5bb6eb0
|
George Bush made a mistake when he referred to the Saddam Hussein regime as 'evil.' Every liberal and leftist knows how to titter at such black-and-white moral absolutism. What the president should have done, in the unlikely event that he wanted the support of America's peace-mongers, was to describe a confrontation with Saddam as the 'lesser evil.' This is a term the Left can appreciate. Indeed, 'lesser evil' is part of the essential tactical rhetoric of today's Left, and has been deployed to excuse or overlook the sins of liberal Democrats, from President Clinton's bombing of Sudan to Madeleine Albright's veto of an international rescue for Rwanda when she was U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Among those longing for nuance, moral relativism--the willingness to use the term evil, when combined with a willingness to make accommodations with it--is the smart thing: so much more sophisticated than 'cowboy' language.
|
|
al-shifa-pharmaceutical-factory
anti-war
ba-ath-party
bill-clinton
democratic-party-united-states
evil
george-w-bush
iraq
iraq-war
leftism
liberalism
madeleine-albright
moral-absolutism
moral-relativism
morality
opposition-to-the-iraq-war
peace-movement
presidency-of-bill-clinton
presidency-of-george-w-bush
rwanda
rwandan-genocide
saddam-hussein
sudan
united-nations
united-states
|
Christopher Hitchens |
7ac2ce6
|
I resolutely refuse to believe that the state of Edward's health had anything to do with this, and I don't say this only because I was once later accused of attacking him 'on his deathbed.' He was entirely lucid to the end, and the positions he took were easily recognizable by me as extensions or outgrowths of views he had expressed (and also declined to express) in the past. Alas, it is true that he was closer to the end than anybody knew when the thirtieth anniversary reissue of his was published, but his long-precarious condition would hardly argue for giving him a lenient review, let alone denying him one altogether, which would have been the only alternatives. In the introduction he wrote for the new edition, he generally declined the opportunity to answer his scholarly critics, and instead gave the recent American arrival in Baghdad as a grand example of 'Orientalism' in action. The looting and destruction of the exhibits in the Iraq National Museum had, he wrote, been a deliberate piece of United States vandalism, perpetrated in order to shear the Iraqi people of their cultural patrimony and demonstrate to them their new servitude. Even at a time when anything at all could be said and believed so long as it was sufficiently and hysterically anti-Bush, this could be described as exceptionally mendacious. So when the invited me to review Edward's revised edition, I decided I'd suspect myself more if I declined than if I agreed, and I wrote what I felt I had to. Not long afterward, an Iraqi comrade sent me without comment an article Edward had contributed to a magazine in London that was published by a princeling of the Saudi royal family. In it, Edward quoted some sentences about the Iraq war that he off-handedly described as 'racist.' The sentences in question had been written by me. I felt myself assailed by a reaction that was at once hot-eyed and frigidly cold. He had cited the words without naming their author, and this I briefly thought could be construed as a friendly hesitance. Or as cowardice... I can never quite act the stern role of Mr. Darcy with any conviction, but privately I sometimes resolve that that's 'it' as it were. I didn't say anything to Edward but then, I never said anything to him again, either. I believe that one or two charges simply must retain their face value and not become debauched or devalued. 'Racist' is one such. It is an accusation that must either be made good upon, or fully retracted. I would not have as a friend somebody whom I suspected of that prejudice, and I decided to presume that Edward was honest and serious enough to feel the same way. I feel misery stealing over me again as I set this down: I wrote the best tribute I could manage when he died not long afterward (and there was no strain in that, as I was relieved to find), but I didn't go to, and wasn't invited to, his funeral.
|
|
cowardice
edward-said
fitzwilliam-darcy
george-w-bush
house-of-saud
imperialism
iraq
iraq-war
iraqis
jane-austen
london
mendacity
national-museum-of-iraq
orientalism-book
prejudice
pride-and-prejudice
race-card
the-atlantic
united-states
vandalism
|
Christopher Hitchens |
c77ddc7
|
There is a noticeable element of the pathological in some current leftist critiques, which I tend to attribute to feelings of guilt allied to feelings of impotence. Not an attractive combination, because it results in self-hatred.
|
|
guilt
impotence
iraq-war
leftism
pathology
psychology
self-hatred
war-on-terror
|
Christopher Hitchens |
0296457
|
I am sorry for those who have never had the experience of seeing the victory of a national liberation movement, and I feel cold contempt for those who jeer at it.
|
|
antiwar
iraq
iraq-war
liberation
liberty
|
Christopher Hitchens |
4dcb552
|
So, whenever the subject of Iraq came up, as it did keep on doing through the Clinton years, I had no excuse for not knowing the following things: I knew that its one-party, one-leader state machine was modeled on the precedents of both National Socialism and Stalinism, to say nothing of Al Capone. I knew that its police force was searching for psychopathic killers and sadistic serial murderers, not in order to arrest them but to them. I knew that its vast patrimony of oil wealth, far from being 'nationalized,' had been privatized for the use of one family, and was being squandered on hideous ostentation at home and militarism abroad. (Post-Kuwait inspections by the United Nations had uncovered a huge nuclear-reactor site that had not even been known about by the international community.) I had seen with my own eyes the evidence of a serious breach of the Genocide Convention on Iraqi soil, and I had also seen with my own eyes the evidence that it had been carried out in part with the use of weapons of mass destruction. I was, if you like, the prisoner of this knowledge. I certainly did not have the option of un-knowing it.
|
|
ba-ath-party
ba-athist-iraq
bill-clinton
crime-family
fascism
genocide
genocide-convention
invasion-of-kuwait
iraq
iraq-war
kuwait
militarism
national-socialism
nationalisation
nuclear-reactor-technology
oil
privatisation
psychopaths
serial-killers
stalinism
united-nations
wmd
|
Christopher Hitchens |
2acd456
|
Some say that because the United States was wrong before, it cannot possibly be right now, or has not the right to be right. (The British Empire sent a fleet to Africa and the Caribbean to maintain the slave trade while the very same empire later sent another fleet to enforce abolition. I would not have opposed the second policy because of my objections to the first; rather it seems to me that the second policy was morally necessitated by its predecessor.)
|
|
africa
american-imperialism
anti-americanism
britain
british-empire
caribbean
imperialism
iraq-war
morality
politics
slave-trade
united-states
|
Christopher Hitchens |
8f3d166
|
If the Bahreini royal family can have an embassy, a state, and a seat at the UN, why should the twenty-five million Kurds not have a claim to autonomy? The alleviation of their suffering and the assertion of their self-government is one of the few unarguable benefits of regime change in Iraq. It is not a position from which any moral retreat would be allowable.
|
|
autonomy
bahrain
iraq
iraq-war
kurdish-people
kurdistan
morality
royalty
statehood
|
Christopher Hitchens |
7db9867
|
"Yet isn't it all--all of it, every single episode and detail of the Clinton saga--exactly like that? And isn't some of it a little bit more serious? For Sen. Clinton, something is true if it validates the myth of her striving and her 'greatness' (her overweening ambition in other words) and only ceases to be true when it no longer serves that limitless purpose. And we are all supposed to applaud the skill and the bare-faced bravado with which this is done. In the New Hampshire primary in 1992, she knowingly lied about her husband's uncontainable sex life and put him eternally in her debt. This is now thought of, and referred to in print, purely as a smart move on her part. In the Iowa caucuses of 2008, he returns the favor by telling a huge lie about his own record on the war in Iraq, falsely asserting that he was opposed to the intervention from the very start. This is thought of, and referred to in print, as purely a tactical mistake on his part: trying too hard to help the spouse. The happy couple has now united on an equally
|
|
2008
ambition
bill-clinton
expediency
greatness
hillary-clinton
iowa
iowa-caucuses
iraq
iraq-war
lies
new-hampshire
new-hampshire-primary
politics
self-promotion
sex
united-states
united-states-elections-2008
|
Christopher Hitchens |
8f1034f
|
As he grew older, which was mostly in my absence, my firstborn son, Alexander, became ever more humorous and courageous. There came a time, as the confrontation with the enemies of our civilization became more acute, when he sent off various applications to enlist in the armed forces. I didn't want to be involved in this decision either way, especially since I was being regularly taunted for not having 'sent' any of my children to fight in the wars of resistance that I supported. (As if I could 'send' anybody, let alone a grown-up and tough and smart young man: what moral imbeciles the 'anti-war' people have become.)
