@@parallaxview6770 Destroy? Hitchens tries to cut Owen off whenever Owen presents Hitchens with a challenge. Hitchens isn't really interested in learning anything that challenges his view, which isn't the mark of an 'intellectual'. If you watch again you'll see Hitchens always dismisses something that doesn't fit his view by saying he doesn't know anything about it, e.g. Norway's rehabilitative approach to criminality. To not know anything about that particular issue (while having written a book on the subject!) and then ignore the evidence presented betrays him and his narrow mindedness.
35:35 - I though you'd just interviewed Chomsky ? Back up info ~ the 6min 56sec video ''Noam Chomsky on Ukraine, Russia & NATO,'' by UkeTube [from 2015] / the 1.52 ''Modern day Nostradamus predicted Ukraine situation in 2015,'' by Gordon Dimmack [a John Mearsheimer clip] and the 6.14 ''Weapons 4 Ukraine {& Military Industrial Complex},'' by Matt Orfalea.
@@lauriesouth4783 he's an old boxer , past his best, taking on a man at his peak. He's holding onto Owen and hoping for a luck shot. His basic argument re Ukraine is sound.
@@dooda77penn19 More to the point why is Jones hated in equal measure by both the right and the authentic left. Indeed the socialist George Galloway who has risen in my estimation of late absolutely despises Jones and everything he stands for. The answer of course lies in the fact that Jones is in reality a neoliberal indeed his views on just everything are identical to that of Californian Shitlib
Owens part in this is minimal, apart from his several displays of ignorance, lack of context and general self awareness. Hitchens is leagues ahead on rationality, history, facts and education.
It is always essential viewing when Owen interviews and spars with Peter Hitchens. This is how a proper debates should happen and it should be shared widely as an antidote to echo chamber rants. Thank you!
The two of you should have a weekly slot, it seems increasingly (and depressingly) rare for people with such divergent opinions to engage in such a civilised way.
I support this. I'm very socially conservative Christian, though with a largely case-by-case non-ideological opinion on many social issues highlighted by progressivism, and though I disagree with Peter on quite a few things, I still of course mainly disagree with Owen on pretty much everything, and yet I would watch a weekly conversation between these two without fail, every single week. They're both outspoken, it would be tremendous. So much more interesting than any other lame and tired punditry going on.
I think Hitchens is right. We quite often get angry over the wrong things. People were angry about Johnson partying, but not about his disastrous lockdown policy.
It's not that the lockdown was disastrous. People are more angry about partying because he didn't even follow his own lockdown rules. It shows utter contempt for the British public who were forcefully locked down.
People were angry about Johnson partying because it was blatant hypocrisy; people have not been as angry about his disastrous lockdown policy perhaps because they accept that neither he nor they, at the time, had any idea how to deal with the pandemic. The government could only flail in the dark, because the data they were getting were too much and contradictory. The former wrongdoing was moral whereas the latter was excusable ignorance.
When I was younger I disliked Hitchens with a venom. He symbolised everything I was against. His pomposity, if there to annoy , certainly worked on me. As I’ve matured I’ve grown to respect him as a voice. I still disagree with much of what he says but his stance is much more nuanced than I gave him credit for. His views on the Iraq war for instance stand out and in this interview his , dare I say it , compassionate summary of Powell’s closing of mental health institutions dares us to give this man our full attention to the end.
I agree 100% with everything you have said. The anger I felt towards him for his political views initially has gradually subsided. This is based on the fact that he is one of only a few political commentators who is able to communicate and debate in a very calm and nuanced way, which a large percentage of the population find it very hard to do without it descending into abuse and personal attacks. Whilst I still disagree with everything he believes in, he has my respect for being open to this type of political debate and to put his point across in a very eloquent way. The UK population could learn a lot about how you can debate politics from two polar opposite points of view, whilst remaining respectful to each other. You are never going to change each other's mind when you are so fundamentally different in your political views, which I think is where people go wrong when trying to debate politics, but these sorts of conversations are essential for both sides in developing a deeper understanding of why people have the views that they do, and how you articulate your arguments, beyond the tribal soundbites that seem to be the only way many people are able to put their point across.
@@Beelzeboogie We all knew it was the one who resembles a schoolboy who was being schooled. Jones should stay in his Guardian safespace if he doesn't want to get exposed.
I rather like Peter Hitchens. And after watching this, I also (now) like Owen Jones. Two opposites willing to have a civilized discussion to inspire thought is rather rare. Bravo.
Yes too often people take things mega personally if someone disagrees with their political opinion. Like their political opinions are part of their personality so to disagree with an opinion they have is to dislike the person him/herself
As a (boring/moderate) centre-left person, I have to say these chats you've had with Peter really make me think and help me get a more rounded view. Thanks Owen and team!
Centre-left is not "moderate'. You murder millions of people worldwide supporting US hegemony and backing capitalist dictatorship everywhere and try and pass yourself off as nice by saying fluffy things about minorities
21:32 I've heard this idea that 'we didn't used to have romantic love' a number of times, and it is total baloney. Just because people didn't write about it till the Chivalric Age doesn't mean people didn't experience it.
I think Owen meant it in terms of a general organising social principle rather than an emotional phenomenon. People fell in love romantically, of course, but were often compelled to marry others due to social pressure. Many 19th century novels are about just this contradiction
I find myself rarely agreeing with Owen Jones but I have massive respect for him for talking to people he doesn't agree with. A more reasonable voice of the left which is very refreshing.
Totally agree, its admirable that he’s willing to talk to people who think differently. Its shameful that we even make a big deal of this, it youst shows how bad things have gotten in the west.
There is absolutely no chemistry between the two men. The superficial cordiality you observe is Hitchens being masterfully patient with a snarky, self obsessed, less well informed gnat.
35:56 Poor Peter sounded like a pedantic fool when discussing Ukraine. Attempting to 'explain' why the Russians had justification, or received 'provocation', for invading this sovereign country, he banged on about a 'putsch' in 2014. What has that got to do with anything? Does Russia have jurisdiction over the internal affairs of Ukraine? If Ukraine had a putsch it's absolutely none of Russia's business. On this subject Owen is right: it was an unprovoked and illegitimate invasion.
incidentally, this is why the personalisation of politics has been so bad. "it's none of your business", as if geopolitics is like the neighbours peeping through the curtains.
@@Mr___X You think Russia has the right to interfere with the internal affairs and foreign policy of any country which it borders? Personalising what the defenders of Russia do - 'Russia is concerned' 'Russia wants buffer states', which is exactly your view.
@@Mr___X Stop using metaphors and try arguments. Explain why Hitchens is right and I am wrong. Owen said it was an unjustified invasion, which Hitchens attempted to contradict. He failed. YOU make his case for him.
