This is part one of the debate between Christopher Hitchens and Tony Blair. You may want to skip to part 2, though, if you want to start watching the actual debate and not this very lengthy introduction.
Hitchens was brilliant, as usual, or dare I say, that his latest performances were among his best, despite (or because?) his battling cancer and probably facing impeding death? He was as witty and spot on as I expected him to be.
Blair, on the other hand, performed almost embarassingly bad.
First of all, I consider him a really nice chap. He seems to be a genuinely good person and without a doubt, is not your rabid, fundamentalist lunatic, of the kind you usually get opposed to Hitchens. It's sort of refreshing to see Hitch debate someone who you don't instantly dislike, someone who does not try to bury his opponent in a big pile of lies and logical fallacies, but engages in an honest discussion. There lies the problem, though,too.
What Blair was basically saying throughout the whole debate was something to the effect of:
"O well, look. Religion has really caused loads of suffering and death and, yeah, you can't really prove any of it is true and real. But come one, there are also a few examples of people doing good in the name of faith and after all, that's what it's all about, not some silly bronce-age myths that no one takes seriously. Right... right?"
You needn't imagine the slightly embarassed look he ought to have on his face while making this sort of argument. It was right there.
Really, one always had the feeling that Blair was absolutely aware of the fact of how utterly ridiculous this line of thinking is and that he really had no case. He tried to strip religion off all the mythical baggage and pretend it was essentially all about doing good and being ethical. Hitchens at some point jokingly remarked that Blair would prefer his theists largely not practising. Blair's eyes seemed to agree.
0 comments:
Post a Comment