I'm a little disappointed in Hedges here. He accused Dawkins of saying that evolutionary biology can be used as a model towards the evolution of human morality. This is not true. Dawkins has constantly railed against that idea, as it is a common charge from evangelicals, i.e. that an atheist must use "survival of the fittest" as a template for morality. Dawkins has repeatedly said that trying to use evolution as a template for morality is "trying to derive an ought from an is".
I agree with everything that Chris Hedges says in this interview. I was especially pleased to learn that he has noticed that Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, etc., are merely the mirror-opposites of religious fundamentalists. This is also true of Richard Dawkins as well. What I find most objectionable about Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Dennet is their complete failure to engage seriously with serious thinkers, such as Thomas Aquinas and Paul Tillich, etc. That's not good enough.
@bayreuth79 How are they supposed to engage the dead guys you mention? They have been willing to have debates with nearly any taker, so maybe your "DEEP THINKERS" with a pulse are just scared.
@MitchStarRepublic I was referring to engaging with the work of Thomas Aquinas and Paul Tillich rather than the men themselves because both of them are of course dead. I notice that Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris never refer to the great defenders of classical theism. There is one exception to this: Dawkins mentions the "Five Ways" of Aquinas in "The God Delusion". However, as Fr Brian Davies OP (an Aquinas specialist) has pointed out, Dawkins completely fails to understand the "Five Ways".
@MitchStarRepublic I'm afriad that it is Richard Dawkins who is running scared of William Lane Craig. It is interesting that both Hitchens and Harris have stated in the past that William Lane Craig is a particularly tough opponent; and after Dawkins' humilitating experiences debating John Lennox, Dawkins is trying to evade another humiliating debate againt an even tougher opponent.
@MitchStarRepublic Christopher Hitchens referred to William Lane Craig as being "Very rigorous, very scholarly, very formidable". It is interesting that in the light of this comment (and other comments by Sam Harris etc) that Dawkins is giving us some absurd rhetoric about Lane Craig being some bumbling idiot unworthy of deabte! A Grayling even lied about having debated Lane Craig previously. Intellectual honesty? Or is Dawkins more interested in book sales??
I'm 2:30 into the video and i've already made up my mind on Chris Hedges. He is purposely falsifying the all the statements of Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens.
Wow...didn't know Hedges delved into the religion fray as well! Of course, as usual, he gives it a fair shake as he does with any subject he deals with. Atheists to me are as uncomfortable as religious fundamentalists. They both need to get laid more. If there is hell, I bet Hitchens is getting sodomized by Falwell as we speak. 'The cult of science'...love it!
While I agree this pinhead hedges did lie about Hitchens at the SF debate, it is small beans to the lie that he tells about Harris calling for a first nuclear strike on the muslim world. Hedges is a putz.
@charlesvan13 Hitchens recognized an enemy of logic when he saw one. Hedges is exactly that, and enemy of logic and by extension, Hitchens. Low class is a perfect description. I hope to some day look Hedges in the eye and call him a liar.
@MitchStarRepublic Harris is very dishonest about his writings on this issue-and his mark fans give him a pass-he sets up a hypothetical on false premises (both historical and present day) that invite the reader to draw the conclusion we should be ready to nuke the rag heads. . . .I mean Islamofascists. . .I mean radical Moslems.
@RPenta I have read Harris and the supposed call for a first strike. ABSURD. That anyone with a modicum of reason could come to such a conclusion after what is so clearly written is beyond understanding. Hedges hates that he isn't the smartest guy in the room, which happens to him a lot I suspect, he just rarely as in this situation, realizes it.
"Never think that those who were slain in the cause of God are dead. They are alive, and well provided for by their Lord; pleased with His gifts and rejoicing that those they left behind, who have not yet joined them, have nothing to fear or to regret; rejoicing in God's grace and bounty. God will not deny the faithful their reward" (3:169).
"Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people. They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is evident from what they utter with their mouths, but greater is the hatred which their breasts conceal" (3:118).
Chris Hedges has become an intellectual joke......when he was alive Hedges got taken down hard by Hitch....he didn't stand a chance because the base of his arguments are made of sand....they just don't hold up - its not him of course....its his fundamental arguments that fail him and others again and again....making an easy target for Hitch and others.....
You've been brainwashed by what the media/entertainment industry shows you. Allahu Akbar is something I say pretty much everyday. Will I go and blow something up? No.
Oh and I'm not totally against Atheists, one of my favourites is right here on YouTube, goes by the name of Coughlin616. This guy speaks a lot of sense, and see's behind the propoganda thats set to destroy all religion. And he researches and speaks against it.
Fair enough if you're an Athiest, but if you have an intention of mocking ALL other religions, then thats not fair. Thats called militant atheism, bit like muslim fundamentalist I guess. Pat Condell, Dawkins, are perfect examples of what I mean.
@TheMrMongolia It's not militant, Religion is a joke and needs making fun of to show how stupid and fabricated by us it is. Religion asks you to submit your critical faculty for its sake. So its almost impossible to have a logical and rational conversation with religious people
@dawtchins "So its almost impossible to have a logical and rational conversation with religious people". Err quite simply you'll find that you cannot have a rational conversation with any person if the conversation is at all related to an irrational topic. And secondly as reasonable viewers may agree, I'm having a rational conversation with you, and I see myself as "Religous".
I have a quite a bit of respect for Hedges' written works, but he's just wildly off the mark here, viciously and profoundly dishonestly mischaracterizing the perspectives of Hitchens and Harris and painting a ludicrous strawman portrait of atheists in general. This video makes him look ridiculous, foolish, petty, dumb, shallow, and ignorant.
At 4:00 Hedges speaks as if Darwin's writings are somehow the evolutionary bible for atheists, noting that Darwin never said that humans evolved morally. WHAT? Of course we've evolved morally. Otherwise we wouldn't have thrived as an intelligence species which rose to our current population. This was occasionally even aided by religion. The beauty of being modern humans is our ability to defy "instincts" and "tradition" and to achieve a more just society, something religion currently bulwarks.
@VigEuth Exactly. His misrepresentation, specifically of Harris' view of the role of science in ethics and building a better morality is outrageous. The claim that Harris/Hitchens/Dawkins see ethics as some linear road of advancement like evolution is so wrong I don't know where to start, but it is quite telling that he doesn't even seem to realize that this isn't even a good descriptor of biological evolution to begin with.
Even if were true that Harris and Hitchens supported all the things which Hedgens claims they do, this still wouldn't represent the views of "the new atheists". What about Dennett, Dawkins, Myers? No, it's nothing like religion, they don't force a set of laws onto others. Problem is religion, because it can cause religious people to kill/hate through proxy, they're after all commanded to do so. It takes away responsibility and makes sheep out of people.
Hedges is deeply dishonest in this. He for instance takes Sam Harris out of context and never has Hitchens said that religious people should be destroyed. He wanted terrorist destroyed and that's something completely else (and a wrong method, but that's the way this foolish world handles things). Atheists do not really give a crap about what people believe as long as there is enough secularism and we aren't forced to become religious too. None expects religion to vanish.
@Hirnlego999 Hitchens doesn't want to destroy people? How about justifying the entire Iraq war, because it's apparently a war against religious people? If he's merely justifying the Iraq war on political or humanistic grounds, why does he constantly refer to the mullahs and other Muslim people when justifying the Iraq war?
@livingstonmail No, he does not. He could easily make the point that Saddam destroyed people killed them in thousands, tortured them, occupied another nation.
And to have him removed is a moral duty for USA who used to back him. Notice also that Hitch was a long time supporter of the Kurds, who are also Muslim.
@Hirnlego999 That was not the duty of the United States to remove him by military force-nor was that the rationale of the Bush Administration for doing so. We surpassed Saddam in body count, especially if we consider the Clinton era sanctions.
@RPenta It didn't matter. Especially the neocons wanted this war no matter what, they made the case for Clinton back in 1998 already, it all came down to selling it and of course 9/11 provided. Saddam of course should not have been supported in the first place.
@charlesvan13 You are making no sense-the no fly zone had nothing to do either legally or historically with the second ginned up war by the US against Iraq.
I'll bet the million dead Iraqis since. . . take your pick from 1991 to the present would agree with you since their country which was a prosperous state was destroyed by the US and its allies for reasons only the Bushes, the Clinton, the neocons and the Israelis know for sure.
The 91 cease fire agreement established the no-fly zones, as a resonse to Saddam crushingthe 91 uprisings. He violated the no-fly zones by attacking aircraft and bombing Kurdish villages. So, yes, this did provide a legal basis.
The Iraqis I know love americans and are grateful. One of them told me that Texas was the greatest state, because of Bush. Opinions differ, moreso than in western countries. But, no, they don't all agree.
@charlesvan13 Asshole, that was 10+before the 911 attacks-even Yellow Back Bush did not not use this to justify war-nor did the Congress rely upon that.
