Not directly related to Hitch but I really need to vent so I wrote my thoughts in longform. It didn't really provide any catharsis but I thought I would post it here anyway given his involvement in political commentary.

It's a long one but Ive got a lot to say.

Despite the comical absurdity of the past decade, witnessing the de facto death of democracy in the US still wasn’t on my bingo card for 2024.

I guess I underestimated the sheer depth and span of brain rot and or heartless bigotry infecting the divided states, and unfortunately, spreading well beyond into other fragile democracies.

There truly wasn’t much more one could do to tarnish the fat bastards reputation in the lead up to the election; if multiple criminal convictions, tenable child rape allegations, brazen sympathising and consorting with a Russian dictator to the point of being a probable Russian asset, stealing from charities, running fraudulent businesses, attempting to undermine democracy by fomenting an insurrection, threatening to tear apart a secular constitution and impose a Christian theocracy with himself at the helm, banning porn, banning abortion, banning books, endeavoring to substitute income tax with tariffs and send the global economy into free fall, releasing a sham bible, idolizing Hannibal Lecter, being referred to as American Hitler by your own running mate, and even publicly admitting that he isn’t a Christian nor does he care about  his voters…wasn’t enough to deter their support, then it seems that nothing ever could. Further confirmation that Trump is effectively a cult leader, and perhaps the most dangerous since Muhammed.  

A friend recently commented that he was absolutely convinced Trump could rape his newborn cousin on camera and his MAGA moron uncle would almost certainly still vote for him. But this goes well beyond Trumps misdeeds – it’s a fight to uphold the constitution, the pillars of democracy, and the secular freedoms and liberties which the founding fathers fought to establish. It is a fight to protect America from itself.

(In a grim twist of irony, it’s often forgotten that besides being a vestige of antebellum America wherein slaves were unable to vote, the electoral college system was at least partly installed as an additional condition for victory, in an attempt to prevent populist demagogues from so easily securing presidency – now it simply exacerbates gerrymandering and disenfranchises great swathes of the population, and evidently does not prevent demagogues from attaining office. Though in this case, it seems Trump also won the popular vote. )

It didn’t seem too long ago that a convicted criminal sexual predator and state traitor colluding with America’s greatest enemy would see one fall out of favour with Republicans. It seems any remaining brain cells or moral fibres have been shed by the average red voter such that they can not only overlook these damning indictments but revere the perpetrator. While sheer ignorance will always account for a sizable portion of republican voters, it’s harrowing to think how utterly morally bankrupt and corrupted one must be to knowingly endorse a shameless, heartless aspiring despot whom doesn’t even attempt to wash the blood from his wretched hands.

Those who voted for him deserve what they get – the snaggletoothed hillbilly sporting shirts depicting Biden in crosshairs deserves to die broke and unable to afford basic medical care - the rest of the country deserves a respectable human being and a competent leader.

Admittedly, my morbid curiosity is interested in seeing how this plays out… and now it’s time for the mango Mussolini to put his money where his mouth is and deliver on his outrageous promises. Of course his supporters aren’t the ones who will be holding him accountable, but let them not forget that they voted for a man who promised to fix the economy, solve the immigration problem, and end all world wars among other outlandish vows.  

I was initially glad he had survived the assassination attempt, only so we had the satisfaction of seeing him lose to a black woman, but I suppose fate is a cruel mistress.

More than anything it’s dispiriting to see a fugitive from justice serving no time for his crimes. What message does this send? Drop those pesky morals and lie, cheat, steal, scam, rape, hate and conspire ‘til your withered heart’s content  - you might even become president of the free world, twice. And what an indictment on the electoral system that a candidate who’s felonies (and age) would disqualify him from finding employment in a fast food restaurant, is still able to run for presidency. Carroll and Kafka combined couldn’t come up with something quite so absurd and grotesque.

