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 sound grasp of the anti-AGW case. But too often I find his presentation of it arrogant and irritating. This time I find it disgusting. A dreadful error of judgement.
Anthony, please read this book. You will find Lord Christopher Monckton at least knows what he is talking about.
Kensal Press, 1985
ISBN 0-946041-33-4
Blood and Soil: Walther Darré and Hitler’s Green Party
by Anna Bramwell
There is one thing that goes through my mind… a striking similarity. You know, the German Nazis were economically challenged. They fixed prices for everything, with the obvious consequence of empty store shelves and a thriving black market long before WW2 started. This exacerbated economic decline, which they countered with forced labor (the Deutsche Arbeitsfront), building a huge White Elephant project, the German Autobahn grid, without much heavy machinery and a lot of moving worker tent camps, 1,000 km of Autobahn a year, but no traffic on them. And other Keynesian projects like digging holes (literally – they let workers dig out holes to create seas for recreational purposes). They later topped it off with a wholesale conversion of the entire economy to a wartime command economy.
Similarly, todays (mostly European) AGW politics consist of price fixing for carbon emissions and for electricity (via feed in tariff cross subsidies), and the building of a huge White Elephant – wind turbines and PV plants that don’t do much for energy production but keep some hands busy. So that’s phase 1. Will phase 2 be the wholesale conversion of the economy into a wartime command economy? Remember that warmists love to use the war metaphor – Salon has a “War Room”, Richard Branson has his climate war room website… maybe we should call them WARmists…
My … How must not Marx, Engels, Hegel & al. and their masters shiver by delight over this thread!
Sean Peake says:
June 22, 2011 at 1:22 pm
“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.”
Well… If you annex one country after the other at some point it becomes global… (which was what Hitler layed out in Mein Kampf which he wrote long before gaining the power, so WW2 was exactly not a surprise). Stalin, BTW, did not try to enforce global socialism – the idea of Stalinism, as opposed to Trotzkism, is that socialism in one country is already so superior to capitalism that it will automatically prevail. Trotzki on the other hand was convinced of the need for a global revolution; maybe so that the ensuing global socialism could get rid of the need for a standing army, an idea that was shared by H.G. Wells. (Don’t know which of these two had the idea first; maybe it was just one meme that was around at that time)
Yes, I think that we can all agree that Monckton’s comparisons to Nazis are over the top. Let’s just stick to our regular comparisons of people who think that GW might be A to Stalin or other fascists.
Hey – what’s the big deal about the use of a Swastika? Why all this political correctness, Anthony?
Shame on you Lord Monckton ! Bad boy!
Apologize, say 5 Hail Marys, Get back to work… try to do better in the future!
Nuff said! GK
The fact is, Nazis exterminated a few million people. The greens think the world is overpopulated by six or seven billion and are planning to do something about that. Who is worse?
I’d call the EPA’s findings on endangerment and the developing plans for regulating power production a scary mix of Millerism and the worst kind of Red Chinese central planning with a group of followers as wrongheaded as the Luddites. Making a comparison with the Nazis involves wickedness and ruthlessness far beyond the capability of the liberals of this era – although some of the pronouncements of Hansen suggest the way things could be heading. His declarations regarding high crimes against humanity on the part coal executives convince me that given the right circumstances he would happily oversee a Reign of Terror. Furthermore, post Hitler Nazism is a space already well filled with kooks like George Lincoln Rockwell, so it’s a mistake to try to shoehorn this professor into that spot.
On second thought, maybe using a Swastika is a bad idea. Now that I’ve read the general consensus here, maybe it is over the top. Maybe we should just all stick to comparing people that think that GW might be A to Stalinists and other fascists, like we usually do.
Luboš Motl says:
June 22, 2011 at 12:05 pm
Mr Motl,
You an me live in the countries which were occupied by Hitler GERMANY and Stalinist SOVIET RUSSIA (to American readers – now Czech (then Czechoslovakia) and Poland respectively).
I do not understand why educated Americans cannot see (not – do not see, just CANNOT) that being thrown to the fringes of society (e.g. losing good jobs) only because one had temerity to express publicly his own opinion, is the modern way of “concentration camps” of the past.
No one has to set up the camps today, it suffices to ostracized sort of “deniers” in most harshest way, namely economical. That’s only one example what is going on. What is being proposed by followers of AGW Church goes much further, with annihilation of opponents.
But to see that analogy one to has live a life free from political correctness breath on his back with real and painful consequences (as in America today).
Mr Watts, I totally disagree with you and your “frustratingly toothless in many context” attitude, as Mr Motl was so kind to unequivocally observe.
Best regards
Przemysław Pawełczyk
P.S. Emoticons and signature used by Mr Motl suggest he was in more relaxed mood writing his comment. I’m not, I am dead serious.
You know, maybe using the Swastika is over the top. But some AGWers have made nasty comments about skeptics. If there’s one think I learned as a kid, it was that when I whined to my mommy that “They did it first,” she always took my side and overlooked my bad behavior.
This thread is spectacularly hilarious.
Yeah – using a Swastika was definitely really bad. I think that instead, Monckton should have stuck to comparing environmentalists to Eugenicists, like Lindzen has done.
Per Sun Tzu:
“To a surrounded enemy, you must leave a way of escape.”
“One defends when his strength is inadaquate, he attacks when it is abundant.”
“And therefore those skilled in war bring the enemy to the field of battle and are not brought there by him.”
