I'm gobsmacked that this post seems to be necessary: A Presentation of Godwin's Law:

[baldguy]

I've always liked to believe that members of DU generally have a higher education level, were more intelligent, and were more well informed than the average person. However, recently it has become increasingly common practice among some people to not just compare their discussion partners to Nazis, but to directly identify them as such. Before now, I've just put these unfortunate, unfounded accusations down to nothing more than the standard DU hyperbole & have dismissed them.

Unhappily, it seems I was mistaken. I am distressed to report that there are DUers who not only make these accusations sincerely and without any trace of humor, but they really & truly believe their opponents are unapologetic member of the Third Reich.

<== Me being gobsmacked.

And so it is my sad duty to compose this article (or at least copy&paste bits from Wikipedia):

Godwin's law

Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies) is an assertion made by Mike Godwin in 1990 that has become an Internet adage. It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." In other words, Godwin said that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis.

Although in one of its early forms Godwin's law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions, the law is now often applied to any threaded online discussion, such as forums, chat rooms and blog comment threads, and has been invoked for the inappropriate use of Nazi analogies in articles or speeches.

...

Corollaries and usage

There are many corollaries to Godwin's law, some considered more canonical (by being adopted by Godwin himself) than others. For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress.

...

more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

So if you happen to feel inclined to start tossing around epithets of "Nazi", or "Quisling", or "Stalin" or "Stasi" or any such similar unlikely and unfounded identities when talking about your fellow DUers, Democrats in good standing - including Democratic members of the House of Representatives or the Senate, and the current staff of the Obama Administration - including the President and the Vice President, please remember that such a revelation will expose you as an unreliable fool.

Just to be clear: President Barack Obama is not a Nazi. Members of his Administration are not Nazis. I would hazard to guess great majority of the people working in the Federal Government are not Nazis.

And no, none of your fellow DUers are Nazis either.

[sibelian]

1. Yeah, you think defense lawyers are somehow tainted with their clients crimes.

PLONK.

[quinnox]

4. exactly!!

Being lectured by someone who posted an OP like that yesterday, well, it is a wee bit hard to take seriously!

[baldguy]

5. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3137937

It's not my fault if you can't read.

[Skidmore]

9. As you note, this name calling gets ridiculous but also note

that the next step is the adolescent "plonk" when someone who doesn't want to entertain any other ideas or opinions puts you on their ignore list. I've never understood why that is considered anything but censoring someone especially when arguing for civil rights.

[OilemFirchen]

28. Are you kidding?

It's an act of courage. Anyone can stay and fight, but it takes a special sort of bravery to stick your fingers in your ears, squeeze your eyes shut and run like hell.

Announcing it, BTW, earns the poster a shiny badge that sez "I ignored an Internet user. Ask me anything!"

[Skidmore]

29. It took me a while to figure out

what "plonk" meant on some posts. But when you see it after a post, it means that the person just put you on ignore and will not engaging in even reading what you have to say let alone responding to it. It is a peculiar subset of cowardice.

[OilemFirchen]

33. Then, as I mentioned, there's the bonus stupid.

Wanna ignore someone? Fine. Silly, IMHO, but to each his or her own.

But announce it? Pitiful.

[Jenoch]

127. Apparently I annoyed two more people yesterday enough

so that they are now 'ignoring' me. I ignore a few posters here, mostly because their posts are long and almost unreadable. I do it the old-fashioned way by simply not reading their posts. I think using the ignore function on this site is childish at best.

[Hekate]

2. KnR

[Cooley Hurd]

3. "stalin" and Stasi" and not covered by Godwin's Law...

Godwin's Law only pertains to Nazi analogies. Besides that, I agree with you.

[arely staircase]

11. they don't violate the letter, but certainly the spirit of Godwin's Law.

I could certainly be more civil myself from time to time around here, so I realize I am not without sin. But I am trying to make a general effort to be more civil.

[Warren Stupidity]

75. No actually they don't violate spirit or letter.

The original formulation was about the probability of a hitler analogy, not "things that might be similar to a hitler analogy". The mundane corruption of the law into a "hitler reference loses" rule is stupid, as some things are like hitler, for example Stalin. However, using your own usage, you lost the argument.

[Pholus]

154. Okay. So, other than the NSA and the Stasi,

who else has embarked on data collection programs involving the communications of its own citizenry?

I'll start comparing to them instead!

[nebenaube]

80. yes

and it's just a disinfectant to keep the fascists safe from having anybody talk about them. Bullshit adage.

[Scootaloo]

6. Quibble...

When a state has a secret and extrajudicial surveillance program operating within its own borders, collecting intelligence and information about citizens not suspected of any criminal wrongdoing "just in case," then yes, a comparison to the Stasi is absofuckinglutely applicable.

[baldguy]

8. No it isn't.

How many people has President Obama secretly tortured, imprisoned without trial & had killed by his secret police?

So, no it isn't.

[Scootaloo]

10. I didn't say anything about Obama

And a comparison does not have to fit 100% in order to be applied.

[arely staircase]

13. yeah, but wouldn't it be more effective to say something like

J. Edgar Hoover would be proud than Stalin or the Stasi?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

12. Does the Awlaki and the drone list count?

Food for thought: it's not about Obama. It's about the apparatus that will be in place and ossified once he leaves office.

[90-percent]

49. Give it time

And if you assume that the info Obama uses to make his judgment calls for his weekly drone killings comes from our overgrown national security apparatus (which could be termed "secret police&quot the number he had killed is perhaps over 2,000? Here's a link to a link about one poor guy responsible for 1626 dead all by himself

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=515893

The trend towards an AMERICAN TOTALITARIAN FASCIST POLICE STATE apparatus since 9-11 is abundantly clear. Just because it isn't on our doorsteps YET, doesn't mean that it won't be in five or ten years.

And we are about 1000% closer to this possibility that we were before GWB.

They aren't putting the hammer down on the general population, YET, but if you look at how "the authorities" have treated the Occupy Protesters, that's what they have in store for the rest of us "independent thinkers".

BTW - do you approve of the way the police have treated Occupiers over the last few years?

-90% Jimmy

PS - it's also more prudent to make an effort to undo this travesty right now. Trying to undo it when the storm troopers are dragging us away in the middle of the night may be a wee bit too late.

[Enthusiast]

123. Plus a brazillion! nt

[bvar22]

130. The really scary thing is that there is NO OPPOSITION PARTY!!!

The Leadership of BOTH dominant Political parties are in Complete Agreement about enhancing and protecting the Surveillance/State Security Apparatus of our Government
without oversight or redress by the American citizenry.


There IS a wing of the Democratic Party that is expressing "concern",
but that wing has been effectively marginalized and Taught-a-Lesson by the Obama Administration.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]




You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS.[/font]

[sulphurdunn]

61. How would anyone know whether he has

or hasn't? That information is classified for your own good and to keep you safe from terrorists.

[muriel_volestrangler]

128. The American state continues to imprison many people without trial in Guantanamo

and that is the fault of several Democrats, as well as Republicans (though Obama has made some efforts to change that. The hunger strike is not pretty, though). The secret-ish torture was under the previous administration, though the lack of prosecutions for it is a blemish on Obama's record. The drone strikes may not be done by 'his secret police', but the effect is similar.

[treestar]

58. So then is having a military

Every state has these things. They are not proof of totalitarianism. They are not unique to Nazis.

People are losing their heads over this spy business. It's not executing people for having said certain things or being of certain religions. It's not locking people in gulags for being of a political party. It is snooping to figure out what other countries' nationals might be up to.