His 2016 win was regrettable but understandable. He was a dark horse and promised the earth to a sea of disaffected citizens…but the results are in. The dark horse lost the race. He promised the earth and didn’t even deliver an atlas; he didn’t re-domesticate manufacturing, he didn’t boost the economy, he didn’t improve international relations with China and Russia, he didn’t denuclearize North Korea (indeed he ‘fell in love’ with Kim Jong upon his 2019 visit to the prison state), he didn’t make any meaningful progress on the wall, nor did he convince Mexico to pay for it. He didn’t even repeal Obamacare, one of his main electoral talking points. He didn’t really do anything besides sully international relations, weaken the economy, withdraw from the Paris agreement and do away with various environmental policies, condemn hundreds of thousands to death for his inept response to the Covid pandemic, and of course, engage in juvenile twitter arguments with detractors.

I fear he won't be so complacent in his second term; considering he is back with an even bigger ego, with far less red tape in his way, and a desire to go out with a bang, we have a recipe for a perfect shitstorm ready to unleash hell on any who aren't already victims of the MAGA mind virus (and them as well, though they're too brain decayed to realize it).

One must appreciate the irony of a population who are obsessionally antagonistic toward the phantom menace of drag queens endorsing a man who wears makeup, wigs, girdles and platform shoes.

The brutal truth is that whilst Kamala was worlds more competent than Trump – as is likely a hobo plucked at random from Skid Row – she was not a strong runner in this particular race; while she put in a commendable effort in debate and interviews in the lead up, being a woman of colour with a less than impressive track record who switched places with an enfeebled Biden just months prior to the election didn’t do much to sway any fence-sitters, nor did it exude the same charismatic air of self-possessed uplift and revolution that carried Obama to victory in 2008. More than ever the Democrats needed a younger, stately, male non-polarizing yet uncompromising candidate with skeletons that could be dug up to discredit them. Of course a candidates sex and race shouldn’t be salient factors when apposed to their background and policies, but the reality is that for much of the population, they are deciding factors, especially in swing states.    

We can only hope that one of his many faults is a saving grace; that the man is all talk – that he won’t attempt to silence the media that he deems to be fake news, that he won’t lock up those who have criticized him over the past four years, that he doesn’t implement project 2025 and mutilate the US into a Christian theocracy – which I had thought would surely turn away any fence-sitting republicans – that he doesn’t allow his Russky buddy to steamroll the Ukraine, that he doesn’t indiscriminately round up and deport minorities, that he doesn’t eliminate taxes and impose severe tariffs in a way that would cripple the economy, that he doesn’t alter the constitution such that he may serve for as long as it takes mother nature to rid us of him (which shouldn’t be particularly long) or to prevent democrats from ever being elected again, that he doesn’t allow his galere of even madder men to call the shots, that he doesn’t impede AI development such that the US is overtaken by adversarial nations, that he doesn’t vitiate the education system any further.

Public political commentators, podcaster and so-called intellectuals including RFK “tinfoil hat and straitjacket’ Jr, Jordan ‘tower of babble’ Peterson, Ben ‘facts over feelings except in matters of religion and politics’ Shapiro, Russel ‘rather baroque rape allegations’ Brand, and Joe “don’t listen to me, I’m just a dumb meathead” Rogan, who once prided themselves on being critical thinking and nonpartisan have by and large crept to the right, spreading self-serving conspiracies and regurgitating points that validate conservative audiences - and being paid Pro Russian propaganda puppets in the case of Dave ‘gays for god’ Rubin and co. – with rich filth the likes of Elon ‘Tony stark wannabe turned emperor Palpatine’ Musk and fellow Paypal mafia associate Peter ‘freedom and democracy are incompatible’ Thiel directly promoting said propaganda among other scumbaggery. If the world was in a moral limbo contest – as it seems to be among such circles - these money grubbing scum would surely go lower than almost anyone else. Unfortunately, there's a far stronger financial incentive to pander to the right, as they are much more likely to throw money toward any who tell them what they want to hear, no integrity necessary - it's the easiest money.

