[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)
Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /spoox/ - Paranormal, horror and the occult.
New board: /AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.
[ Return / Go to bottom ]

File: 1641398346215.jpg (99.79 KB, 960x1024, hitchens2.jpg)

 No.675086[Last 50 Posts]

What do you guys think of Christopher Hitchens? I think he is misunderstood and gets too much hate. He was an ardent Marxist and socialist throughout his entire life. The first 30 years of his life were spent debating, writing books, going on talk shows as an extremely educated Marxist. You can still watch all of these which are great. It wasn't until later when the Communist movement as a whole died down around the world that he stopped being so passionate but even then until his death he called himself a Marxist and a socialist. People just see him as this Iraq Atheist guy but he was a Marxist until the end. One of the best orators at least in our age. It's also funny that he has a brother who has the same job, looks and sounds exactly like him but is a Christian conservative the exact opposite of his brother.

 No.675098

>>675086
If he wanted any respect then he shouldn't have shilled for the Iraq war, he can fuck off and die. Oh wait he did

 No.675101

Overrated, overhyped.

 No.675104

What no theory does to a MF

 No.675105

He was wrong when it mattered. What else is there to say? What else is your worth as an intellectual? Why are intellectuals time and again dumber than the public at large? Is this a capitalism thing? Yiff in hell you twat.

 No.675107

>>675098
How the fuck can you call yourself a leftist and be an apologist for saddam and genocide

 No.675108

>>675098
One bad view = literally Hitler even though he spent his entire life since he was 16 year old being a passionate Marxist trying to help the movement? Even on his death was Marxist but one bad view = Hitler. He has done more the movement than you and probably the entire board combined. Are you standing on the stage in front of millions of people arguing for Marxism?

 No.675110

>>675105
Ok I concede. You're literally perfect. You never been wrong or had a bad view in your entire life. You're the most perfect human. You have never made a mistake ever

 No.675112

>>675086
I heard somewhere that he instructed for his funeral to have the Soviet National anthem played, that was based but siding with the Bush Jr. for the M E wars, wasn't.

 No.675113

>>675107
Saddam apologist? Are you thinking of someone else?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR1X3zV6X5Y

 No.675114

>>675108
Sorry but I'm not a neocon so I'm better than him by default. Also pretty sure he wasn't even a Marxist in his later years, he certainly never talked about it.

 No.675119

>>675112
It was his one bad view but I forgot what the reason I think it was something personal that made him believe it but it doesn't undo everything he did before. It's like if Parenti or whatever thinker you like had one bad view are you just going to drop him entirely because he had one bad view? Everything he did is nullified because one bad view? It's retarded and childish to act like that.

 No.675123

>>675113
It was a response to that anon

 No.675124

>>675086
>Trotskyist
>Marxist
Pick one

 No.675128

>>675114
He did talk about it often almost every interview with him people bring it up.

>Sorry but I'm not a neocon so I'm better than him by default.
You literally do nothing but post on imageboards and twitter. You are worthless.

 No.675129

>>675123
Oh sorry didn't see that

 No.675130

>>675128
Better to be worthless than to be a useful idiot for the Bush administration and imperialism

 No.675135

He is my daddy. When he says that "Nk is a feudal state" I listen and COOM!

 No.675137

>>675130
But the 40 years of writing articles, books, debating Capitalists on prime time TV, doing speeches on TV across the country all for the Marxist movement are all nullified because of one view? Are you underage? Underages usually have very black and white thinking

 No.675138

I mean he was a trot and hung around bourgeois intellegentsia circles, so he left very little to distinguish himself theoretically as a marxist. He acted like a neocon for a considerable amount of time. He was a good polemic against religious nutjobs, but that's it probably. Why do you care about him so much. Are you a child? Because that's when I cared about him.

 No.675148

>>675138
>He acted like a neocon for a considerable amount of time
This was much later on and for a much shorter amount of time. He spent his entire life as Marxist and what 6 years doing the other shit? (while still being a Marxist).

He was the best orator in our times at least based on the ones I've seen. I don't watch or read him for the theory or arguments but just for the great command of the English language.

