Hermer's Nazi Comparison Shows Dangerous Misunderstanding of ECHR Debate
Labour's top law officer undermines serious debate on human rights reform with inflammatory historical comparisons
Lord Hermer's inflammatory comparison of ECHR critics to Nazi Germany represents a new low in Britain's human rights debate.
His remarks not only trivialise the horrors of Nazi Germany — diminishing its unique and horrific historical significance — but demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of legitimate concerns about how human rights legislation is being weaponised against British interests.
The Attorney General conveniently overlooks how human rights laws have increasingly become tools for lawfare, particularly in military contexts. Our servicemen who served honourably in Northern Ireland now face prosecution decades later, while terrorists walk free under the guise of human rights protections. This imbalance in justice — or inversion where protectors face prosecution while terrorists escape it — exemplifies why many question whether current human rights frameworks truly serve their intended purpose.
Far from protecting fundamental rights, the ECHR has become a charter for activist lawyers to undermine national sovereignty. When a single judge in Strasbourg can block government policy on immigration at the eleventh hour, it's not "Nazi-like" to question whether this system remains fit for purpose. Such inflammatory comparisons merely sidestep the substantive legal and democratic challenges at stake.
The comparison to 1930s Germany is particularly egregious given Britain's proud history of defending human rights through common law, long before the ECHR existed.
Rather than engaging meaningfully with critics' concerns about sovereignty and legal principles, Hermer's Nazi analogy serves only to shut down debate through emotional manipulation.
We don't need lectures about human rights from an Attorney General who seems more interested in inflammatory rhetoric than addressing genuine concerns about how these laws are being abused.
This debate isn't about abandoning human rights — it's about restoring democratic accountability and ensuring our legal system serves British citizens rather than enriching lawyers and empowering foreign courts. It's about finding a balance between protecting rights and maintaining national decision-making power.
Lord Hermer's Nazi comparisons do nothing to address these legitimate concerns and only serve to poison serious political discourse.
Anyone who disagrees with their liberal idiotism is either a racist, a bigot, a transphobe, far right an islamaphobe or anything else you care to think of that suits and offends their twisted agenda. Definitely a mental illness and should be certifiable.
Hermer should be locked up for his part in selling the Chagos against the Chagosian people's rights. They are discriminated in Muarusias. Muarusias is a muslim.country and big friends of China.