UPDATE: Monckton offers apology, see below
Given the recent elevated rhetoric in Australia, the claims of death threats, and the media suggestions of skeptics getting tattooed and gassed, I was dismayed to see this in news.acom.au:
h/t to WUWT reader AdderW for the link to the above story.
Since I was invited to tour and speak in Australia last year at many of the same venues, I feel I should comment on this.
Alarmists in Australia are doing enough damage to themselves with over the top rhetoric. We don’t need to weaken our position on our interpretations of the data uncertainty and the science problems by committing rhetorical suicide.
Nobody has ever won an argument by invoking Godwins Law.
While Lord Monckton is free to speak his mind however he wishes, it is my opinion that this has no place in the debate, nor do the recent ugly calls from Australian columnists Richard Glover and Jill Singer.
I’m certainly not blameless in the issue of civility in the climate debate, as I’ve had my moments where I’ve rattled off an angry comment missive or a post that was misinterpreted that I have later regretted. There’s plenty of “heat of the moment” examples of that on both sides.
However, putting swastikas in planned public powerpoint presentations, and linking that by name to a person, is in my opinion, way over the top and in very bad form and totally hijacks and negates the important messages elsewhere in the presentation.
=============================================================
UPDATE: Lord Monckton responds in comments
Monckton of Brenchley says:
I have been a very bad Lord. My remarks about Professor Garnaut were unparliamentary and unstatesmanlike. Mea maxima culpa. I have apologized to him unreservedly, and I deserve the criticisms that Anthony and many commentators have posted here. Sorry to you all. I shall try to keep my cool in future. – M of B
He says similar things in this Telegraph article:
Lord Monckton has since apologised for the remarks.
Speaking to The Daily Telegraph, he said: “I have written to Ross Garnaut to withdraw unreservedly and to apologise humbly. What I said about his opinions was unparliamentary and unstatesmanlike.”
Monckton has a particular sense of humor. I think he has merely re-applied it here. Should be seen in the context of the talk he gave. IM sure most people just laughed at the suggestion (at the talk).
He will shape up and admit his digressions superbly I,m POSITIVE. I do.-most times hhmm. What i want to see is an apology at the right time and him asking for the same from prominant Austalians who have also crossed the line. Well done Christopher. cheers all round. Oh and naming them.
Get his PR onto it pronto.
Hmm, this is interesting. Lets contrast what Lord Monckton is saying what some politicians and environmentalist want to what some of the politicians and environmentalists right here in the United States are actually doing:
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/features/green/2011/06/green_literacy_new_graduation.html
Nope there is nothing like how the Nazi’s propagandized their youth going on by politicians and environmentalists. Yep your right, Monckton shouldn’t be calling these square bladed digging instruments spades since the description doesn’t fit the word.
ad hominem attacks do not advance any cause, and I believe it actually detracts from any legitimate factual evidence a cause may have. While I understand wanting to show parallels between an opponent’s position and other failed theories, doing so with Nazism is counter productive in the extreme. Unless or until some parallels can be drawn with the outright murder of 6 million people, not to mention the brutal deaths of many millions more due to aggressive warfare, there is no place for this comparison.
If you want to compare Idi Amin to Hitler, fine. But Australian leaders and journalists are not in this class, and making this comparison cheapens the debate, dilutes the factual evidence, and gives the opponent a legitimate complaint to discredit skeptics. The Aussie leaders may be deluded, but they do not come near to the evil that Hitler represented.
Thank you Anthony for being the voice of reason.
Anthony.
I am in most cases in agreement with you. BUT in Australia today you see the Radical leftist lying Labor government doing everything they can to undermine Australian democracy with demigod propaganda.
Promoting and encouraging Editorial threats of tattooing or gassing Skeptics, then pretending it was a joke, just like the 10.10 ultra-Violante blow up the sceptics video – This is exactly what happened in Hitler’s socialist Germany and Stalin’s Communist USSR. Lord Monkton was simply showing the similarities. I fear many of your commentator’s are not looking at the context of his comparison.
Ross Garnet is an viscous, abusive, arrogant SOB who has a nasty habit of the worst kind of put downs, much like a lot of the present Labour government, who treat people with derision and scorn who dare to oppose them.
Finally:
It seems to be poorly understood that Hitler was an extreme Socialist and like all Socialist they want everybody else to bear the pain, they will simply oversee it and be rewarded for their foresight!
“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” –Adolf Hitler
(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)
Agreed: Moncton should stick to facts. References to Nazism are neither helpful nor representative of the warmist opinions – except for those in the uniforms and parading on Herr H’s birthday.
This entire post and comments should be forwarded to him.
When a person resorts to such ad hominem attacks, one may well question whether it is science, philosophy or truth that he is defending, or whether he is just a bitter person who found a soap box and a place in Hyde Park.
