Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Monday, April 30, 2007 | Reason : Commentary | print version Print | Comments

Document Are You There, God? It's Me, Hitchens

by Boris Kachka

Reposted from:
http://nymag.com/arts/books/features/31244/

Thanks to Andy Thomson for sending this our way.

Christopher Hitchens on religion (no thanks), Iraq (not a mistake), and his own loud reputation.

One of the most annoying things about Christopher Hitchens is that, even at his most vitriolic, he makes at least as much sense as the majority of sober journo-intellectuals buzzing around Washington. This despite the fact that he is one of the last defenders of Bush's Iraq war—a position that has cost the former Nation contributor a multitude of friends and gotten him new ones like Paul Wolfowitz. Hitchens, who started questioning his faith at age 9 (and wrote a polemic against Mother Teresa called The Missionary Position), has finally written the ultimate attack book, God Is Not Great. He spoke to us about his favorite religious stories, Karl Rove (infidel?), and the one time he found himself praying.

You say in your acknowledgments that you've been writing this book your whole life. Do you think it'll mean as much to others as it means to you?

No, it's one small step for C.H. into one enormous argument dominated by giants in philosophy and theology and science.

So what makes it different from recent atheist screeds by the likes of Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins?

I don't think Richard Dawkins would mind me saying that he looks at religious people with this sort of incredulity, as if, "How possibly can you be so stupid?" And though we all have moods like that, I think perhaps I don't quite.

And what if one of your children found God? Would that be a problem?

Not at all. My children, to the extent that they have found religion, have found it from me, in that I insist on at least a modicum of religious education for them. The schools won't do it anymore. And I even insist, though my wife [who is Jewish] isn't that thrilled, on having for our daughter a little version of the Seder.

What's your favorite Bible story?

"Casting the first stone" is a lovely story, even though we've found out how much it wasn't in the Bible to begin with. And the first of the miracles. Jesus changes water into wine. You can't object to that.

Well, you've said plenty about the pleasures of drink before.

But it also shows the persistence of the Hellenic influence in those regions. If the Jews had not made the crucial mistake of rejecting Hellenism and philosophy and submitting themselves, or being reconquered, by the Maccabean ultra-Orthodox, everything would have been better and we'd never have had to endure Christianity and Islam.

So I guess you're not a fan of Hanukkah.

And they picked it for the worst possible reason, because it happens to be nearest to Christmas! I mean, it's so tawdry.

You're an even bigger critic of Islam.

If you ask specifically what is wrong with Islam, it makes the same mistakes as the preceding religions, but it makes another mistake, which is that it's unalterable. You notice how liberals keep saying, "If only Islam would have a Reformation"—it can't have one. It says it can't. It's extremely dangerous in that way.

Do you think an avowed atheist would ever get elected in the U.S.?

Yes. I do not believe any of the statistical claims that are made about public opinion. I don't see why anybody does.

Has anyone in the Bush administration confided in you about being an atheist?

Well, I don't talk that much to them—maybe people think I do. I know something which is known to few but is not a secret. Karl Rove is not a believer, and he doesn't shout it from the rooftops, but when asked, he answers quite honestly. I think the way he puts it is, "I'm not fortunate enough to be a person of faith."

What must Bush make of that?

I think it's false to say that the president acts as if he believes he has God's instructions. Compared to Jimmy Carter, he's nowhere. He's a Methodist, having joined his wife's church in the end. He also claims that Jesus got him off the demon drink. He doesn't believe it. His wife said, "If you don't stop, I'm leaving and I'm taking the kids." You can say that you got help from Jesus if you want, but that's just a polite way of putting it in Texas.

Do you consider yourself a hawk?

I used to wish there was a useful term for those of us who thought American power should be used to remove psychopathic dictators.

So one day we'll all see just how right you all were about Iraq?

No, I don't think the argument will stop, perhaps forever. But when it does become the property of historians rather than propagandists and journalists, it'll become plainer than it is to most people now that it was just. Most of what went wrong with it was that it was put off too long. What a lot of people wish is that the thing could have been skipped.

Or that Bush hadn't been in charge. You don't believe that?

No, I honestly don't. Iraq was in such terrible shape as a society that it wouldn't have mattered if Paul Bremer had been Pericles.

Is there anything you don't have an opinion on?

My bet with Graydon [Carter, Vanity Fair editor-in-chief] is that he can ask me to write about anything at all, unless it's mathematics or science.

