Hitchens, The Nation Part Ways
Over the last year, I've come to have a new appreciation for Christopher Hitchens. During the Clinton impeachment crisis, I found him an irritating presence on the airwaves - the epitome of the self-defeating leftist tendency to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. His smug style proffered even the most contentious and contrary points of view as somehow self-evident and the views of those who disagreed with him as rank idiocy unworthy of discussion. His high-minded critique of the Democratic administration took no notice of the far worse alternatives, gave no credit to Clinton as a bullwark against forces whose dangerous nature is now so readily apparent. If this guy is a progressive, I thought, who needs reactionaries?
Then came September 11th, and while the rest of the left found themselves painted into a corner by years of self-negating principles and muddled ideology, Hitchens gave powerful voice to many of us who recognized that even idealists need to face the inevitability of violence sometimes. Hitchens defined the enemy - accurately, I believe - as enemies of the entire rationalist project, the philosophical basis of all progressive politics since the Enlightenment. He resisted the urge to romanticize the terrorists as revolutionaries or excuse their actions as justified by an ideology in any way intelligible or sympathetic to the left. He had the courage to articulate distasteful truths in a way respectful of the intelligence and sensibilities of thoughtful citizens (unlike the Administration, with their simple-minded "Axis of Evil" nonsense) and dared to suggest that the traditional discourse of the progressive movement offered by Chomsky, Zinn and Vidal was inadequate, indeed pathetic, in the face of the current threat.
Since that moment of clarity, Hitchens drifted again toward petulance and his self-conscious contrarianism has shown increasing signs of ossifying into genuine political conservatism. His supporters are having difficulty locating his principles - never before a difficult task, whatever else you can say about him - and his crystaline logic is fraying and cracking under the weight of contradictions.
Nevertheless, I would submit that the weathering of Hitchens' idealism makes him a more complex and compelling figure. The spectacle of such a marvelous writer and thinker thrashing about in a welter of doubts and contradictions is a bracing sight in our media culture, where everyone's views are so easily caracatured in ten-second soundbites. It has been especially refereshing to see the drama play out in the pages of the otherwise-predictable, shrill and monochromatic Nation, which makes it too bad that Hitchens has decided to withdraw from that particular forum. Yes, his evoloving views are increasingly out of step with leftist orthodoxy, but his wit and skepticism are far too corrosive to be of any use to the authoritarian right. Joe Conason thinks he's a traitor to the cause of liberalism, but hey, if this guy is a reactionary, who needs progressives?
Another perspective on Hitchens here.
9:56:34 AM 
|
|