Peters logic is, I’m a Conservative, I don’t agree with the current Conservative party, therefore they are hard left, because admitting that they might be closer bedfellows to my own ideology is too difficult for me to admit.
When gay marriage was topical, Peter’s reasoning against it was there’d be no advantage to straight marriage if gay people could also get married 🤨 He’s an interesting guy and sometimes overlaps with left politics but he’s often contrarian for the sake of it.
@@MontyCantsin5 That's the danger of being a talking head who gets paid for opinions. It doesn't take long to cotton on that provocative opinions generate more interest than measured ones and to, consciously or subconsciously, realign a little from that. I doubt he or most others delve into that entirely and become entirely insincere and flippant but there must be a slight skewering of opinions as you become more performative for the audience.
@@JamesMc2051: Yes, I definitely agree with that and it's something I've been thinking about more recently when it comes to the views Peter Hitchens espouses. It's hard to ignore the idea that he is just putting forward daft opinions because that will generate more attention.
Rewatching this in 2024, probably for the fourth time or so. Genuinely has to be one of my favourite discussions on UA-cam. Hitchens and Jones are just about as far away politically from each other as any other duo, and yet they are able to sit down respectfully and discuss some of the most pressing issues facing this country and the world. Bravo!
This history could have many different interpretations. In Ukraine which is my country historical ties between Ukraine and Russia are usually seen as ties between tbe oppressed and the oppressor.
Hitchens seems to be entirely unable/unwilling to test his assumptions. Every answer is "I don't know - I have never looked into it". So he just goes thru life with a set of ingrained attitudes and untested assumptions. He's lauded as an intellectual, but an intellectual would at least be willing to find out whether their deeply held beliefs stood up to scrutiny.
He knows his deeply held beliefs wouldn’t stand up. This is his flaw, that destroys any credibility of his views, analysis and arguments. His feelings and economic interests matter more than facts.
He appears anachronistic because refuses to give an uninformed opinion. He talks very well on subjects which he has researched deeply for his many books.
Firs time in years I’ve seen Owen do a proper interview and employ reasonable disagreement. Keep growing mate, we don’t agree on 99% of things, but conducting yourself like this commands respect.
Great interview again. The one you did with Peter 7 years ago was brilliant. I don't agree with all what Peter has to say but he always does say some interesting and thoughtful things. There were a number of things that he said which were spot on. Libya 🇱🇾 and Cameron getting a free pass. Would the Manchester Arena bombing have occurred if Libya hadn't been attacked? Sadly also absolutely correct about mental health and prisons.
On some issues they agreed on the diagnosis of the disease but had polar opposite views about it's causes and cures. A case in point in the criminal justice system about which Owen was more convincing.
@@andymeakin4263 it was quite funny when Owen claimed to be ‘radical left’, and Hitchens was or is the real radical left. I could hear Hitchens chuckle internally at that one.
I mean, the title alone should tell you he is not playing with a full deck. He's literally just saying "left equals bad, and this stuff the tories are doing is bad so it must be left-wing" Just insane drivel.
@Chase Williams I agree with Roger Scruton (RIP), but Murray is a charlatan/lightweight and Starkey hasn't a clue about serious politics - the latter two are just kneejerk bigots.
I respectfully disagree. I think he spouts knee jerk, reductive, out-dated & offensive views fuelled by his Christian faith. I think he's cold and calculated and works his position well - appealing to his Mail on Sunday readership... for £s..
They both missed the point of the real issue with party gate. The parties while illegal were politically trivial, the real issue was the lying to Parliament which still hasn't been addressed.
There is no evidence he lied to Parliament. He said he 'believed the rules had been followed'. Perfectly feasible and impossible to prove either way. If you want to attack Boris Johnson for his politics, do so. Don't make up tittle tattle
I think most people didn’t care because most people broke the rules themselves and done similar things. The only people upset were the ones who were teachers pets at school
Peter Hitchens is always great to listen to because he's an original mind. It's rather ironic that his elder brother is sometimes considered the epitomy of individualistic intellect, because Peter is far more independent.
Peter Hitchens is in another reality. When question time was worth watching, Peter was a regular and I listened to what he had to say on many occasion, he hasn't ever given me cause for hope. How he assumes the poor should put up with their lot and behave themselves, come what may, he dismisses the reality that crime will always follow poverty and this is why. When you have nothing and your disparate you do your best to survive, that may mean petty theft, shoplifting, drugs which for both men and women may also mean prostitution, homelessness, and begging. Yes I almost forgot, all beggers are professional! with a flashy car parked at the other end of the road. You see Peter has never had to struggle for anything. So I have to ask the question, what qualfies Peter Hitchens to have any views regarding the poor?
@@tonytroiani6599 Same way it qualifies a person to object to the Bombing of Bosnia in 95. Just because someone is doing something it doesn't seem to be right or proper to not care or else give one's views. Last I checked no one has put a gun to your head for you to have a listen to the following conversation.
This is a fantastic chat with Peter, I think this man is a national treasure, you may not always agree with him but u can always see where he’s coming from.
@@duxnihilowhat makes him a conservative in the US he 100% considered a lefty your whole government is you don’t have real conservatives in spite inventing conservatism.
I have a new found respect and liking for Owen Jones. I don’t agree with him on much - but I do appreciate his willingness to listen respectfully & engage with others of vastly differing opinions. I wish there could be more convivial debate like this!
@@kevinb9830 If your referring to Sky News Owen refused to do all media interviews at the time & then someone started a lie that Owen refused to go on & debate Douglas which is a lie because Owen didn't even know Douglas would be there.
"well I dont know about that" Hitchens way of dodging around a legitimate point and moving onto a non-sequitur. Interesting but absolutely infuriating Hitchens is a master of avoiding answering any question directly.
@@formercrow5242 or of simply showing restraint in not commenting on things he actually does not know about instead of the far more prevalent tendency of jumping to ill informed conclusions?
Wild for Peter Hitchens to say that he doesn't have a political program, but also support English independence. He is clearly making his critiques, as all of us do, from a specific political point of view. Hitchens thinks his posture as an amused bystander absolves him of making his position and commitments clear, but it doesn't.
Like watching your own child making the same mistakes he did id expect. I can’t stand Owen but I really respect this exit from his echo chamber, and he does it more regularly than most.
For someone who professes to be invested in moral control over himself, Hitchens' interview with Alex O'Connor make it hard for me to take him seriously anymore
I thought Peter Hitchens wanted to live in the 1950s, I now understand he wants to live during the end of the 19th century. On the other hand he is correct about the Ukraine situation.
I don't hold with Hitchens Christian conservatism but he's a far sighted journalist. He has always maintained that NATO should have been dismantled in 1991-2 when there was no further need for it. He advocates getting rid of nuclear weapons on the grounds of affordability. He acknowledges the stupidity of rail privatisation and the need for an integrated nationally owned and run railway. Socially conservative does not mean politically conservative. He's probably the most far sighted and progressive writer/journalist by a country mile.
