Greens leader Adam Bandt is being compared to Hitler in the Murdoch media. Here’s why passing off that kind of partisan hackery as “opinion” is utter rot, writes Dr Alex Vickery-Howe.
PEOPLE SAY I’m a pedant.
I am.
Like a dog with a bone, I can’t let go. I’m the sort of person who… writes articles. I will irritate you into sleeping, if not submitting.
But I also think pedantry has its place in public discourse. There are certain inarguable truths that we need to hold close to our sense of reason if we are to navigate a way forward over the next 30-plus years.
It’s a scary world, in many ways. Maybe a little scarier this year. We are grappling with the rise of AI and all of the misinformation it brings. We are drowning in the lies and the crimes of some truly dreadful politicians. We are watching a demented demagogue threaten to annex Canada and Greenland.
And we are facing a climate emergency while surrounded by many a self-deluded “dingus” — that’s my word for those who, even now, refuse to believe the crisis is real.
The only thing worse than a pedant is a climate dingus.
We are also more tribal than we’ve ever been in my lifetime.
The Far-Right and the Far-Left each have their arenas, and they each have their strident views. I’m increasingly in sympathy with a centrist position because that’s where the facts tend to congregate, but watching French parliamentary elections, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) ascendent in Germany and the unchecked dishonesties of “he who must not be named” has kept me alert to the very real and pressing threat of a populist swing to the extreme Right.
We have a word for that ideology: fascism. (Frankly, I’d be worried if I lived in Denmark.)
I have to be careful with what I’m about to say next. It’s important that I’m not misunderstood. I don’t like fascists and I don’t support fascism. Naively, I grew up in the ‘90s believing that the Second World War had pretty much put an end to that hateful ideology.
Even now, I believe that if our education system was more critical and our standards more robust, we would have an emerging generation of proud freethinkers, instead of clans, packs and cliques. We certainly wouldn’t have people who think swastikas are cool.
But…
What frightens me more than fascism itself is how the fascists have stopped even understanding what fascism is. American President Donald Trump – sorry, I named him – is a protofascist working his way up to a second term of unmitigated tyranny, all because we… don’t like older people? Or, do we think fragility and kindness are somehow worse than open despotism? You tell me. I think “Sleepy Joe” is looking pretty lovely right now.
Trump calls his opponents “leftists” (sure, some are), “socialists” (not really) and “fascists” (um… Donnie, those are your guys). Meanwhile, locally, Greens leader, Adam Bandt is being compared to Hitler.
Sorry?
The Australian is probably too toxic to be a fish-and-chip wrapper these days. It may be better placed in one’s lavatory as an emergency roll.
Still, I have no idea how Francis Galbally came to this ridiculous comparison in the chaos of 2024: putting a pale imitation of former Senator Bob Brown on the same ticket as one of the cruellest examples of humankind. Or what the “editors” of that crusty broadsheet were thinking when they endorsed Galbally’s bile instead of fact-checking.
But I do know this nonsense is part of a pattern… of stupidity.
I’ve seen people on Twitter whip out an alternative political spectrum, apparently taught in actual schools run by actual idiots, wherein the Far-Right doesn’t lead to fascism but instead leads to “absolute freedom”. I have also been exposed, repeatedly, to the childish theory that, because Nazis had “socialist” in their name, Adolf Hitler must have been a leftist. Someone should’ve sent that memo to Stalin.
I’ve written about it before in Independent Australia and elsewhere. I’ve called out the media and ranted in many other places – including family dinner tables and all the parties I’ll never be invited back to – about how pathetic it is to try and pretend the political spectrum is malleable in accordance with one’s own caprices and to further fantasise that names create reality.
Time and time again, I’ve pointed out that the same rhetorical trick can be used against the Republican Party itself. Look, they have “Republican” in their name… they must be related to the People’s Republic of China… ooh, and North Korea.
I’ve also applied the same word salad technique to Captain Snooze and Burger King. Those guys are surely terrifying if you fail to understand that names have context. All hail the King of Burgers!
I’m aware, of course, that the spectrum may well become a circle insofar as oppression and violence can (and do) emerge from both political extremes. But, if you’re going to be a fascist, then be a fascist.
You don’t have to make up lies because you feel coy about it.
There’s little more pathetic than a fascist who is too scared to admit they’re a fascist. If you have beliefs, stand by them. The MAGA movement is very strange – and cowardly – in this regard.
Previously, I recounted how a Nazi came to my defence on Twitter because the Make America Great Again (MAGA) crowd were insisting that Hitler was a “socialist” and a “left-winger”, so I was – yes, immaturely – goading them to attend a Unite the Right rally and call the crowd “socialists” to their faces. For some reason, they were shy about putting their beliefs into practice. No Trump supporter has ever been committed enough to call my bluff.
The Nazi pointed out that I was correct. It would indeed be deeply moronic to accuse one of Hitler’s devotees of being a “leftist”. That alternative political spectrum may work within the confines of bad schools, in red-state USA, but it will never fly with the rest of planet Earth.