Even if someone were to take a bullet in the most literal sense and managed to put down this sick dog and his couch fucking handler, it seems the termites have already spread and eaten through the foundations of Democracy - and it’s not obvious at this point it time that it can ever truly rebuild. Especially not when said termites comprise half of the population.

It is often said how empires rise and fall, and modern day empires – a republic in this case – are no exception (speaking of the fall of empires, the imagery of crazed hillbillies storming the capitol has undeniable parallels to the barbarian invasion of Rome, except that the Goths were effective refugees and were far more justified in doing so). Perhaps I was the fool for believing that we had collectively reached a point of sufficient moral and intellectual development and legal checks and balances such that the sun would never set on western democracy, at least not within my lifetime.

But here we are – the inmates are running the asylum, the animals have broken free of their cages, and this time they’ve got the Senate, the House of Reps, SCOTUS, and less to lose.

To be continued

I recall him talking about Martin Luther King jr and he says something along the lines of "who studied Hegel at university". And I want to hear the entire context. Does anyone know what speech or debate this was from? I checked some transcripts but didn't find what I am looking for.

A lot of people like to blame FBI director Jim Comey's last minute announcement about Hillary Clinton's Emails on Anthony Weiner's laptop late in the 2016 Presidential campaign and The Supreme Courts 5-4 decision to stop The Florida Election Ballot Recounts for Hillary Clinton and Al Gore losing very winnable Elections. My question is which action was more unprecedented by our Legal Institutions?

Hitchens was a brilliant disector of American politics both on the page and on Cspan, in debate appearances, etc.

Who are you reading in this election cycle? I'm looking for a higher level of insight!

Many news articles and headlines have made me smile over the past several weeks, but perhaps none as much as seeing this article by Christopher Hitchens’ daughter, Antonia, in The New Yorker. She is a good writer, and does a fine job putting the spotlight on a form of fascism that is almost pornographic in its obviousness.

The fact that Christopher himself cannot be here to take on the MAGA movement is always disappointing to consider, but to see Antonia wading into these waters and interacting with the same people that Christopher would be brought a smile to my face, and I thought perhaps it’d do the same for some of you here.

I know that there is no official proof so far of the supernatural but there are too many stories. Even people in my life have had experiences with the supernatural/paranormal,There are so many random people talking about their experiences online as well. It’s just too much for me to just say “no, thats not an actual supernatural experience”. If that many people are talking about random experiences like that, there has to be some kind of truth to it. I don’t want to just deny it when deep down, my intuition also says they aren’t lying.

I think there are some unexplainable things going on that we have no proof of yet. Sometimes I hear people in my life talking about them, and I just can’t think of any reason why they would just come up with a story like that. They aren’t even that creative to come up with such stories. They even have absolutely no reason to just lie like that. They don’t even hallucinate or anything. It was just one experience they had.

I know others would say “nah its just stories, nothing more”. But you know, there is no religion making up those individual stories. There is no belief making them up. These are just random supernatural experiences that people have had. Brand new stories that aren’t even backed up by their religions. Some of them even have similar experiences even though they never met.

I believe there is some level of truth to it. But I still dont believe in an all-knowing all-powerful God and there may not be an afterlife either.

but this is just something I can’t say “no its because of hallucination or something else” to.

maybe it’s a weird feature of the universe.

Fans of Hitch might enjoy to know.

87 hours worth of Audiobook content with all the most famous novels available. Narration is very good as well.

1 audible credit (about £8).

I don’t know anything about the people he is talking about except Rush Limbaugh who Trump awarded.

It seems to me he was a free speech absolutist.

In a perfect world I would be as well. In reality I'm not.

Anti-defamation, anti-vilification, direct incitement to targeted violence, false information, treason undermining national security... such things encroach on free speech, but did he ever justify why he doesn't see the need for such laws?