The vast majority of Iraqis that we have info on did not want the occupation of their country.
Hitchens is a big warmongerer, supported the Iraq war, supports starting a war with Iran which is a nice way to start a WW3.
Hedges is right, religion is not entirely the problem, sure it is bad but there is also another almost type of religion, known as statism, which is what some guys Hedges talks about (even though I would say Hedges is a bit of a statist) and statism offers violent solutions to non-violent problems and is not a civilized form of dealing with others.
I watched the first two minutes, and had to stop. It's just one personal attack after another, without any substance. Then he shows complete lack of understanding what atheism is (not a belief system, by its definition).
Hedges nailed the warmongers. Anyone who supports the war on terror is a mentally defective imbecile. Good job on exposing these neocon frauds who posture as free thinkers but defend militarism and nationalism like only a chickenhawk who's never seen a battle field can. Hedges destroys these fools.
Chris Hedges is so correct it is scary. But you have to be able to understand what Chris is saying in it's totality. That is one of the things that makes Chris so fucking amazing!
I don't like this guy. He's doing straight up hit-pieces on people he disagrees with.
He says in an interview a couple days ago that when he debated Hitchens, it went badly for Hitchens, he flipped off the audience, and stomped out at the end.
I saw that debate, and Hedges is either delusional or straight up lying, because that didn't happen.
@charlesvan13 I think i saw that debate. if you watch it closely you'll see that its been heavily edited. You can see the camera stop when Hedges is about to speak for the second time.
I saw the original unedited version. And Hedges was lying when he said Hitchens flipped off the audience, and stomped off at the end. The parts edited out make Hedges look like the loser of the debate. It apparently was edited, by Truthdig, to save Hedges embarasment.
Hitchens didn't stomp out; they were both sitting and Hitchens gave the last word. The moderator asked Hedges if he had anything to say and Hedges decined.
@ckheldon Actually you'll find that athiests do talk about muslims, Hitchens goes on about Bin Laden. Point is, by criticising Islam calling it a backward religion is no different to criticising muslims. Some Athiests go to the extent to saying that all muslims have been brainwashed. Muslims just want to live like simpletons, without being screwed over by western "democracies".
@TheMrMongolia Obviously in that sense they criticize Muslims just like they criticize certain people of every faith as well as fellow atheists. When Hedges said "talk about Muslims" he wasn't talking about criticism of specific Muslims, he was implying that their criticism of Islam amounted to criticism of the entire Muslim world. Of course there are Muslims who are good people but there's a good chance that they're not good at being a Muslims.
@ckheldon Yes, I take your point. Take the word "muslim" from your comment, and it reminds of a an old saying, "no such thing as good/bad people, people DO good and people sometimes DO bad". If I were an Athiest, followed Dawkins, and did bad, I dunno assassinated a top government official, it doesn't mean Dawkins preaches badness.
@TheMrMongolia But the bad stuff is in the book. I wish it wasn't but it is. If you take something good from it that's great but how can you claim that that their interpretation is wrong when it's really in there. Also people don't "follow" Dawkins. They like, dislike, admire, hate, agree with and disagree with him but no one takes what he says as holy writ and I think he himself would tell you that that's the correct attitude.
@ckheldon Often things are taken out of the context in the book. I believe there's much wisdom in the book, some that have come to light decades ago (the womb, the moon), and some we wont know until years/decades to come. The scientific community is always developing.
@TheMrMongolia The Muslims that you claim only wish to live like "simpletons," if they truly follow the word and message of the Koran, go to the funerals of suicide-bombers and regard them as heroes. It is condescending of us not to take those bombers at their word when they scream "Allahu Akhbar" before they blow themselves up in the name of their god.
@ckheldon When that crazy CHRISTIAN dude killed all those people in Europe last year, did I accuse Christians of going to his funeral and accuse them of attending his funeral? No. I took it as though his interpretation of CHRISTIANITY was flawed, just as I do with Muslim suicide bombers. Its wrong, I condemn it, extremists in all religions. But when religions are overwhelmingly designed to better society, why would I reject them?
@TheMrMongolia I don't see how you can claim that religions are designed to improve society. All evidence points to the contrary especially when it comes to the god of Abraham. Are you denying that Muslim suicide bombers are often regarded as martyrs and heroes? Christianity is obviously not perfect but at this point in history many people who claim to be Christians are (thankfully) not very good at it.
@ckheldon, YES, I AM DENYING IT. But who cares how their regarded? I regard in my thoughts Marolyn Monroe a slut, why does that matter to any1? Which ever sect in Islam a muslim follows, number one rule is taking an innocent life is the same as killing all mankind. These idiots sometimes argue people weren't innocent.... Overwhelmingly though, religion preaches goodness (that's all religions, not just Islam). A good debate about that is Tony Blair vs Hitchen.
@TheMrMongolia No one cares how you feel about Marilyn Monroe. However if you lived in a country where a good percentage of the populace believed the same as you then some people, like the marketers for the new Marilyn Monroe biopic, might care. And if you're beliefs about Marilyn Monroe derive from the fact that you believe that Audrey Hepburn is the greatest film actress of the golden age of cinema and that her performances were divinely inspired AFI might care.
@ckheldon "No one cares how you feel about Marilyn Monroe" demonstrates my point. No-one should care, as you imply, if stupid suicide bombers are regarded as martyrs by stupid people. For the record, I dont think Marilyn Monroe is a slut, I was demonstrating my point which you've helped me make:-)
@TheMrMongolia You obviously didn't read the rest of my comment. I said that no one cares how you feel BUT people would care if a large number of people thought that way or if there was a set of beliefs that made a large number of people feel that way and that's the case here when it comes to Islam.
@TheMrMongolia And "extremism"? how can you not be extreme? If I believed that the universe was created by one entity and I believed I somehow had some insight into what that entity wanted me to do I would absolutely be extreme in executing it's wishes.
@ckheldon Using ur analogy lets imagine a moment ALL muslims are extreme because they have divine insight. If Islam was infact a twisted religion and wanted for example hell bent destruction and suicide mania we'd have it by now? Do you believe Mother Theresa was a fraud and responsible for numerous deaths as Hitchens argues??
@TheMrMongolia Islam does not call for mania and destruction for it's own sake, it's goal is submission to the will of Allah. I am extraordinarily glad that all Muslims are not extreme. I don't know a lot about Mother Theresa but from what I can tell she was not the person most people think she was. I'm not sure what that has to do with our conversation though.
@ckheldon You sed you would execute "its wishes" if you had the divine insight. All muslims have divine insight which is why they are Muslims. A Muslim believes in the 5 pillars of Islam. Therefore you should be fortunate not everyone would follow your steps in executing "its wishes". Could it be that the wishes are actually well-intended for a better society? Which is why we haven't not blown the world up so to speak?
@TheMrMongolia Muslims believe in the Five Pillars and one of those Shahada which means that Muslims must believe that there is only one god and that Mohamed is his prophet. That means that the Koran is the word of god. That must include things like destroying the infidels and exalting martyrs because it's in there. They're not my steps, they are the Koran's steps. I don't believe that anyone has divine insight.
@ckheldon "killing infidels/exalting martyrs"? Are you reading the same Quran? Quotes often taken out of context. It could be talking about the end times when there's war, could be talking about self defence... Anyway clearly you have an irrational agenda, so I sign myself out of this conversation.
@TheMrMongolia "[We] shall let them live awhile, and then shall drag them to the scourge of the Fire. Evil shall be their fate" (2:126) "Do not say that those slain in the cause of God are dead. They are alive, but you are not aware of them" (2:154) "But the infidels who die unbelievers shall incur the curse of God, the angels, and all men. Under it they shall remain for ever; their punishment shall not be lightened, nor shall they be reprieved" (2:162).
@TheMrMongolia There are a number of surveys and studies that have recorded the attitudes of people in countries dominated by Islam to suicide bombing. It's not letting me post any links. The numbers have gone down from immediately after 9/11 but they are still too high.
@TheMrMongolia I know that you coined that term but that is what you believe you have, insight into the will of the creator of the universe. Also can you please let me know what my irrational agenda is?
So apparently @TheMrMongolia has decided he's better than responding to me so if someone else could inform me of my irrational agenda I'd really appreciate it. Thanks.
False equivalence has to be the most pervasive fallacy in our modern discourse. "These people are mad those people are mad they're the same yay for me!!!" Fuck you Chris Hedges.
"They are as culturally, historically, and linguistically illiterate as the Christian right."....... Okay, I've heard enough. Sounds like someone lost one too many debates and now just wants to take some swings when the referee ain't looking. Hedges is so out-of-line and wrong it's absurd. He's so emotional too, you can tell objectivity left the room a long time ago.
