deathtokoalas

and, yes - hitchens ripped him apart in the q & a.

he's christopher hitchens.

he'd do that to anybody.

Throw Away

Were we watching the same debate, Hitchens was juvenile, doing nothing but parroting neolib talking points.

deathtokoalas

i actually found much of what parenti said in the q & a section (such as resorting to questioning the motives of the rulers, which is irrelevant) to be somewhat idealistic and juvenile. but, you forget that what you call "neoliberalism" (the more correct neologism is neoconservatism) is rebranded trostkyism, and hitchens was a self-identified trotskyist. the difference is in the honesty of the discourse; the neo-cons presented left-wing arguments in a dishonest manner to advance their empire, and all evidence is that hitchens actually believed what he said. so, it's the difference between a fake trostkyist and a real one.

but, i've noticed this continually over the last 15 years - yes, hitchens was wrong. but, he was also badly misunderstood. few people seemed to really follow his argument.