“Never be afraid of stridency”: Richard Dawkins’ interview with Christopher Hitchens

[trotsky]

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2015/09/never-be-afraid-stridency-richard-dawkins-interview-christopher-hitchens

The 2011 Christmas issue of the New Statesman was guest edited by Richard Dawkins. This is his interview with Christopher Hitchens from that issue. It was to be Hitchens' final interview; he died as it was published. A sensation at the time, it is now available to read online for the first time.

...

RD Can you talk a bit about that – the relationship of Nazism with the Catholic Church?

CH The way I put it is this: if you’re writing about the history of the 1930s and the rise of totalitarianism, you can take out the word “fascist”, if you want, for Italy, Portugal, Spain, Czechoslovakia and Austria and replace it with “extremeright Catholic party”. Almost all of those regimes were in place with the help of the Vatican and with understandings from the Holy See. It’s not denied. These understandings quite often persisted after the Second World War was over and extended to comparable regimes in Argentina and elsewhere.

So much more at the link. I think even folks who are knee-jerk Hitchens bashers might find some interesting things.

[longship]

1. R&K for Dawkins and Hitch.

Bookmarked for later.

[mr blur]

2. Excellent stuff, thanks for that.

[AtheistCrusader]

3. Not entirely fair.

In Germany, the Protestant population was double that of the Catholics, and they were only too happy to join the Catholics in slaughtering millions of Jews and millions more 'undesirables'.

[rug]

4. "is America heading for theocracy?"

If that subtitle captures their view of American politics, given the reality of what is actually going on here, their parochial view can be readily dismissed.



I hope they enjoyed their tea.

[bvf]

5. Did you actually read the damned thing,

or just skim it for phrases upon which you could make unfounded assumptions?

[cleanhippie]

6. Bingo!

Winner, winner, chicken dinner!

[rug]

8. You won the wrong end of the chicken.

[rug]

7. Of course I did. This is my favorite line:

"You mentioned North Korea. It is, in every sense, a theocratic state."

That was of, of course preceded by this lovely exchange:

"RD I’ve been reading some of your recent collections of essays – I’m astounded by your sheer erudition. You seem to have read absolutely everything. I can’t think of anybody since Aldous Huxley who’s so well read.

CH It may strike some people as being broad but it’s possibly at the cost of being a bit shallow. I became a journalist because one didn’t have to specialise. I remember once going to an evening with Umberto Eco talking to Susan Sontag and the definition of the word “polymath” came up. Eco said it was his ambition to be a polymath; Sontag challenged him and said the definition of a polymath is someone who’s interested in everything and nothing else. I was encouraged in my training to read widely – to flit and sip, as Bertie (Wooster) puts it – and I think I’ve got good memory retention."

Bertie. I'm surprised he didn't mention Jeeves in passing.

[bvf]

9. What part of America is North Korea in?

And yeah, what kind of asshole goes around making literary references, anyway?

[rug]

10. Apparently the theocratic part.

[RussBLib]

11. please disregard

I figured it out. My bad.

Great article, BTW.

[trotsky]

12. Yeah it must have hit a nerve.