@@grahamhorne6956 he only has those views on rail because he's a season ticket holding commuter, crammed in the vestibule like the rest of us plebs during peak time and paying through the nose for that privilege for chronically late trains. If he bothered to drive, he'd be just like any other Tory on that issue.
Hitchens: I'd just like to state a baseless opinion Jones: What about this example that appears to indicate the opposite Hitchens: Well I don't know anything about that, let me move on to another baseless opinion ... rinse, repeat
Can't believe I listened to that whole debate hoping Hitchens would actually engage directly with a question asked by Jones. "Is Chomsky a war criminal?" made it almost worth it though lmao.
Hitchens is absolutely correct on Ukraine, wether or not you think Russia's invasion was justified they had been provoked to no end since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Respect for a havin a convo with opposing points of view, rather than the norm of media staying to their own tribes these days, where hosts and guests completely agree with each other. I want the days of Vidal vs Buckley again!
@Somewhatskeptical Owen made some really strong points too, when explaining how a Russian 'defensive' response against NATO viewed from the West may actually be experienced very differently by people who actually live in Russia or near its borders.
@@greensquare6235 ok, but that comparison is too simple if we accept NATO is an influence in the conflict. The US does what it does in South America with no opposing hostile military alliance present. Imagine for example if China set up military bases in Venezuela or Bolivia, then we can start to make comparisons. Their disagreement was about provocation.
@Somewhatskeptical eh, Hitchens is more confident than Owen so comes across better but Owen was mostly more right than him. Hitchens obviously tried to make Owen uncomfortable and play on his anxiety and it makes him look better than he is
I love these interviews. It is refreshing to see two people disagree but stay civil.. it's also very refreshing to listen to a small (c)onservative speak plainly and clearly about their beliefs. I wish more right wingers spoke as truthfully to their own convictions.
Really interesting interview. Nice setting too. I really enjoyed the opening chapter of 'The Abolition of Britain' when Peter described how a person from 1997 might feel if they were transported back to 1965. Very thought-provoking.
Keep this twosome going, tackle particular issues in depth, including general philosophical basis for taking various positions on the political spectrum.
It depends on how you define the Left. Left in the UK used to mean socialist, which neither this government nor the last Labour government are/were. If you recognise the modern Left as Progressives (Statist Authoritarian Identitarians) rather than Socialists, both are on the hard Left.
Peter Hitchens is completely correct and IMO he didn't hammer this point hard enough. Boris doesn't believe in anything which is why he's so easily influenced by the Progressives and Leftists who surround him. - What "Conservative" Government flies the pride flag? - What "Conservative" leader uses terms like "toxic masculinity"? - What "Conservative" Government tramples on people's individual liberties in favour of the collective? - What "Conservative" Government pays lip-service to transgender ideology? - What "Conservative" Government agrees with mass immigration and essentially open borders? - He parrots the talking points of "diversity and inclusion" - He's totally signed up to the green agenda - The tax levels are essentially the highest they've ever been - The online harms bill is a mandate for political censorship - They've totally lost control of public spending and have been running the money printer non-stop since he got into power All of the main parties are Social Democrats. The Conservatives, Labour and the LibDems agree on essentially everything.
Personally I now hope I live long enough to see Owen get the country he wants and then see the look on he’s face My 8th Army Veteran Grandfather told me that he didn’t know why he bothered fighting away for 6yrs when looking at the country back in the 90s I’m just glad he’s not around to see it now let alone all those laying in Flanders Fields and beyond
Because most liberals don’t understand what it’s like to be working class. They think that because they live a year in a squat, that’s their experience of what it’s like to be a “pleb.”
In large part because they are not poor and want to incentivise/excuse their own ill behaviour (including by encouraging it in others they see as challengers from below).
What's wring with this position? Russia started war in 2014 and radicalised war in 2022. Being anti-war is mean be against russian forces in Ukraine. At least against Russian forces in Continental Ukraine (Ukraine without Crimea).
@@xxvxxv5588 Russia moved their military forces into Ukraine after an illegal coup attempt in 2013, sponsored by the west, forced the legitimate president of Ukraine to flee his country. There's also the fact that the Kiev government had been bombing the Donbas region for 8 consecutive years before the 2022 invasion, resulting in thousands of casualties and hundreds of thousands of refugees pouring into Russia.
Owen, 1:04:00 - basically coming to your ultimate conclusion on the war aim based on your interpretation of a speech. Do you know speak Russian? (translations are one thing, but knowing the actual words and the way they're used does help). Do you understand actual Russian culture? Ever been there? Know Russians? Know Ukrainians? Peter does, as do I. Him definitely more so, at least with history and experience. This is so much more complex and messy than you've led yourself to believe. As he said, knowing anything about the subject is a disadvantage. Knowing nothing is evidently too easy.
@@greensquare6235 I never said there was problems in the translation. My point was that language is a lens into a culture. If I read the Russian transcript, I would understand exactly how he structure is that way, why some ways of speech, verbs, word order etc reflects the Russian mindset. It's not crucial, but it's a huge advantage when you understand nothing of the other culture, as indeed Owen does not.
Just 15mins in but what a joy it is to see a left wing and a right wing commentator having an intelligent discussion instead of screaming at each other like 2 year olds!
Owen states he opposes NATO expansion but seems tone deaf when it comes to NATO activity in Eastern Europe and Ukraine. Funny old world, PH is not someone I usually agree with but he's completely on point on this. It appears OJ has been spending too much time with liberals and cannot notice Western imperialism when it's staring right in his face. He does have form in this however. When Corbyn was being vilified by the papers, including his own, he ended up siding with his liberal friends.
90 percent of people go back to prison BECAUSE they, quite rationally figure that they don't have much to lose. This is reflected in the rise in prison numbers during recessions.
@@1man1bike1road I helped out with the homeless for 10 years ,when it's cold some could'nt cope and would do some crime to get back inside for a short while
As much as I respect the fact that two, well informed people can come together and have a discussion like this, I am increasingly frustrated with the fact that when Peter Hitchens puts his arguments forward, he expects everyone around him to capitulate to his opinion. This may be based on the knowledge that he is factually correct, but it would be nice to hear less pomposity with how he argues. Heaven forbid he should be wrong. This is displayed by the way he delivers a point and then continues to talk, preventing Owen from responding properly. It’s a kind of conversational domination that makes Peter come across as extremely rude.
I think.it's generous of you to assume a man who thinks Starmer is a dangerous revolutionary, is factually correct. I share your frustration with the double standards he applies to his contributions to the discourse.