Will you write about Virginia Tech?

I have no interest in it, but if it goes on for a couple of days I will. My heart sinks when yellow-ribbon events occur, if that doesn't sound too cynical. What one needs in this society is less sentimentality and more stoicism. [He did write a Slate column last week, headlined SUCK IT UP.]

You've complained that American discourse is too polite. But a lot of people think you're too rude.

I used to get told by nice old ladies at bookstores, "It's so nice to meet you, because I used to think you were very unhappy and just disliked everything, and you seem quite friendly." And I would think, Oh, God, is that how I seem?

You did write a book called Letters to a Young Contrarian.

I was contrarian enough to say that I thought contrarianism was a stupid title. But the idea that I think How can I enhance my reputation today by thinking of a famous person to trash?—if you thought that about me, I would feel I'd lost somehow. With Mother Teresa, the subject picked me. But I have written books positive about, say, George Orwell and Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine.

But those people are all dead.

Now you'll have to let me brood on that … I do have a reply—did you think I would completely fail you? Rushdie, Mr. Amis, Mr. McEwan—but it is known that I'm friendly with them, so I get trashed another way: "Oh, well, you're just sticking up for your pals."

Have you ever prayed in your life?

I probably once did pray for an erection, but not addressed to anyone in particular. Nor completely addressed to my cock. You're too polite to ask if the prayer was answered.

Was it?

No. There was an answer, but I don't think it was the result of the prayer. After all, if one was not a mammal, and could get erections on demand, there'd be no need for prayer in the first place.

Comments 1 - 14 of 14 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #36251 by Nails on April 30, 2007 at 4:20 pm

 avatarInteresting.
Havn't heard of Hitchings before his new book became big news, but I think I like his outlook on things. I think many people will be able to identify with him; unlike Dawkins who, genious that he is, is rather aloof. Few of us could ever be the next Richard Dawkins (I'm just not that intelligent) but the next Hitchings?
Maybe.

Other Comments by Nails

2. Comment #36254 by mjwemdee on April 30, 2007 at 4:30 pm

 avatarI suppose it's all subjective, but when people see RD as aloof/strident/agressive/rude/arrogant/fundamentalist etc etc I wonder where they get it from. I simply don't see it myself. If he seems aloof, might that be his tendency to cool judgement, as opposed to the heat of Hitchen's rhetoric?

Other Comments by mjwemdee

3. Comment #36255 by Civilized Worm on April 30, 2007 at 4:40 pm

 avatarI don't think I have a strong enough liver to be the next Hitchens.

Other Comments by Civilized Worm

4. Comment #36264 by MIND_REBEL on April 30, 2007 at 5:16 pm

 avatarMore please.

Other Comments by MIND_REBEL

5. Comment #36271 by Hip_Priest on April 30, 2007 at 6:00 pm

Gross.

Other Comments by Hip_Priest

6. Comment #36273 by foxfire on April 30, 2007 at 6:20 pm

 avatarMIND_REBEL wrote:

More please.


O.K. Go here:

http://www.booktv.org/feature/index.asp?segid=8171&schedID=485

Other Comments by foxfire

7. Comment #36277 by Jack Rawlinson on April 30, 2007 at 6:47 pm

 avatarI don't think Richard Dawkins would mind me saying that he looks at religious people with this sort of incredulity, as if, "How possibly can you be so stupid?"

HA! Well, I don't know about RD but that's exactly how I feel about religious people.

Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson

8. Comment #36291 by mintcheerios on April 30, 2007 at 8:36 pm

Saying you're an atheist when trying to get elected president in the US now is probably one of the best ways to lose. It's like saying you're gay and trying to be the next pope.

Other Comments by mintcheerios

9. Comment #36306 by scooternyc on April 30, 2007 at 9:51 pm

 avatarHitchens is one of THE most intelligent men of our time. His ability to speak eloquently on subjects, regardless of political sides, make him all the more reasonable and higher integrity than any counterparts.

When one only espouses their party's politics and isn't thinking through issues aside from the "game" then they shouldn't be considered for reasonable debate or discussion.

Hitchens has made that fashionable without even knowing it.

Other Comments by scooternyc

10. Comment #36309 by waxwings on April 30, 2007 at 10:20 pm

 avatarMan, I like Hitchens, but he's been drinking that right wing kool aid and he sounds almost as detached from reality as a creationist when he discusses Iraq.

