are saying it too.
And I wholly disagree. It isn’t vandalism. It isn’t even close.
People all over have been comparing it to defacing a political poster in this country. Such is not the case. We are not talking about a political organization who is legitimately seeking change via public discourse. We are talking about a bunch of Nazi thugs who actually kill people on a regular basis – in cold blood and on the streets.
Defacing that poster was no different than, say, defacing a Nazi poster in Berlin 1930. It isn’t vandalism, it is resistance. It is fighting back against the scum of humanity who want no public discourse.
People in the West have become far too insulated and comfortable in their own agreeable way of doing politics. Sometimes people will scream Nazi and deface posters here, but they don’t know what real Nazis are like. Nazis here, by and large, shut up and know their place. A few get out of line and they go to jail, and many of their leaders end up there as well. In Lebanon, this is a wholly different matter.
I applaud Hitchens for what he did. His was an act of resistance, not of vandalism. The restrictions of what should not be done here in a safe and democratic country may not apply in another place where the system is nowhere near what we experience.
Ace blogged about it because he was there right after the fact and interviewed people and said it wasn’t like most people had read about, by the way. As for Hitch, he’s just awesome. He puts his money where his mouth is, and he gives lie to the adage that Atheists have no morals or firm beliefs. I couldn’t be more proud of what he did, and I wish more people did the same.
goon,
you had called him a brit in your original comment, so I thought you talked of the British when you referred to Hitchens’ countrymen or conpatriots.
knockgoats,
> In the Lebanese Civil War of 1975, they sided with the
> Lebanese Communist Party and other leftist forces (and
> against the Phalangists – recognise the derivation there?),
And that proves what? Struggles between rival Fascist groups are as old as Fascism itself. All fringe groups are prone to Judaean Peoples Front vs. Popular Front of Judaea struggles, and Fascism is violent by nature, so internal Fascist struggles tend to be violent too. Remember the Röhm Putsch, the failed Austrian Nazi coup against the Austrofascist Dollfuss regime, Antonescu’s destruction of the Iron Guard, the AAA’s shootings of Carlists in the seventies, to name but a few examples? Nor is Fascist/Stalinist cooperation unknown, the infamous pact of 1939 is just the most prominent example, but the Stasi and the Hepp-Kexel Group cooperated well into the 1980s.
All of this happened in Europe – it’s not that Lebanon is on another planet.
@Cruithne: Really? Would someone from a Unionist background that became a support of united Ireland (or joined one of those odd fringe NI independence groups) still be called a Unionist? (Question in good-faith: genuinely curious)
I’m pleading with you people, enough with the hitchens-is-a-drunk joke. That joke was tired in 1997. We get it. Find a new joke.
If Hitch hadn’t worn that short skirt he wouldn’t have…wait…
Fuck right off you cowardly judgemental bitches.
If the shit ever hits the fan in your little lives, I hope there is someone like me nearby to try to help.
I wear my scars like medals, because sometimes the right thing to do is also a stupid thing to do.
That is what bravery is.
At this point I’m lucky to be alive, and several others are lucky that I was not only alive, but present when something very bad was about to happen to them.
On behalf of everyone who has ever done something stupid but right, regardless of the danger, I cordially invite you to lick the underside of my brave, stupid sack.
I salute Hitch for doing something stupid and brave, thereby giving himself an interesting story to tell later.
Matt.
They might be, though I think some other terminology would be used, probably along the lines of orange something.
I can’t speak for everyone of course but anyone I do know who would vote for a United Ireland still identify themselves as coming from the ‘unionist community’ or having a ‘unionist background’.
Cruithne: Thanks.
Sorry, how is this “brass”? He defaces a poster and he’s somehow a hero? That’s a childish response, not some brave act.
He probably deserved to get his ass kicked.
@176, Cephus,
Read my comment #169.
