Christopher Hitchens Vs. Chris Hedges on Religion - Part 4/4

[mntribefan]

I always pay attention when I hear words spoken by either of these men. I find that I am landing nearer to Chris Hedge's position. While he, I think, correctly calls out the benefits of monotheism in breaking down the tribalism, I think he is off on indicating that monotheism is more helpful than other beliefs (or non-belief) today. I think that Hitchens, as Hedges pointed out, is misplacing his anger of human behavior specifically towards religion. The fault is more with humans in general.

[sgpquek]

As long as Hedges continues to call himself a christian, he deserves all the ridicule that can purportedly hurl at him. Just because he choses and beat about the paletable ala carte dishes of the menu doesn't give him the (divine) right or privileges that he or those comments here about how nasty and impolite Hitchens was, all the while hiding under the thin hypocritical veil of respectability.

[ishinadish]

Wow, Hitchens looks pissed out of his mind in one of those pics! No wonder he relies on cheap gags to get an applaud.

[timparcival]

@MegaTarkers , Sorry, but you haven't convinced me. Anyone can say that. "I'm right and you're wrong, because you aren't using your head." All it indicates is hubris.

[Sconezeta]

Religion is a tool for corrupt persons/governments to use. There are many fine people who believe in religion but this doesn't change the previous statement. Besides who is ever going to agree which religion is the "one" that is right? This fuels more hatred and you end up back at the first statement quicker. We at the very least need more nations to be secular to stop these influences from gaining political power and using religion as a tool.

[timparcival]

Hitchens always got on my nerves. He's the atheist equivalent of my hyper-Catholic father in law: Morally certain, and anyone disagreeing with him is full of it. Hedges' arguments are far more solid, on anything.

[LeonSpinx1]

Hedges' last statement is wonderful

[DiVeronica]

Hedges is missing one of Hitchens' most important messages: which is that Religion, be it totalitarian or not, permits endorses and promulgates credulity.

[narotax]

@DiVeronica Credulity does not need religion to survive nor is it born there. It is everywhere. It exists in politics, sports, art, music, education and anything that anyone with an ego touches. That does not mean that the search for or belief in God should be ceased simply because it affords an opportunity for the gullible to be preyed upon by those with bad intentions.

[DiVeronica]

It is inherent in religion.

[narotax]

@DiVeronica No. It is inherent in life.

[librazone]

@DiVeronica Reality TV promulgates credulity far more than any religion and is insidious in its effect. And I might add that a true Christian who truly understands the new testament looks at the world around him from a neutral platform because the absolution of ego is the basic concept of Christian doctrine.

[DiVeronica]

are we missing something here? there seems to be some audio missing between parts 3 and 4.

[cleanhomer]

08:36 "Christians, Jews, Muslims will not leave you alone." Except the ones who WILL. "They'll find something in their holy books to justify bothering you." Except the ones who desist that behavior, and choose not to do it, even if their book might say they can. I don't know why Hitchens assumes that all, or even most followers of any religion or ideologue will follow every jot & tittle of their sacred writ. Didn't Dawkins point out that people pick & choose their beliefs?

[rodeo179]

Hitchens is a fundamentalist, sounds like the hard headed fascists he opposes - e.g. Taliban.

[debjyotiarr]

@rodeo179 I've never heard such an eloquent Taliban.

[cleanhomer]

@debjyotiarr Are you saying Hitchens is eloquent? Sounds drunk & arrogant to me.

[debjyotiarr]

@cleanhomer Who says you can't be eloquent being drunk and arrogant?

[charlesvan13]

9:55

He's just bullshitting about the cause of widespread religious adherence in America.

The places hardest hit by the recession weren't in the bible belt.

The average Chinese person makes 4000-5000usd a year, with no health insurance, and literally lives in an oligarchy. But it's also one of the least religious countries, with just a fraction of practicing Bhudists and Christians.

[gspaulsson]

"It's easy to beat up on people who embrace a non-reality-based belief system". So what exactly is a "reality-based" religion?