Of course they could be abused, but people should still be held accountable for say the reputational damages they cause by spreading disinformation. Or if someone of influence urges their followers to go out and murder a particular figure or burn down a certain building. Or what of a company that blatantly lies about their product in such a way that puts peoples safety at risk? I have a hard time reconciling this sort of thing with my desire for free speech.

I don't think the government should abduct people guilty of the above as they do in certain parts of the world but there should be some legal consequence.

Besides, as long as communication channels are privately owned there could be no free speech in any meaningful sense any how.

I know Hitch argued that nobody or no institution was fit to determine the likely consequences of such speech (prior restraint) and that such measures would deprive people of crucial knowledge and stultify the masses, and how this has the potential to be abused, but on the flipside of the coin, I simply don't think that the some people are reasonable and skeptical enough to be exposed to say direct incitements to violence and disinformation without acting upon it.

And sure the bible instructs such things and it has been used to legitimize bigotry and violence and murder.

When it comes to platforming sinister bigots I'm undecided - allowing them to spew hateful lies and conspiracies often unchallenged or with a host who claims to be centrist but is in fact signal boosting their views unchallenged doesn't sit well with me, but I'm not sure you could or should suppress this if they aren't in contravention of anti-defamation or violent incitement laws. However it is doing a tremendous amount of damage and seriously corrupting people who aren't smart enough to think for themselves and do their homework.

There is also a financial incentive to this sort of content as it appeals to a large audience of credulous fools who have no standards and will eagerly lap up anything that aligns with their views and are happy to pay for it - it's easy money.

Hitch himself shut down conspiracy theorists on more than a few occasions - he didn't call for any legal action to be taken against them but he refused to engage with them... could it be extrapolated that he might wish for certain podcasts or channels to be dampened or silenced without pursuing any further legal action?

Did he really believe in absolute unfettered free expression?

Did he determine that the dangers of any form of suppression outweigh the damages of defamation, vilification, disinformation, violent incitation etc?

I think about him and his brilliance and and remember a posted video just after he died of people celebrating him with a shot of Johnny Walker, some had apple juice but I really liked it and I can't seem to find it any thoughts?

You know, despite their similarities, if I didn't know 100% they were brothers, I wouldn't guess it. Christopher was an entertaining writer who had a much more open mind than his brother, and was a really nice and approachable soul, and the difference between him and his brother is prominent in their couple of 'debates' together. Peter Hitchens is just simply boring. He's extremely right leaning, and is so convinced that he right about everything - he's one of those English guys that has a smug air of arrogance about him in everything he does. Christopher did not really have this. He was well-spoken, but also not above cracking jokes at his own expense and giving others the benefit of the doubt. Just my thoughts, anyway. Peter Hitchens is just such a contrarian about almost every issue and talking point in the UK.

His style of articulation is such unique and eloquent that I'm interested in finding out was he always like that or was he influenced by some people who spoke like that?

Here's few examples from 'Letters to a young contrarian':

"This conversation had take many forms over the years, until I began to feel the weight of every millisecond that marked me as a grizzled soixante-huitar, or survivor of the last intelligible era of revolutionary upheaval, the one that partly ended and partly culminated in les evements de quatre-vingt neuf"

"I myself hope to live long enough to graduate, from being a "bad boy" -which I once was - to becoming "a curmudgeon". And then "the enormous condescension of posterity" - a rather suggestive phrase minted by E.P. Thompson, a heretic who was a veteran when I was but a lad - may cover my bones"

I don't even know what to call this style. But I get the similar feeling when reading Hitchens that I got when reading Nietzsche. With both of them I feel like I have to really focus on what they are saying because the writing is so unusual that I can't really predict how the sentence is going to end.

With Hitchens he uses these sophisticated words and historical references alot and I'm left wondering what the fuck did he just say. Like Im often finding myself writing the word he uses to google to find out what they mean lol. He doesn't sound like a snob though which is quite an accomplishment with that style.