[LeatherTrumpet]

"When we apply a Nazi comparison to someone or something that does not fit that comparison, then Nazism and the Holocaust lose their power to shock us. And they must never lose that power. If they do, which is quickly happening right now, when something diabolical does come along again in this world, we have no way to identify it, let alone stop it, because we've cried Nazi wolf so often that the comparison has lost its power to persuade."

"he or she that resorts to a Nazi Germany or Hitler comparison loses the argument. "


"You see, for me, a Nazi comparison is a kind of inverted hate speech unwittingly directed at all those who died in the Holocaust. So, if you find Mr. Trump's comments a form of hate speech, it behooves you to not ape their very nature with a grotesquely irresponsible rejoinder. Moreover, when you make preposterous comparisons, you actually draw those on the fence closer to the very person you hope to disempower."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-...b_9334668.html



Excellent article and hopefully a read of it will put an end to the frankly silly and disrespectful comparisons?


Thoughts?

[arista]

Yes LT
I was shocked to see a Mod use this Wrong Term.

Strange Times on TIBB

[Ammi]

..I guess my thoughts are that this should be discussed in the Trump thread..(if there is any necessity for it to be discussed even at all/individual associations in regards to Donald Trump..)...sometimes I think that there is maybe a need to make a separate thread for something, which is touched on during a debate if it is side-tracking too much or merits it's own thread... but not in this vein which seems a sure way of becoming personal and silly/unnecessary to debates which an get personal enough already...would I personally compare Trump..?..no, just because there isn't any need imo, Trump's ideals are worrying enough in their own right/his egotism and everything he stands for are not things that I think represent America's ethos in any way...

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes LT
I was shocked to see a Mod use this Wrong Term.

Strange Times on TIBB

I think some more knowledge of military history is needed for some

[Jamie89]

So the suggestion is that if Person A makes a generic comparison between Hitler and someone else (regardless of what aspects of the two people are being compared), then Person B will no longer be shocked by Nazism or the Holocaust? I disagree. If a comparison can be made then why not make it? It's not disrespectful to anyone other than the person who is being compared to Hitler. And it depends what the comparison is. If someone was to say 'Trump did x and that was as bad as the Holocaust', then obviously that would be incredibly disrespectful, but if it's a comparison of a particular policy/personality trait (I don't know exactly what the comparison is that has led to this thread) and the comparison exists legitimately, or there is an argument to be had for it, then I think it's fine. Calling it 'Hate Speech' is a bit much to be honest
I remember when I was at school we had a teacher that everyone called 'Little Hitler'. It wasn't a comment on Nazism, it was just a silly meaningless insult aimed at the teacher for being a ****.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

So the suggestion is that if Person A makes a generic comparison between Hitler and someone else (regardless of what aspects of the two people are being compared), then Person B will no longer be shocked by Nazism or the Holocaust? I disagree. If a comparison can be made then why not make it? It's not disrespectful to anyone other than the person who is being compared to Hitler. And it depends what the comparison is. If someone was to say 'Trump did x and that was as bad as the Holocaust', then obviously that would be incredibly disrespectful, but if it's a comparison of a particular policy/personality trait (I don't know exactly what the comparison is that has led to this thread) and the comparison exists legitimately, or there is an argument to be had for it, then I think it's fine. Calling it 'Hate Speech' is a bit much to be honest
I remember when I was at school we had a teacher that everyone called 'Little Hitler'. It wasn't a comment on Nazism, it was just a silly meaningless insult aimed at the teacher for being a ****.

Absolutely,I personally would avoid comparing someone to Hitler and the Nazis but at times some real sensationalism can enter into debate as comparing one with another.
Which can work in positive and negative ways, one it gets a debate going but also can help highlight the wrongs of someone trying to be too unacceptably extreme and also really discriminating as to others, especially when such a person is trying to seek office of a high order.
This is how some of the World saw Adolf Hitler before he came to power.

I hate much of the tone of Trump,I just really hope the American people wake up to him fast and if he does unfortunately get the nomination of the Republican party that he gets soundly and massively trounced in the actual Presidential election.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

So the suggestion is that if Person A makes a generic comparison between Hitler and someone else (regardless of what aspects of the two people are being compared), then Person B will no longer be shocked by Nazism or the Holocaust? I disagree. If a comparison can be made then why not make it? It's not disrespectful to anyone other than the person who is being compared to Hitler. And it depends what the comparison is. If someone was to say 'Trump did x and that was as bad as the Holocaust', then obviously that would be incredibly disrespectful, but if it's a comparison of a particular policy/personality trait (I don't know exactly what the comparison is that has led to this thread) and the comparison exists legitimately, or there is an argument to be had for it, then I think it's fine. Calling it 'Hate Speech' is a bit much to be honest
I remember when I was at school we had a teacher that everyone called 'Little Hitler'. It wasn't a comment on Nazism, it was just a silly meaningless insult aimed at the teacher for being a ****.

