Tynan's Anger

Dear Mr. Hitchens,

I was very pleased to have encountered your book Letters to a Young Contrarian. I was especially greatful to have encountered it this year, when I am 23, as opposed to 18, when it probably would have been the kind of book to change my life. No doubt, Mr. Hitchens, your views on being a contrarian are well formed by years of experience, dealing with both the social, political, and psychological pressures of being a contrarian. My question to you, Mr. Hitchens, is the following: why?

No doubt, there is significant value to being contrarian in many instances. If Mother Theresa has had some questionable, perhaps horrific political views or effects, it should be pointed out. Considering the social and political assumptions about Mother Theresa's immaculate reputation, it would probably be a full-time, all-consuming task for an individual. My question is this: do you think anyone would naturally want to be the guy who rails against Mother Theresa for a living? And would you want to be in the social company of the guy who rails against Mother Theresa for a living.

Nonetheless, I understand your motivation for doing so. The unspoken, but often forced silence against Mother Theresa's hardline views represents something of an injustice. In an ideal world, those actually effected by Mother Theresa's views, should be able to voice their concerns. While they mat lack the proper voice and advocacy to do so, is it really your job to speak for an entire people you otherwise have no connection to? In that case, doesn't it become less about social injustice and more about your professional reputation?

Nonetheless, your letters to a young contrarian provide an invaluable resource to understanding how contrarianism works when necessary. In particular, I appreciated your juxtaposition of Vaclav Havel's "as if" policy in an oppressive society with E.P. Thompson's "as if" principle in a free one. The fact that your letters were written and published right around 9/11 have only made the comparison more appropriate, and with less restraint than both you and Thompson displayed.

Nonetheless, Mr. Hitchens, not everyone has the luxury you do of being a professional contrarian. In most cases, people stand up for certain principles that they feel they need to be contrarian about. Being a contrarian for the sake of being contrarian is less of a social justice and more of a method of drawing personal attention (which you have accomplished with remarkable success this decade). Nonetheless, the fundamental problem is this: if a mistake is made in the perpetual search for contrarianism—as in, you take a contrarian view to a just policy-it can damage both the personal clout the contrarian has built. Most dangerously, it can lead to the replacement of a just policy with an oppressive-even if, as a proper contrarian, one looks for an unquestioned injustice.

The ultimate problem is this, Mr. Hitchens; not everyone can be a professional contrarian such as yourself. The reason may be less one of means (journalism, political freedoms, economic means, etc.), and more the fact that, as a contrarian, you are forced to speak for a group of people who want nothing to do with you. The fundamental problem is that contrarianism is an emotional state, not an intellectual one. Skepticism is always to be recommended, contrarianism just leads to personal rather than intellectual ends.

Sincerely,
X

Labels: angry young man, christopher hitchens, ep thompson, letters to a young contrarian, mother theresa, politics, radicals, Social justice, tynan's letters, vaclav havel