The U.S. marines are tough! They can bravely defeat any child. A pregnant woman is no match for a squadron of brave marines either! And the elderly? They'd better say their prayers when the U.S. marines come to town!
Amygdalin is sometimes referred to as sugar cyanide. People don't normally refer to table salt as sodium chloride, yet they could. Keep in mind that ruminants (animals that graze) survive almost exclusively on grass, seeds, leaves & shoots: all of which contain ample amounts of the substance Amygdalin (vitamin B17). If the hydrogen cyanide were toxic then death-by-salad-bar would be common among diners who eat Amygdalin-rich collard greens, mustard greens, spinach & bamboo.
Wikipedia: Hitchens has written of his homosexual experiences when in boarding school in his memoir, "Hitch-22." These experiences continued in his college years when he allegedly had relationships with two men who eventually became a part of the Thatcher government.
Was sodomite Christ' Hitchens' hollow death an early Christmas gift in retribution for the total-war that he endorsed against the mothers & children of the Arab sphere?
Evolutionary THEORY doesn't bolster, nor compliment: virology, epidemiology nor any other -ology. Darwin's plagiarized writings have become the bible of globaloneyists/eugenicists worldwide, from plain Jane Goodall, to public ward Jacques Cousteau. How is it that apes & zoo keepers exist simultaneously? This question is never addressed by evolution's THEORISTS rationally. It irritates them to no end.
David Rockefeller's lickspittle Christ' Hitchens supports the Wilsonian model of "diplomacy" which includes, but is not limited to, expeditionary forces, permanent outposts (bases) and exporting/fomenting revolution by sabotaging local elections to depose popularly-elected leaders.
@smmclaug75 I understand that but come on. You don't see doctors around colleagues calling them Bill or Mike around the workplace, the respectfully call them "doctor". It's called professionalism and Robinson clearly lacks it.
@UtopiaMinor666 well hitchen is not really a neoliberal, hes a Trotskist, the old left who believes that violent intervene abroad. isolationism is not exactly a conservative idea
The great thing about young Marxists is that they evolve into disillusioned socialists. Then they mature into classic liberals. Finally, they evolve into self-loathing libertarians. Thanks for the ride Christopher Hitchens!
@chiefashley56 I disagreed with Buckley about nearly everything, but at least the man had ideas. There was something to debate him about. Nowadays, conservatism has become more of an identity than a set of coherent ideas. What "ideas" remain on the right are pretty nonsensical, mostly conspiracy mongering by the likes of Glen Beck. It's a posture. Nothing to discuss anymore.
The Hoover Inst is a ultra right wing policy tank. Robinson uses the classic buzz word "Trotsky ite" to describe those who believed in liberty and the pursuit of happiness. FYI, Reed Irvine came up with his bogus "Liberal bias" propaganda as a result of the riots in Chicago. . Robinson, "Trotsky ite organization" "you were engaged in narcissism Christopher" is this an objective discussion?
"His tolerance of opposing views and his consistent disdain for ad hominem attacks"
Clearly, you haven't seen the Chomsky and Buckley's debate. I respect the fact that he grew up in a tough environment, but when you are wrong, you are wrong.
@cconat au contraire, Bill was a regular utilizer of the ad hominem tactic. The "listen you queer..."meltdown was an acute example of a life-long malady that bill had.he tried ever so hard to conceal his virulence & contempt for his opponent with unction & pesudo-royal drawl,but be observant,to mailer"i never thought id hear you utter a word with that many syllables" to chomsky:"im guessing you must like him because he hates us [americans]"moreover,his introductions on FLine were vitriolic
My God, so much misinformation just in the intro ! Like the "left " went to Canada, the "right" went to Vietnam. The young "right" at the time like Bush, Cheney , Gingrich etc. had rich parents who got them deferrments and didn't go either. And Buckley was hardly "young" at that time: he was in his 40s. I don't know if 1 million left Cuba after Castro, but whatever they were the very rich who had exploited the poor. As for WFB likening protests to masturbation., shame! even in your grave!
@DrLearyUSA The point is that they are(Robinson, WFB) politicizing a war that exploited poor people, and lined the pockets of the military contractors. The "Misinformation" that Steve( my perception) is referring to is how they polarize the debate(pitting liberal against conservative) by oversimplifying what was a very complex dynamic. I know some Vietnam Vets, and they are appalled at how ignorant people are when they hear comments, "The Left went to Canada, and the right went to Vietnam"
The stance Hitchens takes on Iraq today seems to fly in the face of the stance he took on Vietnam them. He sounds a lot more like William F. Buckley today, it seems to me. Which is also a good thing, it seems to me.
@heyzeusful The difference, I believe, is that the Vietnamese communists never said they intended to harm the United States directly. The enemy in the war on terror says it wants to destroy the West and works feverishly to do so.
@jlewisda The rationale for our involvement in Vietnam was the "domino" theory, i.e..if South Vienam went to the commies it would cause all the adjacent nations falling and the tipping effect would spread throuhout Asia. Actually afer we withdrew Vietnam began fighting with her adjacent commie neighbors, China and Cambodia, and they actually invaded the latter to bring down Pol Pot and today Cambodia is non Communist. China and Laos are communist in name only.
@steveinchelsea The way I remember it was that Saigon fell in April '75, and almost immediately thereafter, the Pathet Lao were installed in Laos and the Khmer Rouge overran Cambodia. There then followed sporadic uprisings in Northeast Thailand, a full-blown opium war in eastern Burma, ethnic cleansing of the Hmong in Laos and a million-odd dead in Cambodia.
So I don't put quotes around the domino theory. Neither did the Vietnamese, Cambodian or Hmong refugees of my acquaintance,
@jlewisda The Pathet Lao were already in Laos, but they are not there now. The Khmer Rouge were bit players until we engineered the coup that overthrew Prince Sihonouk and installed Lon Nol. Then the Khmer Rouge overthrew him. The US recognized the Khmer Rouge as the legitimite governmaent of Cambodia until the communist Vietnamese invaded Cambodia and overthrew him. Now you can argue till the cows come home whether all this happened because of our involvement or despite it.
@steveinchelsea Right on the money!!!!! Was the Carter Admin largely responsible for the policies? or was it the Ford Admin? (in Cambodia) Were we responsible for the slaughter in East Timor?, or our policies affected the outcome?
@stella3265 The arms that we supplied the Indonesians was supposed to be for defense only by treaty. Ford & Kissinger visited Suharto and secretly gave him the go ahead to invade East. Timor.
@mrfrednoname Even if Ford and Dr. K didn't give Suharto a "wink" right before the E. Timor invasion I would think all Americans would be concerned to see our arms paid by our taxes used to slaughter people. Similarly our support of Pinochet in Argentina and the death squads in central america during the '80s. But hey, I don't want to be accused of "apologizing" for America.
@mrfrednoname When we arm or fund the arming of dictators we ARE responsible for what ensues. I believe in the words of two great Americans, George Washington who said to avoid foreign entanglements and Dwight Eisenhower who said beware of the military industrial complex.
@steveinchelsea Milton Friedman played a major role in advising Pinochet, or at least Pinochet's economic advisors were students of the Chicago School!!!!! Your correct in that our taxes go to subsidizing American imperialism, or American terrorism!!!!
