We love Hitchens because he put the time in to build his intellectual arsenal and he had the intelligence to wield it well and the courage to wield it unflinchingly. We get to be lazy and quote him to others. Yes, I don't think that would have pleased him.
Hitchens has been a major influence in my abandonment of Islam, and together with brilliant scientists, he has inspired me to pursue a career in medicine and science, instead of becoming an imam. I became MD recently, and am currently preparing for my residency in neurology and PhD in neuroscience. Thank you HITCH!
Congratulations on your achievement and your decision to not follow Islam. There is SO much good being done in the world and I'm not seeing Islam doing much of it! It's far better to pursue neurology and neuroscience than to want to kill apostates and infidels because some messed up book(s) tells you to. Follow your path of goodness.
I would like to posthumously congratulate Mr. Hitchens for defending the international right of my own home-country, Denmark, to freedom of speech on the world stage.
Strictly speaking, wouldn't you have to be dead to do that? Pedantry aside, you never know, we may both get the chance to do that one day. Like the man said, he liked surprises ! Meanwhile, go Denmark ! Jer er røde, jer er hvite, jer er Dansk dynamit !
Denmark scores 97 on the World Freedom Index and is the 9th most-free nation in the world, 17 places higher than the UK and 43 places higher than the USA.
@@TonyEnglandUK Small EU countries like Denmark and Holland always do well in those areas, like my home country of Aotearoa New Zealand. Something we should never take for granted and something we small nations should be immensely proud of, and, above all, should defend
If you want a bloodless conflict maybe take it up with saddam and co. Yes, I know civilians dying is bad, and it was a terribly conducted war, but removing saddam hussein was, in principle, a moral good. ISIS is a product of our absence in the region, by the way. I love how people grant zero agency to the actual members of isis who hold the insane murderous beliefs. Nope, we MADE them! All our fault! Watch as I whip myself to atone for my sins!
I don't know what you're talking about, who chose what words against whom exactly? What he said is at best moronic, if I humiliate you in any shape or form you have the right to be angry about it, because dignity exists What madness are you living in to think overwise? Furthermore does that mean you never ever at all get offended? That's the human condition and you can't make it seize to exist by simply denying it, you deny others what you practice? Unparalleled insanity indeed
@@xxCrimsonSpiritxx Listen to the part from 1:35 to 1:45. The worst of the cartoons that got the Muslim world all riled up were made up IN ARAB COUNTRIES by ARAB RELIGIOUS LEADERS specifically to increase violent demonstrations against Denmark. I guess they thought no one would notice, but not much got by Hitch. If, as you say, one has a right to be indignant at ANY form of offense, then may I at least suggest that Muslims should have gotten violent against their own leaders, not some media people who were simply exercising their right to free speech in an entirely different country? I think that's what Hitch meant about climbing up on a ladder to see offensive behavior that isn't your business. As for my own self, I never claimed that I never get offended. For example I find your remarks somewhat offensive. Aren't you glad I'm not a religious fanatic, though, and therefore don't consider it my right to murder you for those offensive comments?
No, actually; the paid conmen were the televangelists who earned his righteous indignation. Hitch had a sense of morality more intact than plenty of people of faith (said by a person of faith)
He was brilliant at getting over his points. He knew his facts incredibly well. He spoke the truth. He was fearless in the face of fanatical religions. We badly need more like him.