 No.675153

>>675148
You keep spamming this argument when he was a member of a practically neocon adjacent trotskyist sect, and worse a 3rd campist one

 No.675155

>>675148
>>675137
"In a 2001 interview with Reason, Hitchens said he became a Marxist and a Trotskyist in his teens, beliefs that further developed during his time at Balliol College, Oxford. In 1966, he was demonstrating in Trafalgar Square against the Vietnam War. In 1967, he joined the International Socialists while at Balliol College, Oxford. Under the influence of Peter Sedgwick, who translated the writings of Russian revolutionary and Soviet dissident Victor Serge, Hitchens forged an ideological interest in Trotskyist and anti-Stalinist socialism. Shortly after he joined "a small but growing post-Trotskyist Luxemburgist sect".[21] This organisation is now known as the Alliance for Workers' Liberty. He became a socialist "largely [as] the outcome of a study of history, taking sides … in the battles over industrialism and war and empire." He was also drawn into the political left by his anger over the Vietnam War, nuclear weapons, racism and "oligarchy", including that of "the unaccountable corporation." He also said in the same interview with Reason that he could no longer say "I am a socialist". Socialists, he claimed, had ceased to offer a positive alternative to the capitalist system.[13][22]

In 2006, in a town hall meeting in Pennsylvania debating the Jewish Tradition with Martin Amis, Hitchens commented on his political philosophy by stating, "I am no longer a socialist, but I still am a Marxist".[23] In a June 2010 interview with The New York Times, he stated that "I still think like a Marxist in many ways. I think the materialist conception of history is valid. I consider myself a very conservative Marxist".[24] In 2009, in an article for The Atlantic entitled "The Revenge of Karl Marx", Hitchens frames the late-2000s recession in terms of Marx's economic analysis and notes how much Marx admired the capitalist system that he called for the end of, but says that Marx ultimately failed to grasp how revolutionary capitalist innovation was.

…

Hitchens supported George W. Bush in the 2004 US presidential election.[17] He made a brief return to The Nation just before the election and wrote that he was "slightly" for Bush; shortly afterwards, Slate polled its staff on their positions on the candidates and mistakenly printed Hitchens' vote as pro-John Kerry. Hitchens shifted his opinion to "neutral", saying: "It's absurd for liberals to talk as if Kristallnacht is impending with Bush, and it's unwise and indecent for Republicans to equate Kerry with capitulation. There's no one to whom he can surrender, is there? I think that the nature of the jihadist enemy will decide things in the end".

…

Hitchens supported Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election.[43] In an article for Slate he stated, "I used to call myself a single-issue voter on the essential question of defending civilization against its terrorist enemies and their totalitarian protectors, and on that 'issue' I hope I can continue to expose and oppose any ambiguity."

…

After his disenchantment with socialism, Hitchens increasingly emphasized the centrality of the American Revolution and the U.S. Constitution to his political philosophy. As early as 2002, Hitchens wrote, "as the third millennium gets under way, and as the Russian and Chinese and Cuban revolutions drop below the horizon, it is possible to argue that the American revolution, with its promise of cosmopolitan democracy, is the only 'model' revolution that humanity has left to it"."

wow such based, very socialist

 No.675156

>>675153
Does that matter? He is debating for the idea of Marxism and against capitalism. It doesn't matter what sect you are the arguments are the same.

 No.675159

>>675155
Nice job posting an essay that

 No.675161

>>675155
#fukuyamapilled

 No.675162

>>675159
What's wrong, I thought you liked reading long meandering diatribes

 No.675166

>>675155
An essay that shows he spent 30 years of his working life as as serious Marxist and socialist only in recent times to call himself a Marxist yet again lol

 No.675173

>>675155
>>675162
Also his argument is as the other person side Fukuyamapilled or better yet Zizekism. Zizek who constantly says there are no alternatives to capitalism in the present day yet no one has a problem with it

 No.675175

>>675166
Yes it's very cool to be 'a Marxist, but not a socialist' and thinking capitalism is 'revolutionary'

 No.675177

>>675173
Zizek is a tiresome psued fuck but at least he never made common cause with people wanted to wipe out the towelheads

 No.675178

Watch this hack debate an actual Marxist and see how easily he falls apart.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzkmP3XFFX8

 No.675181

>>675175
That's literally the same position Zizek has. Do you have a problem with Zizek?

 No.675183

>>675110
>>675119
>>675137
Going to war is not a trivial matter. In sum his public life as an intellectual was a negative for the left. Yes, being a nobody is better than that.