@mrfrednoname What drugs are you on? you are uninformed!!! The U.S.A is not doing what I want!!. You think you are speaking for me? I have to repeat myself, the PEOPLE in the Middle East region are fighting for independence!!! The April 6th youth movement is from the PEOPLE!!! I'll repeat myself,read Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine!!! What in gods do you not understand. Communist China was recognized by Richard M. Nixon. The U,S has recognized Red China since!!!!!!. Do you have Alzheimer's ?
@stella3265 Americans are in a total state of amnesia when it come to our actions in Chile, the mass killings in Central America sponsored by our new saint, Ronald Reagan, our interventions in Haiti, the Dominican Republic, our support of the colonels in Greece, and most recently Condoleeza Rice's audience with Kadaffi. The list goes on. I recommend any book on the subject by Naom Chomsky, but in partucular Failed States.
@mrfrednoname You mean that when someone else breaks free of American imperialism(being colonized) and fights for sovereignty , and wants to have their independence from American aggression!!! Thats what is happening in the Middle East, right as we speak!!!! Viva la Revolucion
@stella3265 Being an ally doesn't make you part of an american empire. Lybia sure wasn't and most middle eastern nations are hardly great american allies. The revolutions are not anti-american but anti authoritarian. Who knows what will replace the existing governments??? Oh and there are no us colonies anywhere in the middle east.
@mrfrednoname I suggest you read the definition of "Imperialism" You are in no way an 'Ally" when the imperial power goes against the will of the people by inserting a Dictator that was backed by the U.S.A. Egypt and the other nations in the Middle East have no sovereignty. You are not ally when you are being forced to obey orders at gunpoint. You obviously are not aware of the definition of sovereignty. I suggest that you read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" you might learn something!!
@mrfrednoname If you would like to have a cogent well balanced debate, let me know!!! I suggest that you debate with yourself!!! actually more like Master debating, with yourself!!!!
@mrfrednoname Whats happening in Egypt is a direct response (against American aggression) by the PEOPLE!! not by the Western backed dictator, the PEOPLE are fighting for their SOVEREIGNTY. The Egyptian army has been a occupying force for 60 years. The April 6th youth movement deserves the credit for the uprising that started in Tunisia. You are an unwilling participant of the American empire when it goes against the will of the PEOPLE!!!!! Power to the PEOPLE, Right on!!!!!
@mrfrednoname You are not a well read or well informed person!!! The U.S is planning a possible, I say possible intervention when things begin to ease up a little, which I hope and pray does not happen, or I should say that the PEOPLE will not allow that to happen!!!! The April 6th Youth movement is a grass roots org that is not funded represented or supported by the State. Do you get it know? Look up the definition of Sovereignty!!!
@stella3265 Nation building on the part of the U.S should be directly in support and by the consent of the PEOPLE of Egypt, and every other nation in the entire region who are fighting for independence!
@mrfrednoname No, you obviously do not have any clue about the history in the region for the past 60(since 48) plus years. Do you have Alzheimer's? Young Man, you need to read a book!!! this is embarrassing!!!! Explain what your definition(perception) of Imperialism is. Define Sovereignty. Read A book!! Apply this to the history in the Middle East region for the last 60 years!!! American policy in the region has always supported radical Islam. What in Gods name do you not understand!!!
@mrfrednoname Wrong Freddie!!!! U.S policy has supported Dictators. Mubarak abused the Egyptian people for 30 years. The U.S backed Mubarak(against the will of the Egyptian people) Stop talking in generalities. What American policy, be specific!! Name me the policy that goes against radical Dictators!. There are video tapes of political prisoners being beaten,sodomized, by the approval of the radical Dictators. you have no substance! You are a trained monkey, It's sad that you are ignorant.
@mrfrednoname The April 6th youth movement is a direct response against the brutal, radical Dictators. The U.S has been aware of the brutal,savagery of Mubarak for years, and did nothing to aide the Egyptian people. Mubarak always complied with the U.S policy with Israel(regarding Iran) which went against the will of the Egyptian people. The people in Egypt view U.S policy with Israel as more of a threat, than the Iranians. What in Jesus H Christ do you not understand.
@jlewisda I am not pro-communist in any way. I was in the US Army in Vietnam, but you have to question whether our involvement in what are essentially civil wars does more harm than good.
@jlewisda Sadam Hussein was a secular dictator. He hated Al Quaeda as much as we do. There was no AQ presence in Iraq under SH, unlike now since our invasion.
@cconat Buckley has no knowledge of history...he is unable to separate institutionalized dogma from fact... read any of his critiques on Chomsky or any of his writings on american foreign policy... Buckleys life was an extreme disservice to Knowledge and the Human Quest for Truth
@emiljanowicz Well I'm glad you punctuated 'K'nowledge with a capital K while you made your contribution to the 'quest for truth', thank you for that, for we at youtube would have nothing less! Buckley was a brilliant raconteur and debater of ideas, you are a little shit whose so called contribution to 'knowledge' thankfully limited to youtube posts.
@ogrish84 If you watch a few of his interviews about his new book Hitch 22, he says plainly that he DOES NOT want to be considered a right winger, and also expresses his dislike and lack of respect for Beck and Limbaugh.
@ogrish84 If you watch a few of his interviews about his new book Hitch 22, he says plainly that he DOES NOT want to be considered a right winger, and also expresses his dislike and lack of respect for Beck and Limbaugh.
I would like to point out that Buckley PERFECTLY captures the mood of the 60's in his opening remarks: a time when people were listless, and looking for something to get worked up about. That is the essence right there. You libs here who don't understand Buckley are simply 1) too stupid and ignorant, 2) without the poetic knowledge necessary. I have no use for you buffoons.
William F. Buckley was a pussy. He only picked fights with weak people. If he said anything to someone else he'd get his conservative face smashed against the back of his own skull.
You're a fucking moron. William F. Buckley was a genius, and the fact that you don't recognize it only points to your total lack of a brain. Ever read a book of consequence, mr mental dwarf?
I will never get over the irony of Hitchens opposing Vietnam and then going on to be a fanatical bed-wetting promoting of the disasterous invasion of Iraq.
If you actually listened to his reasons, I think you'd understand that Vietnam was no tyrannical regime like the facist occupation by Saddam Hussein. You can click on my favorites, it's the most recent video, and follow the link on the sidebar to see the FORA video on the "Axis of Evil". He goes into detail of why we should be happy we went to war against Saddam's regime.
He's a Marxist, thus he despises fascism, and he's an anti-theist, so you know he has no love for religious zealots. While I disagree w/ the portrait of the war as some sort of humanitarian effort and find it the sort of shameless partisan propaganda that poisons politics, Hitchens argues its case better than anyone w/out ignorantly resorting to dishonest demagoguery or incoherent spin (see O'Reilly, Hannity). He didn't hesitate to criticize the Bush administration's policy on torture, either.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Oh good lord, Marxism and fascism are the same damn thing in different costumes. They both involve a hatred of human nature and a desire to remake man in the image of some outlandish nonsense. You're an idiot.
You've obviously read virtually nothing about the formation of Marxism or Fascism, two of the most polar opposite ideologies in history. OTOH, the "hatred of human nature" comment leads me to believe you're basing 90% of your political views on Ayn Rand's nutty philosophy.
No, actually I've read just about everythiung Marx and Lenin wrote, and I've also read mein kampf in German (yes, I read German). Western intellectuals constantly repeat this orthodox view of Marxism and Nazism being polar opposite views, but it's a fairy tale, and not based in reason. If they were actually polar opposite views, then they would be opposite in everything, but they're not. Both agree on collectivism, both agree on state control of the economy, both agree on the use of violence...