“He knew his facts incredibly well” “We badly need more like him” Ho the irony!! Sorry but what can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence!! This is so ironic it beggars belief!! Because the “fact” is that it is how we choose to live and end our life that defines how “brilliant” “we” are!! The “fact” is that Hitchens subscribed to the (Merelogical Fallacy), the belief that “we” are all just a brain!! The”fact” is that it’s “self” refuting!! Because the “fact” is that under Christopher Hitchens strictly reductive materialism, atheism or philosophical naturalism “we” are nothing more than “a bag of chemicals” buddy and nothing more substantive than an overgrown amoeba with illusions of grandeur. Under a strictly reductive materialism, atheism or philosophical naturalism “you” and Hitchens are nothing more than the science project of vinegar and baking soda bubbling over!! Does the science project of vinegar and baking soda bubble over bravely when it straw mans moderate religious expression. Can the baking soda and vinegar take the credit for its circular logic and self contradiction? You can’t replace “facts” and truth with showmanship and style over substance. Sorry but it’s beyond ironic that you believe that someone like Hitchens who was caught out being an history revisionist numerous times “knew his facts incredibly well”. This is comedy gold and the worship in this comments section is beyond cringe worthy and hilarious. Sorry but the “fact” is that Hitchens became a willing apologist for the dirty deeds of the American empire? According to the expert linguist and brilliant cognitive scientist Noam Chomsky this is not a good sign that Hitchens “knew his facts incredibly well” It’s a sign that he believed exactly what he wanted to believe and thousands of innocent civilians payed the price. Evidence to the contrary please!! I’ll wait!! Equally, the “fact” is that Hitchens associated with people who promote torture, eugenics, antisemitism and promoted the dangerous belief that “moderate religious believers are more dangerous than extremists because they make extremists look more respectable” (Daniel Dennette). Does that mean that everyday normal “respectable” atheists are more “dangerous” than Stalin, Pol pot and Mau because they make them look more “respectable”? The “fact” is that Hitchens was part of the intelligentsia of the four horsemen that included Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennette!! The “fact” is that Hitchens associate Sam Harris unashamedly bragged… “I am one of the few people I know of who has argued in print that torture may be an ethical necessity.” (Sam Harris). I wonder why he’s one of the few ? Is it because the “fact” is he’s more enlightened than the rest of us or is it because the “fact” is that torture is unbelievably evil and has never been justified by appeals to emotion as there is no clear distinction on where to draw the lines Harris argues that there are scientific “neurological" grounds, “facts” for supposing that his moral reasoning is logically correct and that we “ought” to be torturing people for collateral reasons. We all know which group of people he has in mind. Where he gets his “ought” from is beyond most normal people as he is a determinist so he believes free will does not exist. Are women and children exempt from Harris’s state sponsored torture programme if they had information (facts) that was required by the state.? The “fact” is that…. “Torture is one of the ultimate abuses of state power, and the use of extreme violence that exploits the powerlessness of individuals subject to state control is anathema to the rule of law. It easily becomes a license to target anyone who is declared to be a threat” (Lutz Oette). According to the scientific populariser Richard Dawkins who ironically was recently excommunicated by the (Association of Humanists) and stripped of his (Humanist of the year award) for bigotry and intolerance against moderate religious expression and marginalised groups such as the disabled etc…According to Dawkins who has 3 million followers on Twitter the “fact” is that….. “It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds, It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice. Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? “Facts” ignore ideology.” ( Richard Dawkins). The “fact” is that I think the parents of disabled children including the bereaved relatives of the people who died under the Nazis eugenics policy would beg to differ. The irony is that Dawkins was recently stripped of his (Humanist of the year award) by no other than the (Association of Humanists). That’s a secular atheist organisation by the way! The “fact” is that Dawkins even wrote a book aimed at children that equated the Jews with the Nazis something that is clearly advantageous to the alt right. “Dawkins has over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values,” (Association of Humanists). Similarly, a report from the Southern Poverty Law Center, an American non-profit which tracks extremist activity, stated that some alt-righters found Sam Harris' work "blended easily into that of more overtly racist writers". The report argues that "Under the guise of scientific objectivity, Harris has presented deeply flawed data to perpetuate fear of Muslims and to argue that the “fact” is that black