On Wikileaks and Assange, Hitchens got it completely backward. He encouraged Julian Assange to turn himself in - not to Interpol to answer questions about the Swedish sex case - but directly to the lynch mob that wants Assange 'eliminated' in one way or another. Smart advice, eh?
Hitchens vs. Assange: Who's the real megalomaniac?
I repeat, Hitch's recommendation to Assange on Monday was this: hide from the 'laughingstock' Interpol ('what he really ought to do,' wrote Hitch), but instead face the juridical system for his Wikileaks work, like Hitchens would've done back in '76 when he had the chance to reveal a state secret: 'I would have accepted the challenge to see them in court or otherwise face the consequences.' The bravest of them all, that Hitch, esp. 35 years in hindsight.
Here's just one problem with Hitch's scenario: In relation to his work with Wikileaks, Assange has not been charged with any crimes. Nor is or was he ever 'wanted' by the authorities for questioning in relation to Wikileaks activity. So, what the hell is Hitchens talking about? Has Assange dodged any court challenges related to his work? Absolutely not.
A couple other essential points. Hitch's description of Assange as a 'micro-megalomaniac' couldn't have been more poorly timed, if you think about it. Assange has just been demonstrating his actual power and grandeur by effectively taking on the entire United States government. Megalomania is defined as, 'a mental illness characterized by delusions of grandeur, power, wealth, etc.'
Delusions? If anything, Assange is not just flavor of the week and man of the year; he's a historically significant individual. Not that he's one to boast: Assange has behaved rather modestly throughout the whole process...unlike, say, Chris Hitchens who comes a lot closer to being a megalomaniac.
Hitchens also criticized Assange for 'resenting the civilization that nurtured him.' You really gotta love this one, coming from Hitchens: A man who spent much of the 70's, 80's and 90's resenting the 'civilization' that nurtured him. I guess because Hitchens failed at his resentment, he took a 'well, if you can't beat him, join 'em' turn.
As for Assange having been 'nurtured by civilization', I refer readers to the New Yorker profile which makes plain Assange's family's attempts (largely successful) to avoid so-called civilization. And a very good thing too, for us.
One line I do agree with Hitchens on is this: 'The cunning of Julian Assange's strategy is that he has made everyone complicit in his own private decision to try to sabotage U.S. foreign policy.'
And yet in the same article Hitch tries to tell us Assange is suffering from delusions of grandeur?
No comments:
Post a Comment