What a joke. Everyone uses Second World War imagery to make their political points. Why didn’t Ed Morgan of the Canadian Jewish Congress object in 1990 when the first George Bush called Saddam Hussein worse than Hitler for invading Kuwait?

Didn’t that show an “insensitivity to context and history,” as he wrote this week to the PM and the National Post after Green Party Leader Elizabeth May quoted George Monbiot saying that leaders who fail to meet the global warming threat are worse than Neville Chamberlain?

Among the leaders he named was Stephen Harper, who replied bizarrely all week to questions on torture in Afghanistan by denouncing Elizabeth May and waving the Morgan letter.

For that matter, why didn’t the PM denounce colleague Stockwell Day on the same grounds for accusing Liberals in 2002 of being Chamberlains instead of Churchills? Who owns this stuff? Who gets a veto on how history’s images are deployed?

What if someone mentions the Battle of the Bulge in a speech about diet plans? Is that insensitive to history and context? I’m not trivializing. Many people lost family members in that battle. They’ll surely react, but it doesn’t mean the image is unavailable for the use of others and other generations.

This whole thing is about generations. Each era has to choose its own challenges. There are now generations of Canadians not born when Hitler died in his bunker. An entire cohort doesn’t recall the Red Menace or the Berlin Wall. That doesn’t mean they don’t care; my experience is they do — they want to honour the past and learn from it.

But at what point does Hitler cease to be our sole metaphor for evil and move into a gallery beside Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun, making room, as it were, for new horrors? At that point, it’s legitimate to survey the past for ways in which it can be used to throw light on the present. For many today, the epochal challenge is climate and the environment, as it was the rise of fascism in the 1930s.

In this respect, the appeasement analogy for global warming is entirely apt. Both Prince Charles and the British Foreign Secretary have used it recently. The level of destruction foreseen is apocalyptic, easily rivalling the 50 million deaths of the Second World War. It won’t be due to wars or extermination camps — that’s why it’s an analogy, not a replica.

But the “gathering storm” (Churchill’s term) is, if anything, more ominous than it was when Chamberlain returned from Munich in 1938 declaring “peace in our time.” Of course, no one can know. That’s why the floor is open for discussion. And Chamberlain thought he’d done something commendable, just as the PM thinks now. I’m not surprised he doesn’t like the comparison. Let the debate begin.

I’d say Elizabeth May is part of that new political generation, which is more a mentality than a demographic. Their politics is issue-centred rather than ideological and it’s more inclusive than divisive. They tend to act through grassroots movements or NGOs instead of traditional parties. Elizabeth May spent most of her life in that kind of politics before heading into the electoral version. I’d say, by allying with her, Stéphane Dion showed a respect for this new kind of politics without suggesting he means to change much in the “old” party he leads.

You can see the threat of this new politics in the reactions of oldsters in the parties and media, to the Dion-May deal (“Insiders shocked by Green-Grit deal”). You hear similar aggravation about electoral reform and proportional representation. PR would suit the new politicals just fine, but columnists and editorial writers would have to refill their cliché bags. People don’t like change.

Stephen Harper appeared furious all week at Elizabeth May, perhaps because instead of draining off Liberal and NDP votes, she went and endorsed Stéphane Dion. But fury becomes the PM. He hasn’t had a snit this good since Belinda Stronach crossed the floor.

rick_salutin_small_24_1_1_1_1_0

Rick Salutin

Rick Salutin is a Canadian novelist, playwright and critic. He is a strong advocate of left wing causes and writes a regular column in the Toronto Star.