 No.675186

>>675177
No he just said Immigrants are terrorists and should not be allowed to immigrate to Europe because have a different culture

 No.675188

>>675173
>Zizek who constantly says there are no alternatives to capitalism in the present day
Are you severely autistic? Do you think he's saying this as some sort of matter of fact thing? That there literally is no alternative? Or do you maybe think he's making a comment on the *ideological zeitgeist*?

 No.675189

>>675181
Yes, he's a hack. If Zizek starts shilling for war with China I'll hope he gets brain cancer too.

>>675186
Fine so he's bad too, I really don't care, most self-professed 'intellectuals' are miserable inhuman beasts.

 No.675191

>>675173
Lmao Zizek mocks shit like this all the time.

 No.675193

>>675188
He literally says that he never seen a viable alternative in any possible working model.

 No.675195

>>675189
Wow you guys are a really black and white people. Maybe this is why you aren't winning. If you just throw people out who don't 100% agree with you you aren't going to get a very big movement

 No.675196

>>675191
Source? I've read his books and he literally says this seriously numerous times.

 No.675197

>>675193
Show me the quote.
I know he's going to say the 20th century is over and we need to work out a new way to transcend capitalism. Because that's what he always says.

 No.675198

> He was an ardent Marxist and socialist throughout his entire life.
No he wasn’t.
During the Bush years, he said that he changed his views on capitalism because he thought it was way more “dynamic” than he previously thought. I followed his career really closely.

 No.675199

>>675197
No we can do this an easier way. Show me where Zizek listed a working alternative to capitalism

 No.675200

>>675195
Unity with whom?

 No.675204

>>675199
Why don't you show me a working alternative. Oh right, we're living in a neoliberal hellscape. Guess you can't do it so you're a capitalist.

 No.675205

>>675198
He was quoted as the end calling himself a "Marxist and a socialist" and that he missed the Socialist movement like he missed a lost limb. His position was only that movement had died and at the present time there was no serious alternative to capitalism. Which like I said above is the same position that Zizek takes.

 No.675206

>>675195
>Bro if you can't idolise neocons you will never get anywhere

Very compelling, now face the wall

 No.675208

>>675200
People who want to end capitalism and bring Socialism/Communism

 No.675211

>>675208
Even though he said he was no longer a socialist and capitalism was 'revolutionary'?

 No.675215

>>675196
IIRC he mockingly said that even Fukiyama doesn’t believe that this is the end of history anymore.

 No.675216

>>675211
I don't know the revolutionary quote can you post it? I won't probably disagree with it.

>Even though he said he was no longer a socialist
He was a socialist just he didn't call himself a socialist because there is no present socialist movement or workable alternative. He was still a socialist and said this numerous interviews. I have to get haircut I'll be back in ahour and post iti f you want

 No.675218

>>675215
It's probably not the end of history but that doesn't mean there is a workable alternative. Which is the whole point Zizek makes.

 No.675220

>>675216
>I have to get haircut I'll be back in ahour
my sides

 No.675222

>>675216
"While Hitchens was a socialist for the majority of his lifetime, his beliefs on socialism changed somewhat in his later years. It's important to note that Hitchens also somewhat aligned himself as a Marxist at times, particularly during his youth. Just after the turn of the 21st century, Hitchens proclaimed that he could no longer call himself a socialist, as he believed that socialists could no longer offer a viable alternative to capitalism. It is around this time that he had a bolstered interest in the freedoms of an individual from the state. In 2006, when debating Martin Amis, Hichens stated: "I am no longer a socialist, but I still am a Marxist."
In the last portion of his life, he considered himself to be a conservative Marxist."

IE: He still used Marxist analysis but was not a socialist, and started to worship capitalism and the right wing. Just goes to show, never trust an overprivileged Oxbridge fuck!

 No.675226

>>675205
He waffled HARD during the Bush years.
I know for a fact he made a career distancing from leftist during the Iraq war who were against it. It would figure that at the end after he gets cancer he would call himself a Marxist.
If you actively support imperialist ventures and you see no alternative, you’re a Marxist only in your head.