Wow.... WRONG WRONG WRONG I dig Chris Hedges immensely, he's got a lot of important knowledge and wisdom to offer the world on a variety of issue but he's dead wrong when it comes to this topic. Nowhere in the thousands of lectures and Q & A's I've viewed of both Harris and Hitchens do you find - professed or inferred - the "leap of faith" Hedges describes. "We are moving forward as species to some kind of human utopia" is an unfair interpolation.
@hihellohowareyou1000 Apparently, you couldn't tell how emotionally charged, and intellectually baren his comments were. He was all hyperbole, and no content. I've explained it to you, but cannot understand it for you.
The Hitchens fanboys are on the attack in this forum. Hitchens clearly lost the debate. I'm an atheist and I'm embarrassed by his performance. Hitchens argued that religion is evil because power structures use it to inflict harm on people and that religious people could theoretically do the same good without religion. He didn't take into account personality types (MBTI or otherwise) and he didn't take into account atheistic evil such as in Russia.His argument was pathetic; Hedges did better.
@harlon57 I am an atheist and I don't follow anyone, especially Hitchens, no offense. I didn't find that argument using a Google search. What is it? I imagine it can't be very logical since it's obvious that atheists can do evil without religion, and many people can't seem to go good without it, given their personalities.
@tstruss912 You really don't get it. People don't commit atrocities for the sake of atheism, but they do in the name of their religion. Search this title for Hitchens video response: Christopher Hitchens rebuts Atheist atrocities charge, it was uploaded by doctorofdisbelief. You especially choose to not read a man voted as one of the top five public intellectuals in the world? Strange choice.
@harlon57 hmmm...I think that the top five rating is based on his pre-911 work. Since then he's been a neo-con shill for some reason. I did enjoy his Mother Teresa and Kissinger documentaries. But that's about all I know of his work. I did find and watch the video you suggested. I find that Hitchens doesn't make his point very clearly. The causes of immoral action are easy to find in any psychology 101 book: psychopathy, mob behavior, free will, and following authority.
Being an atheist doesn't disqualify you from any of those sources of evil. You can still follow evil authority figures, may be born a psychopath, may belong to an immoral group, or just choose to act immorally. What he never quite spits out is this: being religious puts your at risk for being part of an immoral group more so than being an atheist does. Then we come to the question, "what makes some people choose religion?" It seems to be a function of personality.
@harlon57 Using the MBTI types as an example, the following are prone to religiosity: ISFJ, ESTJ, ESFJ, ISTJ, INFJ...I think that's about it. INTP, ENTP, INTJ, ESTP, and ISTP mostly find it to be silly. But then again, the first set of types is drawn to MANY power centers, and tend to believe in obedience and order. That is not the case with the second set. I can almost guarantee that if religions were wiped out tomorrow most people would still find evil groups and leaders......
I really don't see how simultaneously the christian right in the US can be fascists while in the middle east terrorism, violent jihad, and race hatred as we see in cartoons showing jews as apes and pigs and the "Protocalls of the Elders of Zion", and Mein Kampf selling 100s of thousands of copies, is "understandable" and rationalizable.
To his credit, I can't hate Chris Hedges because he doesn't make any sense.
In the debates with Hitchens and Harris he always asserts that fundamentalism is the problem, and it is caused by dispair; except for american preachers, in that case fundamentalism is cause by bigotry.
Here is a man who was destroyed in his debate with Christopher Hitchens. After Hitchens' answer of the final question, and offered a chance to respond to Hitchens' attack on Hedges, couldn't respond. He looked floored.
I once watched Christopher Hitchens in an interview with Charlie Rose, spend the entire show, in bitter polemics condemning all forms of spirituality, along with any and all adherents, and blaming all of the world's problems, including his own neurosis, on religion and religious people. He then finished by saying, "The problem with religious people, is they can never resist the urge to proselytize. In fact, they feel as if they are doing you a disservice if they do otherwise."
@83169 Apparently this still holds true, even if the object of faith is a reverence for an universal negative. Life is full of these little ironies, no?
@83169 Apparently this still holds true, even if the object of faith is a reverence for an universal negative. Life is full of these little ironies, no?
Chris Hedges is brilliant on his critique of political issues such as the Iraq war, but defending religion is a bit pathetic. Its funny because Hitchens is the exact opposite yet I find the political issues of stat/corporate powe more dangerous than religion.
He is very right in many of his points, they do espouse a radical atheism that is very similar to that of the radical Christians. Especially right on the points of their over zealous almost Nazi idea's of using murder, or force to make the religious fanatics bow to atheist ideology.
Not to mention that anyone who cant see the clear colonial/economic pretext to the war in the Arab world, and the Wests heavy involvement in manipulating the populace there through religion is blind as they come.
I agree with Chris Hedges on a lot of things. This is not one of them. I believe his heart is in the right place, and as an atheist, I hold him up to very high standards even after hearing his views on atheism. I don't think his arguments would hold up very well in a debate with Harris or Hitchens. And honestly, I don't want them to debate each other because they're all awesome human beings despite ideological disagreement on religion.
I love Hitchens, and I can appreciate Harris (though that may quite often be surname bias on my part), but I have to agree with Hedges on this particular issue. Hitchens and Harris have been overreaching. Hitchens, for one, has gone from reasoned and rational, classical atheism, to frankly dog-piling on Islam, caught up in the rush of Islamophobia. They say he's "owned" Hedges in debate, but let's face it, intelligent people generally can make convincing arguments for otherwise bad positions.
@GoodManBadSerf That being said, I don't think I've felt more grief at watching someone I've never met suffer the effects of illness quite like I have watching Hitchens. The world will be a little worse off when he leaves us.
This is just unbelievable. It's as if Chris Hedges has basically made up a position that he believes he can argue against (albeit rather incomprehensibly), and tries to smear Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens with it.
If I had to guess I would say Chris Hedges is a bit bitter for clearly getting beat down by both Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens in their respective debates. All you have to do is watch the tape and Hedges at the end of both debates is quite vividly defeated.
Chris Hedges logic is basically this: Christopher Hitchens supported the war in Iraq, Christopher Hitchens is an atheist, therefore atheists are evil. Also, human progress should not be pursued because thats utopian, so don't bother. He's a nihilist and a Jihad sympathizer.
Hedges defends Islam..WHY? I have a question for him - would he allow a muslim into his home to cut off his 6yr old daughters genitalia ? This is a muslim practice and is carried out today. Mr Hedges, YES or NO. These are only WORDS and hope they will not be "spammed" ! - this HORRIFIC practice is happening RIGHT NOW . I dare not be more specific here for then this comment will be spammed ! HOW can this barbaric act be justified by any sane person.
in Hedges world it is chauvenistic to point out the truth of how women are treated in the Muslim world. He is a truly bankrupt human being....and really not very bright either
Am I being self dellusional when I say that Chris Hedges is nearly as smart as me ? If you disagree with moi then you can just fuck off. Jeesus..I'm only kidding ! Cunts.
He deliberately misrepresents the atheist movement by saying things that are provably untrue, like atheism requires faith, and that atheists think all believers should be converted or eradicated. Atheists do NOT believe this, nor do they think that all evil is done in the name of religion. EVERY Atheist will very graciously admit that is not true. Chris Hedges deliberately lies in this interview to sway people's opinions, as advocates of religion often do. Don't be taken in by this fraud.
He uses quite a few straw man arguments and exaggerations. "Us vs. them" and "moral superiority" are not genuine sentiments of any of the new atheists. Yes, they'll say certain moral ideas of a religion are in fact immoral, but they've never said religious people are less moral people than the superior atheists. It's a common false accusation to call critics of religion intolerant of religious people, assuming that their criticisms are directed at followers rather than the doctrine itself.
I don't believe in God, but I believe in Chris Hedges more than I believe in Christopher Hitchens. Before critcizing him, people should do a little research on Hedges' career, and they'll find he is one of the most honest, scrupulous, and truly progressive journalists in the United States.
I'm an atheist and I think Chris Hedges is absolutely correct. New atheists, try and separate yourself from your beliefs when analysing what Hedges is saying. Be the freethinker you claim you are.
@shreddakj When you say new atheist, do you just mean someone who doesn't believe in the supernatural and then, by examining the world, believes that religion is a bad influence?
@shreddakj Elaborate. Religion is religion, a belief or worldview independent of evidence and facts that relies solely on faith. I have a feeling all you mean by new atheist is an atheist who actually speaks out. Don't forget that merely knowing someone is an atheist tells you nothing more about the person other than the sole fact that they don't have a belief in the supernatural.
@DevilMayFry I said "those in the vein of Harris and Hitchens". You could say they are figureheads of the New Atheist movement. A 'New Atheist' would be someone who takes their work or similar work seriously. You can be a vocal atheist without being an idiot New Atheist who treats all religious people as if they were fundamentalists.
@shreddakj I challenge you to find any proof that Harris, Hitchens or Dawkins "treat all religious people as if they were fundamentalists." I'm not discounting the possibility, but from what I know of them I think this is not the case.