people are genetically inferior to whites." It notes some of Harris' less responsible uses of his podcast, including the Charles Murray incident, and quotes one alt-righter who moved from Harris' content to that of the overtly racist blogger Paul Kersey. The “fact” is that if you’re going to defend Hitchens, Sam Harris, Dawkins and Dennette (The four horsemen) the “fact” is that you need to remember to defend eugenics and torture including the belief that “moderate religious believers are more dangerous than extremists” and that black people are “genetically inferior” to whites. Not to mention antisemitism. Also please remember that Hitchens accused Mother Teresa of being guilty by association when she accepted money for the poor from people who had chequered pasts. So by Hitchens own standard of cherry picked half truths and logic the “fact” is that all these men including Hitchens himself are all guilty by association of promoting torture, eugenics, racism, prejudice and (Antisemitism) and hate crimes. Furthermore, at the bare minimum it is estimated that 10 thousand Christians currently die every year due to persecution and thousands of Muslims die due to persecution. This includes the persecution of parents and their children!! The “fact” is that Hitchens himself became an apologist for the persecution and dirty deeds of the American empire and by his own standard of evidence he is guilty by (association). What a waste because all of these men could have been so much more!! Furthermore, the worship and deification of Hitchens in this comments section, not to mention the triumphalism and proselytising about a strictly reductive materialism, atheism or philosophical naturalism, is beyond cringe worthy and ironic!! The strictly reductive materialists, atheists or philosophical naturalists worship of the gods of determinism and automatism condemns their myths to hollowness!! I rest my case!!
@@igotstaknow "Do you know anyone who is 'determined to be offended'? " Quite many, actually. If anything it's gotten much worse since this video was recorded.
While I may agree with Hitchens on certain points in his argument, this one I do not agree with because with it there is an assumption of the power dynamic in play which is not always safe. If, for example, the Arabs were tomorrow the leaders of the world economically and militarily, I would nary doubt that their offense to comics etc is something that we could do nothing about. Similarly, you see criticism of China stifled around the world because China has trading relations with countries that make such criticism sacrosanct. We do not to China say “you are determined to be offended”, we edit our language. So yeah, in civil disputes you can ignore those who seem determined to take issue with you. But on the level of systems and nations such advice is only useful if you are a singularly dominating force
Among Hitchens' many talents is his ability to convey just the right tone of disgust and contempt for the apologists for censorship and bullying he so frequently comes up against, all of them mental pygmies by comparison.
Procommenter, interesting that your avatar name looks like a real word except it's not. That's the only interesting thing you bring to this comment page, everything else you say is base, crude insults of an exceptional man who cut through all the religious and political bullshit of the day with wit, panache and devastating intellect. What have you added to mankind's progress lately?
I'm not saying I support what happened, as a atheist I hate organized religion of any form. But cartoons are capable of saying and propagating really vile things. There are necrophilic and pedophilic cartoons/ manga out in the world.
@@AnantMall Well, yeah, because they're expressions of opinions with not only words, but pictures as well. But that's the point - they're just expressions of opinions. You don't fight opinions with violence, you fight them with rational responses. Violence is a terrible way to convince someone you're correct.
Hitchens was wrong about there not being an afterlife...on RU-vid, in videos like this, he is alive to me today as he ever was. When I miss him, I just come here for some "Hitch". He is immortal.
Unfortunately, dairy products to the Middle East is one of our most significant export incomes, which suffered tremendously under the boycott, but in the end rational business sense prevailed :-)
"Get this bit right, atheism is when you tell me I need God I tell you I can get along equally as well without him." What a star in the face of the sky, this man is fucking BRILLIANT!
There is nothing better then Hitchens disgust for the attempts of the religious facists to validate their intolerant bigotry. His eloquence and humor while doing so, is wit in its highest form.
To have that intellect, vast library of facts and anecdotes, and the beautiful and articulate delivery of one's thoughts on the hoof is a rare and hugely impressive phenomenon. I miss Hitch.
It's worth pointing out that he's clearly looking down at his notes when he begins that anecdote. It's something he prepared in advance because he knew what the subject of the talk would be.
As long as there are videos of Hitchens then he is never truly gone, we can still learn from him! He would want us to become more intellectual and he is still here teaching us how to do it!