@@solarpunk7660 A certain lawyer from bretagne in late 18th century France disagrees with you. Keir is in fact much closer to french revolutionaries than the imagination permits.
Owen Jones makes very stereotypically ideological points that Hitchkins is probably already familiar with and instead of arguing semantics he merely plows through to make his point, at which point Jones has to change tact as he realises that most of the trees he was barking up weren't relevant to the point being made in the first place.
Owen Jones once again confusing an "unprovoked invasion" with an "unjustified invasion". Should go and read up on some actual history about what the US has been doing in Ukraine for the past decade. This is willful ignorance.
Please like, subscribe - and help us take on the right-wing media here: patreon.com/owenjones84
Call yourself a Marxist and you locate the problem in Putin's head!!!
Always nice to see Peter destroy you in such a warm relaxed manner : )
@@parallaxview6770 Destroy? Hitchens tries to cut Owen off whenever Owen presents Hitchens with a challenge. Hitchens isn't really interested in learning anything that challenges his view, which isn't the mark of an 'intellectual'. If you watch again you'll see Hitchens always dismisses something that doesn't fit his view by saying he doesn't know anything about it, e.g. Norway's rehabilitative approach to criminality. To not know anything about that particular issue (while having written a book on the subject!) and then ignore the evidence presented betrays him and his narrow mindedness.
35:35 - I though you'd just interviewed Chomsky ? Back up info ~ the 6min 56sec video ''Noam Chomsky on Ukraine, Russia & NATO,'' by UkeTube [from 2015] / the 1.52 ''Modern day Nostradamus predicted Ukraine situation in 2015,'' by Gordon Dimmack [a John Mearsheimer clip] and the 6.14 ''Weapons 4 Ukraine {& Military Industrial Complex},'' by Matt Orfalea.
@@lauriesouth4783 he's an old boxer , past his best, taking on a man at his peak.
He's holding onto Owen and hoping for a luck shot.
His basic argument re Ukraine is sound.
It's refreshing to see two people not agreeing on different issues, but prepared to have a discussion.
I am starting to think that hitchens is seriously mentally unstable .the tory government is the most right wing in UK history
Yeah of course, I wonder why Jones refusers to debate Douglas murray 🤔, wrong type of gay I suspect.
He talks to possibly the only person in the world that would disagree with their own reflection. How about talking to Graham Linehan?
@@dooda77penn19 More to the point why is Jones hated in equal measure by both the right and the authentic left. Indeed the socialist George Galloway who has risen in my estimation of late absolutely despises Jones and everything he stands for. The answer of course lies in the fact that Jones is in reality a neoliberal indeed his views on just everything are identical to that of Californian Shitlib
Owens part in this is minimal, apart from his several displays of ignorance, lack of context and general self awareness. Hitchens is leagues ahead on rationality, history, facts and education.
We need a show where Hitchens and Jones do a road trip of Europe
Yes and Jones can continue to not grasp the current political climate, abroad!
🤔😳🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@ArtwithBen yes. He will be like something something proletariat. Something something power to the people.
In a camper van? Or on Harley Davidsons?
Have wanted to see Peter Hitchens on a lecture tour of Europe for a long time. It'll never happen, unfortunately
It is always essential viewing when Owen interviews and spars with Peter Hitchens. This is how a proper debates should happen and it should be shared widely as an antidote to echo chamber rants.
Thank you!
wasn't much of a spar, Peter ko'd him in the 1st round!
“spars”😂😂😂
'Spars'? A chopstick against a lance makes a poor excuse of a joust.
My politics couldn't be further from yours Owen, but I watch you for things like this. Keep it up!
@@JupiterThunder 🤦♂️🤦♂️
@@JupiterThunder do you realise that just by commenting you've earned him money from youtube ad revenue?
@@JupiterThunder oh chill out..
The two of you should have a weekly slot, it seems increasingly (and depressingly) rare for people with such divergent opinions to engage in such a civilised way.
I support this. I'm very socially conservative Christian, though with a largely case-by-case non-ideological opinion on many social issues highlighted by progressivism, and though I disagree with Peter on quite a few things, I still of course mainly disagree with Owen on pretty much everything, and yet I would watch a weekly conversation between these two without fail, every single week. They're both outspoken, it would be tremendous. So much more interesting than any other lame and tired punditry going on.
@@CarboKill wasn’t really a conversation though was it? A boy being schooled by a man🥴
@@truthseeker8959 and the boy was irritating. Asks a question, doesn't like where the answer is going, butts in and offers his own answer.
Hitchens is not a civilised person
I think Hitchens is right. We quite often get angry over the wrong things. People were angry about Johnson partying, but not about his disastrous lockdown policy.
But that's intentional though. They make people be mad at 'this' thing so they don't worry about 'that' thing.
@@adambritain5774 Exactly.
It's not that the lockdown was disastrous. People are more angry about partying because he didn't even follow his own lockdown rules. It shows utter contempt for the British public who were forcefully locked down.
@@dag3014 Point proven.
People were angry about Johnson partying because it was blatant hypocrisy; people have not been as angry about his disastrous lockdown policy perhaps because they accept that neither he nor they, at the time, had any idea how to deal with the pandemic. The government could only flail in the dark, because the data they were getting were too much and contradictory. The former wrongdoing was moral whereas the latter was excusable ignorance.
When I was younger I disliked Hitchens with a venom. He symbolised everything I was against. His pomposity, if there to annoy , certainly worked on me. As I’ve matured I’ve grown to respect him as a voice. I still disagree with much of what he says but his stance is much more nuanced than I gave him credit for. His views on the Iraq war for instance stand out and in this interview his , dare I say it , compassionate summary of Powell’s closing of mental health institutions dares us to give this man our full attention to the end.
Hitchens is superb.
I agree 100% with everything you have said. The anger I felt towards him for his political views initially has gradually subsided. This is based on the fact that he is one of only a few political commentators who is able to communicate and debate in a very calm and nuanced way, which a large percentage of the population find it very hard to do without it descending into abuse and personal attacks. Whilst I still disagree with everything he believes in, he has my respect for being open to this type of political debate and to put his point across in a very eloquent way.
The UK population could learn a lot about how you can debate politics from two polar opposite points of view, whilst remaining respectful to each other.
You are never going to change each other's mind when you are so fundamentally different in your political views, which I think is where people go wrong when trying to debate politics, but these sorts of conversations are essential for both sides in developing a deeper understanding of why people have the views that they do, and how you articulate your arguments, beyond the tribal soundbites that seem to be the only way many people are able to put their point across.
It really is a joy hearing you two having ongoing conversations. I hope there’s a lot more in the future
Your back and forth with Peter is once again a joy to listen to :)
Peter and Owen do seem to bring out the best in each other.
lol
Owen is perfectly aware that he lacks the knowledge and experience to challenge the old fart.