[TheShadowOfMars]

The source of the evils of totalitarianism is not that flawed humans are in the saddle, but fascist humans.

They're so full of superstitious reverence for their perfect being and masochistic shame about the absolute incurable depravity of human nature, that they just cannot imagine any good positive human(istic) endeavour.

Their anti-fascist God is a benevolent Fuhrer who will forcibly prevent this child-species of savages from committing fascist crimes. How do they not see the contradiction?

[PawnBACM]

@TheShadowOfMars I concur. The debate certainly left me more torn than any I have heard in my life. They're saying the same thing, even when they're not. I wouldn't give America's powers-that-be a pass on the Middle East any more than I would religion on the basis orthodoxy differs from text. Fascism it is; you get the gold star. One can't follow what the Constitution says and the other wants worship of a "god" they are "more civilized than". 3rd world slave imports and Israe-oil. Yippee-ki-aaa

[charlesvan13]

Hedges' blaming religious adherence on economic and political difficulties of the masses doesn't hold up to facts. China is an oligarchy with the average middle class person living off $5000 a year. And 95% of the people are non-religious.

[juwug]

@charlesvan13 In his statement, he was referring explicitly to religious extremists in America and the middle east. And you have to keep in mind that earlier he equated religious extremism to ideological extremism (fascism communism). Impoverished Chinese, with a pluralist religious history, embraced the extremist Communist Party rather than a religious ideology. So no, his statement is not inaccurate. However, I don't think it refutes Hitchen's point that religion itself can be a problem.

[JovialJewels]

Spinoza's "god" was more of what he called the truths of the universe or the laws of nature, he constantly refereed to god as "deus sive natura" which means "god in other words nature." So it is kinda unfair to refer to his god as a force, when really if we are going by his definition, scientists believe in the laws of physics and therefor all believe in Spinoza's "god"

[Aeschylus]

9:29 "It's easy to beat up on people who embrace a non-reality-based belief system," says the apologist for Islam.

10:43 "And when you create those inequities and those disparities, you push people into the arms of demagogues, who promise them a world of magic and miracles... and a divine plan for them," says the man who (echoing Russell) wrote "Why I Am a Socialist."

[rhth79]

@Aeschylus Oh wow, nice criticism lol. Who said it is irrelevant, they are clearly true statements. Or are you that blinded by your bigotry you can't comprehend what he's saying?

[Aeschylus]

@rhth79 Sorry, I didn't think it was necessary to explain the irony. 1) Islam is a non-reality-based belief system. 2) Hedges' socialism promises what it can't deliver.

But where's the bigotry?

[NixonisLord]

So patriarchy is bad-although Mainline Protestantism has only fought against it for about 50 years? What the f*ck were you doing for the past 400 years? Hedges' world-view is as binary as Falwell's. There are those who "get it" and those who are a danger. Religion is stupid and boring and expensive.

[Easleytee]

Oddly enough...people seek greater comfort in romanticizing the implausible than they do in abandoning metaphysical confabulations and superstitions.

[myroseaccount]

I am hoping that someone can post the entire debate which would give a fuller exposition of Hedges's arguments. His closing speech was superb.

[phlumph99]

Hitchens is a one trick pony: all dry humour & analogies. He recites from the same old list of religious evil doers in all his presentations (never bothering to recite from the list of non-religious evil doers). Hedges has obviously spent a lot of time looking inward at his own impulses for good and evil and questioned how those impulses move us to interact with our world. Religion is just one of the many "tools" that gets co-opted by our less noble impulses.

[myroseaccount]

It would have been good to hear Hitchens's response to Hedges closing remarks on this video, which are superb by the way.

[theshunzun]

@myroseaccount I doubt it.

[jvaish]

It's amazing to see the amount of sheep that follow "Hitch", who is basically just a charismatic drunk. Hedges blows him out of the water using pure reason, whereas Hitchens just comes up with subtle ad hominem witticisms. Sheep are sheep on both sides of the spectrum I suppose.