I always loved that one. That young lady straight up lied her ass off when she said she could walk around without a hijab or unescorted in Iran (assuming we're speaking of the same clip.) She lied so she could save face rather than speaking the truth, which, let's face it, would've had some less than savory consequences.
@@rse1113 But you're forgetting that her veil "would be small". That stupid woman even contradicted herself, and worse is that she utterly brushed off the ridiculous lack of human rights in Iran from the safety and comfort of a Western country. Sadly, there are many claiming to be "liberals" who would've applauded her stupidity like clapping seals.
@@rse1113 we can? i mean you can in afghanistan if you wanted to but no one does because they want to stay modest and probs cos their parents makes them. But now Taliban those extremist dogs came so you probs can't without getting told off. Iran is more softer than afghanistan ever since Taliban. I know because i've been there.
Jazzkeyboardist1 but that is cherry picking. war is not a matter of what ifs. it’s a matter of what. if one of his relatives did not die, i wouldn’t consider him “lucky”. if there were only 7 casualties i will say one thing though. obviously those 7 danish thought that it was worth it. and as far as Their relatives go, they would not appreciate you trying to claim their deaths in vain. my case is closed *no hitchens needed for this hitchslap*
Jazzkeyboardist1 no not everything is what if. maybe in the mind of someone who would rather get moved than move on their own behalf. by the way, whenever did i say that i didn’t have empathy for those who died? where did that assumption even come from? that’s right.. from an illusionist who believes putting words in their competitors mouth will win them an argument speaking of empathy, if anyone here is lacking it is you. the way you’re referring to hitchens is very dogmatic
"When Dr. Samuel Johnson had finished his great lexicography, the first real English dictionary, he was visited by various delegations of people to congratulate him, including a delegation of London's respectable womanhood who came to his parlor in Fleet Street and said "Doctor we congratulate you on your decision to exclude all indecent words from your dictionary." and he said "ladies I congratulate you on your persistence in looking them up."
@@mattd400 In order to know he excluded ALL indecent words from the dictionary, those respecatables ladies had to 1) write EVERY indecent word in existance. 2) check the lexicography and search each one of them, to see if it was there. That means not only that those ladies were aware of every indecent word anyways, but more importantly, that they spent a huge amount of time TRYING to be offended, they just didn't succeed. This is what Hitchens then links to the next example: if someone does difficult acrobatics over a precariously balanced ladder in order to be able to watch into the window of my bathroom in the second floor of my house, it's not my problem if they get offended by my nudity. Maybe they should try less hard to be offended in the first place.
I've used this argument myself. Those who want to be offended, go out of their way to find the item they're offended by. A perverse form of mental sadomasochism, it seems they need to feel offended so the adrenaline rush can kick in to fuel their addiction. The worst are those who are offended by things that are not directed at them or the group they belong to.
@@con.troller4183 For me, personally, the greatest Hitchslap was his comment about Falwell; *_"If you gave Falwell an enema he could buried in a matchbox."_*
Phil Rabe Do you scare easily? Or is darkness as light to you, and vice versa. Such sentimental rubbish coming from an atheist? It hardly seems appropriate. You guys are supposed to be so tough, so hard-nosed, wedded as you are to the imperturbable goddess Reason. Where's your coldly rational. 'scientific' perspective on death? But here's another: 'it is appointed for men to die once, then judgment.' Your authorless universe is probably the most ridiculous fable I've ever heard. I cannot muster enough faith in the power of Nullity to believe that fairytale. Who are you to dump on benighted islamists, granted that they are shameless historical revisionists? (John 3:20) 'For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.'