I don’t think being schooled by a more informed commentator is “ bringing out the best”!😂
@@truthseeker8959 Ah, keep it vague about who's getting schooled. Clever.
@@Beelzeboogie We all knew it was the one who resembles a schoolboy who was being schooled.
Jones should stay in his Guardian safespace if he doesn't want to get exposed.
This is a channel that I dip in and out of but I could watch Owen and Peter in conversation all day long.
I rather like Peter Hitchens. And after watching this, I also (now) like Owen Jones. Two opposites willing to have a civilized discussion to inspire thought is rather rare. Bravo.
It's great to see people who don't agree with each other having a civilised conversation.
Made me feel nostalgic, actually
they cut out the bar brawl at the end :D
It's called democracy
Yes too often people take things mega personally if someone disagrees with their political opinion. Like their political opinions are part of their personality so to disagree with an opinion they have is to dislike the person him/herself
So unlike the media-driven House of Commons.
As a (boring/moderate) centre-left person, I have to say these chats you've had with Peter really make me think and help me get a more rounded view. Thanks Owen and team!
Most people start off centre left then As people learn more and develop they move more right. So you’ve got time!
@@TheJohnCooperShow and some of us move from.centre left to hard left without changing our views one bit.
Centre-left is not "moderate'. You murder millions of people worldwide supporting US hegemony and backing capitalist dictatorship everywhere and try and pass yourself off as nice by saying fluffy things about minorities
@@patcampton9799 yes,unfortunately there are always some people misled who are beyond help
Christian is just warped in the head
Not a fan of yours, Owen, but I do appreciate you reaching out and interviewing people who don't agree. Glad you uploaded
100% agree. Shows some maturity and integrity.
They're part of the same tribe so more likely to engage with eachother.
@@AleXoEx0 is Jones a )ew?
@@St-ho8kj yes
21:32 I've heard this idea that 'we didn't used to have romantic love' a number of times, and it is total baloney. Just because people didn't write about it till the Chivalric Age doesn't mean people didn't experience it.
I think Owen meant it in terms of a general organising social principle rather than an emotional phenomenon. People fell in love romantically, of course, but were often compelled to marry others due to social pressure. Many 19th century novels are about just this contradiction
Props to Owen for helping to generate more Hitchens content
Props to Mr Jones for generating more Mr Hitchens content.
@@euan7166 Yes
@@euan7166 I'll
I find myself rarely agreeing with Owen Jones but I have massive respect for him for talking to people he doesn't agree with. A more reasonable voice of the left which is very refreshing.
Yeah, his positions are always reasonable
Totally agree, its admirable that he’s willing to talk to people who think differently. Its shameful that we even make a big deal of this, it youst shows how bad things have gotten in the west.
Wonderful interview, great chemistry between you two. Thank you bringing this!
I cant agree. Defo was the last time. But this time, Owen was clearly getting pissed off with him
There is absolutely no chemistry between the two men. The superficial cordiality you observe is Hitchens being masterfully patient with a snarky, self obsessed, less well informed gnat.
@@claudiahamminger-stone3274 lol so Hitchens continued talking over Jones is acceptable?
@@sirhumphreyappleby6498 I disagree
35:56 Poor Peter sounded like a pedantic fool when discussing Ukraine. Attempting to 'explain' why the Russians had justification, or received 'provocation', for invading this sovereign country, he banged on about a 'putsch' in 2014. What has that got to do with anything? Does Russia have jurisdiction over the internal affairs of Ukraine? If Ukraine had a putsch it's absolutely none of Russia's business. On this subject Owen is right: it was an unprovoked and illegitimate invasion.
blimey, how to miss the point!
incidentally, this is why the personalisation of politics has been so bad. "it's none of your business", as if geopolitics is like the neighbours peeping through the curtains.
@@Mr___X You think Russia has the right to interfere with the internal affairs and foreign policy of any country which it borders? Personalising what the defenders of Russia do - 'Russia is concerned' 'Russia wants buffer states', which is exactly your view.
@@FiveLiver i'm not moving past the fact that you think about politics the way your mother thinks about her neighbours. it's hilarious and tragic.
@@Mr___X Stop using metaphors and try arguments. Explain why Hitchens is right and I am wrong. Owen said it was an unjustified invasion, which Hitchens attempted to contradict. He failed. YOU make his case for him.
A fascinating and civilised conversation, gents - thank you.
☝️😎
This should be an annual meet up. Always interesting discussions from opposing sides of politics. We need more civil discourse in society.
I love Peter Hitchens! This was a great conversation! 👏
Peters logic is, I’m a Conservative, I don’t agree with the current Conservative party, therefore they are hard left, because admitting that they might be closer bedfellows to my own ideology is too difficult for me to admit.
When gay marriage was topical, Peter’s reasoning against it was there’d be no advantage to straight marriage if gay people could also get married 🤨
He’s an interesting guy and sometimes overlaps with left politics but he’s often contrarian for the sake of it.
@persianwungman: Exactly. Much of what PH says is contrarian for the sake of being contrarian which is a bit pathetic.
The Tories are communists though, he's right
@@MontyCantsin5 That's the danger of being a talking head who gets paid for opinions. It doesn't take long to cotton on that provocative opinions generate more interest than measured ones and to, consciously or subconsciously, realign a little from that. I doubt he or most others delve into that entirely and become entirely insincere and flippant but there must be a slight skewering of opinions as you become more performative for the audience.
@@JamesMc2051: Yes, I definitely agree with that and it's something I've been thinking about more recently when it comes to the views Peter Hitchens espouses. It's hard to ignore the idea that he is just putting forward daft opinions because that will generate more attention.
Rewatching this in 2024, probably for the fourth time or so. Genuinely has to be one of my favourite discussions on UA-cam. Hitchens and Jones are just about as far away politically from each other as any other duo, and yet they are able to sit down respectfully and discuss some of the most pressing issues facing this country and the world. Bravo!
Damn. When you really learn more about the history of Russia and Ukraine, you get a better perspective of how it came to be. Deep talk. Thank you.
This history could have many different interpretations. In Ukraine which is my country historical ties between Ukraine and Russia are usually seen as ties between tbe oppressed and the oppressor.
Literally been waiting for this for ages - loved your last chat!
Peter Hitchens and Owen Jones are the most interesting duo in British political commentary. They need their own show.
Agree, I've found both of their discussions fascinating, though I doubt they could tolerate each other on a regular basis.
Half right certainly.
Hitchens seems to be entirely unable/unwilling to test his assumptions. Every answer is "I don't know - I have never looked into it". So he just goes thru life with a set of ingrained attitudes and untested assumptions. He's lauded as an intellectual, but an intellectual would at least be willing to find out whether their deeply held beliefs stood up to scrutiny.
