Global Warming - Worse than Hitler
An absurd letter in today's Melbourne Age:
When sacrifice is the right thingMeanwhile, in the Sydney Morning Herald, a letter argues:
HOW many of us are so selfish that the first questions we ask when confronted with change, are along the lines of: why should I have to pay a carbon tax? Why do I have to look for another job? Who's going to look after me? Why isn't my compensation higher? Who says $150,000 a year makes me so rich that I should have to pay this tax? Why should I change my lifestyle?
Obviously, these people are unwilling to make any kind of sacrifice. Did our forefathers question why they should fight Nazism and fascism? No, they put aside petty arguments and self-serving questions and went off to fight the enemy. Not because they wanted to, but because it was the right thing to do. Today, we are fighting a different and infinitely more dangerous enemy - global warming. This enemy will kill millions of people through famine, flood, drought and other disasters, unless we start fighting it now.
Tony Abbott is like Neville Chamberlain, who refused to believe that there was an enemy who must be defeated until it was too late. Abbott is just as blind when he says we shouldn't have a tax on carbon. Abbott will go down in history as being just as foolish and misguided as Chamberlain.
Chris and Jacki Burgess, Port Melbourne
If a demonstration outside a chocolate shop, and a crucifix appearing in an anti-Abbott advertisement, are the worst examples of anti-Semitism and sectarianism that the ever-vigilant Gerard Henderson can garner, we should rejoice in Australia's tolerance (''Jews know acceptance still has its exceptions'', July 12).So there you have it. Global warming is a bigger threat than the Nazis, yet a bunch of antisemites forming a violent mob outside a Jewish business is no big deal.
Jack Sumner Eastwood
Labels: antisemitism, climate change, SMH, The Age
posted by Dan at 6:09 AM |
6 Comments:
Godwin has been working overtime lately in the global warming debate - on both sides.
Chistery,
It's a common error, but you have misunderstood 'Godwin's Law'.
Besides the fact it's not a 'law' but simply a witty observation by an Internet observer, it has never meant that *any* mention of Hitler somehow invalidates an argument. Indeed, Godwin's Law is unfortunately abused as a form of censorship, when very real analogies to Nazism can be drawn.
Having said that, the comparison in this case is quite simply absurd, if not wholly offensive.
The letter is also historically incorrect.
Labor (amongst others) questioned why Australia should fight Nazism and Fascism, and when in government withdrew Australian troops from the fight against them in favour of defeating Japan.
Dad went off to fight the Germans and the Italians and the Japanese (he was attacked at sea by all of them).
Oddly enough, he thinks global warming is bullshit and what we're doing is insane. And so do most of his surviving veteran mates (those few that are left).
He also thinks the Greens are the modern version of the fanatics that they fought 70 years ago.
Why is it that the people who invoke the fight against Nazism never actually talk to those that fought against Nazism?
Another take on Godwin's Law is used to hilarious effect by Greg Gutfeld who finishes off his rants with, "And if you disagree with me then you, Sir, are worse than Hitler! There, I said it. Hah!"
Not just bigger, but "infinitely" bigger. Wow.
Post a Comment
<< Home