Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Hitchens' thought has too many flaws to mention, but I can accept that he's intelligent, entertaining and compassionate even though I disagree with pretty much everything he says (aside from on Western military intervention, he's pretty good on that).
His recent work of chasing Owen Jones around on twitter regarding him supposedly disproving the aforementioned's poor article on comprehensive vs. grammar schools has been incredibly amusing also.
Rather like James Delingpole and his climate change denial, Hitchens' objections to drugs are political and philosophical
Plus his rampant refusal to accept "evidence" as proof of anything: not really surprising given his devout christian faith
It's really lazy of the BBC also to keep on getting him in to talk about it. Doesn't really generate decent debate.
Although addiction's a bit of an anomaly in the Hitchens canon. Usually he's fairly robust in trying to posit facts over conjecture (well, as much as any other 'opinions' columnist I suppose), but on drugs and addiction he just goes rabid Old Testament MENTAL about it. Very strange. Kind of a bit like Littlejohn on homosexuals...
when hitchens compared treatment of addiciton to how homosexuality was treated back in the day. chandler or the baroness didnt really get a word in
But I don't dislike him. I think I sort of respect how much of a consistent moral code the guy has. Everything he says makes perfect sense within the confines of his own Victorian worldview.