And in any case, like I was saying, religion is religion, a wilful suspension of critical thinking, and I can't for the life of me respect that.
@DevilMayFry It's effectively the entire premise of Hitchens' book, the subtitle is even subtitled 'Religion poisons everything'. His critiques of religion are extremely seemingly wide-sweeping, but in reality only target fundamentalists.
I intentionally didn't lump Dawkins in with Harris and Hitchens because he doesn't do this, he's constantly making the distinction between fundamentalists and 'sophisticated theologians'. Harris and Hitchens lack this subtlety.
@shreddakj Right, he's not saying everyone is a fundamentalist, he's just saying that at the core, that is what religion is. By definition, fundamentalists are people who believe everything of their religion. If there was no religion there would be no fundamentalist religious people.
@DevilMayFry But the problem doesn't lie within religion, it lies within people. Religion is just another set of man-made beliefs. For atheists to grant religion a special place when it comes to influencing people to do things seems a bit bizarre to me. People create and adhere to ideologies pretty universally, irrespective of their religious beliefs. It's human nature that's the problem and specifically the tendency to fanatically hold to ideology, not something unique to religion.
@shreddakj The problem lies exactly with religion. Of all ideologies and beliefs, religion is the world's largest, and it promotes the wilful suspension of critical thinking and absent-mindedly following words of people who seem authoritative. Crazy people can have crazy beliefs but as soon as they truly learn to think for themselves they will grow out of them. Kids have imaginary friends all the time but they grow out of them; why? Because they learn HOW to think, not WHAT to think.
I wonder if the problem is not the 'new atheism' , but rather Hitchenshimself . I don't care whether he is an atheist or a believer, he supported the war in Iraq, disregarding the lies that were told to justify it. If he villifies religion for its 'lies' then why doesn't he viilify the lies that the Bush administration told? He is still a 'believer' - he just chooses which lies he would like to believe.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
@LothairApoclyane Harris wrote that we might have to drop a nuke first if an "Islamist regime" ever acquired long-range nuclear weaponry. His response to Hedges can be read on the Truthdig site, although it doesn't explain what his definition of an Islamist regime is.
Interesting points he brings up. I found myself agreeing with him on some things because it's what I have been thinking about myself and disagreeing with others because I think the evidence says otherwise. The makings of a very interesting conversation if conducted with mutual respect.
As an atheist, I appreciate this man's cogent analysis of the right wing war mongering imperialist-atheists ( Hitchens, for example who extols Bush's & Blair's wars, etc).
The "Four Horsemen" do a fair job of demolishing the "God of Vacation Bible School" and never touch the nuanced ideas of thinkers like Tillich or this man Hedges.
If you consider yourself an atheist, yet still believe war and general violence against others is morally justifiable (outside the extreme context of immediate self-defence), you've got a long way to go so far as becoming a moral and rational person. Militant, bigoted, over-zealous atheists are no better than their god-fearing cousins in their potential to inject more unnecessary death and suffering into the world.
However I do have great respect for Chris Hedges, his point is very clear and well founded... Just because Hitchens, Dawkins, and Harris have more clear understanding of what they know and what they don't know, does not mean that it is right for them to condescend towards anyone who does not agree with them. Carl Sagan understood this well, he recognized that the evils we face as a species are both dogmatism and brazenly self-assured zealotry, and ergo he embodied neither vice.
Harris, Dawkins, and Hitchens have all openly acknowledged that both religious and non-religious people commit atrocities but conclude that non-religious logical rationalism is morally superior because it is an ideology based on tangible observable truths. In contrast, religion, which is both a system and a 'way of being' that serves as paliative for our fears is ultimately founded on anthropocentric and credulous non-thinking. Harris has many times stated that spirituality is intrinsic in us.
How funny that the first few seconds of this video featuring an anti-capitalist should be represented by a corporation. (Incidentally, Hedges is a moronic demagogue and Hitch is a genius)
He claims New Atheists are "fundamentalists", but aren't his own beliefs just as polarizing? He's not trying to build bridges. He's burning bridges to religious fundamentalism as well as New Atheism. He is the very embodiment of what he is preaching against. He also misrepresents his opponents viewpoints, such as claiming that "Harris promotes torture". I read The End of Faith. Sam Harris is against torture. This guy is spewing nonsense.
Relativists, you just can't beat em.
ashburnhouse 11 hours ago
I'm a little disappointed in Hedges here. He accused Dawkins of saying that evolutionary biology can be used as a model towards the evolution of human morality. This is not true. Dawkins has constantly railed against that idea, as it is a common charge from evangelicals, i.e. that an atheist must use "survival of the fittest" as a template for morality. Dawkins has repeatedly said that trying to use evolution as a template for morality is "trying to derive an ought from an is".
devourerofbabies 1 day ago
I agree with everything that Chris Hedges says in this interview. I was especially pleased to learn that he has noticed that Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, etc., are merely the mirror-opposites of religious fundamentalists. This is also true of Richard Dawkins as well. What I find most objectionable about Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Dennet is their complete failure to engage seriously with serious thinkers, such as Thomas Aquinas and Paul Tillich, etc. That's not good enough.
bayreuth79 3 days ago
@bayreuth79 How are they supposed to engage the dead guys you mention? They have been willing to have debates with nearly any taker, so maybe your "DEEP THINKERS" with a pulse are just scared.
MitchStarRepublic 1 day ago
@MitchStarRepublic I was referring to engaging with the work of Thomas Aquinas and Paul Tillich rather than the men themselves because both of them are of course dead. I notice that Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris never refer to the great defenders of classical theism. There is one exception to this: Dawkins mentions the "Five Ways" of Aquinas in "The God Delusion". However, as Fr Brian Davies OP (an Aquinas specialist) has pointed out, Dawkins completely fails to understand the "Five Ways".
bayreuth79 1 day ago
@MitchStarRepublic I'm afriad that it is Richard Dawkins who is running scared of William Lane Craig. It is interesting that both Hitchens and Harris have stated in the past that William Lane Craig is a particularly tough opponent; and after Dawkins' humilitating experiences debating John Lennox, Dawkins is trying to evade another humiliating debate againt an even tougher opponent.
bayreuth79 1 day ago
@MitchStarRepublic Christopher Hitchens referred to William Lane Craig as being "Very rigorous, very scholarly, very formidable". It is interesting that in the light of this comment (and other comments by Sam Harris etc) that Dawkins is giving us some absurd rhetoric about Lane Craig being some bumbling idiot unworthy of deabte! A Grayling even lied about having debated Lane Craig previously. Intellectual honesty? Or is Dawkins more interested in book sales??
bayreuth79 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Chris Hedges is full of shit.
ORTmusic 4 days ago
I'm 2:30 into the video and i've already made up my mind on Chris Hedges. He is purposely falsifying the all the statements of Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens.
kibo3232 5 days ago
Wow...didn't know Hedges delved into the religion fray as well! Of course, as usual, he gives it a fair shake as he does with any subject he deals with. Atheists to me are as uncomfortable as religious fundamentalists. They both need to get laid more. If there is hell, I bet Hitchens is getting sodomized by Falwell as we speak. 'The cult of science'...love it!
xxoooOFxx 6 days ago
Man, he hits the nail on the head! "The cult of science" --great!
Mattlzpf 6 days ago
Hitchens was a scoundrel and an opportunist. His reputation will never be dissevered from his disgusting support for the Iraq War.
Horicert 1 week ago
this guy is right. we have to watch out for tyrany no matter what it's coming from.
glower125 1 week ago
@glower125 No, he's not. Let me know when atheists start setting embassies on fire, force through blashphemy laws, keep women in beesuits.
Hedgens also takes things out of context to which Harris has already responded to.
Hirnlego999 1 week ago
@Hirnlego999 the late Snitchens was a major war monger, but of course you atheist marks gave him a pass on that.
RPenta 1 week ago
Right on Hedges!
Yogawheel 1 week ago
While I agree this pinhead hedges did lie about Hitchens at the SF debate, it is small beans to the lie that he tells about Harris calling for a first nuclear strike on the muslim world. Hedges is a putz.
MitchStarRepublic 1 week ago
@MitchStarRepublic
Hedges seems to think he has some special moral athority, probably from divinity school.
It's his perogative to not like Hitchens, but it was low class to lie about the debate when asked for his thoughts on Hitchens the week of his death.
Most people would judge that debate as not going well for Hedges.
charlesvan13 1 week ago
@charlesvan13 Hitchens recognized an enemy of logic when he saw one. Hedges is exactly that, and enemy of logic and by extension, Hitchens. Low class is a perfect description. I hope to some day look Hedges in the eye and call him a liar.
sickofgod69 1 week ago
@sickofgod69
People immediately loose my attenting when they use these reactionary buzz phrases: "secular-fundamentalist", "Islamophobia", "liberal-fascism" etc.
