Who do you guys think Hitchens would have voted for if he was still alive today?
He held a deep hatred for the Clintons but was highly suspicious of any "business tycoon" politician so maybe he would have refused to vote??
I get the feeling he would have voted Trump
p.s pls /pol/ warriors go away
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
bbc.com
youtu.be
twitter.com
>I get the feeling he would have voted Trump
it's almost a shame that Hitchens became so popular. people only get to know his meme tier work (i.e. they hardly understand him at all,) then they say absolutely preposterous things like this.
i dunno man, i really liked hitchens a lot. he was wrong about many things, but right about many things as well. he was the first person who helped me to realize that i shouldn't follow cult personalities blindly. it was a hard revelation but worth it. i don't know who he would have voted for, and possibly, i think he would have chosen neither. Perhaps he would have chosen Trump simply as a contrarian move, but who knows. the real reason is does it matter what he thought? does it really matter? who did you vote for?
>mfw grew out of my edgy atheist phase and realized peter was the superior hitchens after all
>dat berserk music
grade a shit right there. well, peter stayed away from all the sin, but he wasn't quite as brilliant. just different paths i'd think.
>he wasn't quite as brilliant
maybe...for me the really obvious thing is that he lacks his brother's range. idk if I'm just ignorant, but I've never seen Peter talk or write about anything besides his conservative politics. you'd have a harder time finding a topic Christopher DIDN'T write about.
why is voting trump over Hillary preposterous for hitchens?
i do try to just take bits and pieces of what both of them say and decide for myself in the end. i'm so tired of people following others blindly and being devastated by some grand character they built up in their heads falling down and shitting on themselves. if i'm a human and i know i make mistakes, i know that other humans are just as prone to making mistakes themselves. i do still really like them both though. i used to listen to christ talk about stuff for hours and hours on end.
I think he'd rather drink/smoke himself to death than support the Clintons in any way.
Luckily, he did.
why is it unlikely that a left wing intellectual would've voted for a populist buffoon? does that question sound reasonable to you? the only interesting question is if he would've voted for Clinton or not, given his long standing opposition to her brand. I have no clue about that...he might've just not voted, but there's an absolute 0% chance he would've supported Trump.
>guy who was in favor of nation building and invading arab states
>guy who is a militant atheist
>guy who is for welfare and social justice
Hillary campaigned like she was specifically asking for him to come back from the dead and vote. No, he wouldn't vote Trump.
Extra chromosome detected.
A valuable revelation comrade, some are never granted this. It doesn't matter really but i would be curious to see his take on the situation. I'm not from USA so i cannot vote.
BASED PETER.
Agreed
How many books do you think he actually read?
Not many, I think.
Reminds me of stack threads on Veeky Forums. Fuckin' pathetic.
Zizek preferred Trump you fucking brainlet
Probably the biggest left intellectual
With Hitchens I always got the impression of a man who was pretty smart but desperately wanted everyone to think he was even smarter. There was a certain resentment in him that manifested in a kind of sophistry.
He started in the left and finally matured into a conservative.
Fingers crossed you guys can survive that journey too. xD
Kek.
It's Chomsky by a mile, kid.
I seriously hope this post is a bad attempt at mocking morons, and not an actual moron posting.
Chomsky is an irrelevant dinosaur
Actually its Cenk Uygur.
Peter is more canny when it comes to politics and history than Christopher. Christopher is very book smart, but lacks the awareness of his brother.
>taking anything Zizek says at face value
wew
He literally said he preferred TRUMP
"Don't look at what I do, listen to what I say"
t. Slavoy "Cocaine Nosejob" Zizekov
SJW detected
Its fine, we all get it - Your going through your Liberal ""Phase""
Everyone has done it to some degree while they're young. When you get a bit older kid you'll understand the appeals of conservatism and finally see the downsides of the left.
I am already old enough, and I don't plan on becoming more selfish as I age.