[Scootaloo]

68. Well, depending on what the military DOES...

It's the action that counts. Having an intelligence network does not make you like the Stasi. Using that network to spy on millions of your own citizens, and people the world over, largely indiscriminately "just in case," on the other hand...

No, the NSA isn't murdering people. Is that really going to be the height of our standards, though? "Well, I see you're not committing murder, carry on"?

[treestar]

74. The Stasi

The Ministry for State Security (German: Ministerium für Staatssicherheit, MfS), commonly known as the Stasi (IPA: [ˈʃtɑːziː]) (abbreviation German: Staatssicherheit, literally State Security), was the official state security service of the German Democratic Republic or GDR, colloquially known as East Germany. It has been described as one of the most effective and repressive intelligence and secret police agencies in the world.


Full-time officers were posted to all major industrial plants (the extensiveness of any surveillance largely depended on how valuable a product was to the economy)[13] and one tenant in every apartment building was designated as a watchdog reporting to an area representative of the Volkspolizei (Vopo).[17] Spies reported every relative or friend who stayed the night at another's apartment.[17] Tiny holes were drilled in apartment and hotel room walls through which Stasi agents filmed citizens with special video cameras.[17] Schools, universities, and hospitals were extensively infiltrated.[17]
The Stasi had formal categorizations of each type of informant, and had official guidelines on how to extract information from, and control, those who they came into contact with.[18] The roles of informants ranged from those already in some way involved in state security (such as the police and the armed services) to those in the dissident movements (such as in the arts and the Protestant Church).[19] Information gathered about the latter groups was frequently used to divide or discredit members.[20] Informants were made to feel important, given material or social incentives, and were imbued with a sense of adventure, and only around 7.7%, according to official figures, were coerced into cooperating. A significant proportion of those informing were members of the SED; to employ some form of blackmail, however, was not uncommon.[19] A large number of Stasi informants were trolley conductors, janitors, doctors, nurses and teachers; Mielke believed the best informants were those whose jobs entailed frequent contact with the public.[21]
The Stasi's ranks swelled considerably after Eastern Bloc countries signed the 1975 Helsinki accords, which Erich Honecker viewed as a grave threat to his regime because they contained language binding signatories to respect "human and basic rights, including freedom of thought, conscience, religion, and conviction."[22] The number of IMs peaked at around 180,000 in that year, having slowly risen from 20,000–30,000 in the early 1950s, and reaching 100,000 for the first time in 1968, in response to Ostpolitik and protests worldwide.[23] The Stasi also acted as a proxy for KGB to conduct activities in other Eastern Bloc countries, such as Poland, where the Soviets were despised.[24]
The Stasi infiltrated almost every aspect of GDR life. In the mid-1980s, a network of IMs began growing in both German states; by the time East Germany collapsed in 1989, the Stasi employed 91,015 employees and 173,081 informants.[25] About one of every 63 East Germans collaborated with the Stasi. By at least one estimate, the Stasi maintained greater surveillance over its own people than any secret police force in history.[26] The Stasi employed one full-time agent for every 166 East Germans. The ratios swelled when informers were factored in: counting part-time informers, the Stasi had one informer per 6.5 people. By comparison, the Gestapo employed one secret policeman per 2,000 people. This comparison led Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal to call the Stasi even more oppressive than the Gestapo.[27] Additionally, Stasi agents infiltrated and undermined West Germany's government and spy agencies.
In some cases, spouses even spied on each other. A high-profile example of this was peace activist Vera Lengsfeld, whose husband, Knud Wollenberger, was a Stasi informant.[21]
Zersetzung[edit]


Wikipedia. Please do not compare any US intelligence agent to the Stasi again.

[Scootaloo]

85. Or what, you'll disappear me?

Sorry buddy. You don't get to control the narrative.

[treestar]

89. LOL

Reality controls the narrative. The US has just about nothing in common with E. Germany. People look like idiots trying to make this comparison.

[Scootaloo]

93. Except for the massive surveilance, of course.

Things do not have to be absolutely identical in all ways for a comparison to be made and recognition of similarities to be considered valid.

[treestar]

97. Even the brief Wikipedia article above

shows there was way way more going on in E. Germany. Way more.

They had the janitors spying on people! People who actually know you reporting on you to the government. Not just a record of phone calls without names. The Stasi didn't have to answer to anything, there was nothing like the FISC there.

Good grief.

[baldguy]

101. But you have no proof that the NSA *DOESN'T* have janitors spying on us!!!

It really gets tiresome & just a little pathetic after a while. Doesn't it?

[treestar]

107. I've been suspicious of the janitor

at the office - I think he takes my trash to the FBI - where they promptly die of boredom looking through it.

[dkf]

103. Actually now we spy on ourselves buying our own bugs and trackers.

The Stasi couldn't begin to have the volume, breadth or depth of the NSA.

AND we do this all over the world!!!

[Romulus Quirinus]

90. :shrug:

Wolfgang Schmidt was seated in Berlin’s 1,200-foot-high TV tower, one of the few remaining landmarks left from the former East Germany. Peering out over the city that lived in fear when the communist party ruled it, he pondered the magnitude of domestic spying in the United States under the Obama administration. A smile spread across his face.

“You know, for us, this would have been a dream come true,” he said, recalling the days when he was a lieutenant colonel in the defunct communist country’s secret police, the Stasi.

In those days, his department was limited to tapping 40 phones at a time, he recalled. Decide to spy on a new victim and an old one had to be dropped, because of a lack of equipment. He finds breathtaking the idea that the U.S. government receives daily reports on the cellphone usage of millions of Americans and can monitor the Internet traffic of millions more.

“So much information, on so many people,” he said.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/06/26/195045/memories-of-stasi-color-germans.html#.UdGnCtdn1_U#storylink=cpy

[treestar]

91. All of the technology might have made it easier for them

However they way they recruited people - that was more invasive than any technology.

They had way more than just the data of phone calls. This does not prove anything like you think it does. His thinking it would be great to have is just silly - it would have been meaningless compared to other things they had.

[newthinking]

116. You no longer need physical informants, networks do that work

Yes, it is hard to compare, as history and mechanics have changed.

One could argue that the analysts at their desks with access to the databases and networks are the modern equivilent of pre-information age "watchers".

"the Stasi employed 91,015 employees and 173,081 informants"

We are well over that number.

[Octafish]

81. Except our military was used to attack and invade an innocent country.

Twice, by a father and a son.

There should be a law against lying a nation into war.

I bet there would be in a real democracy.

[treestar]

92. That is not the issue

And even so, the military's existence was not the issue, Dubya and Cheney were! (And Congress going along with them).

[Octafish]

96. I'll be gobsmacked. I thought we were talking about using the word NAZI to describe today.

In my estimation, the word NAZI is very appropriate because the NAZIs invaded innocent countries for profit and power, just like the United States is doing in Iraq, Afghanistan, and a bunch of other places around the world who are no threat to the United States. It's just for power and profit, and those who gain most do so in secrecy. If that's not NAZI, it's un-democratic.

[treestar]

98. Holy cow, that is not applicable at all

This is insane.

[truedelphi]

158. You're not convincing me. I remain as

Gobsmacked as Octafish.

[truedelphi]

157. Yes it is. and those who most totally understand the STASI,

The German people themselves, are the ones who are the most horrified by the recent revelations regarding the NSA spying.

If Americans had a clue, they would be more horrified themselves. But after all, do we really need free press? Surely the paparazzi can keep us informed about Brad and Angelina, Lindsey, Kanye and Kim.