This reminds me of Hitchens’ reply to Dennis Prager’s question about feeling safer being approached by a group of men coming from a prayer meeting:
“Just to stay within the letter ‘B,’ I have actually had that experience in Belfast, Beirut, Bombay, Belgrade, Bethlehem, and Baghdad. In each case I can say absolutely, and can give my reasons, why I would feel immediately threatened if I thought that the group of men approaching me in the dusk were coming from a religious observance.”
Why can’t we all just get along?
But seriously I’ve not seen this kind of backbiting on this site before against each other. We don’t have any IDiots to argue with so we turn on each other? Does Hitchens mean so much to you that you resort to advocating lynching and calling each other names? WTF?
And that proves what? – johannes
Why did you leave out the immediately following:
“after an ideological shift within the party in the 1960s, after which it had a raprochment with the Syrian Ba’athists.”?
If you take the trouble to use google a bit, you’ll find:
1) That the founder of the party based his nationalism on the alleged geographical unity of greater Syria, not on pseudo-biological race concept. The party’s statement of ideology, athttp://www.ssnp.com/new/ssnp/en/ssnp.htm includes the following:
“The alleged racial purity of any nation is a groundless myth. It is found only in savage groups, and even there it is rare. The Syrian nation consists of a mixture of Canaanites, Akkadians, Chaldeans, Assyrians, Arameans, Hiffites, and Metanni as the French nation is a mixture of Gauls, Ligurians, Franks, etc… and the Italian nation of Romans, Latins, Etruscans, etc… the same being true of every other nation.”
2) According to Wikipedia:
“In 1961 the party launched an abortive coup attempt in Lebanon, resulting in renewed proscription and the imprisonment of many of its leaders. In prison the SSNP militants read and discussed politics and reconsidered their ideology, coming under the influence of Marxism and other left-wing ideas.[citation needed] By the beginning of the 1970s, the party had undergone a considerable ideological transformation, and was seen as decidedly left-wing and no longer deeply inimical to Arab nationalism. These ideological turns, however, resulted in splits, and there are now two rival groups laying claim to Saadeh’s mantle.[citation needed]
Proof of this new orientation came with the outbreak of the Lebanese Civil War of 1975. SSNP militias fought alongside the nationalist and leftist forces, against the Phalangists and their right-wing allies. An important development followed with the renewal of contact between the party and its former bitter enemy, the Syrian Baath Party.
After the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and subsequent rout of the leftist forces, a number of the leftist organizations regrouped to engage in resistance to the Israeli occupation. Along with the Lebanese Communist Party, the Communist Action Organization, and some smaller leftist groups, the SSNP played a prominent role in this.”
– But why bother? Just like those who immediately assumed Hitchens’ attackers were Islamists, you immediately assumed they’re nazis. So much easier than actually doing a tiny bit of research, which would reveal a rather more complex reality.
Fuck right off you cowardly judgemental bitches.
If the shit ever hits the fan in your little lives, I hope there is someone like me nearby to try to help. – ggab
Just stay away from me, OK? Why should we take you at your own inflated estimate, you misogynistic braggart? I’d bet 100-1 you’re the sort of idiot who intervenes to make sure a fight starts, when someone’s trying to cool things down.
Who’d would’ve known the real Hitchens assault would happen right here on Pharyngula?
Some of the comments make me wonder if the poster would have ratted out Staufenberg to the Gestapo. After all, he was a Prussian aristocrat officer, and even if he was against the Nazis, he’s part of the TRUE EVIL.
I guess since Hitchens isn’t washed in the true blood of the lamb of both atheism AND anti-imperialism (preferably the 1970 version), his contribution to rational thought and his civil courage don’t count.
Pony #75:
Want context? Here, from that April 24, 1989 Minority Report column. Sounds all reasonable-like until you start thinking about it. Maybe until you start thinking about in the first person, which might be difficult with all the bouncing balls and using “pussies” as insults and other jolly features of the boyos’ usual frothing here in this thread.
What if there were to be a historic compromise?