...and absolute power to re-make reality into a golden age. Both despise the individual and any personal goals which contradict with the will of the party leadership. Where they disagree (and this is one of the few points) is this: fascism is usually oriented around aggrandizing some race or national identity (in the case of Nazism, Germans) whereas communism attempts to reshape all human beings into a new humanity with the proper "consciousness", who think only of the "species".
Okay, for one thing you're conflating Nazism and Fascism, two separate systems of totalitarianism, one primarily devoted to race and the other more to nationalism and economics.
Fascism was conceived as a "third option" to Communism or Capitalism, emphasizing "class cooperation" and only intervening in the economy to benefit business when it's in trouble.
The successors to Franco and Mussolini in Latin America were also very pro-market and specifically pro-business.
Yes and both are forms of socialism. The German National Socialists and Russian Communists (or one might say 'International Socialists') each classed themselves as socialist and claimed to be concerned with the common man/the proletariat while condemning the other as being representative of the very worst of capitalism.
"We are socialists, we are enemies of todays capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions. —Adolf Hitler, [144] 1927 speech"
@anSiarach ...yes he was also karl marx.(as he used to wear a marx like beard for propaganda reasons to ealry rallies to get a piece from the proletarian votes)
you might want to direct us though to a singular socialist policy of nazis.
in fact the gebbelist propaganda was so succesful that a lot of former communists and sociaalists joined the brown shirts storm troops, only to be round up and liquified in the night of the long knifes.(on the demmand of capitalists groups.)
@anSiarach ...ps by capitalists, its clear what hittler reffered to; foreing capitalists and jews,( that is for those that made an efford reading his writtings)not the class in general.
ps 2 the word socialism in nazi aside for ideological plagiarism its also etymological meaningless in the german cultural contex. modern german conservatives are also called christiansocialists.(in bavaria)
you should stop listening to glenn beck and dust off the books.
Why was Hitchens on the wrong side? Because he did not support the U.S. funding imperialists campaigns using false propaganda about fictive domino theories in regards to a nationalist government that would never have submitted its independence to Moscow or Beijing, while at the same time the U.S. was propping up a corrupt dictatorial government in the South that was no less repressive than that in the North and which knew full well that the majority of popular support was directed to the VC?
The left supports "nationalism" only when it is in the service of socialism/communism. In all other cases, the left considers nationalism as "fascist," particularly if part of a political movement in the west.
Inane comment. Should we have allied ourselves with Mussolini & Hitler?
More Vietnamese supported the VC over the RVN government. The RVN knew it could never win elections against them, which is why we had to send 58,000 Americans to their deaths. It was all very anti-democratic, all in the name of fighting for a dictatorial, corrupt Saigon government. The North was also repressive, but the notion that we needed to fight it to limit Chinese hegemony proved disingenuous. They went to war in '79
Oh, now I feel sorry for him. He was so brave, risked so much, had so much to lose! Thanks for enlightening me, and lumping me with "leftists". I speak for myself, although I think most "leftists" don't deride class divisions, they rather point out that class division is the primary engine of human history.
Also, I'm sorry not to have realized that "free-market economics" is giving opportunity to those at the bottom. You are right. Global capitalism is really working for most people, especially the 3 billion or so who live on 2 dollars a day.
Well said. Not to mention those who are starving to death daily for their inability to pay due to sanctions and central bank/corporate loans that their leaders were swindled into knowing full well they could never pay back the loan, thus their citizenry suffer poverty and starvation. "FREE" market.
Continually insulted and despised? By whom? Certainly not his own people. His was a life of privilege from start to finish, and he made the most of it to justify and maintain class division generally. Historically he was on the wrong side of many, if not most major issues. Civil rights, Vietnam, US foreign policy, etc. Smug, haughty, ridiculously affected. My mother said he was a good musician.
Someone really shoud have told Mr. Buckley that the debate is televised so that he could bring along a decent belt and not have to continually hitch up his trousers.
Jesus.. They always make it sound like the hippies were any more intelligent or any more "a movement" than these Obamaton libiots. I was there. They were a bunch of self-serving twits pretending to have a cause to justify their every passive aggressive overdramatic whiiiine.
me me me.
SAME AS TODAY.
anti war was the same as today too except our losers are about a free ride. Those losers were about not having to serve. Not an oz of character or principle between the lot of them.
so your entire argument is "i was there, therefore i know better"???????? seems pretty weak to me. and you do not define character and principle, specially since conservatism defines it as accordance to tradition and taboo combined with smugness and self righteousness.
Buckley is a thin caricature of Ivy league snobbery. He is from an old-boy network where rhetorical style and victorian propriety trump substance. He is king of the ad homonym quip, and he tends to appeal to the bumper-sticker crowd. He opts for narrative simplicity over thorny specifics. He is an ideologue.
There are so many brilliant thinkers on the Right. Why do people flock to Buckley?
Buckley had brain power, but was cold, cynical, cruel and dismissive of anyone's trials but his own. To say anyone protesting in '68 was "masturbatory" indicates he felt no concern for anyone not wanting to kill and die in the jungles of southeast Asia. Buckley's positions all make sense if you replace "we" with "we the wealthy, connected WASPs". e.g. "We need security, not rabble-rousing peaceniks." (insert lean-back and oh-I'm-so-clever lopsided smile/sneer here).
yes..looking back he appears like some cartoon ...and its easy to see how so called far right conservatives today have figured out to get attention by acting repulsive..except of course to the minority that it appeals too.
Hitchens claims to be an atheist yet he practices Marxist statolatry. He should read Human Action by Ludwig von Mises. One need not be a theist like Buckley to advocate free market capitalism.
Hitchens abandoned that idea (though he still has a huge amount of respect for Marx) because he said it has failed to produce a workable replacement to capitalism.
I don't feel like digging through my links to back that up, but a quick google should verify it. I think it was from a REASON interview.
Now Hitchens is saying that sex and procreation were only separated in the 60s. I can't see that as anything but generational vaingloriousness. Even if it were something to take pride in, there's every indication that the trend started after WW1. You only need to read The Wasteland to see it happening.
blasting: It's too bad legitimate conservatism has been hijacked by guys with "little man syndrome" who are blatantly overcompensating for feelings of inadequacy by questioning the manhood of Liberals and Progressives. You could learn a thing or two from Buckley's academic approach.
But WW2 helped a ton in getting out of the Depression, more than FDRs reforms, which I also think helped alleviate the poverty.
From watching this clip, one can tell that Robinson and Buckley are trying very hard to make Hitchens answerable for all the caricatures that conservatives have about everything they disliked in that era. In that sense the subject of the discussion is in itself a lie. Robinson's intro in the beginning also kind of gives it away.
hey, what can you say? It's the Hoover Institute...named after the Republican President who entered us into the great depression, later rescued by Democratic FDR. No doubt where their politics lie. But I would much rather listen to their take on conservatism than the mindless faux news variety.
Excuse me, World war 2 saved this country from the depression. Yes thats right, a war made this country great. Its too bad liberalism has pussified this country with feminism and all the other shit so now we dont see that kicking other peoples asses works when you do it right.
Uh let's be clear, conservatives were the ones against supporting the Allies against Hitler.