[dipsydoodle]

7. Even happens on banjo forums occasionally.

[arely staircase]

15. lol

I can't imagine what the youtube comments under that are - given the fact it is usually stormfront central

[siligut]

95. The comments are generally inane

AForceTrulyEvil 2 months ago
Would anyone happen to remember the one video (posted as an Arby n the Chief video) that contained this clip among many other random clips while the song "Moskau" was playing. It was posted quite a while ago, I have had some troubles finding it.
Reply ·


royalmarine97 2 months ago
he's pretty good
Reply ·


RelativeGalaxy7 5 months ago
OMG I almost pissed myself
Reply ·


Adolfo Cicerón 7 months ago
Este Hitler es un loquillo
Reply ·


roffldroid 1 year ago
That was pretty good, actually.
Reply ·

[arely staircase]

112. it is hard to parody

[siligut]

113. Hell, even from your post I can tell that the moon landing was, in fact, hand-drawn

That is a clever parody. I was trying to determine if it was your own and in my search I came across what I wrote in my subline.

Some of the most inadvertently funny reviews though are for recipes. For example, this one is for Paula Deen's Old-Time Beef Stew. She gave it four stars, but pretty much changed the whole recipe.

My family loved this recipe, said it was the best I've ever made. I changed it up just a bit based on other reviews. I used stew meat and marinaded it in dry red wine for 1.5 hrs in the refrigerator. I tossed the meat with tenderizer seasoning and garlic salt before browning. I reserved the red wine marinade and added beef broth to equal 4 cups liquid instead of using water since I too added potatoes to the dish. I used 2 rosemary sprigs with the bay leaf and 3 garlic cloves. It was still a bit watery so I did use the cold water with corn starch to thicken it. This is definitely a repeat meal for the winter.

Read more at: http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/paula-deen/old-time-beef-stew-recipe/reviews/index.html?pn=10&oc=linkback

[dipsydoodle]

147. Thats not what happens on the banjo blogs

they argue about what type of banjo it is, whether its steel or nylon strung and tuning he used.

[dogknob]

39. Bwahahaha! I'm with Mel Brooks...

Laugh at them. Forever.

[KittyWampus]

83. don't know why I laughed… but I did. Banjo forums get ugly… who knew?

Does Godwin come into effect in threads about nylon or metal?

p.s. i have no idea if banjos ever use metal OR nylon,

[COLGATE4]

146. Left-handed yet! Amazing! nt

[quinnox]

14. "quisling" can be used without any Nazi connections, at least, Merriam-Webster thinks so

Definition of QUISLING
: traitor 2, collaborator

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quisling

[arely staircase]

18. you and I are miles apart on the whole snowden thing

but I don't think that is Godwinish either. I could see myself saying that about Snowden. And if someone (maybe you) called me that on the same issue, I wouldn't alert or even really take much offense. BTW - I don't support the NSA data mining. I think Snowden is a traitor for the stuff he gave the Chinese and probably the Russians.

I think we need to repeal the Patriot Act.

Hi quinnox.

[quinnox]

22. yea, I agree

Hi

[KittyWampus]

84. See how much we really agree on. But we hiss & spit at each other like cats

Oy

[baldguy]

19. Vidkun Quisling †1945 Norwegian politician who collaborated with the Nazis

Perhaps you should read the links you post before you post them.

[quinnox]

20. right, that is the origin of the word

but like other words, that doesn't have be part of the main definition when the word is used.

[JoePhilly]

16. Blasphemer!!!!

Obama is Hitler, Stalin and Mao, rolled into one!!!

And we now live in a totalitarian, fascist, police state.

Opps, sorry, I have to go ... the kid at the internet cafe just brought me my sandwich.

[cherokeeprogressive]

17. Names or it didn't happen.

[baldguy]

21. Ah, but that could be construed as a call-out.

And you can do a search as well as I can.

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. How could it be a call-out if you have links to the posts?

Names or it didn't happen. Sorry... You made the claim. Back it up. No names, just links if it makes you feel better.

It's not good form to make a claim then challenge others to prove you right.

[OilemFirchen]

31. Here are two.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2985771

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2974890

Lots more, of course, but I can already hear my neighbor dialing the authorities. So this'll have to do.

[cherokeeprogressive]

36. I read the OP to mean the OP himself was the one called a Nazi.

"not just compare their discussion partners to Nazis, but to directly identify them as such."

[OilemFirchen]

38. From the OP:

So if you happen to feel inclined to start tossing around epithets of "Nazi", or "Quisling", or "Stalin" or "Stasi" or any such similar unlikely and unfounded identities when talking about your fellow DUers, Democrats in good standing - including Democratic members of the House of Representatives or the Senate, and the current staff of the Obama Administration - including the President and the Vice President, please remember that such a revelation will expose you as an unreliable fool.

[cherokeeprogressive]

94. From your post: "when talking about your fellow DUers"

[Cha]

43. Yeah, they're outing themselves as

stupid.

lol Got to watch out for the schmazi stasti

[treestar]

59. We should demand proof that the Stasi was

limited by anything like the FISC, run by an elected executive, or subject to legislative and judicial oversight.

They are really losing their heads. They all sound very young.

[G_j]

23. aside from using it as a personal accusation

against someone, which I agree is very inappropriate, it would seem that talking about world politics, authoritarian themes, human nature, propaganda, war etc. and not being allowed to mention the Nazis, would be like discussing disease and not being allowed to mention lung cancer.

[truedelphi]

159. I agree with your take on this.

We on the far left have to withstand the continual refrain of "Conspiracy Theorist." Even though, let's all face it, there are conspiracy theories plaguing us continually, from the well proven Bay of Tonkin which brought about further involvement in war against the people of Vietnam, to the more modern day LIBOR scandal wherein the Big Financial Firms collectively and illegally fixed the price of interest. (A true conspiracy if ever there was one!)

Now we have this new intellectual designation to have used against us. Watch it! I mean, Oh Noes! You & I may be guilty of breaking breaking Godwin's Law! Never mind the continual erosion of the USA in its steadily downward progression into Fascism. What is wrong is us for pointing it out!

[CakeGrrl]

24. What strikes me is how

extreme and intractable and belligerent some of the defenders of Snowden have become.

Today alone, I've seen "quisling", "useful idiots", "character assassination", and "any thinking American is with Snowden".

And a vow to upgrade one's ignore list.

It's the "if you're not with us, you're against us" attitude, and in some cases, a need to narrow one's physical view by expanding their ignore list so that they only see what comments with which they agree.

Could that be a symptom of bunker mentality?

[baldguy]

27. It's a sympton of Snowden chauvanists losing.

Is it any wonder that some people of similar ilk don't like Godwin?

[FSogol]

26. LOL, If you don't agree with meeeeeeeeee, you are a pro-authoritarian totalitarian supporting the

pro-corporate 1%ers's fascist state just like the Pro-Statsi Nazis!

[UTUSN]

164. Perfectly depicted!1 n/t

[Cleita]

30. Question.

Have you read just this one book on Nazis, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer? I mean have you really read it, every word, every page?

Because I guarantee you that if you have, you will not smack down everyone who tries to point out the similarities between what happened in Germany and what is happening here. Yes, I believe that the Tea Baggers and Fox News commentators who compare everyone and everything they don't like to Nazis deserve to be smacked down for being ignorant and disingenuous but if people really knew their history, they would be ignored and laughed at.

But people who weren't alive then and who didn't witness the history of what happened first hand need to learn about it so they can ignore and laugh at those people. Trying to shut up those, who have witnessed history, who have read reliable accounts of it, makes me suspicious of why you are trying to shush everyone.

I don't give a shit about Godwin!

[Electric Monk]

37. +1

[baldguy]

47. Where are President Obama's concentration camps?

And just who is being ignorant here?

[Cleita]

51. Have you heard about our privatized prison system?

Have you heard of Sheriff Arpaio of Arizona? If you haven't, it's time to read up on it. Start with Florida. Some of the abuses going on in the prisons there are atrocious. I'm sure I don't have to point you to Gitmo and our other black ops prisons around the world. When you educate yourself on those things, get back to me and we will make some comparisons and I will introduce you to the timelines that led up to the worst abuses towards the end of the collapse of Germany.

[baldguy]

52. A prison is not a death camp. And Joe Arpaio is not Barack Obama.

Millions of Americans are not being exterminated, nor are they intended to be.

[Cleita]

60. So what were the "death" camps?

We call them death camps. The Germans called them work camps. In the Weimar Republic, that is what they were, prison camps that put prisoners to work. When the Nazis started sending people they didn't like, like commies, Jews and gypsies, they were still work camps. Didn't you see Schindler's list? The prisoners worked that could. Eventually, the Germans couldn't use the weak, old, sick and others for slave labor so they started exterminating the useless ones.

However, they knew they couldn't get away with a lot of that in Germany so when they conquered Poland and Hungary, they build the worst camps where they sent most of the undesirables in their mind that they wanted out of Germany. The occupied countries didn't have much to say about what was going on. The worst abuses happened when they were losing the war so they started killing everyone up until the time the allies arrived and freed those prisoners still alive to tell the story.

We have been doing the same. We know about Abu Ghraib and Gitmo but there are camps in other countries we occupy that we don't know about.

[baldguy]

69. Abu Ghraib was closed in 2006. Pres Obama has been trying to close Gitmo since he got into office.

Neither of them had or have industrial-scale infrastructure intended to kill the inmates and dispose of their bodies.

Again: Barack Obama is no Nazi. Any such comparison is fucking insane.

You do understand that getting a Godwin isn't an award, right? It's not something to be proud of; a sign of derision and disgust.

[Cleita]

70. Doesn't matter when it was closed. What matters is that it existed at all.

Godwin is your deity. The God in the name says so. Go worship at his pedestal. I don't have to.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

66. A concentration camp also isn't a death camp. Those were next door, in some cases.

Knowing of what you speak is helpful when your goal is to school others.

[baldguy]

71. .

Wow. just...wow.

Plus the idea of such a massively ignorant statement coming before a massively arrogant one...is just. WOW!

You win today's Godwin Award.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

79. Does accuracy surprise you to the point of "Wow, just wow"?

Those who study history aren't swayed by feigned vapors. Auschwitz was a concentration camp. Many horrible things happened there, and many people died. However, its function was slave labor, not mass extermination. Mass extermination happened next door at Birkenau. Mass extermination also happened at death camps with no adjoining concentration camp, e.g. Treblinka.

As to your bestowal of the Godwin Award on me, please do see my reply to your OP, down toward the bottom of the thread as it exists currently.

[baldguy]

82. Concentration camps in Nazi Germany were an integral part of a industrialized infrustructure

designed to kill large numbers of people.

There is nothing like this in existence in the United States, and nothing even remotely like this planned by the Obama Administration.

Your assertions have no basis in reality.

Obama Derangement Syndrome has come to DU.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

132. My assertions aren't assertions. They're rock-solid facts, not subject to debate.

I don't intend to take on the role of a dumbfuck just to meet the criteria for posting in your thread. Concentration camps were for slave labor. Lots of death happened at concentration camps. Extermination camps were for killing people, primarily Jews. Nothing but death happened at extermination camps. There's a difference between a concentration camp and a death camp. I suggest you learn more about that difference before exposing your ignorance again.

And no, of course there's nothing like this in the United States. If I had claimed that there was, you might actually have a point. But since I never drew that parallel, I guess you have jack shit.

My assertions have a basis in rock-solid, unmoving facts. I'll be glad to take money from any moron who wants to debate history. Let me know your price, and we'll have ourselves a wager about whether there's a difference between death camps and concentration camps. Your move, genius.

[baldguy]

138. So, you accept 1930s Nazi propaganda on whether they were "concentration camps" vs "death camps"

But you don't accept Barack Obama saying that the US govt isn't spying on you.

And I guess those gas chambers & ovens at the concentration camps were just for show? And the thousands of people killed were imaginary?

So much for not playing the role...

[DisgustipatedinCA]

139. I don't accept Nazi propaganda, and I don't accept US government propaganda

You've displayed that you're easily led around by the nose. Historical accuracy is of no matter to you, because you just make stuff up as you go along anyhow.

There are lots of people who are ignorant about history. Not too many of them wear the badge with pride, however. I'm well-versed with the history of Nazi Germany, and you're not. The problem, one of the problems, with people like you and like 'baggers is that you sincerely believe you're the final arbiter of what is and what isn't factual. That's not how facts work. As I suggested at the beginning of this conversation, I don't give much of a shit what you think happened and didn't happen in Nazi Germany. I also don't give a damn what Teabaggers or gum chewers or knitting enthusiasts theorize about Nazi Germany's history. I do care what the consensus of historians is on the subject. That will be all.

[baldguy]

140. .

Majdanek concentration camp
-not classed as a "Death camp"
est. 78,000 killed


Gas chambers on the right.


Ovens.

Buchenwald concentration camp
-not classed as a "Death camp"
56,545 killed


Ovens.

Dachau concentration camp
-not classed as a "Death camp"
31,951 killed


Ovens

The facts is that no matter what the Nazi propagandists called them, the camps' entire reason for being was to kill large numbers of people. Only extreme ignorance or a desire for historical revisionism would allow anyone to try to make a distinction.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

141. Now I find out I'm arguing with someone at the picture book level. Jesus Christ.

Are you really this goddamned slow?
Concentration camps: slave labor, with huge amounts of terror, indiscriminate killing, and yes, gassing workers. But the main function was for LABOR for Germany's WAR EFFORT.

Death camps: for KILLING people.
Numbers you posted: 78,000 | 57,000 | 32,000

Numbers from extermination camps:
1,100,000 | 600,000 | 320,000 | 360,000 | 65,000 (outlier!) | 250,000 | 700,000

See any difference in those numbers, or is your math as atrocious as your history? Yes, there were gas chambers at some concentration camps. Yes, concentration camps were horrible places where many, many thousands of people died due to capricious violence, gassing, being worked to death, or sickness. The primary function (again) of concentration camps was slave labor for the war effort, and secondarily a holding area for those who would one day be executed. Those eventual executions happened, for the most part, at extermination camps/death camps.

The primary, the ONLY function of death camps, was to kill people.

If this is how you deal with factual material, I want nothing to do with the opinions you've formed all on your own. You're not very good at this. My job is easier. I have factual information on my side. I'd have posted links long ago showing that death camps and concentration camps are different entities, but really, what good would it have done? Facts have been laid at your feet, and you act as though these are up for discussion. They are not.

Get on down to the library and start reading, unless you want to remain in ignorance.

[baldguy]

143. So, in the "concentration camps" killing people was just a secondary function?

Well, I guess that was a load off the mind of the people being killed!

"It's OK dearest! This is a concentration camp, not a death camp. They won't kill us right away. They'll work us half to death first, then they'll kill us.!"

You're making a distinction without a difference, and showing yourself to be a fool in the process.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

144. $100

Right here, right now. Put your money where your utterly uneducated mouth is. The wager is in the amount of $100. The question to be answered: was there a difference between Nazi death camps and Nazi concentration camps? I say there's a difference. You say there's not. The loser pays the winner $100 via Pay Pal within 7 days.

You keep trying to slide away from my point. You've told me I'm trying to equate the US with Nazi Germany. I did no such thing (and you haven't apologized for your lying mischaracterization). You've told me I'm dead-wrong. I am not, and I have history and facts on my side. You're now tacitly (read as "in cowardly fashion&quot admitting that there's a difference between death camps and concentration camps, and you're attempting to make me seem like some sort of fan of concentration camps. But you still want to be right, so you don't admit being wrong, you just change the subject a little. You'll need to find someone closer to your own level if you want to run that game--I'm not playing games designed for addled inhalant freaks.

Distinction without a difference? Fool? OK, then you should have no problem capturing $100 from this fool. Put your money where your mouth is, smart boy. Let's do this thing. Waiting. The most fun part about taking your money, besides the fact that I don't actually need it, will be the satisfaction I get thinking about you trying to smear me with a Nazi brush just because I avail myself of facts where you do not. I don't need to revise history to understand how truly horrible the Nazis were. You do need to revise history, apparently because you trade in untruths.

Step right up and display the courage of your convictions. $100.

[baldguy]

145. Typical Paulbot. You see Nazis everywhere & think everything can be solved with money.

If your "concentration camps" weren't designed to kill people, then why did they have gas chambers?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

148. Oh Zippy...there's a wager waiting for you. Don't be afraid.

I already happen to know that you're aware you'd lose the wager. It's hard to find a bunch of concentration camp photos without accidentally coming by the knowledge that concentration camps and death camps were different things.

So now I'm a Nazi sympathizer and a "Paulbot" in addition to everything else you've called me, just because I'm factually correct? Ive been here since 2001, apparently part of a master 'bagger conspiracy.

There's an offer on the table to settle this once and for all. I don't personally believe you're good for the bet since lying and attempted character assassination is in your DNA. But I still want that wager.

Do you stand by your own words, or don't you?

[baldguy]

149. If your "concentration camps" weren't designed to kill people, then why did they have gas chambers?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

161. ShinyPateMan, you're acting cowardly in the face of a challenge

You've tried to ignore it. You've tried to insinuate I'm a Nazi. You've told me directly that I'm a "Paulbot". You also told me I'm a fool. You've changed your stance several times. I've not changed mine at all. I survived your attempt to get me locked out of the thread. I'm still here. You've lied about me. I still present the truth, and you still do not.

Do you have the guts to put your $100 up, or don't you? Again, I already know the answer based on your replies. Without admitting any error, you've shifted to talking about how concentration camps are still really really bad things. No shit, Sherlock. I think we've established that I know a great deal more about this than you do. But when you personally demean me over and over and over again, don't expect me to just sit there and take it.

Your next non-answer to my offer of a wager will be considered binding. You'll either take the bet, or you'll run from it.

[baldguy]

165. Poor Paulbot. I have not "insinuated" anything other than you're clueless.

I said that you see Nazis everywhere. It's called "reading comprehension". You should try it some time.

And all you need do is answer a question that's been put to you three times already.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

167. Here you go: 20 links proving my assertion is correct, and that you're not

I was an English major, by the way. Bring your reading comprehension source material to me, and I'll turn the cereal box around and give you something else to work on for awhile. You've called me a lot of names. You're wrong on the names. You're wrong on the facts. You got spanked with your little alert 6-0. And you've been exposed as someone who doesn't mind playing fast and loose with truth.

You don't deserve an answer to your question, but you're getting it anyway: gas chambers at concentration camps were for the purpose of killing the inmates/slaves in the concentration camps. And no, in no way does this run counter to anything I've said. Death camps were for the express purpose of killing people. Concentration camps were primarily for slave labor for the war effort, and had a secondary function as a holding area before prisoners were killed. Lots of people were killed at concentration camps. Lots more were killed at death camps. DEATH CAMPS ARE DIFFERENT THAN CONCENTRATION CAMPS. This is what I've maintained since I first made the mistake of trying to communicate with you. I haven't changed it one iota.

My assertion: Nazi concentration camps were different than Nazi death camps.

My proof:

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005144

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080410164154AAlYUce

http://www.holocaust-education.dk/lejre/koncudd.asp

http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/politics/difference-between-death-camps-and-concentration-camps/

http://www.ehow.com/info_8418238_concentration-camps-vs-death-camps.html

http://www.wzaponline.com/ConcentrationCampsandtheDeathCamps.pdf

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=25042

http://ccwwii.weebly.com/concentration-vs-death-camps.html

http://prezi.com/txnwtjlgxzec/death-camps-vs-concentration-camps/

http://ww2history.com/blog/ww2-relevance/concentration-camps-and-extermination-camps/

http://infogr.am/THE-DIFFERENCE-BETWEEN-DEATH-CAMPS-AND-CONCENTRATION-CAMPS

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/gascamp.html

http://www.holocaustsurvivors.org/data.show.php?di=record&da=encyclopedia&ke=19

http://fcit.usf.edu/holocaust/timeline/camps.htm

http://www.city-data.com/forum/history/1848976-difference-between-nazi-concentration-camps-nazi.html

http://www.ask.com/answers/230137881/is-there-a-difference-between-concentration-camps-and-death-camps

http://phdast7.hubpages.com/hub/What-Did-Most-Germans-Know-about-Nazi-Concentration-Camps-Part-IV

http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=gvKVLcMVIuG&b=394663

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/maidanek.htm



Is 20 enough for you?

[baldguy]

170. "... it is a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing."

(Since you're an English major...)

You're still applying the Nazi propagandists euphemisms of the camps' functions, and you're avoiding the question:

"If your 'concentration camps' weren't designed to kill people, then why did they have gas chambers?"

The answer is of course, they were designed to kill people. The only difference between the Nazis' "concentration camps" and their "death camps" was the scale of the operation. There were still hundreds of thousands of innocent people systematically murdered in the "concentration camps" - the reason for the gas chambers.

And in any case, the worst prison in America has a better prisoner survival rate than even the best Nazi "detention" camp was - weather they were "work" camps, "relocation" camps, "concentration" camps or "death" camps. So, you're still wrong.

[appal_jack]

151. Looks like Baldguy tried a frivolous alert after losing the argument. Again, he failed.

I hadn't even clicked on this thread until being called to jury service. Of course, I can't say for sure whether it was baldguy or someone else who sent the alert, but the style of wording in the alert is similar to his verbiage. The unanimous jury pretty well settles it: frivolous alerts are frivolous.

At Tue Jul 2, 2013, 01:01 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Does accuracy surprise you to the point of "Wow, just wow"?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3145277

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

OMG! This looks like the poster is advocating some historical revisionism here! Trying to quibble about it's a "death" camp or just a "concentration" camp when millions of people were killed in them - it's crazy talk.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Jul 2, 2013, 01:34 PM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This post doesn't appear to break any DU rules for posting. They went on to explain themselves and gave references. You might not agree, but it doesn't appear to be a violation.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Technically, he's correct, although per Wiki, Birkenau was considered part of the Auschwitz complex.

I have to go bang my head against a wall now.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

-app

[DisgustipatedinCA]

160. Supreme Irony

It's staggering what's happened to this place. I've been here since 2001, and I can say with certainty it's never been like this. Someone actually alerted on me and tried to make it sound as though I was a Nazi sympathizer. You're right--it's likely the bald one, although I'll never know unless he admits it, and he's shown himself to be pretty hesitant with admissions. He already insinuated that I was a Nazi sympathizer of sorts. He called me a "Paulbot". He called me a fool. And do you know why he did all of this? Because I pointed out that death camps and concentration camps are different things. I wasn't arguing any of the rest of the stuff he's talking about in his OP. I wasn't arguing that the US has concentration camps, death camps, or any other damn camps. I wasn't arguing that concentration camps weren't horrible places--in fact I mentioned it several times. I wasn't arguing anything political at all. But still, for this one, I'm a Nazi sympathizer, a fool, and a Paulbot. And no, I didn't alert on any of that. I laid out facts, and I didn't connect them to anything happening in the modern US.

The supreme irony referenced in my subject line refers to BaldGuy starting an OP about Godwin's Law, and then making Nazi insinuations. Whether Baldguy is the actual alerter or not, he said the same stuff in-thread. This person is of very questionable moral character.

It is nice to see that the alert was defeated 6-0. Thanks for letting me know about it.

[truedelphi]

155. However, you need to look at the perspective.

During and after World War One, there were concentration camps that held prisoners of various nationalities. So the French held Germans, the Germans held French, etc.

The Germans of course, were held much longer - simply because the German nation lost the war.

The conditions were hideous, but people survived their internment (for the most part.) During World War II, our federal Government ran a concentration camp of our own in the USA - the most notorious of which was in California near Death Valley. Although death was a constant companion of the Japanese that were kept under the conditions then and there, most of those interned survived.

The German newspapers started mentioning concentration camps at least by 1937. Why was there no universal horror? People knew people who had survived their internment in the World War One camps - so it was not seen as being a place where most people would be gassed. Plus the German propaganda promoted the notion that these camps were work camps. In some cases, rich Jewish people were sent to the camps in rather plush trains whose intercoms informed them of the nice lifestyle they would have once in the camp! And the Final Solution was not readily apparent until after the war. A good source for understanding the German mindset is furnished by the very inclusive study of the German pre-war society by Milton Mayer, in his book "They Thought They Were Free."

Our own society has been very barbaric, since the Second World War has ended. Atrocities in Korean War, documented and a disgrace to those in uniform who participated in them. I mean, no large scale concentration camps - but who needs concentration camps when you have an Air Force that bombs a people into smithereens?

For instance: the Vietnam War: Children, women and the elderly napalmed in Vietnam, with as many as 6 million people made homeless, wounded or killed in Vietnam, and Laos. And don't forget - our war against the Vietnamese people served to make Cambodia unstable, and Pol pot came into power, with our nation's support - so all the millions killed under Pol Pot are somewhat our responsibility also.

We now have a reprehensible record of killing people in Central America, during the eighties, and the half milion dead in Iraq from our 1990's sanctions, (many of htese deaths were suffered by children) and then the one million killed in the aftermath of Iraq War II, and all the killings in Afghanistan, Pakistan.

And this week the brutalities occurring in the Honduras. With The School of the Americas in Georgia responsible for training that those in the Honduras who are currently bludgeoning the "terrorists" who are part of the uprising against the central Government there.

[oberliner]

118. You seriously have not a clue what you are talking about

A gas chamber and crematorium are not used for slave labor. They have a singular purpose.
Auschwitz had both. The original gas chamber is still there in fact.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

120. I seriously do have a clue. Birkenau=Auschwitz II. Read all about it.

This is a matter of historical fact, not subject to revision. I suggest you do a little studying before you come to correct me again.

[90-percent]

53. They're all over the place

Last edited Tue Jul 2, 2013, 09:52 AM - Edit history (1)

It's the United States prison industrial complex. Less the railroad tracks and ovens.

OK, so it's only torture and inhumane treatment. It will be a while before our government burns us alive in ovens. Probably because they don't need to to "neutralize" the modern American dissident or whistle blower with death. Incarceration works almost as good and the PR liability of state sanctioned murder by oven is avoided.

-90% Jimmy

[sulphurdunn]

65. If he had any it would be classified.

[truebluegreen]

72. +100

Thank you.

[840high]

78. Right on. Thank you.

[Enthusiast]

125. Trying to shush everyone makes me a bit suspicious.

Godwin has no relevancy now that the nation has taken such a radically rightward turn.

[wtmusic]

156. Rock on Cleita.

"It could never happen again." Mm-hmm.

[Le Taz Hot]

168. Twice. From cover to cover.

Not only could it happen here, it is happening here with so many on this board giving frighteningly good impressions of Good Germans.

[Cleita]

169. I know. It's too bad it isn't required reading in high school.

We aren't teaching our young people what happened.

[Gore1FL]

32. Technically speaking,

Godwin's "law" merely predicts that a NAZI comparison will be made. If you believe the corollaries you can't be surprised when the "law," itself plays out.

[zeemike]

46. But Godwin's Law has morphed into a way to censer people.

It eliminates any comparison to fascism and now they are adding to it to make it any reference to it at all...even though the comparison is accurate.

[truebluegreen]

77. Yes. It is as if "fascism" is something in the past

that no one has to worry about ever again.

[zeemike]

86. “He who controls the past controls the future

He who controls the present controls the past.”

[truebluegreen]

88. +1

[pa28]

34. And let's not forget to add epithets of racism.

I would suggest that also exposes you as an unreliable fool.

[dogknob]

35. Godwin's Law is some Vichyite bullshit that can kiss my ass

The US PTB and the MSM they dominate learned a great deal from Goebbels and Co. and I will call it whenever I see it!

[Fuddnik]

40. Goebbels actually learned propaganda from an American in the Hoover Administration.

Read my sig line, and google Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud's nephew.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays

[Cleita]

41. Also, Hitler writes over and over again in his tome "Mein Kampf" that he

admired the propaganda techniques of the Americans and the British. He says the Germans fall far behind in propaganda and should learn from the Americans and British.

[dogknob]

45. The "rebranding" guy... yes.

One of the great things about rebranding is that it does fool most of the herd.

Goebbels is one of the few people for whom rebranding will not work and who will never be able to hide behind relative obscurity like Bernays.

I do agree with you, however.

[msongs]

42. what the nazis did was legal according to their self made laws. comparing status to status is not a

a case of godwin's law. if they used the "legal" defense and YOU are using the "legal" defense also, comparisons are perfectly apt.

[baldguy]

44. Where are President Obama's concentration camps?

No, the comparisons are not apt.

[HooptieWagon]

54. Ever hear of GITMO?

And since despite secret law, secret mass surveillence, drone kill lists, etc don't meet the bar for Nazi comparison...only concentration camps...then I assume that when concentration camps are established , you'll be issuing an apology and admission you were wrong?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

48. Quislings, lackeys, collaborators, trying to take a short-cut to shut down discussion.

Fail

[quakerboy]

50. Who decides who is a "democrat in good standing"?

Who makes that determination, exactly?

And godwins law does not invalidate the fact that there are Nazi wannabe's out there. I ran into one the other day, tossing off white supremacist rhetoric. I called him on it, and he claimed not to agree with nazis, just to be proud of his race. seeing as we were in a public forum where claiming it would have had an immediate negative result.

And I would bet that there are at least a few white supremacists on DU. Given the number of people on DU and the way people feel all sneaky and accomplished when they infiltrate the other guy, I would bet good money theres at least one DU'r who would claim to be a Nazi, if he were being honest.

