in defence of liberalism

by Will Hutton

 

I write in defence of liberalism – a tradition as traduced by Baroness Warsi sounding off in the Vatican about a liberal elite undermining religion‘s necessary and important centrality in national life as it is by Dawkins’ high profile campaign to convert us all to atheism. There are many dimensions to liberalism – proportionality, due desert, mutual respect, belief in pluralism and tolerance of dissent – but we liberals would no more want to pillory those who have faith than we would want to endorse a philosophy that for all its appeal to rationality does not respect difference.

 

Liberalism is a doctrine of live and let live, and there has to be a very high threshold of harm before that liberal principle can be qualified.

 

Of course when religion is carried to absurd and dangerous degrees – the Tea Party movement in the US or Islamic fundamentalism – I am opposed, but for the same reasons I recoil from any zealot. George Osborne’s irrational zealotry on debt and deficit reduction is a much more serious threat to our wellbeing than Archbishop Rowan Williams’s Anglicanism. Indeed paradoxically the Church of England he leads is a great liberal redoubt – an institution that embodies proportionality, tolerance of dissent and respect for others along with considerable moral authority.

 

It is our ally, not our enemy, as we are discovering again in its battle against the devastating and thoughtless welfare cuts and the argument for a responsible capitalism. It is why so many English people support it even while their practice and understanding of Christianity is uncertain. Please don’t confuse that hesitancy with their quiet respect – even love – of an institution they understand and feel they need.

 

I am agnostic rather than atheist, which means I am much more well-disposed to the values and sensibility of faith. It also means I set a higher bar for my objections. I object to Baroness Warsi, Rick Santorum and radical Islam alike – but not to longstanding rituals such as prayers before council meetings or even in schools. I am more selective about my fights, and more anxious to protect my general liberalism and tolerance.

(source)

 

*******

 

stephen fry celebrates insolence

 

Intelligence Squared recently organised an event in which the life of Christopher Hitchens was celebrated, facilitated by actor and compere Stephen Fry. Some of Hitchens’ close friends took turns to share anecdotes about the renowned anti-theist, insolent and disrespectful as he is. They include novelists Salman Rushdie and Martin Amis as well as a fellow anti-theist, the biologist Richard Dawkins.

 

Stephen Fry & Friends on the life, loves and hates of Christopher Hitchens

 

Hitchens, when he was better, revels in his crusade against all things religious, from the loony evangelicals in the US and the militant islamists in some parts of the Middle East to even the more benign humanistic Jews as well as the Archbishop of Canterbury himself.

 

Although I admire him for his quick wit and sarcastic rhetoric, he is admittedly a very insolent prick at times – taking potshots at even the most respectable of religious people. I can understand if intellectuals engage in criticism of many of the shams and evils of religion gone awry and to the extreme end, but to attack anyone and everyone who represents any inkling of religious faith reveals a sillier and much more insecure side. Religion will NEVER go away – and to constantly crusade for its annihilation would go against the very ethos that these individuals seem to represent – a secular liberalism which should tolerate even opposing beliefs and worldviews.

 

Otherwise…contrary to what I used to think…a world without religion might not be so good a thing after all. Just look at all the vitriolic and barbarous nonsense it starts to spawn in the likes of religion haters like Hitchens, Dawkins, PZ Myers, AC Grayling and Martin Amis.

 

*******