Charles Lindbergh, anti-semitic isolationist fruitcakes. The Prescott Bush crowd was too busy doing business with Nazis to be bothered to stand up to them.
I would have to disagree. Surely, World War 2 had a helping hand in pulling us out of the great depression, but if you had to give credit to any one person in particular it's not even disputable that F.D.R did the most by initializing the F.D.I.C, and welfare programs.
FDR was great. But what about the scientists who decoded the Germans ? Or the scientists who developed the atmoic bomb to stop the Japanese dead in their tracks?
Or the brave soldiers who gave their lives on the battlefields..
Or the women who stayed home, working in factories while taking care of their kids, to support the war effort.
What about them? The debate here isn't what won the war. FDR was never a military entity, Truman was the show stopper when it came to the war. My arguement is about what ended the great depression, and I still stand by my view points that FDR and his campaign did more then any other person to help end the depression.
tsaketh- Most of FDR's "New Deal" policies were NOT in place under Hoover. Hoover considered direct governmental help to alleviate the suffering of the masses too socialistic and against the grain of the American tradition of rugged individualism.
Well the "new deal" sure has worked swell huh? Welfare, disability, etc. have become so large that it's literally crippling our economy. They aren't the same programs today that FDR envisioned but still... I can't say they were a tremendous success.
Almost the ENTIRETY of the New Deal had already been enacted by Hoover who was scrambling to save face. What FDR did that was actually new and revolutionary was his campaigning. His direct radio addresses and ability to get his message out is what won him the election.
All the public works processes? Started under Hoover. The beginning of Welfare? Started under Hoover.
Worst interviewer of all time.
jflash214 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The U.S. marines are tough! They can bravely defeat any child. A pregnant woman is no match for a squadron of brave marines either! And the elderly? They'd better say their prayers when the U.S. marines come to town!
AsEasyAsEasyIs 4 weeks ago
Amygdalin is sometimes referred to as sugar cyanide. People don't normally refer to table salt as sodium chloride, yet they could. Keep in mind that ruminants (animals that graze) survive almost exclusively on grass, seeds, leaves & shoots: all of which contain ample amounts of the substance Amygdalin (vitamin B17). If the hydrogen cyanide were toxic then death-by-salad-bar would be common among diners who eat Amygdalin-rich collard greens, mustard greens, spinach & bamboo.
AsEasyAsEasyIs 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wikipedia: Hitchens has written of his homosexual experiences when in boarding school in his memoir, "Hitch-22." These experiences continued in his college years when he allegedly had relationships with two men who eventually became a part of the Thatcher government.
Was sodomite Christ' Hitchens' hollow death an early Christmas gift in retribution for the total-war that he endorsed against the mothers & children of the Arab sphere?
AsEasyAsEasyIs 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolutionary THEORY doesn't bolster, nor compliment: virology, epidemiology nor any other -ology. Darwin's plagiarized writings have become the bible of globaloneyists/eugenicists worldwide, from plain Jane Goodall, to public ward Jacques Cousteau. How is it that apes & zoo keepers exist simultaneously? This question is never addressed by evolution's THEORISTS rationally. It irritates them to no end.
AsEasyAsEasyIs 1 month ago
David Rockefeller's lickspittle Christ' Hitchens supports the Wilsonian model of "diplomacy" which includes, but is not limited to, expeditionary forces, permanent outposts (bases) and exporting/fomenting revolution by sabotaging local elections to depose popularly-elected leaders.
AsEasyAsEasyIs 1 month ago
@AsEasyAsEasyIs Teddy Roosevelt kinda preceded Wilson in these sorts of things.
jerzy862 1 month ago
How arrogant do you have to be to call William Buckley "Bill". Robinson is full of himself.
ShaneKarma376 2 months ago
@ShaneKarma376 His friends called him Bill and Robinson was a friend.
smmclaug75 1 month ago
@smmclaug75 I understand that but come on. You don't see doctors around colleagues calling them Bill or Mike around the workplace, the respectfully call them "doctor". It's called professionalism and Robinson clearly lacks it.
ShaneKarma376 1 month ago
yet hitchens supported the iraqi invasion...strange politics, but people change.
UtopiaMinor666 6 months ago
@UtopiaMinor666 well hitchen is not really a neoliberal, hes a Trotskist, the old left who believes that violent intervene abroad. isolationism is not exactly a conservative idea
trueconservatie33 6 months ago 2
The great thing about young Marxists is that they evolve into disillusioned socialists. Then they mature into classic liberals. Finally, they evolve into self-loathing libertarians. Thanks for the ride Christopher Hitchens!
sluggoII 7 months ago
Ironies of ironies Buckley came out against the iraq war and Hitchens came out in favor of it.
MrAbolitionist 9 months ago 21
the fight over vietnam was actually more an "Intraleft fight" between cold war progressives and "new left" progressives
MrAbolitionist 9 months ago
as a leftist, I really love William F. Buckley. he’s such a brilliant and impressive man.
PoisonedOath 10 months ago
@PoisonedOath Yeah, I feel the same way. He was pretty awesome anddd extremely polite for a TV host.
Aaronthegreatest 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Buckley was an idiot then and he still is today.
stabbed22 10 months ago
HITCHENS WILL BE SORELY MISSED. -FOR THAT MATTER, BUCKLEY WOULD BE A BREATH OF FRESH AIR FOR THE RIGHT.
chiefashley56 10 months ago
@chiefashley56 I disagreed with Buckley about nearly everything, but at least the man had ideas. There was something to debate him about. Nowadays, conservatism has become more of an identity than a set of coherent ideas. What "ideas" remain on the right are pretty nonsensical, mostly conspiracy mongering by the likes of Glen Beck. It's a posture. Nothing to discuss anymore.
fileboy2002 10 months ago 8
@fileboy2002 Perhaps the reason you disagree with Buckley is due to your ignorance and close mindedness.
thedavidwilson 9 months ago
@thedavidwilson LOL--yeah, I'm sure that's it. Thanks.
fileboy2002 9 months ago
@chiefashley56 Hitchens hasn't died o.0
Aaronthegreatest 9 months ago
The Hoover Inst is a ultra right wing policy tank. Robinson uses the classic buzz word "Trotsky ite" to describe those who believed in liberty and the pursuit of happiness. FYI, Reed Irvine came up with his bogus "Liberal bias" propaganda as a result of the riots in Chicago. . Robinson, "Trotsky ite organization" "you were engaged in narcissism Christopher" is this an objective discussion?
stella3265 11 months ago
two masters
elchasai 1 year ago
"His tolerance of opposing views and his consistent disdain for ad hominem attacks"
Clearly, you haven't seen the Chomsky and Buckley's debate. I respect the fact that he grew up in a tough environment, but when you are wrong, you are wrong.
toseeornot2see 1 year ago
@cconat au contraire, Bill was a regular utilizer of the ad hominem tactic. The "listen you queer..."meltdown was an acute example of a life-long malady that bill had.he tried ever so hard to conceal his virulence & contempt for his opponent with unction & pesudo-royal drawl,but be observant,to mailer"i never thought id hear you utter a word with that many syllables" to chomsky:"im guessing you must like him because he hates us [americans]"moreover,his introductions on FLine were vitriolic
xtrmsprts 1 year ago
peter robbins is the weakest link... kick him out and let WFB educate master hitchens on argumentation, and hitch inform bill buckley on morality
xtrmsprts 1 year ago
haha 6:47 - way to be an impartial moderator
ahbevegede 1 year ago
My God, so much misinformation just in the intro ! Like the "left " went to Canada, the "right" went to Vietnam. The young "right" at the time like Bush, Cheney , Gingrich etc. had rich parents who got them deferrments and didn't go either. And Buckley was hardly "young" at that time: he was in his 40s. I don't know if 1 million left Cuba after Castro, but whatever they were the very rich who had exploited the poor. As for WFB likening protests to masturbation., shame! even in your grave!