If society really wanted to protect the unborn child, it
would have, in reason and conscience, to make women a serious
proposal. “We” regard the occupant of what is undoubtedly
your womb as a candidate member of the next generation,
and “we” thus claim a right and an interest. “We” do
not like what “we” hear about gender abortions, where potential
girls are flushed out by couples who want boys
(surely the great unintended consequencoef a feminist campaign).
Nor do “we” like what “we” hear about racial implications
of this type of population control. For these and
many other reasons, “we” want to define this as a social
problem. In return:
(1) Contraception will be available free, under a National
Health Service that will also guarantee prenatal, nutrition
and health care for any child born to any family (as is still
the case even in much poorer capitalist democracies like
Britain). Sexual and contraceptive education will be part of
the national school curriculum, just as prayer will not need
to be.
(2) Since not all taking of life is murder, and since it is immoral
and unscientific to maintain otherwise, no woman
may be compelled to bear a child if she is the victim of rape
or incest, or if her mental or physical health is threatened.
These abortions will be performed at no cost by the National
Health Service, which will relieve at least some of the
people who worry understandably about profit-making
abortion “clinics.”
(3) The National Health Service will supervise a national
adoption service. The current disgrace of private and profitmaking
adoption rackets, many of them run by religious
and racial sectarians, will cease.
Most of these socialist reforms should have been implemented
by now in any case. On these conditions it would be
possible to end the dialogue of the deaf between those who
shout “murder” andth ose who dully reply “no problem.” It
is a pity that instead of taking this course, the majority of
feminists and their allies have stuck to the dead ground of
“Me Decade” possessive individualism, an ideology that
has more in common than it admits with the prehistoric
right, which it claims to oppose but has in fact encouraged.
—Christopher Hitchens
knockgoats
What the hell?
misogynistic?
Oh I get it. I used the word bitches. I must be talking about women then huh?
Y’know, sometimes I like the things you have to say, and sometimes I think you’re a judgemental stick-up-the-ass looking desperately for something to be offended by.
That’s an easy one with me, as I tend to be a little rough around the edges. Okay, a lot rough on occasion.
Nature of the beast I guess when it comes to heated online arguements.
By the way, I’m in for a grand on that bet. I’m afraid it’s all I’ve got on me right now.
If you’re one of the people above that was spurting off about what horrors he deserves for doing something as awful as defacing a political poster, then yes, I was talking to you in my post.
Make any assumption you would like about my character, you seem to enjoy that sort of thing. Seems like with all the practice you get, you’d be closer to the mark though.
Well anyway, enjoy.
The report seems pretty sketchy. Does anyone know what actually happened?
As for those claims that Hitchens should quit smoking and lose weight or lose credibility – get bent. He’s not in the spotlight for looking like Brad Pitt, he’s in the spotlight for being as smart as Pitt is good looking. Go tell Jessica to lose weight – Hitchens is fine the way he is.
“Here, from that April 24, 1989 Minority Report column. Sounds all reasonable-like until you start thinking about it. Maybe until you start thinking about in the first person”
I’m having some trouble with how this is supposed to be upsetting other than it being in a level of discourse that suggests that “we” who are empowered are decidedly separate from “you” (women). It’s very socialist.
Y’know, sometimes I like the things you have to say, and sometimes I think you’re a judgemental stick-up-the-ass looking desperately for something to be offended by. – ggab
Y’know, I don’t give a shit what you think of me.
I agree with some of Hitchen’s ideas, but I think that he needs to be more careful in choosing his battles, lest there be more personal injury.
“Choose your battles wisely.”
“He that runs away
gets to fight another day.”
Um, do you know anything about Lebanese politics, or are you just making blind assumptions about brown people? SSNP is actually explicitly secular. Contrarywise, every other major party in Lebanon is highly sectarian, and parliamentary seats are explicitly alotted to religious groups. The only parties that aren’t overtly religious are the SSNP, the Ba’ath Party, the Socialists, and the Communists, whose MP’s still have to belong to a particular confession to be seated in the crazy gerrymandering system. Out of 128 seats, the aforementioned secular parties hold three seats in total — and two of those belong to the SSNP.