He knows his deeply held beliefs wouldn’t stand up. This is his flaw, that destroys any credibility of his views, analysis and arguments. His feelings and economic interests matter more than facts.
Owen looked weak on the issue of Ukraine: Inconsistent, a weak grasp of the history and a lack of analytical rigour
Of course they stand up to scrutiny and you can't speak on a subject unless you know about it.
@@Ruda-n4h do they hell. Unless you’re talking about something very specific.
He appears anachronistic because refuses to give an uninformed opinion. He talks very well on subjects which he has researched deeply for his many books.
Firs time in years I’ve seen Owen do a proper interview and employ reasonable disagreement. Keep growing mate, we don’t agree on 99% of things, but conducting yourself like this commands respect.
Great interview again. The one you did with Peter 7 years ago was brilliant. I don't agree with all what Peter has to say but he always does say some interesting and thoughtful things. There were a number of things that he said which were spot on. Libya 🇱🇾 and Cameron getting a free pass. Would the Manchester Arena bombing have occurred if Libya hadn't been attacked? Sadly also absolutely correct about mental health and prisons.
if we can some how cut out all the parts of Owen jones then I think the interview was fantastic. Jones really is a pointless establishment neo-con.
On some issues they agreed on the diagnosis of the disease but had polar opposite views about it's causes and cures. A case in point in the criminal justice system about which Owen was more convincing.
@@andymeakin4263 it was quite funny when Owen claimed to be ‘radical left’, and Hitchens was or is the real radical left. I could hear Hitchens chuckle internally at that one.
Only in the west are we insane enough to take in mass refugees from countries we've formally declared war on in recent history.
Peter is perhaps the only deliverer of a genuinely well-considered conservative worldview in the modern media landscape.
Well said.
I mean, the title alone should tell you he is not playing with a full deck. He's literally just saying "left equals bad, and this stuff the tories are doing is bad so it must be left-wing"
Just insane drivel.
@Chase Williams I agree with Roger Scruton (RIP), but Murray is a charlatan/lightweight and Starkey hasn't a clue about serious politics - the latter two are just kneejerk bigots.
I respectfully disagree. I think he spouts knee jerk, reductive, out-dated & offensive views fuelled by his Christian faith. I think he's cold and calculated and works his position well - appealing to his Mail on Sunday readership... for £s..
@Chase Williams Murray and Starkey are loathsome.
Enoch Powell isnt loathed for his Rivers of Blood speech, it was evidently a prophetic one
“I want you engage with this point”
“No”
Lmao
What a gentleman!
lmao
They both missed the point of the real issue with party gate. The parties while illegal were politically trivial, the real issue was the lying to Parliament which still hasn't been addressed.
There is no evidence he lied to Parliament. He said he 'believed the rules had been followed'. Perfectly feasible and impossible to prove either way. If you want to attack Boris Johnson for his politics, do so. Don't make up tittle tattle
@@importantjohn John you're a bit thick
@@importantjohn If we are to believe the 'believed the rules had been followed' then he is clearly too stupid to hold any office.
I think most people didn’t care because most people broke the rules themselves and done similar things.
The only people upset were the ones who were teachers pets at school
But as had been pointed out, Tony Blair told that we could be dead within 45 minutes due to Saddam's WMDs.
Thank you Owen for interviewing Peter and allowing him to trace the decline of the UK .
Peter Hitchens is always great to listen to because he's an original mind. It's rather ironic that his elder brother is sometimes considered the epitomy of individualistic intellect, because Peter is far more independent.
Peter Hitchens is in another reality. When question time was worth watching, Peter was a regular and
I listened to what he had to say on many occasion, he hasn't ever given me cause for hope. How he assumes the poor should put up with their lot and behave themselves, come what may, he dismisses the reality that crime will always follow poverty and this is why.
When you have nothing and your disparate you do your best to survive, that may mean petty theft, shoplifting, drugs which for both men and women may also mean prostitution, homelessness, and begging.
Yes I almost forgot, all beggers are professional! with a flashy car parked at the other end of the road.
You see Peter has never had to struggle for anything.
So I have to ask the question, what qualfies Peter Hitchens to have any views regarding the poor?
@@tonytroiani6599 Same way it qualifies a person to object to the Bombing of Bosnia in 95. Just because someone is doing something it doesn't seem to be right or proper to not care or else give one's views. Last I checked no one has put a gun to your head for you to have a listen to the following conversation.
What an intelligent and gracious man Peter Hitchens is.
🤣🤣🤣
This is a fantastic chat with Peter, I think this man is a national treasure, you may not always agree with him but u can always see where he’s coming from.
I always have a severe case of cognitive dissonance about Peter Hitchens. Hate his politics but would love to have a pint with him.
read my mind haha
Hmm...the wrong brother died. Harsh but true.
He's lovable and genuine. However "Boris is hard left" is sooooo bizarre.
@@MontyCantsin5 da boi hate weed bruh.
Seriously though, I share the sentiment of the original comment...I like Peter.
Christopher was better though.
@@duxnihilowhat makes him a conservative in the US he 100% considered a lefty your whole government is you don’t have real conservatives in spite inventing conservatism.
always enjoy these conversations between peter and owen. sensible and courteous exchange.
I have a new found respect and liking for Owen Jones. I don’t agree with him on much - but I do appreciate his willingness to listen respectfully & engage with others of vastly differing opinions. I wish there could be more convivial debate like this!
Shame he wasn't in that frame of mind with Douglas Murray.
Not when it's women with differing opinions.
@@kevinb9830 If your referring to Sky News Owen refused to do all media interviews at the time & then someone started a lie that Owen refused to go on & debate Douglas which is a lie because Owen didn't even know Douglas would be there.
I am glad Owen had this opportunity to learn!
Well done on this interview. I'm quite left wing, but always read and watch right wing outlets to see what they're saying. I enjoyed watching this 👍
If only more people on the left did that.
This was actually a really helpful chat. I’ve always wanted to pull all of my hair out
It’s like arguing with an eel
"well I dont know about that" Hitchens way of dodging around a legitimate point and moving onto a non-sequitur. Interesting but absolutely infuriating Hitchens is a master of avoiding answering any question directly.
@@formercrow5242 or of simply showing restraint in not commenting on things he actually does not know about instead of the far more prevalent tendency of jumping to ill informed conclusions?
Wild for Peter Hitchens to say that he doesn't have a political program, but also support English independence. He is clearly making his critiques, as all of us do, from a specific political point of view. Hitchens thinks his posture as an amused bystander absolves him of making his position and commitments clear, but it doesn't.
I think he's just saying he's not taking action.
His English independence support is more of a meta joke.
The Jones-Hitchens chats are always great. I genuinely think he likes/respects you Owen!