 No.675241

Let's all enjoy a jaunty tune together secure in the knowledge that at least we were smart enough when we were kids to hate Bush

 No.675417

>>675220
Back and looking fresh.. Hitchens said in the interview with Paxman that he was Marxist and still a leftist. Leftist obviously being distinguished from liberal. He talked about missing the Socialist movement like a dying limb. He was still a Marxist and Socialist he just think the movement was dead at the time and there were no real reasons to be a passionate socialist. Same thing Zizek says. No doubting he was still a socialist though.



"There is no longer a general socialist critique of capitalism—certainly not the sort of critique that proposes an alternative or a replacement. There just is not and one has to face the fact, and it seems to me further that it's very unlikely, though not impossible, that it will again be the case in the future. Though I don't think that the contradictions, as we used to say, of the system, are by any means all resolved."

"Marx's original insight about capitalism was that it was the most revolutionary and creative force ever to appear in human history. And though it brought with it enormous attendant dangers, [the revolutionary nature] was the first thing to recognize about it. That is actually what the Manifesto is all about. As far as I know, no better summary of the beauty of capital has ever been written. You sort of know it's true, and yet it can't be, because it doesn't compute in the way we're taught to think. Any more than it computes, for example, that Marx and Engels thought that America was the great country of freedom and revolution and Russia was the great country of tyranny and backwardness."

 No.675436

>>675417
I know the interview. He was dying at this point and nobody in this thread denied that he gave lipservice to marxism again in his last years

 No.675437

>>675417
Point to where Zizek says this is justification to give up on socialism, saber rattle against North Korea, and invade Iraq.

 No.675440

>>675086
>What do you guys think of Christopher Hitchens?
I dont

 No.675483

You can learn all you need to know about this worm in this entertaining debate between him and George Galloway where he gets completely and utterly BTFO.

 No.675921

>supported israel's right to exist
>supported iraq war
>supported bombing of yugoslavia
>supported war on terror
>left the "left" because they didn't like the war on terror or the Iraq war or the bombing of yugoslavia.

 No.676082

>>675436
Why are you guys so black and white? You don't have to live like a 19 year old revolutionary your entire life

 No.676152

>>676082

most people here are 16-22 years old.

 No.676169

>>676152
I know lol. I know the answer to every question I ask

 No.676206

>>676169

shut the fuck up retard.

 No.676213

>>676169
>>676082
>tfw old fag
Wtf?
I love the Iraq war now.

 No.676223

Peak Anglo syndrome. Hitchens was undeniably intelligent but also steeped in the old English aristocratic ways of being an insufferable test which was far more of an influence on him than Marxism ever was. It's a good reminder for why self-described American patriots also make for poor Marxists.

 No.676229

I hate him because I'm arab and only in my early 30s; the war on terror is what radicalized me, and so for me, supporting it is a totally unforgivable sin.

 No.676240

>>676213
If you were old you realize no one is perfect and this idealized it's 100% Marxism-Leninism or nothing is utopian children thinking.

 No.676329

>>675107
Opposing the death of millions of innocent Iraqis and the destruction of their entire society and infrastructure whose effects they'll feel for generations to depose a despot put up by the US in the first place isn't being an apologist for the despot

 No.676338

>>676240
>coping this hard about “Hitchens’s Ideas”
He was a trotskyite cuckold and so are you

 No.676339

some irrelevant anglo retard that huge majority of people never heard of, who cares

 No.676369

>>676329
The man hated Saddam strongly how can you blame him

 No.676409

File: 1641425358855.png (1.36 MB, 1536x1571, 1617217125244.png)

>What do you guys think of Christopher Hitchens? I think he is misunderstood and gets too much hate.
I like him, but I don't think he's misunderstood. His "one bad view" was also a serious one. Itellectuals can only be held accountable based on their views, so the hatred he gets from the Left is warranted.

It's understandable he'd faulter after the disasters of the 80å's and 90's. It really did seem like the movement was dead for good and would never come back. However, many Leftists turned into libs and still were able to stand against Bush and the wars. When it counted, he stood with capital and for disastrous war.

He may have called himself a Marxist and materialist, but his reasoning for his neo-con views were completely idealist and distinctly anti-materialist. His argument was precisely that Jihad and the threat of Islamism is caused by bad ideas, not war and imperialism, or other material conditions. Let this also be a lesson to all young radicals out there; the view of his that has been most conclusively refuted by history was the one where he most clearly diverged from materialism and veered off into idealism.

