Who mugged Chris Hitchens?

There's a saying that a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged.  I've wondered for some time, who mugged Chris Hitchens?

And I think it was himself.

He was a tireless, even compulsive, writer.  Yet at some point he became tired of writing in support of Leftist views.  As his tenure at The Nation came to a close, he lacked inspiration.  As Ian Parker said in The New Yorker:

...our conversation began with events in 2001. By that year, Hitchens said, he had begun to doubt if his future lay in political journalism. He had, by then, published fifteen books, including one on the Elgin Marbles dispute, and slim, scornful volumes—modern versions of eighteenth-century pamphleteering—making the case against Henry Kissinger (mass murderer), Bill Clinton (sex criminal), and Mother Teresa (friend of despots). He had written, but not yet published, an admiring book about George Orwell’s political clear-sightedness. He had a column for Vanity Fair, in addition to his “Minority Report” for The Nation, which he had started in 1982, a year after moving to America. But, he said, political commentary had become “increasingly boring. There were times when I was due to write a Nation column and I hadn’t got a hugely strong motive to write.” He no longer described himself as a socialist, an identity he had formed as a teen-ager, in the late sixties. He had taken to describing capitalism as the world’s only true revolutionary force.

“I was becoming post-ideological,” Hitchens recalled. 


An anti-authoritarian, he first applied his talents to the Right, but he also questioned the authorities of the Left.  He wouldn't be the first to be disappointed that the followers of the Left are no less vulnerable to sheeplike unquestioning devotion than those of the Right. 

I believe he must have eventually tired of his own authority, shoring up the certitude of the Left.  There was nothing to do but to challenge it.  Like a detective becoming a bank robber, a churchman become libertine, he knows where all the cracks in the foundations lie.

Was this conscious?  I wonder.  It seems more likely he saw looming before him endless questioning and shifting sands and decided to stay on dry land.

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments

  • 12/17/2011 1:14 PM Buz wrote:
    Interesting post, Old Feminist!
    Especially in light of the fact the alternate reality pages of the Wall Street Journal published a piece of Hitchens just this morning from 2004, I think. In it he justifies the "necessity" of the Iraq War.

    Jeez, just think of all the thousands of people who died, were maimed, tortured, and imprisoned because of that war. There were and are many countries in the world where the dictator was or is as bad as Saddam. But, I guess, they did not fit Hitchens' and others view of the necessity of "regime change".
    Reply to this
  • 12/18/2011 12:58 AM oldfeminist wrote:
    It is unfortunate that many people do believe "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Worse still that someone who was clearly quite intelligent fell for it.

    Interesting timing, too, since the last US troops just left Iraq tonight.
    Reply to this
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Enter the above security code (required)

 Name (required)

 Email (will not be published) (required)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.