steveinchelsea 1 year ago
@steveinchelsea Poor and ghetto people went to Vietnam too. It's not just misinformation, it is insulting to the families of the dead
DrLearyUSA 1 year ago
@DrLearyUSA The point is that they are(Robinson, WFB) politicizing a war that exploited poor people, and lined the pockets of the military contractors. The "Misinformation" that Steve( my perception) is referring to is how they polarize the debate(pitting liberal against conservative) by oversimplifying what was a very complex dynamic. I know some Vietnam Vets, and they are appalled at how ignorant people are when they hear comments, "The Left went to Canada, and the right went to Vietnam"
stella3265 10 months ago
I recognize this guy from the Hoover Institute interviewing Milton Friedman.
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
Why was Hitchens cut short at the end with commentary?
macsm 1 year ago
The stance Hitchens takes on Iraq today seems to fly in the face of the stance he took on Vietnam them. He sounds a lot more like William F. Buckley today, it seems to me. Which is also a good thing, it seems to me.
heyzeusful 1 year ago
@heyzeusful The difference, I believe, is that the Vietnamese communists never said they intended to harm the United States directly. The enemy in the war on terror says it wants to destroy the West and works feverishly to do so.
jlewisda 1 year ago
@jlewisda The rationale for our involvement in Vietnam was the "domino" theory, i.e..if South Vienam went to the commies it would cause all the adjacent nations falling and the tipping effect would spread throuhout Asia. Actually afer we withdrew Vietnam began fighting with her adjacent commie neighbors, China and Cambodia, and they actually invaded the latter to bring down Pol Pot and today Cambodia is non Communist. China and Laos are communist in name only.
steveinchelsea 1 year ago
@steveinchelsea The way I remember it was that Saigon fell in April '75, and almost immediately thereafter, the Pathet Lao were installed in Laos and the Khmer Rouge overran Cambodia. There then followed sporadic uprisings in Northeast Thailand, a full-blown opium war in eastern Burma, ethnic cleansing of the Hmong in Laos and a million-odd dead in Cambodia.
So I don't put quotes around the domino theory. Neither did the Vietnamese, Cambodian or Hmong refugees of my acquaintance,
jlewisda 1 year ago
@jlewisda The Pathet Lao were already in Laos, but they are not there now. The Khmer Rouge were bit players until we engineered the coup that overthrew Prince Sihonouk and installed Lon Nol. Then the Khmer Rouge overthrew him. The US recognized the Khmer Rouge as the legitimite governmaent of Cambodia until the communist Vietnamese invaded Cambodia and overthrew him. Now you can argue till the cows come home whether all this happened because of our involvement or despite it.
steveinchelsea 1 year ago
@steveinchelsea Right on the money!!!!! Was the Carter Admin largely responsible for the policies? or was it the Ford Admin? (in Cambodia) Were we responsible for the slaughter in East Timor?, or our policies affected the outcome?
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 The arms that we supplied the Indonesians was supposed to be for defense only by treaty. Ford & Kissinger visited Suharto and secretly gave him the go ahead to invade East. Timor.
steveinchelsea 11 months ago
@steveinchelsea So if someone else breaks thier deal with us, we are at fault?
What sort of "logic" is that?
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Yes, I know, some of those dictators can just be SO annoying at times !
steveinchelsea 11 months ago
@steveinchelsea Still waiting to see how thats our fault.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Even if Ford and Dr. K didn't give Suharto a "wink" right before the E. Timor invasion I would think all Americans would be concerned to see our arms paid by our taxes used to slaughter people. Similarly our support of Pinochet in Argentina and the death squads in central america during the '80s. But hey, I don't want to be accused of "apologizing" for America.
steveinchelsea 11 months ago
@steveinchelsea Still waiting to show how we are responsiable for other peoples actions.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname When we arm or fund the arming of dictators we ARE responsible for what ensues. I believe in the words of two great Americans, George Washington who said to avoid foreign entanglements and Dwight Eisenhower who said beware of the military industrial complex.
steveinchelsea 11 months ago
@steveinchelsea If i give you a gun, I am not responsible if YOU decide to shoot someone with it.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Would you give a gun to a known criminal, an insane person, or a child?
steveinchelsea 11 months ago
@steveinchelsea No but even if I did, I would not be responsible for thier actions.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrfrednoname That makes no sense at all. If you don't you don't. And why is it that you don't?
steveinchelsea 11 months ago
@steveinchelsea Milton Friedman played a major role in advising Pinochet, or at least Pinochet's economic advisors were students of the Chicago School!!!!! Your correct in that our taxes go to subsidizing American imperialism, or American terrorism!!!!
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 The USA is doing what you want and is no longer the dominate force in the world. What will replace her?
Commuinist China??? The nation that sells its prisoners organs?
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname What drugs are you on? you are uninformed!!! The U.S.A is not doing what I want!!. You think you are speaking for me? I have to repeat myself, the PEOPLE in the Middle East region are fighting for independence!!! The April 6th youth movement is from the PEOPLE!!! I'll repeat myself,read Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine!!! What in gods do you not understand. Communist China was recognized by Richard M. Nixon. The U,S has recognized Red China since!!!!!!. Do you have Alzheimer's ?
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 Americans are in a total state of amnesia when it come to our actions in Chile, the mass killings in Central America sponsored by our new saint, Ronald Reagan, our interventions in Haiti, the Dominican Republic, our support of the colonels in Greece, and most recently Condoleeza Rice's audience with Kadaffi. The list goes on. I recommend any book on the subject by Naom Chomsky, but in partucular Failed States.
steveinchelsea 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname You mean that when someone else breaks free of American imperialism(being colonized) and fights for sovereignty , and wants to have their independence from American aggression!!! Thats what is happening in the Middle East, right as we speak!!!! Viva la Revolucion
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 Being an ally doesn't make you part of an american empire. Lybia sure wasn't and most middle eastern nations are hardly great american allies. The revolutions are not anti-american but anti authoritarian. Who knows what will replace the existing governments??? Oh and there are no us colonies anywhere in the middle east.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname I suggest you read the definition of "Imperialism" You are in no way an 'Ally" when the imperial power goes against the will of the people by inserting a Dictator that was backed by the U.S.A. Egypt and the other nations in the Middle East have no sovereignty. You are not ally when you are being forced to obey orders at gunpoint. You obviously are not aware of the definition of sovereignty. I suggest that you read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" you might learn something!!