They have no logical coherence, but are thrown out merely for propoganda purposes.
charlesvan13 2 days ago
@MitchStarRepublic Harris is very dishonest about his writings on this issue-and his mark fans give him a pass-he sets up a hypothetical on false premises (both historical and present day) that invite the reader to draw the conclusion we should be ready to nuke the rag heads. . . .I mean Islamofascists. . .I mean radical Moslems.
RPenta 1 day ago
@RPenta I have read Harris and the supposed call for a first strike. ABSURD. That anyone with a modicum of reason could come to such a conclusion after what is so clearly written is beyond understanding. Hedges hates that he isn't the smartest guy in the room, which happens to him a lot I suspect, he just rarely as in this situation, realizes it.
MitchStarRepublic 1 day ago
"Never think that those who were slain in the cause of God are dead. They are alive, and well provided for by their Lord; pleased with His gifts and rejoicing that those they left behind, who have not yet joined them, have nothing to fear or to regret; rejoicing in God's grace and bounty. God will not deny the faithful their reward" (3:169).
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
"Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people. They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is evident from what they utter with their mouths, but greater is the hatred which their breasts conceal" (3:118).
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
This guy acts as if Darwin knew every thing we now know about evolution...which he obviously didn't. He was just a man, he didn't know everything.
dakotadenverdexter 2 weeks ago
Chris Hitchens is a intellectual retard.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
Chris Hedges has become an intellectual joke......when he was alive Hedges got taken down hard by Hitch....he didn't stand a chance because the base of his arguments are made of sand....they just don't hold up - its not him of course....its his fundamental arguments that fail him and others again and again....making an easy target for Hitch and others.....
72group4 2 weeks ago
You've been brainwashed by what the media/entertainment industry shows you. Allahu Akbar is something I say pretty much everyday. Will I go and blow something up? No.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
Whats his argument going to be in 100 years when we find out how we experience grief, sorrow and love? gaps argument again
dawtchins 2 weeks ago
Oh and I'm not totally against Atheists, one of my favourites is right here on YouTube, goes by the name of Coughlin616. This guy speaks a lot of sense, and see's behind the propoganda thats set to destroy all religion. And he researches and speaks against it.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
Fair enough if you're an Athiest, but if you have an intention of mocking ALL other religions, then thats not fair. Thats called militant atheism, bit like muslim fundamentalist I guess. Pat Condell, Dawkins, are perfect examples of what I mean.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia It's not militant, Religion is a joke and needs making fun of to show how stupid and fabricated by us it is. Religion asks you to submit your critical faculty for its sake. So its almost impossible to have a logical and rational conversation with religious people
dawtchins 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dawtchins "So its almost impossible to have a logical and rational conversation with religious people". Err quite simply you'll find that you cannot have a rational conversation with any person if the conversation is at all related to an irrational topic. And secondly as reasonable viewers may agree, I'm having a rational conversation with you, and I see myself as "Religous".
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
I have a quite a bit of respect for Hedges' written works, but he's just wildly off the mark here, viciously and profoundly dishonestly mischaracterizing the perspectives of Hitchens and Harris and painting a ludicrous strawman portrait of atheists in general. This video makes him look ridiculous, foolish, petty, dumb, shallow, and ignorant.
reallyordinary 3 weeks ago
One of the smartest people around right now.
thecomposer1962 3 weeks ago
At 4:00 Hedges speaks as if Darwin's writings are somehow the evolutionary bible for atheists, noting that Darwin never said that humans evolved morally. WHAT? Of course we've evolved morally. Otherwise we wouldn't have thrived as an intelligence species which rose to our current population. This was occasionally even aided by religion. The beauty of being modern humans is our ability to defy "instincts" and "tradition" and to achieve a more just society, something religion currently bulwarks.
VigEuth 3 weeks ago 3
@VigEuth Exactly. His misrepresentation, specifically of Harris' view of the role of science in ethics and building a better morality is outrageous. The claim that Harris/Hitchens/Dawkins see ethics as some linear road of advancement like evolution is so wrong I don't know where to start, but it is quite telling that he doesn't even seem to realize that this isn't even a good descriptor of biological evolution to begin with.
mystech 15 hours ago
Wow, not more than 50 seconds into this I realized that this guy is a moron!
danielstruve 3 weeks ago
Even if were true that Harris and Hitchens supported all the things which Hedgens claims they do, this still wouldn't represent the views of "the new atheists". What about Dennett, Dawkins, Myers? No, it's nothing like religion, they don't force a set of laws onto others. Problem is religion, because it can cause religious people to kill/hate through proxy, they're after all commanded to do so. It takes away responsibility and makes sheep out of people.
Hirnlego999 3 weeks ago
Hedges is deeply dishonest in this. He for instance takes Sam Harris out of context and never has Hitchens said that religious people should be destroyed. He wanted terrorist destroyed and that's something completely else (and a wrong method, but that's the way this foolish world handles things). Atheists do not really give a crap about what people believe as long as there is enough secularism and we aren't forced to become religious too. None expects religion to vanish.
Hirnlego999 3 weeks ago 6
@Hirnlego999 Hitchens doesn't want to destroy people? How about justifying the entire Iraq war, because it's apparently a war against religious people? If he's merely justifying the Iraq war on political or humanistic grounds, why does he constantly refer to the mullahs and other Muslim people when justifying the Iraq war?
livingstonmail 1 week ago
@livingstonmail No, he does not. He could easily make the point that Saddam destroyed people killed them in thousands, tortured them, occupied another nation.
And to have him removed is a moral duty for USA who used to back him. Notice also that Hitch was a long time supporter of the Kurds, who are also Muslim.
Hirnlego999 1 week ago
@Hirnlego999 That was not the duty of the United States to remove him by military force-nor was that the rationale of the Bush Administration for doing so. We surpassed Saddam in body count, especially if we consider the Clinton era sanctions.
RPenta 1 week ago
@RPenta It didn't matter. Especially the neocons wanted this war no matter what, they made the case for Clinton back in 1998 already, it all came down to selling it and of course 9/11 provided. Saddam of course should not have been supported in the first place.
Hirnlego999 1 week ago
@RPenta
The 1990 cease-fire agreement with Saddam had conditions, i.e. no-fly zones, for a reason.
The Iraqis I know are completely grateful for the US overthrow of Saddam.
charlesvan13 1 week ago
@charlesvan13 You are making no sense-the no fly zone had nothing to do either legally or historically with the second ginned up war by the US against Iraq.
I'll bet the million dead Iraqis since. . . take your pick from 1991 to the present would agree with you since their country which was a prosperous state was destroyed by the US and its allies for reasons only the Bushes, the Clinton, the neocons and the Israelis know for sure.
RPenta 1 week ago
@RPenta
The 91 cease fire agreement established the no-fly zones, as a resonse to Saddam crushingthe 91 uprisings. He violated the no-fly zones by attacking aircraft and bombing Kurdish villages. So, yes, this did provide a legal basis.
The Iraqis I know love americans and are grateful. One of them told me that Texas was the greatest state, because of Bush. Opinions differ, moreso than in western countries. But, no, they don't all agree.
charlesvan13 2 days ago
@charlesvan13 Asshole, that was 10+before the 911 attacks-even Yellow Back Bush did not not use this to justify war-nor did the Congress rely upon that.
The vast majority of Iraqis that we have info on did not want the occupation of their country.
RPenta 1 day ago
Hitchens is a big warmongerer, supported the Iraq war, supports starting a war with Iran which is a nice way to start a WW3.
Hedges is right, religion is not entirely the problem, sure it is bad but there is also another almost type of religion, known as statism, which is what some guys Hedges talks about (even though I would say Hedges is a bit of a statist) and statism offers violent solutions to non-violent problems and is not a civilized form of dealing with others.
RyanR3volution 3 weeks ago
I watched the first two minutes, and had to stop. It's just one personal attack after another, without any substance. Then he shows complete lack of understanding what atheism is (not a belief system, by its definition).
olegkikin 3 weeks ago
@hihellohowareyou1000 Your inability to respond without showing your ignorance and hateful character, show the weakness of your mind.
harlon57 3 weeks ago
Hedges nailed the warmongers. Anyone who supports the war on terror is a mentally defective imbecile. Good job on exposing these neocon frauds who posture as free thinkers but defend militarism and nationalism like only a chickenhawk who's never seen a battle field can. Hedges destroys these fools.
JannahCaller 4 weeks ago
Chris Hedges is so correct it is scary. But you have to be able to understand what Chris is saying in it's totality. That is one of the things that makes Chris so fucking amazing!
MrFrameofmind 1 month ago in playlist 2010 - Oct 14th - Chris Hedges - 6pm
I don't like this guy. He's doing straight up hit-pieces on people he disagrees with.
He says in an interview a couple days ago that when he debated Hitchens, it went badly for Hitchens, he flipped off the audience, and stomped out at the end.