The threats of tattoo’s, re-education camps and public witch trials aside, the AGW camp having lost the argument(s) seem to be successfully luring the skeptical side into their arena of petty malice.
Why Monckton felt compelled to add rhetoric to a reasonable argument, seems either unusually clumsy and out of character, or he experienced an uncommon (for him) brain fart.
While there is an autocratic element to Green policy, it should be demonstrated as unsavory on it’s own merits (and lack of them), historical reference is unneeded. The Nazi trope is an unusually lazy dig by Monckton, beyond pointing out the obvious flaws in AGW theory, he’s well off message.
What the he’ll is going on? This is most unhelpful.
We need to take the high ground in this debate. We must be squeaky clean, after all, that’s what we are demanding from the Warmists.
Lord Monckton has undermined that. He should be torn a new arse, and really dragged over the coals, publicly. But then we should let him right back in, because Forgiveness is Divine!
I often ask why ot is that Warmists feel the need to use name calling, and it’s a useful argument. That has been diluted and I’m really, really disappointed.
I note the above earlier comment by Lubos Motl and the reply from Anthony. I enjoy both blogs and I greatly respect the content of both. However, these blogs play different roles, WUWT gives an important face of skeptics to the world at large while the raw, unfiltered outpourings from the brilliant mind of Lubos provide that cold slap in the face we all need to somehow stay sane.
Me personally? I would not have used the Nazi reference, however I’m going to give Monckton some credit for political smarts and good strategy and here is why.
Recently in particular, alarmists have made some appalling statements in attacking sceptics (WUWT has listed some, such as “gas yourselves” and “tattoo sceptics”) at the height of the Carbon Tax debate here in Australia. NONE OF THE MSM HAVE CALLED OUT THESE ALARMISTS FOR IT.
Now that Monckton has used the same tactic, watch these alarmists hit him with everything bar the kitchen sink, but when they do, they themselves will no longer be able to use these tactics without being seen for what they are, hypocritical a-holes.
In fact, what Monckton has done is FORCE the debate to a higher level by taking all the flack himself and I for one thank him for it.
“That’s not a knife…this is a knife”
When your opposition regularly operates from the gutter it is sometimes necessary to sink to their level if only to remind them, and everybody else, that they are in the gutter. The alternative is that the one-sided gutter politics usually wins, as we have seen to our cost with CO2 based CAGW fascism so far…
The original meaning of fascism – one way – predates the Nazis, can be applied to left or right wing politics and/or belief systems, and should not cause offence… So does the swastika – the original form was, and still is, a Hindu symbol of peace and it should not cause offence. The Nazi swastika points to the right while the original Hindu version points to the left – though I’m not sure how many people ever bothered to find out…
The question is – do you want to be trampled all over in perpetuity or do you want somebody to stand up and kick back once in a while? You can’t fight anti-science with science, you can’t fight fascism with reason, and you can’t fight politicians with democracy because they do as they like once elected. Attack is a good form of defence. Sometimes you’ve just got to be as obnoxious as your opposition… As long as the tactic remains the exception and does not become the norm then I don’t have a problem with it…
Comment window has changed since the last time I commented here at WUWT. I don’t see a “waiting for moderation” so I assume my attempted comment has gone to the never never. I’ll try a shorter version.
I give Monckton credit for a superb strategy. The CO2 Tax debate here in Oz was getting out of hand with even government ministers and public servants having a go at sceptics.
The alarmists will not resist hitting Monckton with everything but the kitchen sink over this one. But when they do, they themselves will no longer be able to make statements such as “tattoo sceptics” or “gas yourselves”.
Monckton has taken all the flack himself, but in doing so has forced the debate to a higher level and I for one thank him for it.
I just think that many people who question what is actually happening (skeptics) are getting mad and tired of the alarmists “jokes” about killing, gasing, and murdering skeptics. Altough i dont agree with this particular thing Lord Mockton did i understand why .
As far as I’m concerned, Mussolini’s fascism and the National Socialist Germany Workers (Nazi) Party in Germany was right-wing communism that stressed nationalism (the superiority of its peoples over all others) rather than global socialism—the ideological difference that eventually pitted the Nazis against the Soviets.
I don’t think Monckton is an ideal spokesman for the anti-AGW movement and if he sees himself as that then he is no better than Al Gore. In many ways I partly agree with him. I have been accused of being impolite over at the Bishop’s house because I write what I think but I think like a Physicists and a Business management expert. When you stand in front of the management board of a large-ish company and know that they are being stupid there is little point in being polite. You will loose your head and be dumped outside if you are ‘soft’ and touchy touchy, feely feely. Brusque and direct is OK by me but calling someone a fachist or a nazi is just pure ad hom. Stupid, incompetent, lacking in scientific integrity, liar are all fine be my if you have the evidence, concrete evidence. Chris M is too loose and not scientifically cognisent to call others fachists and nazis. He must stick to the facts or fail BUT we can’t afford for him to fail it provides too much ammo for religious crowd.