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 I suggest you are anti-american shill and clueless.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Oh my God!!! I suggest that you read a book!!!
stella3265 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname If you would like to have a cogent well balanced debate, let me know!!! I suggest that you debate with yourself!!! actually more like Master debating, with yourself!!!!
stella3265 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Read a book!!! Again(repeating myself) lookup the definition of Sovereignty and Imperialism
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 I know exactly what they are, you seem to be having an issue understanding them.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Exactly what is? Explain to me what your knowledge is of the region? Your a trained Monkey!!
stella3265 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname If you know then prove it!!! Tell me, what is your definition of Imperialism, Sovereignty? tell me!!! write it down!!!!
stella3265 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Whats happening in Egypt is a direct response (against American aggression) by the PEOPLE!! not by the Western backed dictator, the PEOPLE are fighting for their SOVEREIGNTY. The Egyptian army has been a occupying force for 60 years. The April 6th youth movement deserves the credit for the uprising that started in Tunisia. You are an unwilling participant of the American empire when it goes against the will of the PEOPLE!!!!! Power to the PEOPLE, Right on!!!!!
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 American aggression? Where? The americans supported the uprising.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname You are not a well read or well informed person!!! The U.S is planning a possible, I say possible intervention when things begin to ease up a little, which I hope and pray does not happen, or I should say that the PEOPLE will not allow that to happen!!!! The April 6th Youth movement is a grass roots org that is not funded represented or supported by the State. Do you get it know? Look up the definition of Sovereignty!!!
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 Nation building on the part of the U.S should be directly in support and by the consent of the PEOPLE of Egypt, and every other nation in the entire region who are fighting for independence!
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 They are.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Who is they? Define who "They" are, and what "They" are allegedly doing or not doing?
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 Is this "information" from the same people who said bush was going to invade iran in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008???
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname No, you obviously do not have any clue about the history in the region for the past 60(since 48) plus years. Do you have Alzheimer's? Young Man, you need to read a book!!! this is embarrassing!!!! Explain what your definition(perception) of Imperialism is. Define Sovereignty. Read A book!! Apply this to the history in the Middle East region for the last 60 years!!! American policy in the region has always supported radical Islam. What in Gods name do you not understand!!!
stella3265 11 months ago
@stella3265 American policy has always opposed radical islam. By this comment alone you show yourself ignorance and my point is proven. Thank you.
mrfrednoname 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Wrong Freddie!!!! U.S policy has supported Dictators. Mubarak abused the Egyptian people for 30 years. The U.S backed Mubarak(against the will of the Egyptian people) Stop talking in generalities. What American policy, be specific!! Name me the policy that goes against radical Dictators!. There are video tapes of political prisoners being beaten,sodomized, by the approval of the radical Dictators. you have no substance! You are a trained monkey, It's sad that you are ignorant.
stella3265 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname The April 6th youth movement is a direct response against the brutal, radical Dictators. The U.S has been aware of the brutal,savagery of Mubarak for years, and did nothing to aide the Egyptian people. Mubarak always complied with the U.S policy with Israel(regarding Iran) which went against the will of the Egyptian people. The people in Egypt view U.S policy with Israel as more of a threat, than the Iranians. What in Jesus H Christ do you not understand.
stella3265 11 months ago
@mrfrednoname Who are the people you are referring to? be specific!!!! stop talking in generalities.
stella3265 11 months ago
@jlewisda I am not pro-communist in any way. I was in the US Army in Vietnam, but you have to question whether our involvement in what are essentially civil wars does more harm than good.
steveinchelsea 1 year ago
@jlewisda Sadam Hussein was a secular dictator. He hated Al Quaeda as much as we do. There was no AQ presence in Iraq under SH, unlike now since our invasion.
steveinchelsea 1 year ago
@cconat Buckley has no knowledge of history...he is unable to separate institutionalized dogma from fact... read any of his critiques on Chomsky or any of his writings on american foreign policy... Buckleys life was an extreme disservice to Knowledge and the Human Quest for Truth
emiljanowicz 1 year ago
@emiljanowicz Well I'm glad you punctuated 'K'nowledge with a capital K while you made your contribution to the 'quest for truth', thank you for that, for we at youtube would have nothing less! Buckley was a brilliant raconteur and debater of ideas, you are a little shit whose so called contribution to 'knowledge' thankfully limited to youtube posts.
owenline 1 year ago
@owenline wrong ... I'm a masters student.
emiljanowicz 1 year ago
@emiljanowicz Yeah a masters student in faggotry! LOL!
owenline 1 year ago
@owenline ... ty for revealing your intelligence f agget
emiljanowicz 1 year ago
Hitchens is a different man today. Hitchens was a left winger but now has converted to a right winger.
ogrish84 1 year ago
@ogrish84 If you watch a few of his interviews about his new book Hitch 22, he says plainly that he DOES NOT want to be considered a right winger, and also expresses his dislike and lack of respect for Beck and Limbaugh.
belevezero 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ogrish84 If you watch a few of his interviews about his new book Hitch 22, he says plainly that he DOES NOT want to be considered a right winger, and also expresses his dislike and lack of respect for Beck and Limbaugh.
belevezero 1 year ago
@ogrish84
He still calls himself a Marxist, explains he is no neo con, and says that Das Kapital explains the econ crisis
PersianSocialist777 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PersianSocialist777 "and says that Das Kapital explains the econ crisis"
Hahahahaha I cannot believe that Hitchens his that stupid. Can you give me a source?
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
Whoa, Hitchens certainly has changed, or become less naive.
MinisterAilingTongue 1 year ago
This host is such a cock.
whiterat83 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I didn't know Hitchens was a commie. Let's see here. An Atheist Communist?
NEVER! LMAO
brian8793 2 years ago
hitchens looks really young in this
cdphatty 2 years ago 2
Yeah, real sexy too.
MrSalamander7 2 years ago
I would like to point out that Buckley PERFECTLY captures the mood of the 60's in his opening remarks: a time when people were listless, and looking for something to get worked up about. That is the essence right there. You libs here who don't understand Buckley are simply 1) too stupid and ignorant, 2) without the poetic knowledge necessary. I have no use for you buffoons.
Cocteau120 2 years ago
Someone should have told Mr. Buckley that he was being filmed for television so he could have put on a belt to keep his trousers up.
fomastephanovitch 2 years ago
"Listen to me you queer, I'll sock you in the god damned face and you'll stay plastered see..."
William F. Buckley to Gore Viddal.
rudenoodle 2 years ago 5
Such a badass...
rolpho 2 years ago
William F. Buckley was a pussy. He only picked fights with weak people. If he said anything to someone else he'd get his conservative face smashed against the back of his own skull.
Beardmania 2 years ago
I thought he saw combat in world war 2 or something like that.
rudenoodle 2 years ago
So, any pussy can pretend he's a man with a gun in his hand. War should be brought back to just swinging fists and throwing rocks.
Beardmania 2 years ago
Well to be fair William Buckley did threaten to punch Gore Vidal in his "queer" face on national television.
Are you implying that being in war is easy, or does not take at least some courage?
I don't even know what we're talking about anymore, lol
rudenoodle 2 years ago
You're a fucking moron. William F. Buckley was a genius, and the fact that you don't recognize it only points to your total lack of a brain. Ever read a book of consequence, mr mental dwarf?
Cocteau120 2 years ago
Waa Waaaa! You big wussy/obvious troll
Beardmania 2 years ago
Hitch is a bigger drunk than Vidal ever was
AlejandroDelLoco 2 years ago
You say it like it's a bad thing.
rudenoodle 2 years ago
@rudenoodle Vidal'sresponse, "Oh, Bill......please...!"
steveinchelsea 1 year ago
@rudenoodle Crypto Nazi...