I’m all for promoting liberal democracy in Lebanon, but Hitchens’ little stunt was both stupid and completely ineffective. This isn’t standing up to fascism — it’s just a manic drunk misjudging the willingness of an angry group of thugs to beat his tender white ass after taunting them.
I’m having some trouble with how this is supposed to be upsetting other than it being in a level of discourse that suggests that “we” who are empowered are decidedly separate from “you” (women). It’s very socialist. – blueelm
No, not really. Universal health care and good sex education are not specifically socialist – they do not imply the collective ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. What’s more, instituting them in no way implies that as a quid pro quo, women should be forced to continue with pregnancies they don’t want.
Hitchens’ spew is extremely sexist – hectoring feminists, and women in general, about how they must bear children for
the fatherlandsociety. I’m not in the least surprised.Knockgoats,
> Why did you leave out the immediately following:
> “after an ideological shift within the party in the
> 1960s, after which it had a raprochment with the Syrian
> Ba’athists.”?
Er, Ba’athists aren’t exactly the greatest Anti-Fascists on earth, either. Beside this, everybody has allied with, or fought against, everybody in the Byzantine world of Lebanese politics. That proves nothing. The Shi’ites were once allied with the Israelis against the Palestinians.
> The Syrian nation consists of a mixture of Canaanites,
> Akkadians, Chaldeans, Assyrians, Arameans, Hiffites, and > Metanni
So if your ancestors in 2000 BC were Metanni, you can still join the SSNP? How generous! Glad to hear about the end of anti-Metanni prejudice.
> – But why bother? Just like those who immediately assumed
> Hitchens’ attackers were Islamists, you immediately
> assumed they’re nazis. So much easier than actually doing a tiny bit of research,
> which would reveal a rather more complex reality.
So they modernized a bit and toyed with Strasserism? Where I come from, all the Nazis do that. If the average North-Korea loving, National Bolshevik East German skinhead is a Nazi, than the SSNP, wich is much more similar to “classic”, thirties-style Fascism, is a Nazi party, too.
Now hold on just a minute here . . .
You can get alchohol in Lebanon!?
johannes,
It’s clear you’re not interested in evidence: you’ve decided the SSNP are Nazis, so they’re Nazis.
NickK writes:
Sometimes it’s OK to blame the victim. A drunk driver wraps his car around a telephone pole and dies. It’s OK to blame the victim. An idiot dives into shallow water and breaks his neck. It’s OK to blame the victim. A belligerent Anglo Saxon visits a land that has fought civil wars on and off since Jimmy Carter was president, and defaces a poster of one of the combatant parties. I think some responsibility can lie with said Anglo Saxon. Stupidity needs to be called out for what it is.
I love the smell of cultural relativism in the morning. It smells like… fail.
First off, “victim” implies someone else victimized a person. If you drive drunk and wind up in a ditch, you’re an idiot, not a “victim.” If you’re forced off the road by a drunk driver, you’re a “victim.” The moral notion that it’s immoral to blame the victim doesn’t hold well if you redefine “victimhood” to mean ‘anyone that gets hurt.’ That’s so… 90’s.
Af far as the anglo saxon versus whatever stuff – while it may be the ground reality, I’m not going to give racism more of a nod than suggesting you keep it to yourself.
Concerning the heroism vs stupidity debate, I wonder if Hitchens has overlooked Gen. Patton’s advice: “Nobody ever won a war by dying for his country!”
Commenting a poster of a party with a violence-supporting ideology? Great!
Commenting such a poster while a member of that party is watching? What good is supposed to come out of that?
At least, it appears, Hitchens had the good sense to actually run away instead of pulling a Thermopylae.
Bingo.
I’m still amazed at how many people still seem to think there has to be a Good Guy somewhere in there. There isn’t. There just ain’t.
—————–
And, scooter… get off your childish revenge fantasies. Really.
here’s the poop!
http://exiledonline.com/christopher-blubber-jaw-hitchens-picks-a-three-against-one-fight-with-a-syrian-nerd-and-still-gets-his-ass-stomped/#comments
“I wasn’t there. I was there, however, for the immediate after-action report, and have heard it told ten times by now, including most of it from Hitchens.
