video of Christopher Hitchens on Ayn Rand

[James Bond]

Pretty entertaining. I especially liked the "cult of individualism" bit.

[TheEgoist]

Hitchens has commented, to my knowledge, 2 other times on Rand. One was during a talk called "The Moral Necessity of Atheism" I believe. The other was during a debate against his brother.

He mentioned it twice in the talk he gave on moral necessity of atheism, mentioning Rand as one of the few Atheists of the "Right", I believe. The other was provoked by a questioner.

EDIT: after watching the clip, let me say he comes off a bit more positive every time he mentions her. Here he calls VOS "Quaint". At his Atheism talk, he approvingly speaks of VoS. At his debate mention, he says he believes in enlightened self interest but then goes on to quote Bernard Shaw on that matter, who was a socialist and supporter of Hitler's regime.

Edited July 25, 2009 by TheEgoist

[Myself]

Hitchens wasn't approving of Rand at all. He found it amusing that there were people so ridiculously stupid in modern America that they would advocate for capitalism and selfishness.

This is the Toohey technique. Don't come right out and say, like Chomsky, that Rand is "one of the most evil figures of modern intellectual history." Instead just snear.

We were beneath contempt.

[RussK]

I figured he harbored such opinions after I read his recent book, "God is not Great." In the book, besides attacking most of the worlds religions, he essentially outlines his growth as a socialist, which he started out by being a communist. The Right will not be moved to Rand's capitalism because of her atheism; the Left will not be moved to her atheism due to her capitalism.

[Zip]

I figured he harbored such opinions after I read his recent book, "God is not Great." In the book, besides attacking most of the worlds religions, he essentially outlines his growth as a socialist, which he started out by being a communist. The Right will not be moved to Rand's capitalism because of her atheism; the Left will not be moved to her atheism due to her capitalism.

Good thing that atheism isn't the point then isn't it.

[TheEgoist]

Hitchens wasn't approving of Rand at all. He found it amusing that there were people so ridiculously stupid in modern America that they would advocate for capitalism and selfishness.

This is the Toohey technique. Don't come right out and say, like Chomsky, that Rand is "one of the most evil figures of modern intellectual history." Instead just snear.

We were beneath contempt.

And no actual response to what I said above? Toohey was quite explicit in his hatred, btw.

As far as his socialist leanings, as far as I know he no longer considers himself a Trotskyite.

[Guest Erik Martinsen]

From Wikipedia

"In 2009 Hitchens was listed by Forbes magazine as one of the "25 most influential liberals in U.S. media." The same article noted, though, that he would "likely be aghast to find himself on this list" and that he "styles himself a radical," not a liberal. Despite his dissent from the political left, Hitchens as recently as 2009 has defined himself as a Marxist."

I always figured that Hitchens was a secular conservative along the lines of Dennis Miller, so it came as a surprise to learn that he considers himself a Marxist. I'm not sure how one can be a Marxist but not as socialist—are anyone able to elaborate on this?

Edited July 25, 2009 by Erik Martinsen

[TheEgoist]

From Wikipedia

I always figured that Hitchens was a secular conservative along the lines of Dennis Miller, so it came as a surprise to learn that he considers himself a Marxist. I'm not sure how one can be a Marxist but not as socialist—are anyone able to elaborate on this?

Wow, that is a surprise. I never figured he was some kind of conservative, but to still describe himself as a Marxist...This is more daunting and troubling. As far as being a Marxist, but not a socialist, Marxists are ideally anarchists. They believe that Socialism is a middle point between the Capitalist state to Utopian anarchy. I just can't believe Hitchens would ever believe that, as he never described himself as Marxist before but a follower of Trotsky.

And here is the non-wiki source, an audio-video from Youtube. At the beginning he says he was a Socialist Internationalist for much of his life. Then around 2:45 he says "I still do consider myself a Marxist"

Edited July 25, 2009 by TheEgoist

[Guest Erik Martinsen]

Wow, that is a surprise. I never figured he was some kind of conservative, but to still describe himself as a Marxist...This is more daunting and troubling. As far as being a Marxist, but not a socialist, Marxists are ideally anarchists. They believe that Socialism is a middle point between the Capitalist state to Utopian anarchy. I just can't believe Hitchens would ever believe that, as he never described himself as Marxist before but a follower of Trotsky.

Thanks for the clarification.

Here's a 2009 article by Hitchens called "The Revenge of Karl Marx."

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200904/hitchens-marx

Edited July 25, 2009 by Erik Martinsen

[RussK]

Good thing that atheism isn't the point then isn't it.

Yeah, it's a shame that the subject has so much stature over other ideas. Then again, maybe not. If it were not for that type of silliness, Communism may have had more sway in America.

[RussK]

On Hitchens and Marxism, etc., in "god is not Great," he states that he was a Marxist and a Trotskyite:

When I was a Marxist, I did not hold my opinions as a matter of faith but I did have the conviction that a sort of unified field theory might have been discovered. The concept of historical and dialectical materialism was not an absolute and it did not have any supernatural element, but it did have its messianic element in the idea that an ultimate moment might arrive, and it most certainly had its martyrs and saints and doctrinaires and (after a while) its mutually excommunicating rival papacies.

The purpose of this part of the book is to show solidarity with readers who may be having their faith challenged, illustrating how his faith was challenged when he was a Marxist.

Thus, dear reader, if you have come this far and found your own faith undermined--as I hope--I am willing to say that to some extent I know what you are going through. There are days when I miss my old convictions as if they were amputated limbs.

I didn't know about Christopher Hitchens until I read the book, and it's the only thing I know him by. The book isn't bad, but it's not exactly the strongest case for atheism that can be made. In the book, Hitchens argues against religion by illustrating many contradictions to be found within particular religions, and the arguments he puts forward for atheism are solely from a secular humanist perspective--which is why I thought of him as a probable socialist type. How did others here come to their opinions of Hitchens, if not from the book?

[Andrew Grathwohl]

I didn't know about Christopher Hitchens until I read the book, and it's the only thing I know him by. The book isn't bad, but it's not exactly the strongest case for atheism that can be made. In the book, Hitchens argues against religion by illustrating many contradictions to be found within particular religions, and the arguments he puts forward for atheism are solely from a secular humanist perspective--which is why I thought of him as a probable socialist type. How did others here come to their opinions of Hitchens, if not from the book?

Hitchens has been a columnist for Vanity Fair for a long time, and he's been a pretty outspoken commentator on national news programs in the US. He has been considered a neo-conservative by some due to his foreign policy, which is, from most of my research, pretty accurate. He was very supportive of Bush's War in Iraq because it somehow backs his views on religion.

I agree that Hitchens' book is not a very strong case for atheism because it is mostly a historical and literary overview of religious contradictions rather than an examination of any particular moral code. Although he does touch upon how religion is often borderline child abuse, and how it engages in the initiation of force (circumcision and the like).

He is a strong admirer of Thomas Jefferson, but I truly don't see too many similarities. I think that Hitchens is great for being sure of himself, grounded in some amount of reason and rational thinking, and is generally unapologetic about it. He even goes far enough to resent not just the Republican party but the Democrats as well (he has given some of the funniest names for Hilary Clinton that I've ever heard in the media). However, he loses a lot of points in my book for being absolutely dead wrong about the role of government and the proper ethical role of the individual in modern society.