MattSingh1 10 months ago
I will never get over the irony of Hitchens opposing Vietnam and then going on to be a fanatical bed-wetting promoting of the disasterous invasion of Iraq.
It makes no sense.
revolutionaryluddite 2 years ago 3
If you actually listened to his reasons, I think you'd understand that Vietnam was no tyrannical regime like the facist occupation by Saddam Hussein. You can click on my favorites, it's the most recent video, and follow the link on the sidebar to see the FORA video on the "Axis of Evil". He goes into detail of why we should be happy we went to war against Saddam's regime.
MysteryManoLove 2 years ago
He's a Marxist, thus he despises fascism, and he's an anti-theist, so you know he has no love for religious zealots. While I disagree w/ the portrait of the war as some sort of humanitarian effort and find it the sort of shameless partisan propaganda that poisons politics, Hitchens argues its case better than anyone w/out ignorantly resorting to dishonest demagoguery or incoherent spin (see O'Reilly, Hannity). He didn't hesitate to criticize the Bush administration's policy on torture, either.
InfernoWars08 2 years ago 2
Hitchens is a Keynesian not a Marxist. He renounced Marxism years ago
Invirtuo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Oh good lord, Marxism and fascism are the same damn thing in different costumes. They both involve a hatred of human nature and a desire to remake man in the image of some outlandish nonsense. You're an idiot.
Cocteau120 2 years ago
You've obviously read virtually nothing about the formation of Marxism or Fascism, two of the most polar opposite ideologies in history. OTOH, the "hatred of human nature" comment leads me to believe you're basing 90% of your political views on Ayn Rand's nutty philosophy.
LemVlad 2 years ago
No, actually I've read just about everythiung Marx and Lenin wrote, and I've also read mein kampf in German (yes, I read German). Western intellectuals constantly repeat this orthodox view of Marxism and Nazism being polar opposite views, but it's a fairy tale, and not based in reason. If they were actually polar opposite views, then they would be opposite in everything, but they're not. Both agree on collectivism, both agree on state control of the economy, both agree on the use of violence...
Cocteau120 2 years ago 2
...and absolute power to re-make reality into a golden age. Both despise the individual and any personal goals which contradict with the will of the party leadership. Where they disagree (and this is one of the few points) is this: fascism is usually oriented around aggrandizing some race or national identity (in the case of Nazism, Germans) whereas communism attempts to reshape all human beings into a new humanity with the proper "consciousness", who think only of the "species".
Cocteau120 2 years ago
Okay, for one thing you're conflating Nazism and Fascism, two separate systems of totalitarianism, one primarily devoted to race and the other more to nationalism and economics.
Fascism was conceived as a "third option" to Communism or Capitalism, emphasizing "class cooperation" and only intervening in the economy to benefit business when it's in trouble.
The successors to Franco and Mussolini in Latin America were also very pro-market and specifically pro-business.
LemVlad 2 years ago
Nazism & Fascism are both fascist.
OneBigRetard 2 years ago 7
Yes and both are forms of socialism. The German National Socialists and Russian Communists (or one might say 'International Socialists') each classed themselves as socialist and claimed to be concerned with the common man/the proletariat while condemning the other as being representative of the very worst of capitalism.
anSiarach 1 year ago
"We are socialists, we are enemies of todays capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions. —Adolf Hitler, [144] 1927 speech"
anSiarach 1 year ago
@anSiarach ...yes he was also karl marx.(as he used to wear a marx like beard for propaganda reasons to ealry rallies to get a piece from the proletarian votes)
you might want to direct us though to a singular socialist policy of nazis.
in fact the gebbelist propaganda was so succesful that a lot of former communists and sociaalists joined the brown shirts storm troops, only to be round up and liquified in the night of the long knifes.(on the demmand of capitalists groups.)
amet1980 1 year ago
@anSiarach ...ps by capitalists, its clear what hittler reffered to; foreing capitalists and jews,( that is for those that made an efford reading his writtings)not the class in general.
ps 2 the word socialism in nazi aside for ideological plagiarism its also etymological meaningless in the german cultural contex. modern german conservatives are also called christiansocialists.(in bavaria)
you should stop listening to glenn beck and dust off the books.
amet1980 1 year ago
@OneBigRetard Nazism is less fascist than it is socialist. But I'd say it's authentically a member of both sets.
DrCruel 8 months ago
You're absolutely correct in this. Fascism and Communism run, remarkably, in the same political vein.
Mesmeridicus 1 year ago
@Cocteau120 "read just about everythiung Marx and Lenin wrote"aka listening to glenn beck.
sit boo sit, you marxist schoolar.
amet1980 1 year ago
He has very neoconservative views on American foreign policy.
VanDoodah 2 years ago
@revolutionaryluddite How right you are!!!!!! Peace
stella3265 11 months ago
I would have been at Woodstock in '69, not the rice-fields!!
vanuvius 2 years ago
They both would have sucked
rudenoodle 2 years ago
I just don't understand people who've studied economics and politics and still "believe" the markets are actually free.
Santa clause, equality, freedom, free markets, democracy are nonexistent.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
So, Hitchens has always been on the wrong side. An unfortunate misguided fool.
digitalPublius 2 years ago
Why was Hitchens on the wrong side? Because he did not support the U.S. funding imperialists campaigns using false propaganda about fictive domino theories in regards to a nationalist government that would never have submitted its independence to Moscow or Beijing, while at the same time the U.S. was propping up a corrupt dictatorial government in the South that was no less repressive than that in the North and which knew full well that the majority of popular support was directed to the VC?
lombard34 2 years ago
The left supports "nationalism" only when it is in the service of socialism/communism. In all other cases, the left considers nationalism as "fascist," particularly if part of a political movement in the west.
sinatra1976 2 years ago
Inane comment. Should we have allied ourselves with Mussolini & Hitler?
More Vietnamese supported the VC over the RVN government. The RVN knew it could never win elections against them, which is why we had to send 58,000 Americans to their deaths. It was all very anti-democratic, all in the name of fighting for a dictatorial, corrupt Saigon government. The North was also repressive, but the notion that we needed to fight it to limit Chinese hegemony proved disingenuous. They went to war in '79
lombard34 2 years ago
coffee's still rationed there, despite my best efforts! classic Hitchens
shikagonga 2 years ago
I can tell you one thing and that is I love to watch Future Weapons. Vietnam would have been over in a few months.
Entropy56 2 years ago
Oh, now I feel sorry for him. He was so brave, risked so much, had so much to lose! Thanks for enlightening me, and lumping me with "leftists". I speak for myself, although I think most "leftists" don't deride class divisions, they rather point out that class division is the primary engine of human history.
lipsbach 2 years ago
Also, I'm sorry not to have realized that "free-market economics" is giving opportunity to those at the bottom. You are right. Global capitalism is really working for most people, especially the 3 billion or so who live on 2 dollars a day.
lipsbach 2 years ago
Well said. Not to mention those who are starving to death daily for their inability to pay due to sanctions and central bank/corporate loans that their leaders were swindled into knowing full well they could never pay back the loan, thus their citizenry suffer poverty and starvation. "FREE" market.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
Continually insulted and despised? By whom? Certainly not his own people. His was a life of privilege from start to finish, and he made the most of it to justify and maintain class division generally. Historically he was on the wrong side of many, if not most major issues. Civil rights, Vietnam, US foreign policy, etc. Smug, haughty, ridiculously affected. My mother said he was a good musician.
lipsbach 2 years ago
i think there were plenty of people on the left who went to vietnam.
anearforbaby 2 years ago
2:52
Something is cut? What was said that they needed to edit out?