“…Well, when this Syrian Nazi goon saw Hitch do this, he confronted him and kinda-sorta attacked him. I say kinda sorta attacked, because what his main intent was was to delay Hitchens from leaving — until the ten Nazi goons he had just texted on his cell phone could arrive.
“There was some kicking and pulling and hitting. Hitch and the others attempted to get into a cab — the Syrian Nazi goon got right in the cab with them, still hitting Hitchens”
and so all three ran away on foot with the one guy still chasing them….sounds hillarious…
and the soruce says he was NOT drunk as it was barely after noon.
Knockgoats
“Y’know, I don’t give a shit what you think of me.”
There you go, saying something that makes me like you again.
No more angry tirades today. I think I got it out of my system.
Thank you all. It was some snarky fun.
Ah therapy. Who needs it when you’ve got forums.
If that’s not a setup for some of you to throw some more cracks my way, I don’t know what is.
Enjoy!
Sure, no good ever came from not letting yourself be intimidated by violent people. If you make enough concessions, eventually everyone will become friends.
Hitchens is awesome precisely because of his political nuances (not to mention he is great with words). For example, his position on global warming is that whether men are causing it or not, we need to act as if we are because we only have the one planet and can’t risk screwing it up. Compare that to the typical leftist browbeating, and ask yourself which is more likely to make a denier change their stance about reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Holy shit! Hitch must have balls as big around as my head.
Of course. Only a bit over half of the country is Muslim, most of the rest are Christians.
Please. If you can only lose, fighting is a stupid option, out of which no good can come.
If you can win, it’s different, but that doesn’t seem to have been the case here.
“Win first, then go to battle.”
— Sunzi
Are you deliberately misunderstanding me? I never said Hitchens shouldn’t have written on that poster. He should have. It was just counterproductive to do it while a goon was watching.
Yeah, and pretend that a scientific stance on this issue of climatology doesn’t exist. Right, go ahead…
One thing I have to say about the Lebanese… they have the best food in the world… but be sure to take your tums with you.
I’d be more impressed if he hadn’t been drinking.
There’s a fine line between bravery and stupidity, but when alcohol is involved that line suddenly becomes very blurry.
Re: David Marjanović, OM(#202)
Yeah, and pretend that the other scientific stance on this issue of climatology doesn’t exist. Right, go ahead…
Hitchens is losing his relevance quite quickly; what a childish thing to do. Look out for his sob story on Larry King Live later this month.
Scooter, you’re making Pete Rooke look well-adjusted.
Really, you’re a sick fuck. I wouldn’t want Kim Jong Il or Osama Bin fucking Laden hanging in my yard. In very small windowless cells and forced to listen to shit like this 24 hours a day, yes.
But getting a hard-on for execution like you’re exhibiting is Monkeydamn disturbing and closer to those assholes’ ideologies than you might like to believe. A large part of the country was fully supportive of the war. You got 100,000,000 trees or are you going to make your “political statements” sequentially?
“There’s a fine line between bravery and stupidity, but when alcohol is involved that line suddenly becomes very blurry.”
no indication that it was. see post above.197
ggab@198,
I admit, that was an unexpectedly good-natured response!
Knockgoats
I know how course I can be sometimes.
I’ve got a bit of a temper (surprised?) and I’m more than a little opinionated.
I imagine that it can be a little grating if you only know me through forums. I kinda can’t help it.
I’ve always loved my debates to be of the drunken’ barstool variety. Good old knock down drag outs.
Just seems so passionate.
I can always go from having someone hurl insults at my mother to buying them a drink and asking them for a game of pool.
I’m incapable of holding a grudge and genuinely find something to like about nearly everyone I meet.
We have had a couple of dust ups, but I don’t see any point in trying to hang on to that. As I said earlier, I often agree with what you post here.
Also, I love it when I throw out snark and someone hits me right back. That’s how my friends and I talk to each other.