Anatomy of this Hitchens reply: 0:33 Humorous analogy to familiarise the audience - while also entertaining them - with the idea of proactively being offended 1:01 Use the momentum of the audience being on-side to deliver the otherwise unacceptably-strong remark, "sinister piffle" 1:11 Use another humourous analogy enroute to the conclusion of self-made offence 1:25 Use all of this as a premise in your argument that the offence takers are the real danger
tobo86 Nothing unacceptable about using the phrase "sinister piffle" to refer to sinister piffle. And the offence-takers are indeed the danger, since they are the ones who want to censor speech and thought, censorship being essential for totalitarianism.
tobo86 And all this unprepared, on the hoof. Just constructs this beauty of an argument with all these tacit implications and relevant historical references to make mincemeat of the foolish point his opponent was making.
The amount of world events and obscure quotes that were locked inside his head is astonishing and unparalleled. This is one of the reasons why he was unbeatable in any debate he participated in.
I am so envious. As someone with a phenomenally terrible memory, I can't argue at all, which is increasingly dangerous in the modern world where we're all on trial all the time.
He was the most effective debater I ever listened to. Total clarity of thought, of speech, and of message. Surrendering your democratic rights, because someone is "outraged" is the quickest path to losing all of your democratic rights, because someone, somewhere, is outraged about something. Remember that some people are outraged by the existence of Jews. Always remember that when someone tells you they are outraged. You can be outraged and an idiot simultaneously. They aren't mutually exclusive conditions.
RudeBoy Jim Your ass isn't an entity you need concern yourself with... Unless your are gay? But even then, imagining your ass has a personality is still silly. A bit like those folks who imagine there's a God with an equally fragile, easily offended ego, and their best interests in mind hey!
gor265 agree with the second part. As far as the part where you didn't understand that I was just jokingly reimagining the meaning of your comment goes, that's retarded!
Hold on. We have Noam Chomsky, and when Gore Vidal was asked after Iraq if Hitchens is your natural successor, Vidal replied, " *NO!!* " Good for Gore.
A man is not dead until he is forgotten therefore Christopher Hitchens is immortal thanks to clips like these. I often wonder and 'pray' that his family and friends read these comments to see, as if they didn't know, how much he is so missed.
How does he have so much historical information in his head? I don't know even a fraction of the things he knows about religion, history and world events about the things that I have spent decades being most interested in. Truly brilliant.
@@tgstudio85 I never said he didn't, I take key notes in front of me when I speak too. You'd have to be an idiot not to. Show your reading comprehension "kiddo"
I have never seen or read the work of a man who is so articulate and in command of the English language as Christopher Hitchens was - not to mention his expert use of reason, logic and clarity of argument.
@@ckmoore101 I like Jordan Peterson. Have all his books, went to his tour, watched hundreds of hours of his lectures and talks over the years, so I’m not just some hater, but he is not as articulate and on the fly as Hitchens was, and even in the debate against Sam Harris he somewhat struggled.
Hitch said in one of his final interviews that he had gotten real sense of the impact of his work, his words, in the world. Fans and enemies alike, but he got what he wanted most out of life, he challenged tyrannical institutions and inspired people to think. He was also very honored to be considered one for the "Four Horsemen" of atheism/secularism, along with Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Sam Harris. He was a very powerful agent of freedom, and is sorely missed.
Ouch Paul, Religiously? hmmm It's not that I should be the decider I'm just thinking that wouldn't be a word that I would use to describe the way I watch Hitchens. It would be more like...I watch him atheisticaly, that is; with an open mind.
He could tell a witty joke and stop there, and he would have been charming enough. He could respond immediately with a treasure trove of historical knowledge and facts that would bowl over his opponent, and he would have been considered impressive. Hitchens did BOTH in the same response. And that's why he's nothing short of legendary.
It's such a mistake to even debate with theists. If someone repeatedly told you there was a dragon in their wardrobe, would you A) Invite other dragon-believers and unbelievers to discuss the matter or B) Say _"Show me the dragon or hush"_
They do actually, it's part of the nature of their job. To talk people through and out of the negative emotions they experience. That is done by crafting arguments that have to hold up stronger than those of their patients
I love that (even though I'm a reasonably intelligent person) I sometimes need to re-play what Hitch said, and then do a bit of research, before finally understanding the brilliance of his 'off the cuff' riposte! I miss this guy sooo much!!