You should try it. Start by realising that the cultures of Europe belongs to the natives of Europe.
Holy shit you just put into the dumpster
>"you are young and here is a strawman"
>LMAO REKT
In your own words, grow up.
...
I'm going to guess your between the ages of 16-25 this is the perfect time to explore the left and rebel against the patriarchy/education system or whatever you kids are doing these days.
Like i said, its a perfectly natural phase for someone working their way towards adulthood/maturity ( Don't worry, its a bumpy road but you're gonna make it! xD )
When i reflect on this time in my life it was probably the time when i had the most fun and learned the quickest.
Then you get responsibilities.
If you think being "conservative" is selfish..... all i ask you do is really think about it. I mean really fire those old neurons and consider what a "liberal" is asking for.
I am 28 years old, am educated and settled, and went through my "we should be an authoritarian fascist empire :D" state when I was a teenager.
I grew out of it, hopefully you will as well. It is a bumpy road, but I am sure you will make it.
Until then, fire up those neurons, and make an argument when you attempt to argue.
And the right dares to complain about the left being condescending when the "you'll be leftist when you're young and rightist when you're older" meme has been a claim they've made for more than a century now.
Hypocrites.
Just shut up and grow out of liberty and social security. Go to church and sign up for the army, be a real man.
...
More strawman. More lack of argument.
>just do the dumb shit I do already!
t. right winger
Liberty only works when the people are capable of being left alone by the state and not be criminals.
Social security only works when it's used as a temporary safety net to catch those that fall until they can get back up.
For example, when you have "liberty" in Britain that means that Islamic sex trafficking gangs can target thousands of white girls for years with the protection of the state, but the father that attempts to save his daughter gets arrested (in one case the girl getting raped was arrested for being "disorderly"), is it any wonder that people will start turning against liberty?
>being this paranoid and fucked
>liberty means state funded rape
No, it doesn't.
>poor british children raped by somalis
In reality, 17 year old british slags getting drunk and having sex with pakistanis. OH NOES A PEDO ORGANIZATION OH MY GOD, when in reality it was a party house that teenage whores went to so they can drink and smoke weed.
I hate that this story went viral, and that people still insult the police for not arresting men whos only crime was giving alcohol to 17 year olds without their parent there.
He's right you know.
Read up on Rotherham.
>This much delusion
I believe this thread started with hitchens. We all know what the guy thought of muslims and religion in general, but it definitely would be interesting to hear what he had to say on Trump. He may see him as a necessary evil, a method of resisting his hated enemies in the Clintons, or he may side with them, believing them genuinely capable of leading the country better than the opposition. Doubtlessly, he would be a strong advocate for hating both of them for various reasons, and I can't imagine he wouldn't be able to tie some historical political events with what we're experiencing today to help we hoi polloi understand a little better.
It's important to make up your own mind tho.
You read up on Rotherham, imbecile.
1. The children were 17-21 year old women.
2. The rape was of the "i regretted it next week" variety.
3. The "rapists" were british citizens of foreign background, not illegals.
>what is Rotherham, Bristol, Oxford, Rochdale, Telford, Aylesbury, etc.?
You do know that this exists, right?
Yes, party houses where teenage sluts go to have sex and regret it later do exist.
Do you want the fuhrer to outlaw them?
>british citizens of foreign background
What did he mean by this?
If you're not of Anglo-Saxon stock, you're not British.
>conveniently avoids that he has to temporarily adopt the neo-feminist definition of rape to push his narrative
>>liberty means state funded rape
>No, it doesn't.
Why not?
Also, funny how quickly the left will start victim blaming when the victims are white and the perpetrator was non-white. It is also funny how you make excuses to rationalise the horror of the event in order to avoid accepting the reality of it. Sticking your head in the sand wont make it go away, nor will protecting the rapists.
>Claims that Rotherham/etc were just "party houses where teenage sluts go to have sex and regret it later"
>Implying this was the case
I didn't want to dignify it with a response, but if you insist.