Hope I haven’t offended anyone too much.
Don’t mind if I offended some a little bit though.lol
Folks, we are overthinking this. Its not like Hitch wrote on that poster knowing the facists were watching him. Im sure he didnt think it was all that brave or counterproductive. Probably just saw some random flyer, not unlike you’d see for a band or a lecture on a telephone pole in any city, and added a few choice words. Graffiti on top of graffiti.
I tell ya what was ballsy though, was showing at his lecture the next night. yea, he took a couple socialist goons too, for audience ‘balance’, but I doubt they would’ve jumped in front of a bullet for him.
>>>He stayed on in Beirut to deliver a scheduled talk at the University of American in Lebanon yesterday evening, where he was confronted by another group of SSNP members. “By that time they had worked out who I was and where I was going to be,” he said. “So I took along some very nice comrades from the Popular Socialist Party to sit near me. [The rival activists] were outnumbered.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/feb/19/christopher-hitchens-beirut-attack
Long time reader, first time commenter.
Rather appalled that the arguments being used to denigrate Hitch are identical to those arguments being used by the Fundies. Yes, that’s right all you “he had it coming” and “what did he expect?” people: you are the spitting image of those you abhor.
Chances are with this act and his harbouring Rushdie at the height of fatwa, he’s done infinitely more to fight political and religious extremism than the naysayers.
The Grauniad story Matt links to is interesting: it says Hitchens had been drinking, and was with two other journalists. It quotes him as saying:
“What shook me is how nearly it could have got fantastically nasty. We could have been hurt or taken away.”
Quite: not just him, but his two companions. I wonder if we’ll hear what they thought of his actions?
The PSP is the party led by Walid Jumblatt – in effect, it’s the party of the Druze, although officially secular. It was responsible for a number of massacres of Christians during the “Mountain War” of 1983. Jumblatt was a great pal of the Syrians and Hezbollah up until a few years ago (even though the Syrians assassinated his father), but is now one of Washington’s blue-eyed boys. “Opportunist” doesn’t really cover it. As I said, good guys are thin on the ground in Lebanese politics.
@212
You’re purposely obfuscating the issue Paul. This isn’t about some sort of BS “he had it coming” argument (at least not from the majority of Hitchens’ detractors), it’s about the prudence of knowing when and where to pick a fight.
The crux of the situation is that Hitchens was attacked for defacing a organization’s poster by a member of the organization. This same organization is known to have assassinated rivals and has a known violent streak. If Hitchens hadn’t been observed ruining the poster nothing would have come of it, and the status quo wouldn’t have been altered one bit. By being attacked some light has been shed on the situation, but the likelihood of any lasting positive impact in the region is also small.
This was a futile gesture that could have gotten him killed. He’s lucky it didn’t, and for that we should all be grateful (even, if like me, some people might think he’s a boorish ass). This doesn’t change the fact that he had no strategic goal and no hope of destabilizing the local power structure. It was an infantile act, not an act of heroism. No, the act that had an impact here is that he not only stayed in the country to give his lecture, but that he brought a posse of opposition party members with him to ensure his safety while speaking. It may turn out that by refusing to back down he ends up having an impact, but it’s also just as likely that once he leaves things will settle right back to where they were before his lecture. Nothing will have changed, and he’ll have the bruises for naught.
You can try to claim that we’re somehow “blaming the victim”, but that simply shows a lack of strategic thinking and simple-minded notions of civil disobedience. Yes it’s good to stand up to oppression, but doing so with no chance of changing the situation isn’t brave, it’s stupid. All it will do is get a hero killed with no hope of helping anyone or changing anything.
But go ahead, up the ante say we’d also blame a rape victim for her plight. That seems to be popular around here.
“No, the act that had an impact here is that he not only stayed in the country to give his lecture, but that he brought a posse of opposition party members with him to ensure his safety while speaking.” – Dustin
Point of information: the PSP is part of the current “Government of National Unity” in Lebanon. So is the SSNP.