“If you know your enemy and you know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself you will succumb in every battle.”
Wait for it, wait for it, wait for the crazed climate communist hippie parade’s tin foil hat soldiers, supported by the violent pacifist-anti-fascisti-anti-corporate troopers, with the the anti-g8 greenpeazers in reserve, are all running around defending the “deer” old Garnaut.
It’ll be so hilarious when they’re all running around noticing it’s their own feet they’re blowing to smithereens, as they find out he’s a corporate man, a G8 man, a trilateral (“death ray hurling”) Bilderberger dude. LMAO satire. :p
Spot on! Invoking Nazi’s never helped one’s cause. In fact, I think the term ‘denier’ brings up the same kind of connotation and is actually harmful to the AGW cause. It detracts from facts and true discussions.
Lord Monckton i believe, knows what he is doing,his mission is to expose the move towards a “world government”.
He understands that climate change is being used as the tool to achieve that aim.
He also knows that the people that are now venting their offence over this have more than likely already made up their minds on where they stand on the issue.
However his retoric will gain attention from a lot of people and many of those will not be offended with his nazi
comparisons,it may even make some of them think about the subject more.
Those that are offended will get over it,i get offended many times a day, but i would rather be offended than punched in the face.
Its dirty work i agree,but does that mean it shouldnt be done when its important?
Monckton is to warmists/skepics as Palin is to democrats/republicans
He “fires up the base” but doesn’t win over any independents
I can’t resist another go at this topic. While the opinions here are diverse in and of themselves this is a fight to the finish. Some here condemn Lord Monckton for his approach other like myself do not when taken in its intended context re: Australia and it increasingly nasty fight over carbon tax that 60% of Australians oppose.
None of us here get to choose who fights this battle on either side – the individuals decide for themselves where they wish to come down for a multitude of reasons to many to name here. Mr Watts has chosen the high road and I will respect that on this blog. However much we may agree or disagree on any particular topic the AGW battle is worldwide with worldwide players. The scenes range from downright nasty to discussions based on the sciences as attempted here. Both sides have players immersed at every level of this global struggle with trillion of dollars at stake and perhaps the fate of nations thrown into the mix. Entire industries have taken sides while other industries are singled out for extinction. This isn’t small potatoes. Governments can rise and fall on the outcomes. This is global and the sakes are enormous.
Emotions are very high and like it or not those of us on this side have players willing to mix it up down in the gutter exactly where they find AGW believers. I easily swing within both worlds.
This is so funny. Of all the scientific topics on this blog there are lots of replies/posts explaining the finer points or just the science behind the topic. Hardly any views from Warmists, no replies to the mis use of data, the increase in sea ice, the decrease in global temperatures, the errors of the IPCC, the corruption of the green “charities”,
Nothing.
But I see “Lord Monckton” in the title all of the trolls appear. Its like thay have a network telling them what to say. Trolls? No, Sheep. From the cult of AGW.
When you see some criticism by the warmists of Monckton (or others), ask them about the errors in the IPCC reports. Or maybe about the failure of Climate models/predictions. Or about Pal review. Or many other things.
BUT. I will bet they will come back with a reply which has nothing to do with your question, and maybe even posing a question to you.
I agree with Lord Monckton. And I believe he was correct in everything he said. Even if the showing of some distasteful images offends some people, his analogy stands. Telling us that it is all down to Godwin’s law is incorrect. The warmists HAVE followed the path where such analogies are pertinent.
I am upset with Monckton using images such as the Nazi swastika or the phrase “heil Hitler” in his attack on Ross Garnaut, and I certainly hope he eliminates this from his Australian tour. Monckton cannot help the sceptic cause like this.
That said, Ross Garnaut is a venal and mendacious individual who deserves the unrelenting scorn of millions of Australians for the rest of his sorry existence. Garnaut knowingly lied to the Australian people in support of a carbon dioxide tax that the government has no mandate for. He has accepted significant amounts of tax payers money to lie. He has advocated an unelected committee to control a tax that the citizens are not allowed to have a vote on, so that the citizens have no defence against his lies.
I do not approve of Monckton’s use of Nazi imagery in his attack on Garnaut. However If Monckton was to refer to Garnaut as undemocratic, fascist, venal, greedy, mendacious, unethical, amoral, scientifically illiterate, arrogant, elitist, egotistical and stupid, I would have no problem with that.
Before we all start throwing rocks at our good friend Christopher Monckton, I’d have to see the context in which things were stated. I’ve read an article and saw a 1 1/2 minute news story. As far as invoking Godwins Law, as some of the other readers have pointed out, the alarmists beat Monckton to it by a few years. As to the one bit of context that I can see, blindly accepting authority with out question, fascism does fit, but I prefer totalitarianism, I wouldn’t want our commie friends to feel left out when expressing my disgust.
But, in retrospect, if one wanted to distinguish other totalitarians, one could simply state totalitarian socialist and in that manner one could be including the fascists and communists. And then, if you wrap them in a nice green blanket, you can call them alarmists or warmistas or what ever…..as long as the contempt is properly shown, which, I believe Monckton did adequately express, but it may be beyond people’s sensitivities.
Trolls? What trolls?
I’ve been here before, Roy. But I have to admit, this thread is an absolute gem.
The “Mommy, mommy, they did it first” posts are my favorites.
That said, Kudos to Anthony for putting up the post. I hope he’s looking closely at what kinds of people read his website.
Thank you Anthony. Right on!