How do you know it's a meme? I can think of several former lefties who swung to the right as they aged. If anything the recent farce the left has made out of itself is just accelerating the process. Why would a young, white, man vote for the parties endorsed by the people who insulted him and questioned his very right to exist? Honestly if you read the kind of books this board likes you're probably a bit of a cultural conservative whether you know it or not.
>why does liberty not mean state funded rape
Because definitions and history. Read a book.
This is indeed the case, you should investigate a bit. Yes, this would include reading things other than stormfront blogs.
>1. The children were 17-21 year old women.
Actually aged between 13 and 17. Read he report.
>The rape was of the "i regretted it next week" variety.
No, it was the "held down and penetrated multiple times, forcibly injected with drugs, and trafficked to other cities" variety.
>british citizens of foreign background
Then they weren't British. They were the exact people I was talking about when I said some people don't deserve liberty.
>british citizens of foreign background
The Normans?
>Because definitions and history. Read a book.
Liberty is multiculturalism in the modern world. "You have the freedom to live your life according to your culture."
If that culture (and it does) says that raping the females of the other tribe is acceptable and commendable, who are you to say that's wrong? All cultures are equal, aren't they? We should all have the liberty to practice our own cultures, shouldn't we?
Fantastic story written from the cellars of your mother's estate.
Being a conservative doesn't mean your 100% fascism and totalitarianism. This is the problem with the majority of liberals, everything has to be in black and white for their brains to cope.
You say that being a "conservative" is selfish? Waiting for you to explain this one.
::hint:: You cant.
>Then they weren't British.
You mean, like the Queen, a British citizen of German descent?
>everything has to be in black and white for liberals
>"lol eveyone on the left is an SJW white man-hating anti-free spech totalitarian communist! XDD"
this is your brain on the redpill. god I miss old-school conservatives...those guys were smart, at least.
>Shifting the goalposts and changing the subject this hard when you get called out
Like pottery.
>This is the problem with the majority of liberals, everything has to be in black and white for their brains to cope.
Yet if I don't hate blacks I must love cuckold porn and rent my wife to gangsters. You lack self awareness.
>Yet if I don't hate blacks I must love cuckold porn and rent my wife to gangsters
Well, which is it?
>"I was drawn into a world of fear, rape and horrific abuse. I lost my childhood at the hands of those men."
>"No one understood. No one wanted to understand. I felt lost, isolated, trapped, ashamed and completely worthless."
>"I was completely owned by these dirty old men who would do with me whatever then wanted, whenever they wanted."
t. girl who sold her pussy for alcohol over the course of months and when she got pregnant she cried rape
Still awaiting that explanation of why conservatism is more selfish than liberalism.
::hint:: liberalism is extremely selfish
What rock have you been living under? The mainstream left supports affirmative action, supports hate speech laws, supports feminism, supports mass immigration, supports multiculturalism, and is against personal freedom and self determination in general. And it's not some big conspiracy, they're quite open about it.
>not adressing the point besides shouting "fallacy" and posting memes instead
It was an reductio ad absurdum, frogposter.
In any case, this is a stasis of definitions, and these are notoriously hard to resolve. Seeing as you didn't even comprehend that simple argument, I'd be wasting my time.
Why is "we should help those less fortunate" less selfish than "those less fortunate can fuck off back to Iraq"?
In the words of a horrific imbecile, not everything is black or white, your brain just makes it that way to cope with it.
Why do we have a duty to help foreigners? Is helping foreigners worth it if it harms our own country?
It makes my blood boil, absolutely appalling. And they say we're the privileged ones, when these "British" citizens had carte blanche, or should I say carte brun, to rape little girls.
>The person dismissed as a ‘racist’ is not worthy of inclusion in the human family, and there is no need to debate with him. We can instead despise him. Thus, such people have no need to engage in a proper debate with their opponents. They subject them to what is in effect a citizen’s arrest on behalf of the Thought Police. The offender is carted off and never heard from again.