Dustin,
The mentality that I am seeing is why women have to yell “fire” instead of “rape” when they are being raped. It’s why the French had a problem with Car-b-cues a few years back. It’s because people will not take a stand. Hitch stood up, he continues to stand up.
How do you know that his actions have no lasting impact? There certainly is a chance they will. This will unquestionably have more impact than walking by, eyes averted, just to avoid the hassle of doing the right thing.
What is often overlooked is that one man, or a small group of men, often change the course of history. So who knows what the end result of this will be? If a couple of bumps is a catalyst to the eventual ouster of the Syrian backed National Socialists, it’s a small price to pay.
@ 215
They’re not members of the same party and have waged open conflict with each other as recently as early last year. Even if they are in a coalition it’s not a peaceful or stable situation. Equating the two on a technicality might work on paper, but if it’s anything like other strained peace agreements around the world what’s on paper and what’s in the street aren’t often the same.
@217
If you look at the local Lebanese news sites you’ll find no mention of Hitchens scuffle. With that said if this ends up being some sort of storybook “catalyst” I’ll eat my shirt.
Individuals and small groups have changed history, but it doesn’t happen nearly as often as we’d like to think. The fact that most cultures can teach their children about nearly every one of these individuals who sculpted their cultural history in dramatic ways should give a clue to how frequently they occur. This isn’t one of those times, and I’ll be shocked if this gets even 10% as much play in Lebanon as it has on this site.
Dustin,
Individuals and small groups changing history happens way more often than you would like to admit. You think it meant nothing, I think it might lead to bigger things. That we are having this conversation at all means it did have a minor impact. Might make some people in the west do some re-thinking as well.
The gist of your argument, and feel free to correct me, is this: if the potential for impact is slim to none, no action should be taken. You know, like standing in front of a tank in Tiennamen Square, or climbing over the Berlin Wall, or sitting at the front of a bus when you should be sitting in the back. Was Hitchens’ action in any way similar? Just in spirit and who knows where it will lead.
Tyranny should be opposed. That you think he chose the wrong place and time is a matter of opinion. That he did it all speaks volumes about the man.
j.t.delaney says :
…
Um, do you know anything about Lebanese politics, or are you just making blind assumptions about brown people? …
__
*rolls eyes* teh brown peeople of color
There are lebanese members of racist white power groups in Europe and in America. To this day, the most infamous nazi skinhead in France is a guy named Serge Ayoub ( of lebanese origins , as you may guess ).
In my experience, most lebs see themselves as some kind of white, though slightly different from the all-american, whitebread “plain white” of european origin . Someone mentionned the SSNP thinking of egyptians as subhumans . That doesn’t seem far fetched to me, especially since they’re extremely nationalistic and that egyptians were never part of the syrian ethnicity.
I think they basically are happy with the ethnic roots of syrians and aren’t trying to divide syrians into smaller groups. That isn’t incompatible with racism : I doubt they’d be the type to welcome sudanese “arabs” to Lebanon, even with their recent tolerance of pan-arabism.
Ironically, one could argue that ancient Hebrews and the Jews were part of the syrian people. But the SSNP is quite explicit that they have no tolerance at all for jews .
And the beating up continues here in Pharyngula. Congrats, you islamo-fascist pals, you’ve got talent!
I puke to all of you who call Hitchens an asshole for doing stupid but right things. What are you, the Politically Correct Brigade or something? Fucking lame-ass cowards! The only move you know how to make is bend your backs. So bend them, but don’t DARE to patronize the ones who don’t!
Fucking sheep.
And yeah, I’m pissed off, because I’d expect to find here people that regardless of politics, would sympathize with Hitchens, who only did what was right, though not clever.
But no, it apparently seems that the DKos TrollBot Brigade just wants Hitchens dead, because he defended the war on Iraq.
