Scott Horton Interviews Philip Hammond

Scott Horton, November 12, 2008

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Philip Hammond, author of “Darfur: the Dangers of Celebrity Imperialism” in the Spiked Review of Books, discusses the folly of liberal “humanitarian” interventionism, why complicated conflicts like that in the Darfur region of Sudan are often described as “genocide” and why waging empire in the name of helping people never does any such thing.

MP3 here. (36:16)

Philip Hammond, a senior lecturer in media and communications at London South Bank University, is the author of Media, War and Postmodernity.

3 Responses to “Philip Hammond”

  1. Modern day white man`s burden. These ignorant celebrities need to stick to entertaining.

  2. Really good interview guest and topic. I think Bush and Cheney think the US can be a new Rome, bringing light to the world I think is the line in The Gladiator movie. It’s mostly do-gooderism on the left and the right, just slightly different rationales but obviously bottom line they are looking for an excuse to project power.

    The great historian Paul Johnson said as much about this Iraq War on an Uncommon Knowledge show a couple of years ago, around the time he got the Presidential medal of Freedom, that it was basically the burden of the privileged to spread the light and that this is what Rome once did *by conquest*. The ends justify the means; coming from a devout catholic like Johnson this is fairly shocking. I think this is what is motivating many non-zionist neocons, much more than oil etc. So what kind of relations could we have with very poor third world nations, if we don’t try to control them? I think ordinary people don’t see an alternative to this, so they grudgingly let it happen and believe the bs they’re fed.

    The trotskyite neocons are all about equality – we have to do this, for to leave them in such dire state and do nothing leaves too big a gap between haves and havenots. We must do stuff for them, no matter what it is, *because we have too much ourselves*. And they don’t really want a UN as world government on majority vote, nobody wants that, except the very far left. This theory of theirs also dovetails nicely with their desire to get mega-rich and make history.

    Anyway, as Michael Crichton said in State of Fear, let’s look at the outcomes, show me the results please. And we NEVER see them, except places like antiwar.com.

  3. All together now, let’s sing: Why can’t the farmers and the cowboys just be friends?

Leave a Reply