A Note on Christopher Hitchens

I woke up this morning to the news that Christopher Hitchens has died. Though I've been following him on Google Alerts, the news surprised me, what with his recent contributions to Vanity Fair and interview with Richard Dawkins in the New Statesman. I was hoping we'd have him at least through the 2012 elections.

I once thought of writing a book about Hitchens' place in contemporary culture. It would've had the subtitle, "Why America Doesn't Know What to do With Christopher Hitchens." This is what was so great about him. In a rigidly partisan era where one's views on one subject nearly always predict one's stance on 10 others, Hitchens stood apart as a bold thinker who held his moral compass up to the difficult lessons of history, philosophy and politics. The half-baked professions of Newt Gingrich only underscore what we've lost; while Newt's geopolitical musings serve cynical, predetermined ends, Hitchens was playful, irreverent, occasionally upsetting, and deeply moral.

His video critique of the 10 Commandments captures him in his droll glory. You don't have to agree with everything he says to appreciate the humor and sharpness of his intellect—and the magnitude of what we have lost.

Who's a Thug?

I've written before that, while I believe Mumia Abu-Jamal is guilty of killing Philadelphia Police Office Daniel Faulkner, his death sentence should be overturned in favor of life in prison. When this finally happened this week, Maureen Faulkner, Officer Faulkner's widow, had this to say about his leaving death row:

"I am heartened that he will be taken from the protective cloister he has been living in all these years and begin living among his own kind — the thugs and common criminals that infest our prisons.”

(Read the AP article here.)

While Faulkner's anger is obviously understandable, her comparing Abu-Jamal to "thugs and common criminals" does not help bring clarity to this contentious case.

All sides agree on a few basic facts of that terrible night in 1981. Abu-Jamal witnessed his brother in an altercation with Faulkner and ran to the scene. In the ensuing mayhem, shots were fired both by Faulkner, hitting Abu-Jamal, and from a gun registered to Abu-Jamal, killing the officer.

Given the context, that would make Abu-Jamal, the convicted cop killer, something other than a common thug. It was not cold-blooded, pre-meditated murder, or an act driven by mindlessness, selfishness or greed. It was not crass barbarism of the variety seen in urban gang violence and atrocities against innocents on the sidelines of drug feuds and sectarian warfare the world over—that is thuggery. Thuggery can be murderous or just stupid and petty, such as the recent case in Philadelphia of a bicycle rider sucker punched on Kelly Drive. It is usually driven more by a type of sociopathy than strong emotion.

Abu-Jamal is not that. He is a convicted murderer who destroyed many lives, but we should not let rhetoric allow us to look at him—or this case—with clouded vision.