[nemirn]

This does sound like it was heavily edited. It has been a long time, but I remember hearing the original, which included more "Hitch slaps". Sorry i don't know where to find it.

[iowntwocats]

@HitchSlapYouSon yes but hedges is no moron. just looks like one by comparison LOL

[0933062]

Hedges really doesn't make the case. 'white noise' as the Hitch says. Also churns out the old argument of all the good 'ordinary religious folks' do. Pity Hitch didn't remind him that to make 'good, ordinary folks' do something really evil - you need religion. So, he comes across as an apologist for religion, even though its a 'non-reality based belief system'. Can he hear himself? A belief system based on lies is never going to be good in the long run. Know an enemy when you see one.

[vvaghel1]

Hedges is a good guy and has some good political insights, especially when it comes to South America. But on heavier, more difficult issues like theology, his arguments are very weak tea

[theshunzun]

@vvaghel1 why is his argument weak?

[writersblock26]

Thank you for posting this, TheStevenBlue.

[KennGM]

Heh, this version of the debate is almost as if they took out many of the beatdowns Hedges took throughout the debate including Hitchens final statement. I guess it's fair play as the missing bits have been available here and there and people have been calling to hear what else happened.

[jeffdee]

Hedges claims to despise people who offer magic and miracles and claims that Jesus walks with people and protects them. Well what is HE doing, when he defends the view that there's magic and miracles and Jesus? He's being a hypocrite, is what he's doing.

[bullbunnies]

@jeffdee hedges didn't say he's a christian he just offered a different analysis of religion that wasn't a polemic

[theshunzun]

@jeffdee what do you mean he's being a hypocrite?

[shreddakj]

@jeffdee Hedges doesn't believe in magic and miracles, nor does he defend that view.

[jeffdee]

Hedges says that if evil people don't cloak themselves in religion then they'll cloak themselves in something else. Well then we'll strip away THOSE cloaks, too! He's arguing that we shouldn't expose religion as a sham because there are other shams available. But that's no defense. We don't want ANY shams!

[stevensw]

@jeffdee I don't think there is a better cloak than religion. The very essence of fear is threatening people with something they can't sense with any of the 5 senses. Threatening people with hell for an in an afterlife, these things can only be of the supernatural. People value their lives, but they value their afterlives even more.

[sageSPH]

@jeffdee If we rid ourselves of "shams", we'll still behave, as some would say, "immorally" (though morality is subjective). What if a man kills another man in a flair of passion because that man was having an affair with the woman the former loved, should we then rid ourselves of love? Wow, what a perfect world that would be.

Evil is eternal.

[SamKnause]

TheStevenBlue; thanks for posting this debate.

Thank you for all your debates Mr. Hitchens.

You shine throughout and win hands down every time.

[AL13NM]

Thanks for posting this.

[charlesvan13]

There is a lot more to this debate.

[TheStevenBlue]

@charlesvan13 This is supposed to be the full exchange, although it might be edited. It is all I could find anyways.

[charlesvan13]

@TheStevenBlue

Perhaps Hedges and Hitchens debated more than once. 

But I recall a debate in which Hitchens gets more agressive at Hedges toward the end.

[OdinLowe]

@TheStevenBlue

i have all of it... there's about 15 min more

[OdinLowe]

@TheStevenBlue whoops that is the whole thing i was mistaken...

[charlesvan13]

@TheStevenBlue

In fact, the end when Hitchens gets very truculent is not here.

It left enough of an impression on Hedges that he wrote a book on how much he hates the new atheists.

[PawnBACM]

@TheStevenBlue commonsenseatheism(DOT)com/?p=­50 was the best link I could find, but I didn't look very long. Peace. Nice upload; terribly cool actually.

[charlesvan13]

@charlesvan13

I thought this was the debate where Hitchens gets offended because Hedges defends suicide bombing as a reaction to opression. Perhaps those parts were editted out.

These debates resulted in Hedges not being on good terms with Hitchens and Harris. Then he wrote a hit-piece, "I don't believe in atheists", on Hitchens and Harris.

[KingObould]

Pretty short....