Christopher Hitchens
He backed the war in Iraq. He was right about most things, but he was wrong about that. Why?
Gary Kaminya has the answer. He wrote in The Virtuoso (Salon, December 17): “On the most crucial political and moral issue of our time, Hitchens took the wrong side. His friend Tom Luddy once told me that Hitchens supported the war simply because he was passionately opposed to fascism, no matter what form it took or where it was found. No one could argue with this. Hitchens also had many Iraqi and Kurdish friends who had suffered under Saddam Hussein’s tyranny, and whom he stood up for. Again, no one would argue that he was not right to do so.”
However, he was wrong.
Michael Ignatieff
He was wrong about forming a coalition with the NDP.
From CBC News, March 26. 2011: “Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff started the first official day of the campaign by ruling out a coalition government with other parties, while trying to strike a contrast between his party and the Conservatives.
“He was joined by a small group of Liberal candidates as he made his opening remarks of the campaign in front of the Peace Tower on Parliament Hill Saturday.
“‘Today is a beautiful spring day, a little chilly, but you can feel spring is coming. The Harper winter will soon be over,’ Ignatieff said.”
It was not. Why not? Because Michael Ignatieff made the wrong decision. Many thought so at the time.
Albert Einstein
Was Aristotle wrong? Not according to the state of knowledge in his day.
Was Newton wrong? Ditto.
Was Einstein wrong?
No doubt many thought so in his day and, a few decades later, so did the author of the website The Einstein Hoax: “[The Website] is intended for those who have been suspicious of the premise that reality is so subtle that it can only be understood in terms of sophisticated abstract mathematics to which only the elite were privy. The understanding of reality in concrete terms was presented as being beyond the capability of intelligent individuals. Instead, reality turns out to be readily understandable in terms of common sense reasoning once the smoke and mirrors of mathematical obfuscation and the mathematical and logical errors associated with special and general relativity have been removed.”
But now doubt has been cast on Einstein’s theory on substantial grounds. Time Magazine carried an article by Michael D. Lemonick on September 23: “A team of European scientists has reportedly clocked a flock of subatomic particles called neutrinos moving at just a shade over the speed of light. According to Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity, that can’t be, since light, which cruises along at about 186,000 miles per second (299,000 km/sec.), is the only thing that can go that fast.
“If the Europeans are right, Einstein was not just wrong but almost clueless. The implications could be huge. Particles that move faster than light are essentially moving backwards in time, which could make the phrase ‘cause and effect’ obsolete.”
• • • •
If the Europeans are right, Christopher Hitchens and Michael Ignatieff could not be in better company.
Eric Koch’s book, The Weimar Triangle, is available at Indigo-Chapters and in your local bookstore. 
Would we be better or worse off if we eliminated “right” and “wrong” from our vocabulary and instead observed how any conclusion, decision or action has implications for better or for worse, sometimes both? And would it be fair to ask if the implications and outcomes of some decisions, actions or conclusions may not be discernible or fully assessable now or ever? And could we wonder if our own conclusions about rightness or wrongness also change as our experience and perception grow and develop, and as circumstances change? One example, gleaned from Jeffery Simpson’s article in the December 2011 edition of Queen’s Quarterly: Sweden’s Health Care Revolution. “Today, the Swedes have embraced new health-care strategies that involve private delivery, keen competition and even user fees.” That’s tantamount to heresy, but Simpson interviewed some Swedish Social Democrats, now out of power, and asked if they would go back to the old system. They all said no.
The idiocy of the Lemonick quote from Time Magazine pretty much passeth all understanding. Scientists aren’t right or wrong. They observe and think and formulate theories, which they would be the first to say are just that. The theory du jour is good and valid and “right” until more acute observation (such as has just been announced at the LHC at CERN) comes along, prompting further thought (not yet announced, or even done) aimed at either tweaking the theory or discarding it in favour of a new one.
I suspect Einstein might be pleased to hear the news; I’m sure he’d be quite grumpy at some dumb journalist’s suggestion that he’d been “wrong”.
And the best of the season to all.
Hitchens is apparently a wonderful essayist. Some of his essays may even last a few generations. Being wrong, occasionally, is not wrong. But, being wrong about Iraq – and his reasons for supporting the war, and not changing his mind – casts a shadow over all of his logic and wit. The Bush administration displayed many facets of fascism, especially the separation of ‘them’ into ‘other’, and suitable for persecution, illegal imprisonment, and torture. In the end you can say that you think the war was justified as a gamble to achieve certain aims. While I disagree, it may be a valid point of view. But to support it, knowing what we do, because you’re righteously fighting against something, is just too full of holes.
I think he supported it because it made for good argument – which he loved.
Ignatieff and Lemonick seem less important, forgotten in months if not weeks.
The blog and comments elegantly compass ‘right’ and ‘wrong’. In this midwinter season of showing forth and reflection, what also comes to mind? Manifestations of nature, creativity and curiosity that precede right and wrong. For example the Large Hadron Rap ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM ) of Kate McAlpine (www.katemcalpine.com) and Will Barras ( http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~s9527813/links/ ) in 2008.
Peace & glad tidings to all.