Still, it's stupid to discount him. He was able to make such an impact because the liberal Left he moved against was weak, impotent and crippled by idiocy. Which is far worse than being wrong, or even in the wrong. On the Left it was common at the time, as in some circles it still is, to react to every problem caused by Islam and muslim immigration with "ah, but this is all because West does so and so". This had nothing to do with materialism as a tool of analysis. It was - and for many continues to be - a craven escape into relativism, when the libs were faced with truly difficult problems they had no easy answers for. Again, they're not even wrong. They're stupid and weak, which for us, is worse.

I still like him. His writing was good, and he's the only person in his generation that can be called a proper orator. It's sad we lost him to the right, but in those days we lost literally everything. I dom't know that I could have lived through that time and not have my deepest ideas and convictions collapse.

 No.676464

>>676152
I'm 28 and I still think Hitchens is a shitheel

 No.676482

>>676369
Just like you hate the ayatollah so you don’t care about what a US coup would do to Iranians? Or how the US made these people posaible to begin with?

 No.676602

>>676482
I prefer the US over Saddam personally dunno about you

 No.676609

>>676602
They are one and the same

 No.676611

Literal neocon. Fuck him

 No.676612

File: 1641428945986.jpg (71.62 KB, 800x696, iraq before and after.jpg)

>>676602

 No.676618

>>676612
Looks the same with a sandstorm that blew over some papers and made the air look brown. I literally see no difference

 No.676627

>>676609
I don't think any US soldiers were torturing the sons and daughters and then killing them in front of the parents. I would take privatizing some reconstruction of roads over that but I could be wrong. Not an expert.

 No.676638

>>676627
>The US wasn’t responsible for Hussein and his regime

 No.676641

>>676638
Were they? I don't read much history so I didn't know that. How did they do that?

 No.676652

>>676618
Obviously the message is that the US military is the biggest polluter on the planet. Which is true btw.

 No.676654

>>676627
>I don't think any US soldiers were torturing the sons and daughters and then killing them in front of the parents.

Yeah they just blow up the whole family with an airstrike or drone.

 No.676664

>>676627
Some yanks literally did that. Any investment in infrastructure was only done in order to facilitate the movement of capital from Iraq to Western porky. I wouldn't even call this investment in infrastructure tbh, it undeveloped the country even further.

 No.676668

lol you're all childish marxists i'm a mature neoliberal who hates dictators so much i'm more than willing to cause the deaths of millions of people i say i want to save
saddam killing 100 people is a heinous act of evil, me killing those 100 plus a million more is the righteous anger of not-god (because i'm also an atheist)
also let's go save afghan women from the patriarchy by killing them ourselves

 No.676682

File: 1641430366502.jpg (16.84 KB, 264x376, Abeer_Qassim_Hamsa.jpg)

>>676627

 No.676692

>>676654
All the data shows that US drone strikes are the safest form of war and that terrorists kill more people in these countries than civilians at die.

 No.676693

File: 1641430506940.mp4 (10.18 MB, 1280x720, “I toppled Saddam’s statue….mp4)

>>676602

 No.676699

>>676627
us soldiers raped the daughters (14 yrs old) and killed the families

 No.676700

>>676692
>He think’s we’re talking about drones and not things like the highway of death

 No.676702

File: 1641430638271.png (664.52 KB, 951x477, big data guy stocks.png)

>>676692
>All the data

source: obscure NGO funded by oil companies

 No.676704

>>676692
>All the data shows that US drone strikes are the safest form of war
for us soldiers maybe
data also show that 80-90% of drone victims are innocents/collateral
reading your posts is sickening, it's all lies

 No.676705

>>676702
Do you have any contrary evidence?

 No.676706

>>676704
source?

 No.676710

>>676706
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/civilian-deaths-drone-strikes_n_561fafe2e4b028dd7ea6c4ff

 No.676714

>>676705
>>676706
bro you haven't presented any evidence to support your own claims

 No.676716

>>676705
You haven’t even provided your own evidence, catamite.

 No.676727

>>676692
Even if that were so and the surgical strike meme was true, it doesn't change the imperial nature of the war but only confirms it even more: total subjugation without any chance of resistance, the "war that didn't take place" that Baudrillard wrote about. In the end the result is the same: these countries are turned into extreme peripheries, basically slaves of the West with the burger boot keeping them on the ground.