That said, it largely misses the point. Its funny, one side feels the other is akin to the nazis in spirit of accepting oppression of people, whereas the other seems to feel that its conversational opponents are automatically racist because they oppose some of the policy's of the first black president. Interesting to see the two parts of Naziism separated and each side holding one aspect of it against the other.

I do wonder who was the "most evil" comparison in 1925, the pre nazi nazi, if you will. Before The Nazi's, who was the worst, the one you wouldn't want to be compared to. For people living in Germany, as Hitler came to power, if they compared him to this prenazi-nazi, would they have been "unreliable fools"? I would guess many Germans would have said so at the time. Because none of us ever know for certain the motivations of others, nor can we reliably predict the future on such a grand scale.

[Bluenorthwest]

55. The piece of internet tomfoolery called Godwin's 'law' serves the Nazis and should

be soundly rejected by any thinking person. To discuss politics and world events with censoring of mention of any past nation, empire, Party or despot is a terrible idea.
The OP is so full of mendacity and duplicity it is shocking. Affected wailing and gnashing of teeth, the author should be ashamed to associate the name of Barack Obama with tripe such as this flushworthy diatribe.

[Demo_Chris]

108. Pretty much. If a friend giving me a ride is doing 75 mph and accelerating...

It is reasonable to consider the consequences if left unchecked.

That's where we were under Bush. Today we are going 120 and both parties are screaming to go faster. We know what's at the end of this road. Whatever flavor you choose to call the coming tyranny really doesn't matter and is hardly the point. People sputtering about Godwin at this point are the ones who look like fools to me.

[Melinda]

56. baldguy, You previously said: "If it goose-steps like a duck, & "Seig Heils" like a duck..."

Of course, your post was only the 2nd post in this thread, so I am guessing Godwin's law doesn't apply. Oh wait - yes it does:

Although in one of its early forms Godwin's law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions,[4] the law is now often applied to any threaded online discussion, such as forums, chat rooms and blog comment threads, and has been invoked for the inappropriate use of Nazi analogies in articles or speeches.[5]

And of course, I presume it's okay to say such as you said as long as a Democratic President is in office. Or, as long as the law allowing such is passed without the citizenry being informed. If Democrats do it, it's okay. That about sum it up?

[baldguy]

99. From 2005? Are you kidding?

[Melinda]

100. Umm, no. Your words. You don't own your words? What's changed?

Godwin's law? That principle was formulated much earlier than 2005.

[baldguy]

102. Barack Obama is not Adolf Hitler. And Barack Obama is not George W Bush, either.

No matter how much you wish that were the case.

[Melinda]

105. Umm, wrong on this count too. You'll not find a post from me disparging President Obama.

Please - lose the hyperbole, baldguy. You see monsters where none exist.

I disagree with PBO on many things, but I've never leveled a personal attack against him, nor accused him of being GWB. Never.

I am firmly anti-DLC aka Third Way, however. I am. Which, btw preceded and precedes PBO by many, many years.

No, it's the hypocrisy in this OP which made me go hmm. And I'm curious why you accuse others of the very act that you yourself performed, albeit 8 years ago. If one is going to try and use Godwin's law (which, by the way is not a real law, it's a simple philosophical claim), one should make sure and remove the mote from ones own eye first.

Really. I guess you don't get it.

[bvar22]

129. ........And CHECKMATE!

Nicely done, Melinda!


theYeah...but I said that in 2005, so it doesn't count was worth a snort of derision.
So much easier to just say, "you know I made a mistake" than trying to discount Your Own Words and Opinions. It is difficult to maintain any credibility after trying THAT dodge.

That is the chief problem severe derangement syndrome among those trying to defend the indefensible. Most of them are On Record as being Against It when Bush Did It!

[Puglover]

150. Wow! A thing of beauty!

Nicely done!

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

106. lol

too funny!

[Hydra]

134. /thread

You win Melinda! Thanks for that!

[hootinholler]

57. Are you some kind of Nazi Nazi?

[Jamastiene]

62. Nice post, Hitler

[NealK]

109. Lol!

[DisgustipatedinCA]

63. Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as censorship

My subject title comes from your Wikipedia link.

Meantime, the fact that you tried to slip Stalin into Godwin's Law is telling. The reason you lose an argument by bringing up Hitler, according to G's L, is that Hitler and the Nazis were uniquely evil. This is not the case. Hitler slaughtered more people, yes, but Joseph Stalin gave him a real run for his money. And the bulk of Stalin's murders happened before the bulk of Hitler's murders. To make the claim that the Nazis are uniquely evil is incorrect. Therefore, the prohibitions against making comparisons to Nazis isn't valid. There was a very apt comparison in Joseph Stalin. Ask the Poles. They know.

Now, as regards NSA spying, etc, I don't think the Nazi comparison is apt. A comparison to the Stasi or the NKVD would be more correct, as far as spying and data collection is concerned. Of course the US is doing this on a much larger scale than the East Germans or Soviets ever managed. And no, none of this means that Obama is having hundreds,of thousands of people shot (because some Einstein was going to bring that up--they always do).

[rug]

64. Nice post, Goebbels.

[sulphurdunn]

67. Godwin's Law

is no more applicable to the name of Vidkun Quisling than it is to Judas Iscariot. Both names have become metaphors for those who betray their people.

[jtuck004]

73. "Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle actually used a wider notion of analogy.

They saw analogy as a shared abstraction.[6] Analogous objects did not share necessarily a relation, but also an idea, a pattern, a regularity, an attribute, an effect or a philosophy. These authors also accepted that comparisons, metaphors and "images" (allegories) could be used as arguments, and sometimes they called them analogies. Analogies should also make those abstractions easier to understand and give confidence to the ones using them."

One source here: here.

So I guess some people might look at that and give credence to the poster, for using an apt analogy. If they think the Shield and Sword patch fits, of course.

Oh, and from the same link you posted - I know we are limited as to what a poster can excerpt, but it seems like a couple of paragraphs were left out of the above post that might be important.,

While falling afoul of Godwin's law tends to cause the individual making the comparison to lose their argument or credibility, Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as censorship, fallaciously miscasting an opponent's argument as hyperbole when the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.[9] Similar criticisms of the "law" (or "at least the distorted version which purports to prohibit all comparisons to German crimes&quot have been made by Glenn Greenwald.[10]
History

See, it points out that throwing out Godwin's law as anything more than a device to make conversation more civil around a coffee table or computer bulletin board can frequently be something else than authoritarian.

and, and

Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons. "Although deliberately framed as if it were a law of nature or of mathematics, its purpose has always been rhetorical and pedagogical: I wanted folks who glibly compared someone else to Hitler or to Nazis to think a bit harder about the Holocaust", Godwin has written.[11]

Not that using it invalidates your argument, he just doesn't want the comparison to be done without thought.

I would agree that people should be thoughtful in their postings.

This isn't a law against using the terms which make up the wide variety of authoritarian analogies and mythologies, (unless one wants to cut off argument, like that Bashar al-Assad guy in Syria, which brings us to another analogy, eh?). It is a teaching tool, a "rhetorical" device to prompt you to consider with some thought the comparison you are making.

That didn't seem clear in the first posting.

[Major Hogwash]

76. Trying to ruin their day, or what??

You people!!!

[Number23]

87. I saw a "good German" post from a renowned imbecile here. Those posts are my absolute favorite after

the ones that equate any and everything to lynches. Makes me feel all warm and tingly.

[BlueStreak]

104. I bet Hitler woud be pleased to see your explanation of Godwin's law

(just kidding.)