Hitchens was a formidable debater, even on issues where he was wrong (for instance, his position on the Iraq war) you would have to come very well prepared before starting a discussion with him.
His command of the english language and his ability to form a coherent argument is so impressive that you could argue the sky is blue and grass is green and you'd still lose to him in a debate.
The thing about Hitchens was he had no agenda, in that sense he was like a scientist. "I give not one solitary fuck about anyone's beliefs or arguments if they are not founded in evidence and facts". And isn't that the way we should all approach life? Do not allow people to tell you what to think, do not accept orthodoxy, investigate stuff for yourself and form your own opinions. It's about being a grown-up, sentient, independent being, we are not sheep so why do so many of us behave like them?
Hitch said it best: Shepherds don’t look after sheep because they like them. They either want to fleece them, eat them, or fuck them. Sheep spend their entire lives fearing the wolves, but the shepherd is the one who sells the wool and lives on the mutton.
@@markanthony4950 You should have left out the comma. It looks like you are shouting "HONEY!" after saying you are glad! Also, what are you glad about?
Loss to the world? I’m unsure how many people he actually helped ... fed ... clothed... healed... I’ve just discovered Chris Hitch and quite certain I would have been ok had I never known of him
@@cquinn4555 Of course you would be ok but who cares what you think? If Gods design for the human body had been perfect there would be no need for healers. The fact is, the faults in the human body fills hospitals and doctors surgeries to capacity, hospitals are overflowing with illness. If god cared he would send Manna from heaven to feed the starving of the world, there would be no need for charities like UNICEF, but christianity loves suffering doesn't it ? as long as it's not YOU that's suffering.
I love how he handles this. First a small narrative. Smal but with a fierce sting. And then, when he has already scored the point, he doubles down with a fenomenal blow of *facts* .
He was a protector of our way of life, not easily replaced though more than ever we need somebody to take up the mantle. A gentleman of war and a fine Conrad to look up to, and to learn from. A pleasure as ever Christopher Hitchens
When Denmark is mentioned, with praise, by any major celeb (like hitch) us Danish people react like you would If you saw that you had randomly been filmed and put in Avengers: endgame #WeLoveOurSmallCountry
He is just immotal. He calls BS immediately right there and is not affraid of anyone. So far I haven't seen anyone more erudite, knowledgeable, and more ready to cut through any crop out there. He was like a walking encyclopedia but powered by superb reasoning. I don't even understand how anyone even hoped to make any dent in a debate with him. Thank goodness we live in the era of RU-vid to forever have these jewels.
not sure under which rock i was hiding while Hitchens was working his craft, but am glad to have stumbled across it now! what a voice he had! please reason/sanity don't RIP yet..
@@jennycook290 I would've love to put christopher hitchens in the arms of the 1949 possessed boy in saint louis missouri on april 13 1949 that's when christopher hitchens was born the exorcism in saint louis missouri was 5 days from it's conclusion christopher hitchens would look totally own if I took a photo of that moment if the moment would've been.
The 1949 possessed boy in saint louis missouri his the reason why the exorcist film starring actress linda blair hit theaters on december 26 1973 the exorcism film starring actress linda blair is just the baby.
To be interventionist and against pacifism when it comes to toppling horrible dictatorships does not make him more right wing. The traditional left wing view of things was interventionist, and traditionally, it was conservatives that were isolationist. In other, later interviews, he has admitted he is still on the left. I think the way he felt about his relationship with the left altered a lot throughout his life. Reportedly, his last words before he died were 'Capitalism downfall'. Socially speaking he had conservative views? He has spoken before about how the best way to liberate and develop societies is by giving rights, especially economic rights, to women. There's a whole debate with him about feminism, and he comes across as very rational and pretty left wing. And anyway, the regressive left isn't the left wing I mean when I talk of Hitchens. The regressive left is a modern-ish warping of the left wing. And anyway mk. II, you've mentioned Orwell twice, who was a stalwart socialist.
