Godwin's Law: Difference between revisions

Note that the [[Captain Obvious|Law is not supposed to apply to serious discussions of]] [http://xkcd.com/261/ Fascist Germany or its policies], but rather describes the logical fallacy of Hitler/Nazi comparisons. However, Godwin's Law is ''not'' intended to apply to ''on-topic'' comparisons of neo-fascist groups to Nazis.

{{quote|''In other words, it's OK to call these un-American white supremacists exactly what they are: "By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you," Godwin said on Sunday evening.''|[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/14/godwins_law_creator_rescinds_ruling_after_nazis_march_in_charlottesville/ Chap behind Godwin's law suspends his own rule for Charlottesville fascists: 'By all means, compare them to Nazis']}}

 

The most common forms of Godwin's Law are [[Hitler Ate Sugar|"The Nazis supported X, therefore X is bad"]], or alternatively, [[Hitler Ate Sugar|"The Nazis opposed X, therefore X is good"]]. Whether using "Nazi" as a random insult falls under the Law is a matter of debate. Unfortunately, this has become so popular as to come full-circle, making any discussion of totalitarian regimes susceptible to "HAY GODWIN'S LAW HURR".

Heavily overlaps with [[Demonization]] and can be seen as its modern, secular adaptation. See also [[Abomination Accusation Attack]]. Not to be confused with [[Godwin's Law of Time Travel]]. It ''might'' be justified when seriously discussing [[Would Be Rude to Say Genocide|genocide]], since the Holocaust is pretty much the [[Trope Codifier]] that most other genocides are measured against. The word was even first coined in reference to it.

 

 

{{reflist}}