I saw that debate, and Hedges is either delusional or straight up lying, because that didn't happen.
charlesvan13 1 month ago 11
@charlesvan13 I think i saw that debate. if you watch it closely you'll see that its been heavily edited. You can see the camera stop when Hedges is about to speak for the second time.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia
Yes, much of the original video is missing.
I saw the original unedited version. And Hedges was lying when he said Hitchens flipped off the audience, and stomped off at the end. The parts edited out make Hedges look like the loser of the debate. It apparently was edited, by Truthdig, to save Hedges embarasment.
Hitchens didn't stomp out; they were both sitting and Hitchens gave the last word. The moderator asked Hedges if he had anything to say and Hedges decined.
charlesvan13 2 weeks ago
@charlesvan13
I have to add, that Hedges made that mischaracterization, or flat out lie, about that debate right after Hitchens died.
charlesvan13 2 weeks ago
Morally and intellectual bankrupt. To the bone.
TheBaerista 1 month ago
@hihellohowareyou1000
I was obviously speaking idiomatically, a polite way of saying that Hedges is a bullshitter.
Hedges is the one trying to convince me of something, and he failed.
That's his problem, not mine.
charlesvan13 1 month ago
this guy is an idiot..he is WRONG !
lento99 1 month ago 2
Good thing there is some real foreshadowing in the first 12 seconds of this video. 8>)
adambobrow 1 month ago
Hedges ABOUT Hitchens ? Since when does the crumb talk about the cake ???
sooperfukker 1 month ago
Atheists are like rabbit dogs after this guy because he does not see "their way".
kotkee 1 month ago
"If you listen to what they say about Muslims..." They don't talk about Muslims that much, they talk about Islam. There's actually a big difference.
ckheldon 1 month ago 3
@ckheldon Actually you'll find that athiests do talk about muslims, Hitchens goes on about Bin Laden. Point is, by criticising Islam calling it a backward religion is no different to criticising muslims. Some Athiests go to the extent to saying that all muslims have been brainwashed. Muslims just want to live like simpletons, without being screwed over by western "democracies".
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia Obviously in that sense they criticize Muslims just like they criticize certain people of every faith as well as fellow atheists. When Hedges said "talk about Muslims" he wasn't talking about criticism of specific Muslims, he was implying that their criticism of Islam amounted to criticism of the entire Muslim world. Of course there are Muslims who are good people but there's a good chance that they're not good at being a Muslims.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon Yes, I take your point. Take the word "muslim" from your comment, and it reminds of a an old saying, "no such thing as good/bad people, people DO good and people sometimes DO bad". If I were an Athiest, followed Dawkins, and did bad, I dunno assassinated a top government official, it doesn't mean Dawkins preaches badness.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia But the bad stuff is in the book. I wish it wasn't but it is. If you take something good from it that's great but how can you claim that that their interpretation is wrong when it's really in there. Also people don't "follow" Dawkins. They like, dislike, admire, hate, agree with and disagree with him but no one takes what he says as holy writ and I think he himself would tell you that that's the correct attitude.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon Often things are taken out of the context in the book. I believe there's much wisdom in the book, some that have come to light decades ago (the womb, the moon), and some we wont know until years/decades to come. The scientific community is always developing.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia The Muslims that you claim only wish to live like "simpletons," if they truly follow the word and message of the Koran, go to the funerals of suicide-bombers and regard them as heroes. It is condescending of us not to take those bombers at their word when they scream "Allahu Akhbar" before they blow themselves up in the name of their god.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon When that crazy CHRISTIAN dude killed all those people in Europe last year, did I accuse Christians of going to his funeral and accuse them of attending his funeral? No. I took it as though his interpretation of CHRISTIANITY was flawed, just as I do with Muslim suicide bombers. Its wrong, I condemn it, extremists in all religions. But when religions are overwhelmingly designed to better society, why would I reject them?
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia I don't see how you can claim that religions are designed to improve society. All evidence points to the contrary especially when it comes to the god of Abraham. Are you denying that Muslim suicide bombers are often regarded as martyrs and heroes? Christianity is obviously not perfect but at this point in history many people who claim to be Christians are (thankfully) not very good at it.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon, YES, I AM DENYING IT. But who cares how their regarded? I regard in my thoughts Marolyn Monroe a slut, why does that matter to any1? Which ever sect in Islam a muslim follows, number one rule is taking an innocent life is the same as killing all mankind. These idiots sometimes argue people weren't innocent.... Overwhelmingly though, religion preaches goodness (that's all religions, not just Islam). A good debate about that is Tony Blair vs Hitchen.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia No one cares how you feel about Marilyn Monroe. However if you lived in a country where a good percentage of the populace believed the same as you then some people, like the marketers for the new Marilyn Monroe biopic, might care. And if you're beliefs about Marilyn Monroe derive from the fact that you believe that Audrey Hepburn is the greatest film actress of the golden age of cinema and that her performances were divinely inspired AFI might care.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon "No one cares how you feel about Marilyn Monroe" demonstrates my point. No-one should care, as you imply, if stupid suicide bombers are regarded as martyrs by stupid people. For the record, I dont think Marilyn Monroe is a slut, I was demonstrating my point which you've helped me make:-)
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia You obviously didn't read the rest of my comment. I said that no one cares how you feel BUT people would care if a large number of people thought that way or if there was a set of beliefs that made a large number of people feel that way and that's the case here when it comes to Islam.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon, special skill you have to understand large number of muslim minds. Proof? Or Just your thinking?
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia And "extremism"? how can you not be extreme? If I believed that the universe was created by one entity and I believed I somehow had some insight into what that entity wanted me to do I would absolutely be extreme in executing it's wishes.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon Using ur analogy lets imagine a moment ALL muslims are extreme because they have divine insight. If Islam was infact a twisted religion and wanted for example hell bent destruction and suicide mania we'd have it by now? Do you believe Mother Theresa was a fraud and responsible for numerous deaths as Hitchens argues??
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia Islam does not call for mania and destruction for it's own sake, it's goal is submission to the will of Allah. I am extraordinarily glad that all Muslims are not extreme. I don't know a lot about Mother Theresa but from what I can tell she was not the person most people think she was. I'm not sure what that has to do with our conversation though.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon You sed you would execute "its wishes" if you had the divine insight. All muslims have divine insight which is why they are Muslims. A Muslim believes in the 5 pillars of Islam. Therefore you should be fortunate not everyone would follow your steps in executing "its wishes". Could it be that the wishes are actually well-intended for a better society? Which is why we haven't not blown the world up so to speak?
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia Muslims believe in the Five Pillars and one of those Shahada which means that Muslims must believe that there is only one god and that Mohamed is his prophet. That means that the Koran is the word of god. That must include things like destroying the infidels and exalting martyrs because it's in there. They're not my steps, they are the Koran's steps. I don't believe that anyone has divine insight.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon "killing infidels/exalting martyrs"? Are you reading the same Quran? Quotes often taken out of context. It could be talking about the end times when there's war, could be talking about self defence... Anyway clearly you have an irrational agenda, so I sign myself out of this conversation.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia "[We] shall let them live awhile, and then shall drag them to the scourge of the Fire. Evil shall be their fate" (2:126) "Do not say that those slain in the cause of God are dead. They are alive, but you are not aware of them" (2:154) "But the infidels who die unbelievers shall incur the curse of God, the angels, and all men. Under it they shall remain for ever; their punishment shall not be lightened, nor shall they be reprieved" (2:162).
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia Do a search for "Pew Islam"
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@ckheldon "Divine insight" is a term I coined per ur example.
TheMrMongolia 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia There are a number of surveys and studies that have recorded the attitudes of people in countries dominated by Islam to suicide bombing. It's not letting me post any links. The numbers have gone down from immediately after 9/11 but they are still too high.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
@TheMrMongolia I know that you coined that term but that is what you believe you have, insight into the will of the creator of the universe. Also can you please let me know what my irrational agenda is?
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
So apparently @TheMrMongolia has decided he's better than responding to me so if someone else could inform me of my irrational agenda I'd really appreciate it. Thanks.
ckheldon 2 weeks ago
False equivalence has to be the most pervasive fallacy in our modern discourse. "These people are mad those people are mad they're the same yay for me!!!" Fuck you Chris Hedges.
ckheldon 1 month ago
all large bureaucracies are run in the interest of those at the top and the church is no exception
chocobosage420 1 month ago
As Seen On: atheism
hmmmmmm
AndroidPolitician 1 month ago
@AndroidPolitician No, as seen on Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's "The Hour".
tremben 1 month ago
@tremben
I mean the youtube thing from where it was linked from.
AndroidPolitician 1 month ago
hahahaha!! all the atheists flood to click the thumbs down button.
areteist1 1 month ago
Interesting points - makes me think...I still like Hitch though!
damrak1969 1 month ago
"They are as culturally, historically, and linguistically illiterate as the Christian right."....... Okay, I've heard enough. Sounds like someone lost one too many debates and now just wants to take some swings when the referee ain't looking. Hedges is so out-of-line and wrong it's absurd. He's so emotional too, you can tell objectivity left the room a long time ago.