The reason there is Godwins Law et is that its lazy and 99.9% inaccurate

all you are doing is thinking of the worst extreme to try and prove a point (usually that you dont like something)

[LeatherTrumpet]

In December 2015, Godwin cited several articles on Republican presidential candidate Donald J. Trump for their Nazi and Fascist comparisons.


Even Godwin himself is calling out those who make the Trump comparison


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

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

In December 2015, Godwin cited several articles on Republican presidential candidate Donald J. Trump for their Nazi and Fascist comparisons.


Even Godwin himself is calling out those who make the Trump comparison


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

Interesting link, I think this part is particularly relevant:

"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."

If somebody feels that making a comparison is relevant during a discussion, then they have the right to make that comparison. Trying to censor them because you disagree with it isn't helpful to the discussion at all.

[Toy Soldier]

I don't know. I'm the first to agree with Godwin's Law when it comes to people pulling the Nazi card, and if anyone starts saying that Trump is "just like" Hitler or is going to successfully form a new Nazi regime, then yes, Godwin's all the way.

However...

There are some clear, obvious and demonstrable comparisons that can be made between Trump's popularity and the rise of Hitler. Anyone who bleats "blrrrr Godwin's law lolol" whilst refusing to acknowledge or address those in any way, is just as bad as someone Barking "Nazi!".

There are similar economic and political trends at work that are being leveraged in similar ways, using similar rhetoric, for a similar surge in political popularity that would not have been possible under other circumstances. That's just a fact.

There are comparisons to be drawn. Comparing does not necessarily mean equating. Shooting down those comparisons in a kneejerk fashion, "OMG you said Hitler lololllll Godwin lol get out" is disingenuous.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

Interesting link, I think this part is particularly relevant:

"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."

If somebody feels that making a comparison is relevant during a discussion, then they have the right to make that comparison. Trying to censor them because you disagree with it isn't helpful to the discussion at all.

No one is censoring bob

just trying to move the debate to a slightly higher lever perhaps

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by bobnot

If You are going to start threads with a copy and paste of part of a news article (even using the headline as the thread title) i believe it is at the very least courteous to post the original source but also infringes on copyright if you do not.
How rude.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-...b_9334668.html

sorry that is my bad, I did post the link but made an error by putting it in the picture box

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I don't know. I'm the first to agree with Godwin's Law when it comes to people pulling the Nazi card, and if anyone starts saying that Trump is "just like" Hitler or is going to successfully form a new Nazi regime, then yes, Godwin's all the way.

However...

There are some clear, obvious and demonstrable comparisons that can be made between Trump's popularity and the rise of Hitler. Anyone who bleats "blrrrr Godwin's law lolol" whilst refusing to acknowledge or address those in any way, is just as bad as someone Barking "Nazi!".

There are similar economic and political trends at work that are being leveraged in similar ways, using similar rhetoric, for a similar surge in political popularity that would not have been possible under other circumstances. That's just a fact.

There are comparisons to be drawn. Comparing does not necessarily mean equating. Shooting down those comparisons in a kneejerk fashion, "OMG you said Hitler lololllll Godwin lol get out" is disingenuous.

i seem to remember that Farage for this and no doubt in French forums Le Pen gets this all the time, in fact I doubt that there has been any right wing popular politician who has not been compared to Hitler, ever

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

No one is censoring bob

just trying to move the debate to a slightly higher lever perhaps

That point would only be valid if there was no merit to the comparisons. If people believe there are valid reasons behind making a comparison then they have the right to make that point. If on the other hand I decide to start comparing Trump to Pingu then that would lower the level of the thread because I can't back up why it would be relevant.
The whole point in this thread is to censor the Hitler comparisons, not because there aren't reasons behind them, but because you don't agree with the validity of the reasons, which is a simple difference of opinion, so saying that you're not trying to censor people is a contradiction.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

That point would only be valid if there was no merit to the comparisons. If people believe there are valid reasons behind making a comparison then they have the right to make that point. If on the other hand I decide to start comparing Trump to Pingu then that would lower the level of the thread because I can't back up why it would be relevant.
The whole point in this thread is to censor the Hitler comparisons, not because there aren't reasons behind them, but because you don't agree with the validity of the reasons, which is a simple difference of opinion, so saying that you're not trying to censor people is a contradiction.

I cant censor anyone but i can perhaps make them re-evaluate the comparison as it is rather ridiculous

naturally I had hoped someone may have said "yes perhaps i have been a bit hasty"

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

i seem to remember that Farage for this and no doubt in French forums Le Pen gets this all the time, in fact I doubt that there has been any right wing popular politician who has not been compared to Hitler, ever

Well surely they can be. I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding of the word "comparison" to be honest, like I said, with people believing that "compare" and "equate" mean the same when they don't. "There's no comparison!!1!!1"... Well... Of course there is. I could write a lengthy post comparing Hitler to a banana sundae, if the mood were to strike. Or anything else. There may be no similarity at all... That would be a part of the comparison?

So yes, compare any right wing politician to a facist dictator and you will inevitably find similarities to highlight. That's inevitable. Just as it's inevitable that you will be able to find similarities between left wing politicians and hard socialism / communism / Marxism. The Tories for example absolutely love to do just that?

So, it is in fact perfectly valid to compare Trump with Hitler. There's no inherent problem with it, if it's just part of the conversation and explained. There ARE similarities in the reasons that they rose to popularity, there ARE similarities in their rhetoric. Should it be off limits to say so just because of the wider implications? In my opinion, no, but I guess it depends on your audience and your intent. Pointing these things out is not the same as saying "Trump = Hitler! Trump is a Nazi!"

IMO Godwin's law comes into play, then, when "Nazi" or "Hitler" is used as the descriptor itself without further examination or elaboration. When the entire argument is "X is a Nazi", "Y is Nazi propaganda" etc.

There's no inherent problem with comparison.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Well surely they can be. I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding of the word "comparison" to be honest, like I said, with people believing that "compare" and "equate" mean the same when they don't. "There's no comparison!!1!!1"... Well... Of course there is. I could write a lengthy post comparing Hitler to a banana sundae, if the mood were to strike. Or anything else. There may be no similarity at all... That would be a part of the comparison?

So yes, compare any right wing politician to a facist dictator and you will inevitably find similarities to highlight. That's inevitable. Just as it's inevitable that you will be able to find similarities between left wing politicians and hard socialism / communism / Marxism. The Tories for example absolutely love to do just that?

So, it is in fact perfectly valid to compare Trump with Hitler. There's no inherent problem with it, if it's just part of the conversation and explained. There ARE similarities in the reasons that they rose to popularity, there ARE similarities in their rhetoric. Should it be off limits to say so just because of the wider implications? In my opinion, no, but I guess it depends on your audience and your intent. Pointing these things out is not the same as saying "Trump = Hitler! Trump is a Nazi!"

IMO Godwin's law comes into play, then, when "Nazi" or "Hitler" is used as the descriptor itself without further examination or elaboration. When the entire argument is "X is a Nazi", "Y is Nazi propaganda" etc.

There's no inherent problem with comparison.

Godwin invented his law to make people try and think a little deeper and avoid the obvious just because you dont like something

Hopefully today maybe people have

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

No one is censoring bob

just trying to move the debate to a slightly higher lever perhaps

I'm going to be honest LT... I think using Godwin's law as censorship is exactly what you're attempting to do.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I'm going to be honest LT... I think using Godwin's law as censorship is exactly what you're attempting to do.

Just making people aware is not censorship

if I were a mod and i shut the Trump thread then yes

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Godwin invented his law to make people try and think a little deeper and avoid the obvious just because you dont like something

Hopefully today maybe people have

He sure did. He didn't invent the law to block anyone from ever drawing any parallels with Hitler or the Nazis in any circumstance. That would be ridiculous.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

He sure did. He didn't invent the law to block anyone from ever drawing any parallels with Hitler or the Nazis in any circumstance. That would be ridiculous.

indeed, it was to make them think deeper

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Just making people aware is not censorship

if I were a mod and i shut the Trump thread then yes

It's light censorship LT, by Tring to make people feel foolish or uneducated by spamming an arbitrary argument. Lazy.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

indeed, it was to make them think deeper

One can think deeply about the meteoric rise of Donald Trump in politics and still come out of it with unsettling Hitler tease. Trust me.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

It's light censorship LT, by Tring to make people feel foolish or uneducated by spamming an arbitrary argument. Lazy.

Jesus TS, its the lazy AH comparisons that spawned it ffs

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

One can think deeply about the meteoric rise of Donald Trump in politics and still come out of it with unsettling Hitler tease. Trust me.

Yes and you can probably do the same with the rise of Adele too