I think they both have thought through their principles and you can respect that even if you disagree
Like watching your own child making the same mistakes he did id expect. I can’t stand Owen but I really respect this exit from his echo chamber, and he does it more regularly than most.
@@katiemiaana Funny when Owen brought up South America Hitchens' principles mysteriously disappeared.
Best Owen Jones video I’ve watched, Peter, an actual intellect
For someone who professes to be invested in moral control over himself, Hitchens' interview with Alex O'Connor make it hard for me to take him seriously anymore
I thought Peter Hitchens wanted to live in the 1950s, I now understand he wants to live during the end of the 19th century. On the other hand he is correct about the Ukraine situation.
Perhaps the 18th Century, Lol.
I don't hold with Hitchens Christian conservatism but he's a far sighted journalist.
He has always maintained that NATO should have been dismantled in 1991-2 when there was no further need for it.
He advocates getting rid of nuclear weapons on the grounds of affordability.
He acknowledges the stupidity of rail privatisation and the need for an integrated nationally owned and run railway.
Socially conservative does not mean politically conservative. He's probably the most far sighted and progressive writer/journalist by a country mile.
Well only in so much that the first shots were fired in 2014. However the invasion was inevitable since the break up of the USSR.
@@grahamhorne6956 he only has those views on rail because he's a season ticket holding commuter, crammed in the vestibule like the rest of us plebs during peak time and paying through the nose for that privilege for chronically late trains.
If he bothered to drive, he'd be just like any other Tory on that issue.
@@BlyatimirPootin No it wasn’t
I cannot fathom how ignorant Owen is around the whole Ukraine situation
It’s staggering. This is recent history.
Peter is making a lot of sense, great debate, thanks to both
Thanks for this. Love Peter , and quite like Owen.
Hitchens: I'd just like to state a baseless opinion
Jones: What about this example that appears to indicate the opposite
Hitchens: Well I don't know anything about that, let me move on to another baseless opinion
... rinse, repeat
Spot on.
He finally has what he has always wanted and now it’s terrible he has nothing to say. So he talks about the 1950s a lot
Yep, those mail on Sunday columns practically write themselves.
Can't believe I listened to that whole debate hoping Hitchens would actually engage directly with a question asked by Jones. "Is Chomsky a war criminal?" made it almost worth it though lmao.
Hitchens is absolutely correct on Ukraine, wether or not you think Russia's invasion was justified they had been provoked to no end since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
^^^This. Provocation isn't limited to physical violence. That's just one form of provocation (grossest one obviously).
So you support Russia. The so-called 'provocation' is just a pretext for Putin getting what he wants, no different from Hitler's.
That's like saying a raped woman provoked her rapist by wearing lipstick and a dress.
So refreshing to hear an actual discussion rather than a 'panel' of heads all with the same opinion
I can't help but love Peter Hitchens.
He seems so convivial for a curmudgeon.
Thanks, I could have listened to another hour of this
Fantastic, love listening to Peter Hitchens even though I don't agree with him.
I salute you Owen. That wasn't an easy interview! What a character that Peter!
Respect for a havin a convo with opposing points of view, rather than the norm of media staying to their own tribes these days, where hosts and guests completely agree with each other. I want the days of Vidal vs Buckley again!
I loved the rigorous discussion on Ukraine, both made strong points, especially Peter to be honest.
@Somewhatskeptical Owen made some really strong points too, when explaining how a Russian 'defensive' response against NATO viewed from the West may actually be experienced very differently by people who actually live in Russia or near its borders.
Peter Hitchens' refusal to be pinned down on his principles when Owen compared Ukraine to South American countries made me lose some respect for him.
@@greensquare6235 ok, but that comparison is too simple if we accept NATO is an influence in the conflict. The US does what it does in South America with no opposing hostile military alliance present. Imagine for example if China set up military bases in Venezuela or Bolivia, then we can start to make comparisons. Their disagreement was about provocation.
@Somewhatskeptical eh, Hitchens is more confident than Owen so comes across better but Owen was mostly more right than him. Hitchens obviously tried to make Owen uncomfortable and play on his anxiety and it makes him look better than he is
@@thejfoshow1320 impressive cope.
I love these interviews. It is refreshing to see two people disagree but stay civil.. it's also very refreshing to listen to a small (c)onservative speak plainly and clearly about their beliefs. I wish more right wingers spoke as truthfully to their own convictions.
Really interesting interview. Nice setting too. I really enjoyed the opening chapter of 'The Abolition of Britain' when Peter described how a person from 1997 might feel if they were transported back to 1965. Very thought-provoking.
Keep this twosome going, tackle particular issues in depth, including general philosophical basis for taking various positions on the political spectrum.
The Pessimist said to the Optimist “Things are terrible. They can’t get any worse.”
The Optimist said to the Pessimist “Oh yes they can.”
Other way around, surely.
Very educational. Thanks for making this video Owen Jones.
Great to hear we can Thank Ian Hislop and Paul Merton, for Boris Johnson being P.M.
I hate Owen Jones but this is a bloody interesting talk from both sides - fair play both. Pls do again
I love listening to Peter Hitchens.
Owen is a spirited character who in challenging Peter enables him to reveal the depth of his knowledge and singular viewpoint.
I've been a fan of Peter's for many years, so I appreciate you doing things like this even with people you don't always agree with
He's useless here. Approaches the subject of immigration then changes the subject whilst cuddling himself. Lame. 13:25
What a cracking conversation. I could listen to these two for days.
If Peter Hitchens regards Blair and Johnson's governments as hard left, I shudder to think what to him is a hard right government.
It depends on how you define the Left. Left in the UK used to mean socialist, which neither this government nor the last Labour government are/were. If you recognise the modern Left as Progressives (Statist Authoritarian Identitarians) rather than Socialists, both are on the hard Left.
@@ian_b What authoritarian policies/changes are progressives pushing for?
@@freddyM610 Diversity legislation, green legislation, health legislation, speech censorship, the list is endless.
Peter Hitchens is completely correct and IMO he didn't hammer this point hard enough.
Boris doesn't believe in anything which is why he's so easily influenced by the Progressives and Leftists who surround him.
- What "Conservative" Government flies the pride flag?
- What "Conservative" leader uses terms like "toxic masculinity"?
- What "Conservative" Government tramples on people's individual liberties in favour of the collective?
- What "Conservative" Government pays lip-service to transgender ideology?
- What "Conservative" Government agrees with mass immigration and essentially open borders?
- He parrots the talking points of "diversity and inclusion"
- He's totally signed up to the green agenda
- The tax levels are essentially the highest they've ever been
- The online harms bill is a mandate for political censorship
- They've totally lost control of public spending and have been running the money printer non-stop since he got into power
All of the main parties are Social Democrats. The Conservatives, Labour and the LibDems agree on essentially everything.