FullAccessAgent 1 month ago 2
Wow.... WRONG WRONG WRONG I dig Chris Hedges immensely, he's got a lot of important knowledge and wisdom to offer the world on a variety of issue but he's dead wrong when it comes to this topic. Nowhere in the thousands of lectures and Q & A's I've viewed of both Harris and Hitchens do you find - professed or inferred - the "leap of faith" Hedges describes. "We are moving forward as species to some kind of human utopia" is an unfair interpolation.
FullAccessAgent 1 month ago 2
@hihellohowareyou1000 Very weak comeback. Sad, but not surprising.
harlon57 1 month ago
@hihellohowareyou1000 Apparently, you couldn't tell how emotionally charged, and intellectually baren his comments were. He was all hyperbole, and no content. I've explained it to you, but cannot understand it for you.
harlon57 1 month ago
The Hitchens fanboys are on the attack in this forum. Hitchens clearly lost the debate. I'm an atheist and I'm embarrassed by his performance. Hitchens argued that religion is evil because power structures use it to inflict harm on people and that religious people could theoretically do the same good without religion. He didn't take into account personality types (MBTI or otherwise) and he didn't take into account atheistic evil such as in Russia.His argument was pathetic; Hedges did better.
tstruss912 1 month ago
@tstruss912 Were you an actual atheist who followed Hitchens, you would already know his response to the bogus atheistic evils charge.
harlon57 1 month ago
@harlon57 I am an atheist and I don't follow anyone, especially Hitchens, no offense. I didn't find that argument using a Google search. What is it? I imagine it can't be very logical since it's obvious that atheists can do evil without religion, and many people can't seem to go good without it, given their personalities.
tstruss912 1 month ago
@tstruss912 You really don't get it. People don't commit atrocities for the sake of atheism, but they do in the name of their religion. Search this title for Hitchens video response: Christopher Hitchens rebuts Atheist atrocities charge, it was uploaded by doctorofdisbelief. You especially choose to not read a man voted as one of the top five public intellectuals in the world? Strange choice.
harlon57 1 month ago
@harlon57 hmmm...I think that the top five rating is based on his pre-911 work. Since then he's been a neo-con shill for some reason. I did enjoy his Mother Teresa and Kissinger documentaries. But that's about all I know of his work. I did find and watch the video you suggested. I find that Hitchens doesn't make his point very clearly. The causes of immoral action are easy to find in any psychology 101 book: psychopathy, mob behavior, free will, and following authority.
tstruss912 1 month ago
Being an atheist doesn't disqualify you from any of those sources of evil. You can still follow evil authority figures, may be born a psychopath, may belong to an immoral group, or just choose to act immorally. What he never quite spits out is this: being religious puts your at risk for being part of an immoral group more so than being an atheist does. Then we come to the question, "what makes some people choose religion?" It seems to be a function of personality.
tstruss912 1 month ago 2
@harlon57 Using the MBTI types as an example, the following are prone to religiosity: ISFJ, ESTJ, ESFJ, ISTJ, INFJ...I think that's about it. INTP, ENTP, INTJ, ESTP, and ISTP mostly find it to be silly. But then again, the first set of types is drawn to MANY power centers, and tend to believe in obedience and order. That is not the case with the second set. I can almost guarantee that if religions were wiped out tomorrow most people would still find evil groups and leaders......
tstruss912 1 month ago
sam harris has said in so many debates that he is against the War in Iraq-- what is hedges talking about?
peamealbaconrules 1 month ago
I really don't see how simultaneously the christian right in the US can be fascists while in the middle east terrorism, violent jihad, and race hatred as we see in cartoons showing jews as apes and pigs and the "Protocalls of the Elders of Zion", and Mein Kampf selling 100s of thousands of copies, is "understandable" and rationalizable.
charlesvan13 1 month ago
So he wrote this book just as a polimic against Hitchens and Harris.
The net effect of the christian right in the US is that casino gambling and prostitution are illegal most places. Who cares?
charlesvan13 1 month ago
To his credit, I can't hate Chris Hedges because he doesn't make any sense.
In the debates with Hitchens and Harris he always asserts that fundamentalism is the problem, and it is caused by dispair; except for american preachers, in that case fundamentalism is cause by bigotry.
charlesvan13 1 month ago
WARNING WARNING - FANBOYS ON THE ATTACK.
mykebulvai 1 month ago
Here is a man who was destroyed in his debate with Christopher Hitchens. After Hitchens' answer of the final question, and offered a chance to respond to Hitchens' attack on Hedges, couldn't respond. He looked floored.
harlon57 1 month ago
I once watched Christopher Hitchens in an interview with Charlie Rose, spend the entire show, in bitter polemics condemning all forms of spirituality, along with any and all adherents, and blaming all of the world's problems, including his own neurosis, on religion and religious people. He then finished by saying, "The problem with religious people, is they can never resist the urge to proselytize. In fact, they feel as if they are doing you a disservice if they do otherwise."
83169 1 month ago
@83169 Apparently this still holds true, even if the object of faith is a reverence for an universal negative. Life is full of these little ironies, no?
83169 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@83169 Apparently this still holds true, even if the object of faith is a reverence for an universal negative. Life is full of these little ironies, no?
83169 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Chris Hedges is brilliant on his critique of political issues such as the Iraq war, but defending religion is a bit pathetic. Its funny because Hitchens is the exact opposite yet I find the political issues of stat/corporate powe more dangerous than religion.
JagjeetMann 1 month ago
Comment removed
JagjeetMann 1 month ago
He is very right in many of his points, they do espouse a radical atheism that is very similar to that of the radical Christians. Especially right on the points of their over zealous almost Nazi idea's of using murder, or force to make the religious fanatics bow to atheist ideology.
Not to mention that anyone who cant see the clear colonial/economic pretext to the war in the Arab world, and the Wests heavy involvement in manipulating the populace there through religion is blind as they come.
NeutralExistence 2 months ago
Wow, even when there's nobody there to debate him, he still can't win an argument.
Aeschylus 2 months ago 2
I agree with Chris Hedges on a lot of things. This is not one of them. I believe his heart is in the right place, and as an atheist, I hold him up to very high standards even after hearing his views on atheism. I don't think his arguments would hold up very well in a debate with Harris or Hitchens. And honestly, I don't want them to debate each other because they're all awesome human beings despite ideological disagreement on religion.
SnafuMatthew 2 months ago
I love Hitchens, and I can appreciate Harris (though that may quite often be surname bias on my part), but I have to agree with Hedges on this particular issue. Hitchens and Harris have been overreaching. Hitchens, for one, has gone from reasoned and rational, classical atheism, to frankly dog-piling on Islam, caught up in the rush of Islamophobia. They say he's "owned" Hedges in debate, but let's face it, intelligent people generally can make convincing arguments for otherwise bad positions.
GoodManBadSerf 2 months ago
@GoodManBadSerf That being said, I don't think I've felt more grief at watching someone I've never met suffer the effects of illness quite like I have watching Hitchens. The world will be a little worse off when he leaves us.
GoodManBadSerf 2 months ago
He's heinously misrepresenting both of them. He's wrong.
MissAPierce 2 months ago
This is just unbelievable. It's as if Chris Hedges has basically made up a position that he believes he can argue against (albeit rather incomprehensibly), and tries to smear Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens with it.
It's beyond pathetic.
ubernaffa 2 months ago
If I had to guess I would say Chris Hedges is a bit bitter for clearly getting beat down by both Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens in their respective debates. All you have to do is watch the tape and Hedges at the end of both debates is quite vividly defeated.
enigmafia89 2 months ago 3
@enigmafia89 Couldn't agree more.
stratocaster1986able 2 months ago
Comment removed
thomasey2 2 months ago
Well Darwin wrote a lot of what evolutuion was about, but he wasnt right about everything
moroney1 2 months ago
This is painfully stupid
moroney1 2 months ago
Chris Hedges logic is basically this: Christopher Hitchens supported the war in Iraq, Christopher Hitchens is an atheist, therefore atheists are evil. Also, human progress should not be pursued because thats utopian, so don't bother. He's a nihilist and a Jihad sympathizer.
athabascka 2 months ago
Hedges defends Islam..WHY? I have a question for him - would he allow a muslim into his home to cut off his 6yr old daughters genitalia ? This is a muslim practice and is carried out today. Mr Hedges, YES or NO. These are only WORDS and hope they will not be "spammed" ! - this HORRIFIC practice is happening RIGHT NOW . I dare not be more specific here for then this comment will be spammed ! HOW can this barbaric act be justified by any sane person.
brindow1 2 months ago
in Hedges world it is chauvenistic to point out the truth of how women are treated in the Muslim world. He is a truly bankrupt human being....and really not very bright either
funcpl2741054 2 months ago 2
..good input from the intervieiwer (sic)....im awfly drunk
charliemctruth 2 months ago
Am I being self dellusional when I say that Chris Hedges is nearly as smart as me ? If you disagree with moi then you can just fuck off. Jeesus..I'm only kidding ! Cunts.
xx
charliemctruth 2 months ago
He deliberately misrepresents the atheist movement by saying things that are provably untrue, like atheism requires faith, and that atheists think all believers should be converted or eradicated. Atheists do NOT believe this, nor do they think that all evil is done in the name of religion. EVERY Atheist will very graciously admit that is not true. Chris Hedges deliberately lies in this interview to sway people's opinions, as advocates of religion often do. Don't be taken in by this fraud.
melzaren 2 months ago
He uses quite a few straw man arguments and exaggerations. "Us vs. them" and "moral superiority" are not genuine sentiments of any of the new atheists. Yes, they'll say certain moral ideas of a religion are in fact immoral, but they've never said religious people are less moral people than the superior atheists. It's a common false accusation to call critics of religion intolerant of religious people, assuming that their criticisms are directed at followers rather than the doctrine itself.