I'm also quite confident that he will be shown to be wrong about future historians, and that our descendants will look back upon our warlike ways as barbaric tribalism.

Other Comments by waxwings

11. Comment #36318 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on April 30, 2007 at 11:03 pm

 avatar10. Comment #36309 by waxwings on April 30, 2007 at 10:20 pm

Man, I like Hitchens, but he's been drinking that right wing kool aid and he sounds almost as detached from reality as a creationist when he discusses Iraq.


I think thats pretty harsh. In this interview he said it was a basketcase, and that regardless of how it had been approached it would have been catastrophic.

I don't agree with him that it was the right thing (or even sane) to do, but at least he's not gilding the lily, or claiming "it's all going to be fine with the surge", like the Bush telegraph.

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

12. Comment #36319 by NormanDoering on April 30, 2007 at 11:07 pm

I'm amazed no one here has noted that Hitches thinks Rove and maybe Bush are atheists. (Well, Bush is just not sincere about dumping the booze.)

Did you catch this:

Has anyone in the Bush administration confided in you about being an atheist?

Well, I don't talk that much to them—maybe people think I do. I know something which is known to few but is not a secret. Karl Rove is not a believer, and he doesn't shout it from the rooftops, but when asked, he answers quite honestly. I think the way he puts it is, "I'm not fortunate enough to be a person of faith."

What must Bush make of that?

I think it's false to say that the president acts as if he believes he has God's instructions. Compared to Jimmy Carter, he's nowhere. He's a Methodist, having joined his wife's church in the end. He also claims that Jesus got him off the demon drink. He doesn't believe it. His wife said, "If you don't stop, I'm leaving and I'm taking the kids." You can say that you got help from Jesus if you want, but that's just a polite way of putting it in Texas.


http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2007/04/is-karl-rove-atheist.html

Other Comments by NormanDoering

13. Comment #36343 by sanjiv on May 1, 2007 at 1:02 am

We need all kinds. Dawkins, Harris and Barker have their own style and get the message across to different audiences. But we also need someone like Hitchens. His style is more down-to-earth. Praying for an erection! Man that's funny - most people would connect with that kind of stuff! I can't imagine Dawkins or Harris talking like that!

On Iraq I support him (and inadvertently support that moron Bush). The American lifestyle depends so much on Oil and unfortunately most of it lies under Arab lands. Americans are also the champions of freedom. To maintain these two factors, Americans are bound to come up against dictators and rogue states sometime or the other. You can delay, talk, discuss, slap them with sanctions, demonise them, etc. But eventually, you may have to use the hardware on them. People get killed in such conflicts, but like a hostage situation, the police cannot endlessly talk and negotiate, while the hostage is systematically brutalised.

I am willing to be corrected on my stand on Iraq.

Other Comments by sanjiv

14. Comment #36446 by MrEmpirical on May 1, 2007 at 6:54 am

Hey Hitchens, why won't America use its power to remove psychopathic regimes in other countries (e.g Zimbabwe)? Oh yeah, that's right, there's no oil in those other countries. Whoops. And yeah, Iraq's society really was in a terrible state before the American invasion, what with the civil war between the Sunnis and Shiites...oh wait, the civil war started AFTER the invasion, silly me. At least Iraq now has adequate electricity, water, and sanitation supplies...oh wait, their infrastructure has been devasted. Well, at least the invasion of Iraq has helped to reduce the threat of Islamic extremism...oh wait, all of the analyses suggest that the invasion has actually provoked greater levels of recruitment within extremist groups. Well, Saddam was a terrible man, and he killed many of his own people. And we wouldn't want innocent Iraqis to die, would we? Oh hang on, over 600,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the last four years of the invasion. Whoops! Well, at least America is going to leave Iraq in a better state than that in which it was found, once all the reconstruction is completed, and a legitimate government is created, and...oh hang on, America's probably going to pull out pretty soon, isn't it? Oh dear... Well, at least no one can say that these problems were predicted before the invasion of Iraq...oh wait, these problems WERE foreseen by opponents of the planned invasion. But we all know it's silly to listen to the warnings of people who are opposed to war, because their warnings are always wrong...oh wait, in the case of the Iraq invasion, the warnings were valid. Hmmm, well at least we got rid of all those nasty WMDs...oh, silly me, they never existed.

Nice one, Hitchens.

Other Comments by MrEmpirical
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: