NP Left responses "disgraceful" says Hitchens

[Phil Wise]

Thanks for posting the link.  The piece is, unfortunately, utterly without
substance - not only does Mr McGuiness completely fail to provide examples -
he can't even take us through Hitchens' recent arguments with Chomsky, which
would be ideal for the point he wants to make - but nor does he provide any
summary of Hitchens' thought on the Sept 11 events, which I have some
sympathy with even though they ultimately depend upon the assumption that a
leapard will change its spots (and his views don't contradict Chomsky even
if he thinks they do).

But onto a couple of choice examples:

"Hitchens would still consider himself definitely on the Left, and certainly
espouses views which would be categorised as Left. But he is prepared to
argue his views and does not show the kind of massive ignorance, dogmatism
and disrespect for either evidence or rational argument which categorises
most of the modern Left, in Australia and elsewhere".

You'd perhaps expect that he'd follow this up with some proof, argument of
his views rather than assertion, or maybe show some knowledge of the left,
or something rational, at least so he doesn't seem rediculous, having just
said that.  But no, he goes on to make some reasonable points about the
limits of libertarianism, the reason for which I have no idea.  Earlier in
the article, he does provide something akin to an argument - against demands
for third world debt relief:

"Thus when the sillier adherents of left-wing causes propose the forgiveness
of outstanding debts of poor countries, they are not taking account of the
fact that the indebtedness, which everybody knows will never be repaid in
any case, at least provides some sanction for past irresponsibility."

Yes, clearly a silly thing, especially since he's just explained that many
of the loans have gone into the pockets of corrupt regimes.  But he forgets
that some of these corrupt regimes came to power with either the support or
the acqiescence of the West, and that if the lenders didn't know that much
of the money was being stolen, then the West's intelligence networks really
were useless.  Who was irresponsible?  The World Bank and the regimes.  Who
are suffering the sanctions?  The poor sods working in factories under
sweatshop conditions, whose countries can't even offer them a decent health
care system from the taxes they pay.

I'm no economist, so I'll allow that there may be a decent economic argument
in favour of not providing debt forgiveness.  It would have to a damn good
one, though, especially if it is to overcome the somewhat compelling moral
argument the other way, let alone the economic ones.  But, whatever: the
above quote is at a level of such repugnance that only complete ignorance
would save Mr McGuinness from accusations of cynical callousness.  Either
way, offensive in the extreme.

phil



----- Original Message -----
From: "jbor" <jbor at bigpond.com>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2001 6:39 PM
Subject: NP Left responses "disgraceful" says Hitchens


> Saturday, October 13, 2001
>
> OPINION
>
> The Left's thinkers abandon ship after it collides with reason
>
> By Padraic P. McGuinness
>
> In the wake of the terrorist atrocities in the United States, the
crumbling
> of the Left consensus continues. Thus while the usual suspects, especially
> in the media, heaped blame upon the victim and claimed that fanaticism and
> poverty in the Third World were the fault of the US and of globalisation,
> there were sufficient voices from independent thinkers who consider
> themselves of the Left to show that the centre of the Left consensus
cannot
> hold - things are falling apart.
>
> [...]
>
> [T]he crumbling of the Left consensus in intellectual terms ... has been
> exemplified by the denunciation by Christopher Hitchens, a leading leftist
> journalist, of the disgraceful responses to terrorism in Left circles.
>
> [...]
>
> [H]e is prepared to argue his views and does not show the kind of massive
> ignorance, dogmatism and disrespect for either evidence or rational
argument
> which categorises most of the modern Left.
>
> [...]
>
> Full opinion at:
>
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/0110/13/opinion/opinion6.html
>
> Interview with Christopher Hitchens in _Reason_ at:
>
> http://reason.com/0111/fe.rs.free.html
>
> best
>
>
>
>
>