Hitchens at it Again

Christopher Hitchens argues Ari Fleischer’s comments on September 17th, 2001 that “all Americans need to watch what they say, watch what they do” amounts to nothing more than a “slightly unfortunate” choice of words and other interpretations implying anything more sinister “should now be put to rest.” His main point, though slightly buried in his post, is that the fear present in the United States is due to the “loud and gloating statements and actions, made and taken by people who thirst to kill us” and do not originate from other sources, such as government officials. To write otherwise, he claims, appears “grotesque” and “very slightly worrying.”

Hitchens is right to criticize Krugman and co’s interpretation of Ari Fleischer’s speech. He is wrong, however, to assume the negation of Krugman’s point proves his own.

Hitchens believes Krugman misinterpreted Ari Fleischer’s comments because Fleischer’s comments were actually a “mild rebuke” directed at a fellow republican and that Fleischer was simply asking for a “politically correct respect for civility in a rather testing time.” In Hitchens quest to defend Fleischer he conveniently misses other possibilities. For example, it hardly seems logical that Fleischer, an experienced communicator, did not realize the implications and strength of his words especially when he is asking others to watch their own. Even the irony seems lost on Hitchens who is too busy trusting Fleischer because of his “herbivorous” character.

It is also rather obvious in the transcript that Fleischer is making an association between Bill Maher’s criticism of U.S. policy and a Republican congressman’s stereotyping and borderline racism. Isn’t that, at least indirectly, sending a message to Americans about what is allowed in the public discourse and what is considered to be on the fringe? Hitchens fails to even consider such a question. Furthermore, Hitchens’ claim that Fleischer is simply making a plea for “civility in a rather testing time” implies Fleischer is making a temporary request of the American people. This is contradicted in the very same transcript by Fleischer when he states, “This is not a time for remarks like that; there never is.”

Lastly, Hitchens believes Krugman and others are wasting their “privilege” as columnists by writing about “the Fleischer reign of terror” while terrorists “thirst to kill us.” But Hitchens is so quick to criticize and bicker with his colleagues that he no longer realizes that part of the journalist's job is to be a check on the government and others who hold powerful positions in society. Today, in times of war and terrorism, this is more important than ever.