@@freddyM610progressives in the 1920s literally wanted education camps I bet they try that at some point haha
Thank you for mentioning John Mearsheimer Peter his work on the US origins of the Ukraine conflict are fascinating to watch.
Personally I now hope I live long enough to see Owen get the country he wants and then see the look on he’s face
My 8th Army Veteran Grandfather told me that he didn’t know why he bothered fighting away for 6yrs when looking at the country back in the 90s
I’m just glad he’s not around to see it now let alone all those laying in Flanders Fields and beyond
frankly i want this to go beyond politics i want a buddy cop movie
'Hitchens and Owens'
Mmmmm
Starsky and Hutch comes to mind
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Anything left of Thatcher is far left these days.
Funny enough he is not really a fan of her lol
Tories support sex education for 3 year olds so yeah they're far left
@@sparkymmilarky I know it is
@@sparkymmilarky I've heard some rubbish before but that's comical
@Emperor Shaddam IV believe that and you'll believe anything
19:20 "It's perfectly possible to be poor and to be well-behaved."
This is something that is lost on a lot of liberals.
Absolutely a million times correct .Nye Bevin would be horrified by what the UK welfare state has become .
Because most liberals don’t understand what it’s like to be working class. They think that because they live a year in a squat, that’s their experience of what it’s like to be a “pleb.”
In large part because they are not poor and want to incentivise/excuse their own ill behaviour (including by encouraging it in others they see as challengers from below).
@@Mr___X are you suggesting the majority of poor people are right wing? And what are the ill behaviours of the liberals?
"as someone from the anti war left I support arming ukraine in that war of self defence"
This made me chuckle!
The Anti War Left is another myth that needs to die.
He'd vote to end NATO but backs a US/NATO proxy war.
What's wring with this position? Russia started war in 2014 and radicalised war in 2022. Being anti-war is mean be against russian forces in Ukraine. At least against Russian forces in Continental Ukraine (Ukraine without Crimea).
@@xxvxxv5588 Russia moved their military forces into Ukraine after an illegal coup attempt in 2013, sponsored by the west, forced the legitimate president of Ukraine to flee his country. There's also the fact that the Kiev government had been bombing the Donbas region for 8 consecutive years before the 2022 invasion, resulting in thousands of casualties and hundreds of thousands of refugees pouring into Russia.
Russia didn't commit enough troops to capture and hold Kiev, it was a show of force to intimidate, but taking Kiev couldn't have been the goal.
Owen, 1:04:00 - basically coming to your ultimate conclusion on the war aim based on your interpretation of a speech. Do you know speak Russian? (translations are one thing, but knowing the actual words and the way they're used does help). Do you understand actual Russian culture? Ever been there? Know Russians? Know Ukrainians? Peter does, as do I. Him definitely more so, at least with history and experience.
This is so much more complex and messy than you've led yourself to believe. As he said, knowing anything about the subject is a disadvantage. Knowing nothing is evidently too easy.
Without pointing to any problems in the translation your comment has no impact at all.
@@greensquare6235 I never said there was problems in the translation. My point was that language is a lens into a culture. If I read the Russian transcript, I would understand exactly how he structure is that way, why some ways of speech, verbs, word order etc reflects the Russian mindset.
It's not crucial, but it's a huge advantage when you understand nothing of the other culture, as indeed Owen does not.
Just 15mins in but what a joy it is to see a left wing and a right wing commentator having an intelligent discussion instead of screaming at each other like 2 year olds!
You two really are a dream combo
I love that you two can have these conversations
I do like Peter but unless he is the only person speaking, he’s convinced he’s being interrupted.
And how he constantly pauses and then continues ad nauseum.
@@MrSteamingTurd speaking absolute nonsense as he drones on and on and on
@@timhall3575 it's amazing he has the position he does. The bloke is well and truly off the deep end.
Tea, cake, Peter Hitchens and Owen Jones in polite, gentlemanly conversation - what a winning combination!
Owen states he opposes NATO expansion but seems tone deaf when it comes to NATO activity in Eastern Europe and Ukraine.
Funny old world, PH is not someone I usually agree with but he's completely on point on this. It appears OJ has been spending too much time with liberals and cannot notice Western imperialism when it's staring right in his face. He does have form in this however. When Corbyn was being vilified by the papers, including his own, he ended up siding with his liberal friends.
You can’t hassle the Hitch. Bravo getting together again Owen!
"not axiomatically" smiles and slurps tea with his win 😂
Why didn’t owen answer about why Ukraine suppressed the crimea referendum?
Peter schooling Owen on Ukraine. Surprise surprise the guardian journalist can’t see NATO’s sly actions for what they are
Having said that, I very much enjoyed the conversation. How I wish his brother was still around so you could share a conversation with him
Chomsky made the same argument about Nato and Russia just 3 weeks ago. But you didn't give him the same furious lashing
90 percent of people go back to prison BECAUSE they, quite rationally figure that they don't have much to lose. This is reflected in the rise in prison numbers during recessions.
noone comits a crime believing they will be caught thats why even in countries with capital punishment rarely have a deterrent
@@1man1bike1road I helped out with the homeless for 10 years ,when it's cold some could'nt cope and would do some crime to get back inside for a short while
As much as I respect the fact that two, well informed people can come together and have a discussion like this, I am increasingly frustrated with the fact that when Peter Hitchens puts his arguments forward, he expects everyone around him to capitulate to his opinion. This may be based on the knowledge that he is factually correct, but it would be nice to hear less pomposity with how he argues. Heaven forbid he should be wrong. This is displayed by the way he delivers a point and then continues to talk, preventing Owen from responding properly. It’s a kind of conversational domination that makes Peter come across as extremely rude.
I think.it's generous of you to assume a man who thinks Starmer is a dangerous revolutionary, is factually correct. I share your frustration with the double standards he applies to his contributions to the discourse.
@@solarpunk7660 A certain lawyer from bretagne in late 18th century France disagrees with you. Keir is in fact much closer to french revolutionaries than the imagination permits.
Owen Jones makes very stereotypically ideological points that Hitchkins is probably already familiar with and instead of arguing semantics he merely plows through to make his point, at which point Jones has to change tact as he realises that most of the trees he was barking up weren't relevant to the point being made in the first place.
This is such excellent and refreshing content.
Owen Jones once again confusing an "unprovoked invasion" with an "unjustified invasion". Should go and read up on some actual history about what the US has been doing in Ukraine for the past decade. This is willful ignorance.
To be fair the Putin apologists are using the two words interchangeably so it's not really much of an issue.
Provocation suggests intent, do you think this was intentional?
@@solarpunk7660 provocation doesn’t necessitate intent, being reckless as to the consequences of your actions would often suffice.
Amazing, thank you. Of all the things you can call Peter Hitchens you can't possibly call him boring, uneducated or unintelligent.