 No.676737

>>676692
"Terrorist" is often defined as basically anyone who died in a drone strike or was put in Guantanamo
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/drone-attacks-innocent-civilians_n_1554380

 No.676738

>>676710
Your own study says that 90% figure was only during a 5 month period in Yemen. Their own stats show it's not even a 10% civilian death which is still much less than any other form of war. Nice clickbait headline though

 No.676743

>>676738
>Their own stats show it's not even a 10% civilian death
lol what are you talking about, this is bullshit

 No.676747

>>676727
>>676737
Again your own source shows that the actual non-CIA number is around 10%. Like I said in the original post

 No.676748

>>676692
The actual data behind drone warfare shows that it's an incredibly imprecise and ineffective grift. Read this.

http://www.killchain.org/read-online

 No.676749

>>676743
Look at the infograph

 No.676752

>>676738
Instantly reduce civilian casualties with this one weird trick

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/under-obama-men-killed-by-drones-are-presumed-to-be-terrorists/257749/

Doctors hate him!

 No.676755

>>676752
The guy above posted the same type of article and it literally says the non-CIA journalists posted the real stats which is around 10% which is what I said above

 No.676778

>>676727
>Even if that were so and the surgical strike meme was true
The precision of these weapons may indeed be very high, however that only tells you that they hit precisely where they are pointed at. It does not help you to avoid pointing at civilians. They used signatures to point their weapons and that's were it all fell apart. They droned dudes shooting their Kalashnikov's, must be terrorists right ? But then it turns out that's a wedding ritual, whoops.

 No.676882

>>676755
no ti doesn't
>In the complex world of remote killing in remote locations, labeling the dead as “enemies” until proven otherwise is commonplace, said an intelligence community source with experience working on high-value targeting missions in Afghanistan, who provided the documents on the Haymaker campaign. The process often depends on assumptions or best guesses in provinces like Kunar or Nuristan, the source said, particularly if the dead include “military-age males,” or MAMs, in military parlance. “If there is no evidence that proves a person killed in a strike was either not a MAM, or was a MAM but not an unlawful enemy combatant, then there is no question,” he said. “They label them EKIA.”
so the graph you're talking about is shit because a bunch of those that aren't listed as civilians could be civilians because of the intentionally shitty way the US classifies its victims

 No.676884

>>676240
>perfection is not being pro-war in Iraq
Your bar is real low on perfection, child.

 No.677060

lol get fucked

 No.677535

>He was an ardent Marxist and socialist throughout his entire life
Nope, even when he was more of a pseudo-socialist he was a libtarded bong bougie trot
>Early in his career Hitchens began working as a correspondent for the magazine International Socialism, published by the International Socialists, the forerunners of today's British Socialist Workers Party. This group was broadly Trotskyist, but differed from more orthodox Trotskyist groups in its refusal to defend communist states as "workers' states". Their slogan was "Neither Washington nor Moscow but International Socialism"
Also, he moved quite a lot to the right at the end of his life unironically promoted the ultra-imperialist "islamo-fascist" narrative. He was also a great example of an early debatebro, man could be manipulated into defending almost any position if he felt his ego and reputation as a debater would be harmed by admitting he had been wrong

 No.677552

>>675086
>He was an ardent Marxist and socialist throughout his entire life
no he wasn't, he was part of the trot to neocon pipeline. He only had a deathbed conversion back to marxism because the recession/financial crisis of 08 onwards was still happening when he died in '11

 No.678293

File: 1641498047730.epub (546.73 KB, Seymour, Richard - Unhitc….epub)

All you need to know about Chris Hitchens:
https://archive.md/muWNg
https://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/26/hitchens-in-the-dock/
https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/11/30/another-look-at-christopher-hitchens-why-ben-burgis-why/
Or for that matter, just type this into DDG:
Christopher Hitchens site:counterpunch.org
Nobody on the Left should admire this racist social-chauvinist. I spit on his grave and will have no benedictions when his fellow British imperial revivalists Harris and Dawkins finally croak. It's just a fucking shame that they are the face of atheism for most people. Never trust a self-proclaimed "contrarian" for they have no principles by definition.


Unique IPs: 32
[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]
[ Return / Go to top /