Fuck all of you. I was against Iraq war from the start, but I’ve always respected Hitchens, even in his point of view. Even if I didn’t, even if it was Bushie that got cornered and beated up, even if it was god-damned CHENEY, I would NEVER say a tenth of what I’ve read in here. I’d say “BRAVO, SIR! Not clever, but right, and things NEED to be SAID, not hidden because of FEAR, so I SALUTE YOU”
I’d say that to fucking KISSINGER! Of course, Kissinger would never do such thing, but hey.
Hitchens is awesome, and there are too many pansies criticizing him.
Wow, I can’t believe how incredibly ignorant people who read this blog are. I would have thought you’d be people who look at the actual direct evidence before forming opinions, but apparently not. I’d suggest the people criticising Hitchens actually read his opinions, especially on the Bush government and the war in Iraq before making comments that make it so blatantly obvious that you don’t know what his opinion is at all.
There are certainly plenty of legitimate criticisms that could be levelled at Hithens, but most of the ones in this topic topic are far from that.
Seems like a very stupid act, irrespective of his motivations or views on things.
> johannes,
> It’s clear you’re not interested in evidence: you’ve
> decided the SSNP are Nazis, so they’re Nazis.
Knockgoats,
The problem with your evidence is that it tends to confirm, rather than disprove my position, neither a checkered history of conflict and alliances with other authoritarian or totalitarian groups, nor a pop history stretching back to some semi-mythical warrior tribes of the bronze age nor a commitment to faux socialism or corporativism are atypical for Fascism. They had learned to quote Alain de Benoist, so what? The Vlaams Belang, the FPÖ and the Font National do the same thing. They prefer an opportunistic alliance with the Ba’athists when the alternative is an one-way ticket to Tadmor and a date with Mr. Electrodes? Le Pen (ab)uses the black Minstrel sockpuppet Dieudonne M’Bala M’Bala as a spokesman to get antisemitic votes from the banlieus, the Vlaams Belang toys with abandoning Antisemitism to get Jewish votes in Antwerp, Fascism is eclectic and opportunistic by nature. Whatever concessions the SSNP might have made, the mere fact that it was responsible for making suicide bombings part of middle eastern popular culture – other groups might have used suicide bombers before, but it was the SSNP who started to recruit physically attractive individuals as suicide bombers, and to market them posthumously as pop stars – shows that it is a very destructive force.
He is really lucky he didn’t run into the nationalsit Social Party of Syria….he would have been in REAL trouble then!! Keep stickin it to ’em CH!!
Cruithne #174
Eh? Everyone I know that would vote for a United Ireland would NEVER identify themselves as coming from the Unionist Community. I would perhaps agree that they may very well say they have a Unionist background, then QUICKLY add that their new worldview is correct, but to identify with one community or the other in Northern Ireland is to openly and blatently ally yourself with one side of the argument, i.e. Unionist/Nationalist. And I would also go as far to suggest that you have indulged in a spot of flimflammery (god, I LOVE that word) to win the point. People from Northern Ireland would be very familiar with this, rightly or wrongly, when someone says I am from the nationalist/unionist community, it implies certain views on the whole debate.
What kind of attention did this get in Lebanese media? Are the SSNP getting bad publicity for being thin-skinned thugs?
Bottom line: Writing on one of numerous posters already posted on a public wall does not warrant being beaten up.
—————————
JDP,
I don’t think Hitchens is a fascist. Cue Inigo Montoya.
Hitchens is clearly an imperialist, but I am not aware that he is championing palingenetic ultranationalist populism.
http://cursor.org/stories/fascismiii.php
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2004/10/rise-of-pseudo-fascism_25.html
—————–
Cruithne #167,
No, the southwest should not go to the Mexican imperialists either. The entire U.S. needs to respect its treaty obligations with the Native Americans, for a start.
I see what you’re saying but I think you only lose when you give in. I consider Hitchens to have won.
I consider not doing something that you would normally do because some goon was there making a concession to the goon.
@ 228
Bottom Line: None, and none.
Yeah, don’t take action… BELIEVE IN THE BALLOT!
…Yeah right.
Massive brass? Yes, I’ll go along with that. He’s not particularly swift, is he?