Being defended by a Nazi for understanding what a Nazi is must be peak internet crazy; however, strange as it may seem, it was the wannabe heroes of the Trump camp who scared me more. How can we deprogram extremists if they think Hitler was on the Left? Can we even engage in political discourse with people who don’t understand the basics of history?
Once again, I’m pointing the blame at an overstretched, indulgent, and economically motivated education sector, where every student is a budget item and everyone’s opinion is of “equal value” — no matter how ignorant or how dangerous. There’s a point where schools and universities just have to do better.
I’m also pointing the blame at articles like Galbally’s. These are dumb articles for dumb people. Appearing before a parliamentary committee, News Corp Australia’s executive chair, Michael Miller, framed the response to the article in terms of “differing opinion” and “personal agreement”.
No. Just no.
It is simply factually inaccurate to link Adam Bandt with Adolf Hitler. Galbally has – objectively – delivered a false comparison. End of story.
If Miller insists on bringing “opinion” into it, I would go so far as to call the publication of that article utterly irresponsible, misleading and head-smackingly embarrassing. But that, I acknowledge, is subjective.
To make it clear that I have no bias. I’m quite happy to say that Adam Bandt is a politician I fail to connect with. I do not doubt we share a passion for environmental protection and animal rights, and I admire anyone who stands up in support of those causes. But I think his self-satisfied and confrontational manner has made the Australian Greens less palatable than the party was under Brown’s charismatic and engaging leadership.
For me, again subjectively, Bandt’s approach is bad for the Greens. Besides, the way he took snarky advantage of Queen Elizabeth’s death struck me as tactless and undiplomatic. Anyone who knows me well knows I have a strange relationship with the late monarch. Look, I’m not the only one.
I won’t stand by while Bandt is compared to Hitler, though. Nobody should. It is plain wrong to pass that kind of partisan hackery off as “opinion” or “disagreement”. It is plain wrong to behave as though all ideas are “equally valid”. Journalists shouldn’t do it. Teachers shouldn’t do it. Society should – must – be firmer and smarter.
More recently, Bandt has been compared to a Marxist — not even slightly true, but at least the author understood the political spectrum.
Jeni O’Dowd’s reflection on tax policy and the housing crisis kicks off with this little spray of paranoia:
‘The Greens should rebrand themselves as the Reds and the Teals as the Pinks. Why? Their policies are starting to look like something out of a Marxist manifesto.’
Um, nah…
Pretty sure Marx would have plenty to say about upwardly mobile capitalists, even upwardly mobile capitalists who recycle. And I’m pretty sure Marx would have better things to do with his time than exchange ideas with a lightweight like Bandt.
If one wants to criticise the Greens leader for something he actually is, why not start with “hypocrite”? As comedian Dave Hughes pointed out during an on-air exchange, the person leading Australia’s “animal-friendly” party is… surprisingly carnivorous.
The following comes from the Greens website:
The Australian Greens believe that:
- animals must be recognised as sentient beings that deserve our care and respect;
- animals have intrinsic value, separate from the needs of humans;
- humans have a duty of care to minimise physical and psychological suffering of animals resulting from human activity; and
- strong animal welfare standards and laws are necessary.
Bandt seems to have no issue eating “sentient beings” with “intrinsic value”. Neither does he foresee the potential for “physical and psychological suffering” from, say, being boiled alive like a lobster, watching one’s child being carried away and killed shortly after birth as a mother cow must endure, or being skinned and sliced like… whatever the Bandts are eating for dinner this evening.
How can Bandt be expected to impose welfare standards on the seafood and dairy industry and the live export industry if he’s an eager consumer? I don’t claim to be perfect in this regard. I’ve been a vegetarian since my early teens, but nachos and paddle pops are my weaknesses. However, I think Hughesy has a valid point to make about the leader of a party who preaches one thing and practices another.
Even if you’re not an animal defender, the fact is that meat consumption is a major contributor to climate issues and the clock is ticking towards our collective transition. The leader of the Greens party can, quite rightly, be expected to lead that charge, not cringe and equivocate when a radio announcer calls him out.
Still, Bob Brown lived in Eggs and Bacon Bay. Nobody’s perfect.
This article began with my confession of pedantry. I admit that the way people confuse or obfuscate political terminology in an attempt to mask their true dogma annoys me on both a moral and a linguistic level. The two are more closely linked than they may seem at first glance.
We can’t fall into a situation where spectrums have no meaning, history is rewritten every few years and words themselves are twisted out of their intended context. If we play that linguistic game, then we fall into a moral quagmire where right is left, up is down and the Greens are the Brownshirts.
For what I hope will be the last time, let’s be clear — Hitler belonged to the extreme Right.
The Nazis know this, so we’d all be wise to get our heads around it.
Dr Alex Vickery-Howe is an award-winning playwright and social commentator. He teaches creative writing, screen and drama at Flinders University.
Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.
Related Articles