ByronC900 2 years ago
The intro with the props ("One of these!") - hilarious.
Ieshido 2 years ago
Someone really shoud have told Mr. Buckley that the debate is televised so that he could bring along a decent belt and not have to continually hitch up his trousers.
fomastephanovitch 2 years ago
Jesus.. They always make it sound like the hippies were any more intelligent or any more "a movement" than these Obamaton libiots. I was there. They were a bunch of self-serving twits pretending to have a cause to justify their every passive aggressive overdramatic whiiiine.
me me me.
SAME AS TODAY.
anti war was the same as today too except our losers are about a free ride. Those losers were about not having to serve. Not an oz of character or principle between the lot of them.
cmovbe 2 years ago
so your entire argument is "i was there, therefore i know better"???????? seems pretty weak to me. and you do not define character and principle, specially since conservatism defines it as accordance to tradition and taboo combined with smugness and self righteousness.
leonheartmm 2 years ago
Buckley is a thin caricature of Ivy league snobbery. He is from an old-boy network where rhetorical style and victorian propriety trump substance. He is king of the ad homonym quip, and he tends to appeal to the bumper-sticker crowd. He opts for narrative simplicity over thorny specifics. He is an ideologue.
There are so many brilliant thinkers on the Right. Why do people flock to Buckley?
irad222222 2 years ago
its a shame that buckley for all his intelligence comes to so many wrong perceptions.
or..does just that fact make them not intelligent?
JadeTomZ 3 years ago
Buckley had brain power, but was cold, cynical, cruel and dismissive of anyone's trials but his own. To say anyone protesting in '68 was "masturbatory" indicates he felt no concern for anyone not wanting to kill and die in the jungles of southeast Asia. Buckley's positions all make sense if you replace "we" with "we the wealthy, connected WASPs". e.g. "We need security, not rabble-rousing peaceniks." (insert lean-back and oh-I'm-so-clever lopsided smile/sneer here).
ericpmoss 3 years ago
yes..looking back he appears like some cartoon ...and its easy to see how so called far right conservatives today have figured out to get attention by acting repulsive..except of course to the minority that it appeals too.
JadeTomZ 3 years ago
My goodness, I have to say that there precious few of these calm intelligent discussions on television anymore. They all seemed to vanish after 9/11.
Now Hitchens and Dawkins are forced by clowns, such as Hannity or O'Reilly to talk about their ideas between streams of interruptions or insults.
Toocold 3 years ago 27
so damn true. the whole media is rigged. its a disgrace. try the real news network, its all ive managed to find
jameswp266 3 years ago
Thank you! I only saw the very end of this on TV a few years ago and have been waiting to see the whole thing.
suraaldy 3 years ago
Hitchens claims to be an atheist yet he practices Marxist statolatry. He should read Human Action by Ludwig von Mises. One need not be a theist like Buckley to advocate free market capitalism.
hmagram 3 years ago
Hitchens abandoned that idea (though he still has a huge amount of respect for Marx) because he said it has failed to produce a workable replacement to capitalism.
I don't feel like digging through my links to back that up, but a quick google should verify it. I think it was from a REASON interview.
godlesscontrarian 3 years ago
two amazing powerful minds. great stuff!
LAballin24 3 years ago
Now Hitchens is saying that sex and procreation were only separated in the 60s. I can't see that as anything but generational vaingloriousness. Even if it were something to take pride in, there's every indication that the trend started after WW1. You only need to read The Wasteland to see it happening.
BlacksuitedSPECTRE 3 years ago 3
Listen carefully. He says they were the first generation to take that separation for granted.
mainsqueeze1977 3 years ago 2
Only the most simple minds view conflicts between countries, as "good guys vs bad guys".
Robinson is the "Mayor of Douchebagistan"
Politic007 3 years ago 3
I love both William Buckley and Christopher Hitchens, but as far as witt and overall intelligence goes you have to give it to Hitchens.
SwizzleStickMcGee 3 years ago
"what pn earth were you thinking?" what a fucking prick the host is...douche
arash402003 3 years ago
blasting: It's too bad legitimate conservatism has been hijacked by guys with "little man syndrome" who are blatantly overcompensating for feelings of inadequacy by questioning the manhood of Liberals and Progressives. You could learn a thing or two from Buckley's academic approach.
But WW2 helped a ton in getting out of the Depression, more than FDRs reforms, which I also think helped alleviate the poverty.
mowriter 3 years ago
From watching this clip, one can tell that Robinson and Buckley are trying very hard to make Hitchens answerable for all the caricatures that conservatives have about everything they disliked in that era. In that sense the subject of the discussion is in itself a lie. Robinson's intro in the beginning also kind of gives it away.
mammers11 3 years ago
hey, what can you say? It's the Hoover Institute...named after the Republican President who entered us into the great depression, later rescued by Democratic FDR. No doubt where their politics lie. But I would much rather listen to their take on conservatism than the mindless faux news variety.
mowriter 3 years ago
Excuse me, World war 2 saved this country from the depression. Yes thats right, a war made this country great. Its too bad liberalism has pussified this country with feminism and all the other shit so now we dont see that kicking other peoples asses works when you do it right.
blastingcaps 3 years ago
Uh let's be clear, conservatives were the ones against supporting the Allies against Hitler.
Charles Lindbergh, anti-semitic isolationist fruitcakes. The Prescott Bush crowd was too busy doing business with Nazis to be bothered to stand up to them.
mammers11 3 years ago 2
I would have to disagree. Surely, World War 2 had a helping hand in pulling us out of the great depression, but if you had to give credit to any one person in particular it's not even disputable that F.D.R did the most by initializing the F.D.I.C, and welfare programs.
SwizzleStickMcGee 3 years ago
FDR was great. But what about the scientists who decoded the Germans ? Or the scientists who developed the atmoic bomb to stop the Japanese dead in their tracks?
Or the brave soldiers who gave their lives on the battlefields..
Or the women who stayed home, working in factories while taking care of their kids, to support the war effort.
ByronC900 3 years ago
What about them? The debate here isn't what won the war. FDR was never a military entity, Truman was the show stopper when it came to the war. My arguement is about what ended the great depression, and I still stand by my view points that FDR and his campaign did more then any other person to help end the depression.
SwizzleStickMcGee 3 years ago
Except that FDR did nothing new to the economy, as most of his "new deal" policies were already in place by Herbert Hoover.
tsaketh 3 years ago
tsaketh- Most of FDR's "New Deal" policies were NOT in place under Hoover. Hoover considered direct governmental help to alleviate the suffering of the masses too socialistic and against the grain of the American tradition of rugged individualism.
frc1968 3 years ago
Well the "new deal" sure has worked swell huh? Welfare, disability, etc. have become so large that it's literally crippling our economy. They aren't the same programs today that FDR envisioned but still... I can't say they were a tremendous success.
hvaughan5 3 years ago
That's actually a really common myth.
Almost the ENTIRETY of the New Deal had already been enacted by Hoover who was scrambling to save face. What FDR did that was actually new and revolutionary was his campaigning. His direct radio addresses and ability to get his message out is what won him the election.
All the public works processes? Started under Hoover. The beginning of Welfare? Started under Hoover.
tsaketh 3 years ago