Really makes you think. The funny thing is this has been practised so heavily that a large group of people have started to identify with the racist label wrongfully assigned to them and by subversion make racism socially acceptable again.
>Say everything has to be black and white, us + them for liberals
>Liberals proceed to formulate us vs them arguments
Never change.
>Reasonable people point out how much Europe is suffering from the mass refugee intake - Mass violent crime and sexual assaults aggressively down played by the media
>Liberals defend Mohammed's patriarchal, degenerate rape culture. Plethora of reasons why its the victim/western civilizations fault.
>Reasonable person presents statistics
>Liberal: " Your racist" " Go back to stormfront nazi"
The El classico
>made racism socially acceptable again
ask Richard Spencer's face about that, cuck
Chomsky has no meme power.
Zizzy oozes the stuff like a poison arrow frog.
>and went through my "we should be an authoritarian fascist empire :D" state when I was a teenager.
No you didn't. You're lying right now. Admit it.
Why do you do this? Do you doubt your position and efficacy to defend it so much that you feel compelled to lie?
verily
>citizen’s arrest on behalf of the Thought Police
That's good, I'm stealing that one.
>No you didn't
where'd you learn how to read minds?
>being coy in response
I knew it. Why would you lie about such a basic thing? Do you not see how telling that is that you refuse to be honest at even the most basic of levels?
>point out the hypocrisy of your posts
>"YOU SWEDE KEK LIBERAL SJW KEK PEDO"
The El classico.
>stameena training device!
Do you see it Veeky Forums? Was Hitch a memelord?
I absolutely did. Do you have an argument to present here, or are you willing to let neutral viewers assume you know more about my childhood than myself?
And how is this guy being "coy" for asking you the most obvious basic question, how the fuck can you know what I was like? You are so certain and convinced of it, because you are a self indoctrinated husk.
You will grow out of it. Its not even hard, all it takes is being happy. No joke, when the times get good for you personally, you will break out of this.
>This is what modern liberals think conservatism vs liberalism boils down to.
conservatism: Hey guys we haven't managed to kill off the entire species yet and the majority of people have access to medicine/food/education!!
liberalism: We must change all of this.
>is it worth it to help others
Yes, nigga, you are THAT selfish.
>Ignoring the last half of user's post.
I always knew he was a pseud. This confirms it.
>liberalism is the political doctrine demanding the removal of medicine, food and education from the equation, so we can kill the entire species
Citation Needed.
breddy good taste
>i don't want to pay 5% more tax to ensure you dont get beheaded for refusing the call for jihad
This is the definition of being selfish.
You've actually gotten yourself so mad you had to recreate your childhood.
top kek
I pay my taxes, I donate to charity, I hold the door open for people. What more is required?
Not sending atheist families back to a jihad warzone, because thats where they were born, so I guess they should deal with it. And then crying when they get butchered, and using their corpses as statistics to not allow the next refugee in as well.
Liberalism is a threat to the stability that conservatism created.
Liberalism = selfish because its willing to create turmoil/risk in order to impose its ideologies on an already well functioning society.
Easy enough to understand dindu??
If you actually think the majority of refugees are atheist you're beyond help
>your example doesn't apply to everyone everywhere
Okay. That was never the intention, and it doesn't make you smart to point it out.
Now how about those arguments?
>I absolutely did.
I don't believe you.
You can keep affirming this and being passive aggressive about "unhappy husks" and all that, l but I simply don't believe you. I think you like to be passive aggressive and dishonest with people.
>progress is bad, because we aren't currently dying, so why change?
Thank Zeus some half-ape a long time ago took upon himself to use the liberal principles and start cooking food rather than eating it raw. BUT UGG NUGG, WHAT IF THE FIRE POISONS IT? YOU DOOM US ALL!!!
Look you retard, we can't even get priority status for Christians and Yazidis, not in Canada. We are importing the Jihadists, not atheists.