Oddhermit 2 months ago
I don't believe in God, but I believe in Chris Hedges more than I believe in Christopher Hitchens. Before critcizing him, people should do a little research on Hedges' career, and they'll find he is one of the most honest, scrupulous, and truly progressive journalists in the United States.
cslad1 2 months ago
I'm an atheist and I think Chris Hedges is absolutely correct. New atheists, try and separate yourself from your beliefs when analysing what Hedges is saying. Be the freethinker you claim you are.
shreddakj 2 months ago 2
@shreddakj darn it.. i share your views sir., and im am an atheist myself..
balbahut0g 2 months ago 2
@shreddakj When you say new atheist, do you just mean someone who doesn't believe in the supernatural and then, by examining the world, believes that religion is a bad influence?
DevilMayFry 2 months ago
@DevilMayFry I mean those in the vein of Harris and Hitchens who malign all religion with the same brush when issue is far more complex.
shreddakj 2 months ago
@shreddakj Elaborate. Religion is religion, a belief or worldview independent of evidence and facts that relies solely on faith. I have a feeling all you mean by new atheist is an atheist who actually speaks out. Don't forget that merely knowing someone is an atheist tells you nothing more about the person other than the sole fact that they don't have a belief in the supernatural.
DevilMayFry 2 months ago
@DevilMayFry I said "those in the vein of Harris and Hitchens". You could say they are figureheads of the New Atheist movement. A 'New Atheist' would be someone who takes their work or similar work seriously. You can be a vocal atheist without being an idiot New Atheist who treats all religious people as if they were fundamentalists.
shreddakj 2 months ago
@shreddakj I challenge you to find any proof that Harris, Hitchens or Dawkins "treat all religious people as if they were fundamentalists." I'm not discounting the possibility, but from what I know of them I think this is not the case.
And in any case, like I was saying, religion is religion, a wilful suspension of critical thinking, and I can't for the life of me respect that.
DevilMayFry 2 months ago
@DevilMayFry It's effectively the entire premise of Hitchens' book, the subtitle is even subtitled 'Religion poisons everything'. His critiques of religion are extremely seemingly wide-sweeping, but in reality only target fundamentalists.
I intentionally didn't lump Dawkins in with Harris and Hitchens because he doesn't do this, he's constantly making the distinction between fundamentalists and 'sophisticated theologians'. Harris and Hitchens lack this subtlety.
shreddakj 2 months ago
@shreddakj Right, he's not saying everyone is a fundamentalist, he's just saying that at the core, that is what religion is. By definition, fundamentalists are people who believe everything of their religion. If there was no religion there would be no fundamentalist religious people.
DevilMayFry 2 months ago
@DevilMayFry But the problem doesn't lie within religion, it lies within people. Religion is just another set of man-made beliefs. For atheists to grant religion a special place when it comes to influencing people to do things seems a bit bizarre to me. People create and adhere to ideologies pretty universally, irrespective of their religious beliefs. It's human nature that's the problem and specifically the tendency to fanatically hold to ideology, not something unique to religion.
shreddakj 2 months ago
@shreddakj The problem lies exactly with religion. Of all ideologies and beliefs, religion is the world's largest, and it promotes the wilful suspension of critical thinking and absent-mindedly following words of people who seem authoritative. Crazy people can have crazy beliefs but as soon as they truly learn to think for themselves they will grow out of them. Kids have imaginary friends all the time but they grow out of them; why? Because they learn HOW to think, not WHAT to think.
DevilMayFry 2 months ago
Who is this crap-brained loser?
hznfrst 2 months ago
This makes a heck of a lot of sense.
Froschsenki 2 months ago
The like-dislike ratio shows the stupidity of YouTube.
5555miles 2 months ago
I wonder if the problem is not the 'new atheism' , but rather Hitchenshimself . I don't care whether he is an atheist or a believer, he supported the war in Iraq, disregarding the lies that were told to justify it. If he villifies religion for its 'lies' then why doesn't he viilify the lies that the Bush administration told? He is still a 'believer' - he just chooses which lies he would like to believe.
piax00 2 months ago
Does he say "nucular" in every talk he gives?
d1lightboy 2 months ago
probably the only subject I can't agree with hedges
......... on politics though he is on point, unlike hitchens
which ironically i agree with on the 'god' debate but not politics
matereymate 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 2 months ago
I would like to actually hear Sam Harris say we should nuke the mideast..
LothairApoclyane 3 months ago
@LothairApoclyane Harris wrote that we might have to drop a nuke first if an "Islamist regime" ever acquired long-range nuclear weaponry. His response to Hedges can be read on the Truthdig site, although it doesn't explain what his definition of an Islamist regime is.
logicbranch 3 months ago
@LothairApoclyane
That's a missrepresentation of some passages in Harris' book.
Sam Harris didn't write or say that we should nuke the middle east.
charlesvan13 1 month ago
Uh... 'time is linear' is an Augustinian theory.
It's good to know that critical thinking is now officially dogma according to Hedges.
ladyvanda 3 months ago
Interesting points he brings up. I found myself agreeing with him on some things because it's what I have been thinking about myself and disagreeing with others because I think the evidence says otherwise. The makings of a very interesting conversation if conducted with mutual respect.
moety2 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As an atheist, I appreciate this man's cogent analysis of the right wing war mongering imperialist-atheists ( Hitchens, for example who extols Bush's & Blair's wars, etc).
The "Four Horsemen" do a fair job of demolishing the "God of Vacation Bible School" and never touch the nuanced ideas of thinkers like Tillich or this man Hedges.
leahcim3360 3 months ago
Comment removed
leahcim3360 3 months ago
Hedges is much deeper than Hitchens.
AkiraBergman 3 months ago
If you consider yourself an atheist, yet still believe war and general violence against others is morally justifiable (outside the extreme context of immediate self-defence), you've got a long way to go so far as becoming a moral and rational person. Militant, bigoted, over-zealous atheists are no better than their god-fearing cousins in their potential to inject more unnecessary death and suffering into the world.
WhyteEagle 3 months ago
So Chris Hedges doesn't believe in atheists. Well, I don't believe in the absurdly incoherent ramblings of postmodernists like Chris Hedges.
AtheistWoman 3 months ago
However I do have great respect for Chris Hedges, his point is very clear and well founded... Just because Hitchens, Dawkins, and Harris have more clear understanding of what they know and what they don't know, does not mean that it is right for them to condescend towards anyone who does not agree with them. Carl Sagan understood this well, he recognized that the evils we face as a species are both dogmatism and brazenly self-assured zealotry, and ergo he embodied neither vice.
Itseasyifyoutry 3 months ago
Harris, Dawkins, and Hitchens have all openly acknowledged that both religious and non-religious people commit atrocities but conclude that non-religious logical rationalism is morally superior because it is an ideology based on tangible observable truths. In contrast, religion, which is both a system and a 'way of being' that serves as paliative for our fears is ultimately founded on anthropocentric and credulous non-thinking. Harris has many times stated that spirituality is intrinsic in us.
Itseasyifyoutry 3 months ago
How funny that the first few seconds of this video featuring an anti-capitalist should be represented by a corporation. (Incidentally, Hedges is a moronic demagogue and Hitch is a genius)
shmuelposin 3 months ago
He claims New Atheists are "fundamentalists", but aren't his own beliefs just as polarizing? He's not trying to build bridges. He's burning bridges to religious fundamentalism as well as New Atheism. He is the very embodiment of what he is preaching against. He also misrepresents his opponents viewpoints, such as claiming that "Harris promotes torture". I read The End of Faith. Sam Harris is against torture. This guy is spewing nonsense.
craigblack1234 3 months ago