The next best thing to Hitchens would be a young college kid named Alex O'Connor. If you haven't already, check him out on The Cosmic Skeptic on RU-vid. Well worth your time.
He should have got a bunch of badges made up that read "I've just been hitchslapped" and handed them out to the idiots just after he hitchslapped them :-)
I miss Hitch so much. I mourn his loss every day. The strongest beacon of light that threw clarity on the importance of reason and truth was extinguished by his passing. But before he left us he lit hundreds of thousands of torches in those that listened to him and through us he will become eternal. I am in fact a Deist. I know he did not believe in that either but I've never heard him argue against deism. He argued against theism because it's oppressive and the cause of violence and division. I am totally in agreement with all that. Theism is a preposterous notion and if their methodology was simply to offer guidance to those who sought it, then I'd be indifferent to them. But since they try to impose their nonesense and dogma on to everyone, together with the threat of violence..... I see them as dangerous and I consider them well worthwhile opposing.
ipuya So what exactly do you believe, if I may use that word, ipuya? 🤔 That a clockmaker designed the universe, then left it to its own? I am simply curious, as that is my understanding of traditional Deism, as subscribed to by the US Founding Fathers.
@@W42PZ the one thing that I'm proud of, when it comes to any of my beliefs, is that I'm not attached to any. The beliefs are fluid. They change according to the evidence i see. 🤷🏻♂️
This man is like the embodiment of Denmark. Seriously i grew up there and ive lived many places, never have i seen a more chill people with zero fucks given but also wont put up with your shit and will shut you down with the most witty dark humor and contempt.
Anthony de Carvalho No, the world does not need him. The world needs Christ, but Hitchens was an enemy of Christ. That cancels out whatever admirable qualities he possessed. As Christ said, the first will be last, and the last first.
@@marcusonesimus3400 The world had your "god" for 2000 years and look where it brought us. Stop your nonsense or at least keep your colorful ignorance to yourself. We need humans, not invisible stalkers in the sky.
"If a woman sees a man getting undressed through his window he is indecent, if a man sees a woman getting undressed through her window he is a Peeping-Tom!" The philosopher Sir Bob Monkhouse 🏆🇬🇧
Though Hitchens would not have approved, he should have a honorary statue erected in Copenhagen. For being one of the few to speak out in defence of freedom, instead of kow-towing to religious lynch-mobs.
I wish he didn't die, I don't see anyone replacing him anytime soon, in terms of someone who is able to cut through bs and make such a clear argument so efficiently.
daweller Agree, but we must promote his brother Peter, and Douglas Murray an Sam Harris, into his place. They do call out BS, but not so eloquently or incisively.
this will be my last reply, because I dont argue will children it seems to me that this brilliant man has and will continue to baffle simple minds like yours. hitchens may be gone but he has proven that religion poisons minds and you just proved that yourself by the answer you gave,so religion looses again and so do you.
diesel 303 coward? how you figure That? the man never ran from a debate, instead and unlike you he always had: a hard hitting, straight to the point, no bs, witty, and highly precise response. :)
I thought after death, there is nothing else? Isn't that what you guys believe? I'm not sure either way, but it seems like a contradiction of what atheism is.
Except its not really. You just need to turn off the TV, stay off the Internet and stop reading the papers. In nearly all places with the exception of active war zones things are 99% fine 99% of the time its just that bad news spreads like wild fire and the fear factory is in full effect working overtime through our media channels to keep us scared and compliant. Do your own thinking and base it on what you actually see and experience on a daily basis.
He talked about it being gratifying to him that he knew already what his legacy was, through the large stream of communication from his supporters and his critics. He knew that he had an ego, and didn't apologize for it, but his core message was the opposition to tyranny and ignorance and that everyone should have the courage to think for themselves. Follow his arguments, yes, but educate yourself as he did, make your own conclusions, and stand by them. Never accept arguments from authority. Secular Humanism is our best hope for happiness and freedom.