|
|
civilisation
courage
enemies
fathers
humour
iraq
iraq-war
morality
resistance
sons
war
war-on-terror
|
Christopher Hitchens |
4c1ce1d
|
You might think that the Left could have a regime-change perspective of its own, based on solidarity with its comrades abroad. After all, Saddam's ruling Ba'ath Party consolidated its power by first destroying the Iraqi communist and labor movements, and then turning on the Kurds (whose cause, historically, has been one of the main priorities of the Left in the Middle East). When I first became a socialist, the imperative of international solidarity was the essential if not the defining thing, whether the cause was popular or risky or not. I haven't seen an anti-war meeting all this year at which you could even guess at the existence of the Iraqi and Kurdish opposition to Saddam, an opposition that was fighting for 'regime change' when both Republicans and Democrats were fawning over Baghdad as a profitable client and geopolitical ally. Not only does the 'peace' movement ignore the anti-Saddam civilian opposition, it sends missions to console the Ba'athists in their isolation, and speaks of the invader of Kuwait and Iran and the butcher of Kurdistan as if he were the victim and George W. Bush the aggressor.
|
|
anti-war
ba-ath-party
baghdad
communism
democratic-party-united-states
george-w-bush
invasion-of-kuwait
iran-iraq-war
iraq
iraq-war
iraqi-communist-party
iraqi-kurdistan
kurdish-people
kuwait
labour-movement
leftism
middle-east
opposition-to-the-iraq-war
peace-movement
republican-party-united-states
saddam-hussein
socialism
|
Christopher Hitchens |
63121c1
|
Some peaceniks clear their throats by saying that, of course, they oppose Saddam Hussein as much as anybody, though not enough to support doing anything about him.
|
|
interventionism
iraq
iraq-war
saddam-hussein
|
Christopher Hitchens |
c769481
|
The 'pre-emption' versus 'prevention' debate may be a distinction without much difference. The important thing is to have it understood that the United States is absolutely serious. The jihadists have in the past bragged that America is too feeble and corrupt to fight. A lot is involved in disproving that delusion on their part.
|
|
debate
delusion
iraq-war
islam
islamic-terrorism
jihad
preemptive-war
preventive-war
united-states
war
war-on-terror
|
Christopher Hitchens |
9ca4e11
|
I have been taunted on various platforms recently for becoming a neo-conservative, and have been the object of some fascinating web-site and blog stuff, from the isolationist Right as well as from the peaceniks, who both argue in a semi-literate way that neo-conservativism is Trotskyism and 'permanent revolution' reborn. Sometimes, you have to comb an overt anti-Semitism out of this propaganda before you can even read it straight. And I can guarantee you that none of these characters has any idea at all of what the theory of 'permanent revolution' originally meant.
|
|
blogosphere
internet
iraq-war
isolationism
neoconservatism
peace-movement
permanent-revolution
politics
propaganda
right-wing-politics
trotskyism
us-non-interventionism
war-on-terror
|
Christopher Hitchens |
5bc4daf
|
Revolution from above, in some states and cases, is [...] often preferable to the status quo, or to no revolution at all.
|
|
iraq-war
neoconservatism
politics
revolution
|
Christopher Hitchens |