FOR SEAOAT AND TEO. Internet Discussions 101: Today's lesson - Godwin's Law

Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies[1][2]) is an assertion made by Mike Godwin in 1990[2] 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."[2][3] 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,[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] The law is sometimes invoked, as a rule, to mark the end of a discussion when a Nazi analogy is made, with the writer who made the analogy being considered to have lost the argument.

In 2012, "Godwin's Law" became an entry in the third edition of the Oxford English Dictionary.[6]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

The reality is that in an anonymous forum environment Nazis feel that they can spew their poison without ramifications in employment or their social life which is usually devoid of contact with other humans, isolated, and involves fantasies involving uniforms.   They go unchallenged because most people simply do not want to confront stupid and evil.   They usually ignore the nazi poster.   I however, have given this over five years to self correct.   No more patience and no more tolerance of stupid.   Nazi threads are defined specifically by their content.   They will be addressed.   There is no appeasement Bob with a Nazi.    You can sit on the fence and play Chamberlen, but I will be Churchill and will not give an inch to a Nazi.  You can think Nazi concepts are abstract, but they are a very real part of our world in 2013.   Good will prevail.   Evil will need to crawl under a rock again.

2seaoat wrote:The reality is that in an anonymous forum environment Nazis feel that they can spew their poison without ramifications in employment or their social life which is usually devoid of contact with other humans, isolated, and involves fantasies involving uniforms.   They  go unchallenged because most people simply do not want to confront stupid and evil.   They usually ignore the nazi poster.   I however, have given this over five years to self correct.   No more patience and no more tolerance of stupid.   Nazi threads are defined specifically by their content.   They will be addressed.   There is no appeasement Bob with a Nazi.    You can sit on the fence and play Chamberlen, but I will be Churchill and will not give an inch to a Nazi.  You can think Nazi concepts are abstract, but they are a very real part of our world in 2013.   Good will prevail.   Evil will need to crawl under a rock again.

Im starting to find you funny. kind of like chicken little.

Whoever conceived of Chicken Little did a great disservice to us all. Because if the sky does start falling, we will not believe it because of him. And, trust me, a falling sky is not gonna be any picnic.

Both National Socialism (Nazi) and Marxism were blowback to the "robber barron" version of capitalism which prevailed at the time.  As much as anything else,  both were a rebellion against that...

In social criticism and economic literature, Robber barons became a derogatory term applied to wealthy and powerful 19th-century American businessmen that appeared in North American periodical literature as early as the August 1870 issue of The Atlantic Monthly[1] magazine. By the late 1800s, the term was typically applied to businessmen who used what were considered to be exploitative practices to amass their wealth.[2] These practices included exerting control over national resources, accruing high levels of government influence, paying extremely low wages, squashing competition by acquiring competitors in order to create monopolies and eventually raise prices, and schemes to sell stock at inflated prices[2] to unsuspecting investors in a manner which would eventually destroy the company for which the stock was issued and impoverish investors.[2] The term combines the sense of criminal ("robber") and illegitimate aristocracy (a baron is an illegitimate role in a republic).[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_%28industrialist%29

The part of the Hitler and Nazi story which is rarely ever told to us in our history textbooks,  is that before Hitler and the Nazis,  Germany was experiencing massive unemployment.  After the National Socialists and Hitler rose to power,  they essentially eradicted unemployment in Germany.
That was the most powerful factor for explaining why the country rallied in support of them.

Still trying to find a fence to sit on.....sorry there was nothing redeeming about nazis. Absolutely nothing. They need to be eradicated upon the first sighting of raising their ugly head. To ignore the obvious is not fence sitting, it is being a nazi cheerleader. rah rah full employment........get in the game, and take no prisoners.

I've always found it better to the let the facts speak for themselves.  

Propaganda and spin,  be it coming from democrat or republican,  liberal or conservative,  capitalist or socialist, nazi or jew,  is a poor alternative to truth.

[quote="Bob"]I've always found it better to the let the facts speak for themselves.  

Propaganda and spin,  be it coming from democrat or republican,  liberal or conservative,  capitalist or socialist,  nazi or jew,  is a poor alternative to truth.[/quota ha ha Bobs a Nazi to

Bob wrote:Both National Socialism (Nazi) and Marxism were blowback to the "robber barron" version of capitalism which prevailed at the time.  As much as anything else,  both were a rebellion against that...

In social criticism and economic literature, Robber barons became a derogatory term applied to wealthy and powerful 19th-century American businessmen that appeared in North American periodical literature as early as the August 1870 issue of The Atlantic Monthly[1] magazine. By the late 1800s, the term was typically applied to businessmen who used what were considered to be exploitative practices to amass their wealth.[2] These practices included exerting control over national resources, accruing high levels of government influence, paying extremely low wages, squashing competition by acquiring competitors in order to create monopolies and eventually raise prices, and schemes to sell stock at inflated prices[2] to unsuspecting investors in a manner which would eventually destroy the company for which the stock was issued and impoverish investors.[2] The term combines the sense of criminal ("robber") and illegitimate aristocracy (a baron is an illegitimate role in a republic).[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_%28industrialist%29

interesting. we have a huge group of people on here who complain about the robber barons all the time.

perhaps we don't even have republicans and democrats, could just be Nazis and communist LOL

I keep saying that if we simply look at the results... there is really very little difference to our two major parties.

Dispite what they say... or what the followers say. Hitler used disorganization in the nazi hierarchy to foster distrust... to harbor a type of paranoia that gave the leaders an ultimate control. I see that used in our two party system to our detriment.