[TheKentuckian]

110. Godwin's law is not a law. It is an assertion which folks are free to take or leave

and place value on as they see appropriate.

I'm of the thought that I'll consider the argument overall and go from there rather than filter for "red flags" to disqualifying without thought. I might even generally agree with the spirit of the surface of the assertion, that usually we are going to take a short trip to no content are straight dumb but not always and when those exceptions come they are important not to ignore, odds are that some fuckers will dwarf the NAZIS and damn sure too many have operated in various ways just under that line and it creates something of a pass for them. Better they get called out sooner than to late.

Not a big deal to let arguments play out considering how much of my time is wasted without invoking Godwin. TeaPubliKlans and corporate centrists are all about it.

[Lint Head]

111. I agree with your OP. But are you saying there is "never" a time to use the comparison?

If that is so then how long doe it take for a person to call someone an unreliable fool? I don't think name calling is right any time. Ever. The validity of a comparison, any comparison, should be challenged without resorting to name calling when debating. Just my opinion.

[Gravitycollapse]

114. The irony of this self-righteous post is that Godwin's law is merely a claim of probability.

It does nothing to measure the ethical nature of bringing up Nazis.

[reusrename]

115. Is this some new form of Holocaust denial?

There's a phrase you should look up: "Never Again"

[baldguy]

117. Is this some new form of Obama Derangement Syndrome?

Invoking Godwin's Law is the exact opposite of Holocaust denial. It's a protest of the debasement & dilution of the true evil represented by Nazis.

Now matter how much you may wish it to be true, President Obama is not a Nazi.

[reusrename]

119. What the hell does Obama have to do with any of this?

Yes, I do believe you could have Obama Derangement Syndrome if you think any of this has anything to do with Obama.

If Obama has changed anything, his being elected has only bought us some time, a few years at most. His election has probably saved the planet from a U.S. nuclear first-strike in Iran. I am sure it would have happened by now under a McCain administration.

You honestly may have an Obama Derangement Syndrome. It would explain a lot.

[baldguy]

121. Why bother reading the OP?

[reusrename]

122. Ah, I think I see where you are coming from now.

It's a false dichotomy.

Either Obama is a Nazi or we are not becoming a fascist state.

The two actually are very different things. It is possible for us to continue our descent into fascism without Obama becoming a Nazi. It's not only possible, it is actually happening.

Those people who believe Obama can simply snap his fingers and fix everything are not being realistic - neither are those who pretend nothing is broken.

[morningfog]

124. There can be elements of fascism that do not equate to Nazism.

Same with authoritarianism.

Pointing out fascist policies is not the same as calling someone a Nazi. Surely you can appreciate the difference. I am not sure, other than the one call out in the OP, what else you are referring to, but it seems you may be painting with too broad a brush.

Seriously, do you have a link to where a DUer "really & truly believe their opponents are unapologetic member of the Third Reich"?

[bvar22]

126. The problem is that Goodwins Law IS a Logical FAIL in and of itself.

It is based on the premise that [font size=3]Nothing will EVER in ANY way be as BAD as the NAZIS, so there can never be a valid comparison to anything that happened in Germany during the NAZI Regime.[/font]

I reject this premise.

[yurbud]

131. uh...Godwin's "Law" isn't a scientific law, it's just a clever, memorable way to express something

Godwin didn't like.

I could make up my own law that invocation of Godwin's Law indicates that a comparison to Nazis is too close to reality for the invoker, so they invoke to shut down their opponent--but that wouldn't automatically make my "law" axiomatic description of reality.

[truebrit71]

133. Godwin's Law is complete and utter bollocks, used by weak-minded people that can't win an argument..

..on it's own merit...

As with any comparison, each have their own merits, or not, and should be judged on those, and not some arbitrary "law" made up by someone who was obviously losing at his own argument..

For example: Obama proposed Obamacare = NOT a Nazi
Obama defends the use of mass spying on his own citizens as "necessary" = Nazi/Fascistic

Knee-jerk response of "you used some bullshit "law" so I win the internet = Completely weak sauce, get off the computer and go and clean your room like your mother told you an hour ago.

[baldguy]

135. You're just saying that because Glenn said so.

http://www.salon.com/2010/07/01/godwin/

Talk about weak-minded!

[truebrit71]

136. Nope, actually I've been saying that for years...

..

[dogknob]

142. First rule of Oppression Club: Don't talk about Oppression Club.

... and Glenn Beck is a doofus.

[nolabels]

137. Let's not get too hung up on names here

If there was a "R" in front instead of a "D" there would little debate here.

Perhaps the ole The Times They Are A-Changin' by Bob Dylan

Read more: http://www.bobdylan.com/us/songs/idiot-wind#ixzz2XuuTSJpk

On edit: wrong link
try this

http://www.bobdylan.com/us/songs/times-they-are-changin

To me it's not so much who or what they claim to be, but more on what they seem to be doing

[Pholus]

152. This from the guy who called me a whacked out corporatist Paulite libertarian or something.

I'd quote it, but it got hidden after an alert. It was pure name-calling.

I regret that anyone reported it though. I tend to like those things to stay online.

Right now, I would have trotted it out to show another side to the person singing this particular song.

[Democracyinkind]

153. What does the observation that in online discussions, Nazi-comparisons will inevitably be made

... have to do with the normative ending of your post? I think people are taking something that is basically a descriptive prediction and somehow delude themselves into thinking that this provides a normative argument. It does not.

This criticism does not cover the act of calling fellow-discussants Nazis. But I am dumbfounded by the fact that some people take Godwin's Law as an a priori refutation of the validity of any comparison made with the Nazis online.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

162. It's a corollary to Godwin's Law that was added over time. It's nonsense.

Edited to actually add something to the body of the post:

It's nonsense, because Godwin's Law relies on the notion that the Nazis were uniquely evil with respect to killing innocents. While the Nazis were unmatched at killing innocents (may they burn in a hell I don't believe in), Joseph Stalin conducted mass killings that very nearly equaled Hitler's killing. Stalin was in the same general area of the world at the same general time Hitler was killing so many in Poland and elsewhere. And so, making the claim that comparisons to Nazis cannot be brought up because the Nazis were uniquely evil is just a wrongheaded notion.

[Democracyinkind]

163. Glad to see I'm not the only one thinking that. nt

[LanternWaste]

166. as it stands, it's really nothing more than a very trendy, very popular internet meme

If the time ever arrives in which godwin's law is recognized and accepted as a formal academic rule of either critical logic or writing style, I'll give it scrutiny. Yet as it stands, it's really nothing more than a very trendy, very popular internet meme, and I'll certainly allow it all the consideration it actually warrants.

Comparisons and analogies are either valid or invalid in and of themselves, regardless of whether Hitler, Stalin or My Pretty Pony are used. Critique each use on its own, or allow an internet meme triumph over critical thought.

Wondering how many people would have giggled at anyone bringing up Godwin's Bumper-Sticker in my History of Germany, 1933-145. Most I would think. I once compared Pol Pot to Hitler in regards to per capita death toll. Goodness... what happens when we break this "law". Fallacy Police in Keystone Cops uniform appear?

[galileoreloaded]

171. Internet memes equal intelligent discourse. Check.

[boston bean]

172. If one cannot examine history and relate certain aspects of it

to current issues, you might as well say, let it happen again.

[azurnoir]

173. seems a feeble attempt to limit, label, or perhaps censor

in the example you cited in the OP the words quisling and totalitarianism were used, not Nazi. IMO those two woirds to not automatically equate to Nazi as Nazism was not the only such government in history