What is wrong with calling a fascist a fascist.
Anthony,
I honor your wishes not to talk here on WUWT extremely/explicitly about how the policies and tactics promoted by advocates of IPCC AGW and/or ideological environmentalism may actually parallel what happened in Germany in the 1930’s and early 1940’s.
Having said that, if any given person sees strong and documented parallels between present day instances of countries implementing the IPCC climate science agenda and Germany in the 1930’s and 1940’s then they should be given free expression to show their case . . . . if not here on WUWT (per your request) then I am sure they will find many many other open venues.
A major contributing part of what happened in Germany in the 1930’s and 1940’s was the lack of general citizens in Germany and Europe speaking out against what they saw happening which they knew was terribly wrong.
All it takes for it to happen again now in some country is for normal citizens to not speak out, to remain silent when they know something is terribly wrong.
Although I may sometimes be annoyed by Monckton’s style, I give him great credit for being fearless about saying what he thinks in a way that is totally unequivocal. Of course the unbalanced MSM will use it against him and skeptics in general. That is a given. What would be tragic is for people not to say what they think is terribly wrong just because the press will attack them for it; if we do that then we have already lost the argument by silence.
Anthony – I continue to be a strong supporter of your WUWT.
John
Sean Peake
June 22, 2011 at 1:22 pm
###
That point of view only works from within the straight jacket of Marxist political theory. I.e. the left-right dichotomy is an invalid construct created by socialist to remap all positions as just one version of socialism versus another. Left and right are really the ends of the socialist spectrum.
“Nobody has ever won an argument by invoking Godwins Law.”
Unless they are arguing that Hitler was not a very nice man. Or they could be judging a Hitler look alike competition and arguing about who is the most like Hitler?
On a very serious note, Godwin’s law certainly has its place. Every year of my life there has been a remembrance Sunday. Every year we are warned to never forget, lest our generation, or future generations make the same mistakes. How the hell are we supposed to avoid making such mistakes if it becomes unacceptable to warn people when authoritarian control freaks start advocating using the same tactics as Hitler? Seriously? When some alarmists genuinely want to tattoo, imprison and even gas “disbelievers”, why the hell can we NOT draw the obvious comparison and invoke Godwin’s law?
REPLY: Because to my knowledge, Garnaut did not say any of those things, others did. Monckton could have made valid comparisons in context of history/policy (if they exist) without the need for displaying a swastika or saying “Heil Hitler”. All he has done is hijack his own presentation and given the media and blog a tool to beat him over the head with. – Anthony
Just like the Republicans have tried to take the high road, in most cases, when dealing with dirty tricks from the Democrats; skeptics have kept their contributions relatively clean. But sometimes you have to crawl down into the muck and grapple with the enemy on his own terms. It’s a dirty business, but unfortunately it is sometimes necessary.
Hi Anthony,
I agree that using the swastika is WAY over the top. Yet, the fact remains that some AGW-fanatics do wish the worst for skeptics, and in some cases even wish to wipe them out.
Maybe you can add a new category, sub to climatefails orso, with unappropriate proposals against skeptics. What Monckton tries to do is show the public the sinister side of AGW. But maybe showing the facts will do a better job than name-calling. (Btw, I’m not a saint myself, I’ve used ecof****** lots of times, sry, but at times I get so angry that I cannot stay calm.)
Anyway, thanks for your relentless efforts in this epic battle of science vs. mythology.
Reason WILL conquer superstition and ignorance.
Kind regards,
Scarface
“Given the recent elevated rhetoric in Australia, the claims of death threats, and the media suggestions of skeptics getting tattooed and gassed…”
“Skeptics getting tattooed and gassed” – has Ross Garnaut personally expressed a desire for this (or a similar) “solution?” Because if not, then Lord Monckton’s attack is unwarranted.
@DesertYote, agreed. I couldn’t think of a distinctive (memorable) label for the middle of the road socialist except for, you know, socialist. I’m sure you have better examples but I never really paid attention to them… until just recently.
You can’t confront modern fascist movements without being honest about what they are. Unfortunately in the case of eco-fascism they and their socio-fascist political bretheren have framed the debate in such a way as to label anyone who correctly calls them fascists as being . . . well, fascists.
Very strange, but true.
I find it a sign of Human special immaturity that the swastika is still regarded so. Humans kill humans, we have done this since caveman days. We’re brutal and stupid and prone to being deceived into committing horrific acts. Civilization gives us hope that we can do better, but we shouldn’t ever forget or pretend like we’re anything far above that which migrated out of Africa.
Nazis happened, and this is of course hard for people to accept, but without a large change in human nature their ilk will happen again. We shouldn’t be so afraid of ourselves that we pretend the worst parts of us don’t exist, that makes it easier to forget and let it happen again.
In short, I disagree with you on this one Anthony, and I expressed as much in the other thread.