Saturday, 9 April 2011

I DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS A TERM FOR IT!


I'm sure most of you who read this shite, have been in an argument with some Bolshevik bastard and you know exactly when they've lost the argument, when they come out with the NAZI or RACIST word, well seemingly there's a term for it.


Taken from Wikipedia:

Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies)[1][2] is a humorous observation made by Mike Godwin in 1990[2] which has become an Internet adage. It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."[3][2] In other words, Godwin put forth the hyperbolic observation that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope— someone inevitably criticizes some point made in the discussion by comparing it to beliefs held by Hitler and the Nazis.


Just thought I'd let you know.  Now you can baffle the bastards, by quoting GODWIN'S LAW!

14 comments:

McGonagall said...

" ...given enough time ..."

In my experience enough time is about 5 fucking seconds. Maybe it's just me?

Dark Lochnagar said...

Mcgonners, no it's not. I was arguing with some fucker on twatter the other day, who was calling me a Nazi and a Racist because I put forward the theory that Pakistan is a shitehole because it's full of Pakis. They just fling it in now. He also accused me of being in the BNP, the KKK and some bunch I'd never heard of. They think that winning an argument is done by slanging about terms of 'abuse', not knowing that we actually delight in it because we know we've won the argument.

Anonymous said...

I would disagree completely with Godwin's law. It's only intent is to deny historical precedent by refusing to acknowledge historical comparisons.

Godwin's law is Hitler's shield, the only people who need to use it are those who share National Socialist beliefs which is of course their right but they must also accept the fact they will be criticised for those beliefs. Godwin's law is designed to prevent that criticism and is best described as a tool to deny freedom of speech.

I do not seek to deny anyone's right to support National Socialism should they desire to do so, I do however expect my right to criticise and make historical comparison to it's methods and policies without fear or prejudice to be upheld, it is after all part and parcel of free speech.

It is a Pyrrhic victory if you win only to be branded as a Nazi.

History is precedent, those who will not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.


John.

subrosa said...

Your link isn't working DL.

greyingmantis said...

Anon/John: "Godwin's law is... a tool to deny freedom of speech."

Lighten up pal ffs.

It's basically a light hearted observation. If it has any use then it's simply as memetic tool to reduce the (all too common) incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons/discourse.

You saying that it exists to crush free speech is so ironic my brain just exploded.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for your reply Greyingmantis, Self-detonating brain aside I trust you are well.

If it is, as you maintain, 'a light hearted observation', why then is it thrown around like some verbal tactical nuclear weapon to dissuade any comparison to history that makes the original writer feel guilty or points to some unpleasant facet of human beings in general?

Surely if they are going to hide behind Godwin's Law they must expect to be judged as National Socialists, a good reason not to hide behind it.

It is also an admission that they have no rational argument against the comparison except 'you can't compare us to the Nazis'.

There is another adage well used on the Internet, 'if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck then it is a duck!'

There a nice comparison of adages no different to comparing contemporary events with historical ones really.

Laws too can be compared with historical laws just as policies and political beliefs can be compared to those historical beliefs is it wrong to do so?

I think not, as one can look back and say well that worked or, oh that was not what legislators had in mind at all, either way something is learned and it will be beneficial. Preferable to repeating the same mistakes over and over and looking like incompetent fools with no idea what is going on.

May I suggest that the next time you see historical comparisons why not try to think of them as tools that indicate what could work, does work or does not work.

I'm sure we'll either agree or agree to disagree on Godwin's law and historical comparisons. Everyone else no doubt has their own viewpoint which is as it should be, which is also part and parcel of that tool called free speech.

John.

Anonymous said...

jobbies crap jobby poo jobbie shite shit

1. faeces the passing of excrement through the anus.
ooh my stomach is sore I think I may need a few jobbies
jobbie jobbies poops faeces crap

2. jobbies originally a Scottish slang name for faeces (poo). Used to describe something or someone that is disliked by someone.
she thinks he's a pile of jobbies.

what a pile of jobbies.
pile of jobbies shite crap pap poo

Anonymous said...

The thing that ruins good debate is using hyperbole like "verbal tactical nuclear weapon", "Hitler's shied", "tool to deny freedom of speech" etc and so on.

This is what Godwin's law states. You would know if you read about it.

I thereby declare you a Nazi.

Dark Lochnagar said...

John, welcome to the blog.

"History is precedent, those who will not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." Unfortunately you are right. However for various reasons, most of them Jewish, we hear a lot about Hitler and mainly the 'Holocaust'. Remembering of course that history is written by the victors and that Jews control the media, perhaps, there are, lessons to be learned. Strange, however when we aren't taught in school about the atrocities and the millions killed by the Bolshevik under Stalin in the Ukraine. Nor are we told about the millions of UK, US and allied troops who died fighting the Japanese, it is only the 'left-wing liberals' who feel they can throw about terms like Nazi or Racist.

I have always tried and particularly on this blog, to take a view on different issues as they arise. I have, in my opinion unfairly, been called a Nazi and a Racist, on another blog written in the fine city of Dundee by a nest of Bolsheviks. Problem being, that they moderated my denials to the extent that I had to explain my argument to another commenter who comes on here, who was then in turn also moderated.

But if I am a racist or a Nazi, so be it. I support my country and my people, first and foremost.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Rosie, it seemed to be OK when I tried it there. But I'm sure you could google it.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Greymantis, welcome to the blog. Nice to see you've come over from Twatter, you get a better discusion on here.

As you spurred this post, I now give you the h/t I should have done in the first place.

John, does seem to have taken the post a bit seriously. It just goes to prove that Godwin's law works!

Dark Lochnagar said...

John, I have no problem with free speech and would be the first to applaud it. As I said previously, I have no problem with being called names.

I thought the adage was " if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's a Nazi".

Dark Lochnagar said...

Anonymous 1, how dare you come on here talking a load of shite. That's my job.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Anonymous 2, well said. I think.