Godwin? Schmodwin!
The lesson to draw from Hitler's Germany is not that it was uniquely evil. The lesson to draw from Hitler's Germany is that it could so easily happen again, for the totalitarian urges which led to its creation have never gone away. Indeed, right now in Europe they are as strong as they have ever been.
This is why I believe it is time to rescind Godwin's Law.
According to Wikipedia the term dates back to 1990 and is the invention of an attorney called Mike Godwin.
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." Godwin believes the ubiquity of such comparisons trivializes the Holocaust.
Hmm. Of course I see his point but I think what his tediously over-cited law has actually achieved is quite the opposite of what Godwin intended. It has let modern Nazis off the hook.
"Nazi", I would concede, is a term which has since the war been bandied about far too readily - as often as not by liberals who want to make people who believe in evil things like small government, liberty and the Constitution hide themselves for very shame.
But just because it is overused doesn't render it beyond the pale of reasonable use. For example, I quite often like to draw parallels between the modern environmental movement and the Nazis. When I say "Nazis", I am not using the term in its vague, liberal sense of "someone I disapprove of", but rather with reference to a very specific Weltanschauung.
As I note in my book Watermelons, the Greens and the Nazis have an awful lot in common - as reflects their shared ideological roots in German romanticism. Whenever I strive to make this point, though, there'll always be some wise guy who steps in to invoke "Godwin's Law" - as if the very mention of that phrase somehow invalidates my entire argument.
"Godwin's Law" is in fact just another tedious variant on a technique beloved by the left: closing down the debate.
- Comment (20)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
Mar '11
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
Indeed - this is why "liberal" "progressives" hate Jonah Goldberg's book "Liberal Fascism".
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
I remember once Cenk Uygur (spelled correctly?) of the Young Turks interviewed Jonah on his YouTube/radio show. It was clear that Cenk didn't even attempt to find a synopsis of the book- his go-to argument was "you're calling me a fascist!"
Similarly, I watched a YouTube video of Dennis Prager interviewing Arianna Huffington. She said HuffPo has a rule against Hitler comparisons. Seems to directly link back to this "Godwin's Law."
Aug '10
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
Thank you. Very well done. It's worse than Lysenkoism.
I just ordered your book.
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
Hey James, I hope you can answer this because I've always wanted to know.
Do you read the comments on Amazon? More specifically, do you read the "1 star" comments? As is the case with every one of these silly "rating systems," it goes quickly from 5 stars to 1 stars.
Apr '11
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
Ethan Safron: Hey James, I hope you can answer this because I've always wanted to know.
Do you read the comments on Amazon? More specifically, do you read the "1 star" comments? As is the case with every one of these silly "rating systems," it goes quickly from 5 stars to 1 stars. · Sep 27 at 11:26am
I love reading the comments for political and religious commentaries on Amazon, as they generally do elicit such black and white responses. The best 1-star comment for this book starts, "I don't have to read the book ..." and then proceeds to criticize the book for several paragraphs.
May '10
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
You make a point that needs to be reiterated.
Years ago I was acquainted with a very accomplished Jewish man who had left Germany in the late 1930's, just before it was too late to escape. He told me that we had Hitler all wrong. Rather than a singular and exceptionally evil man, he was quite ordinary and at the time, easy to like. His point was that what happened in Germany in the 1930's was not nearly as freakish as our wartime propaganda and subsequent history have portrayed it. That movement made sense at that time to a lot of ordinary Germans who never imagined where it would lead.
His larger point was that such a thing could easily happen again in any country, and that failure to recognize that made it even more likely.
Jun '10
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
"Nazi" was a shortened form for "nationalsozialistischen," national socialist in English. It is weird how the left tries to hang that label on free market conservatives.
Oct '10
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
Honestly, this argument drives me up the wall. The Nazi party was an example of centrist totalitarianism, so it's left and right. The greenies are stupid, nihilistic, and corporatist in their methods, but I don't think they're any more fascist than any other nihilist/anti-capitalist group.
They certainly aren't as corporatist as, say, minority "liberation" groups, or labor unions.
Feb '11
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
I agree that there is much parallel between today's "progressives" and the Nazi and Fascist movements. Marxism was a bastard child of the Enlightenment; Naziism and Fascism were counter-Enlightenment. Modern "progressivism" combines elements from both these movements plus some all its own.
The best book I have read on the climate in Germany between the wars is "Defying Hitler," the memoir of Sebastian Haffner, who grew up there during that era. I reviewed it here.
May '10
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
I don't think fascism is necessarily left or right, but the Nazi party was influenced much more by the left than the right. Their big beef with the communists was that German leftists (ie. Nazis) were also nationalists (spread the wealth among the Germans who believe like us), while communists were global (spread the wealth among all who believe like us).
Today's green movement certainly exhibits fascist characteristics, and in fact the Nazis were quite green, promoting organic food and nature worship.
As mentioned above, check out Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg if you have not read it.
Edited on Sep 27, 2011 at 5:50pmFeb '11
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
There was considerable psychological overlap between German Communists and German Nazis; one Nazi leader remarked that a Communist would often make a good Nazi but a Social Democrat rarely would.
Sebastian Haffner (see my comment above) described two acquaintances, one a Communist and the other a Nazi:
“They both came from the ‘youth movement’ and both thought in terms of leagues. They were both anti-bourgeois and anti-individualistic. Both had an ideal of ‘community’ and ‘community spirit’. For both, jazz music, fashion magazines…in other words the world of glamour and ‘easy come, easy go’, were a red rag. Both had a secret liking for terror, in a more humanistic garb for the one, more nationalistic for the other. As similar views make for similar faces, they both had a certain stiff, thin-lipped, humourless expression and, incidentally, the greatest respect for each other.”
Mar '11
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
Devin Cole
As mentioned above, check out Liberal Fascism by Johan Goldberg if you have not read it.
Would that be Jonah's long-lost Austrian cousin (who did the translation into Austrian)?
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
Ethan, any author who says he doesn't read all his reviews, good and bad, is a liar. I find the one star reviews refreshing and oddly charming because they reveal the poverty of the arguments of those who seek to criticize me. That review cited by CU Douglas is a case in point. The guy hadn't read the book, didn't want to read it, but just knew, he just KNEW it was bad. I also enjoy when these reviewers get taken to pieces by other reviewers. That makes it even more worthwhile.
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
Oh man, thanks for the answer. This is life changing.
The lesson here, my fellow Americans, is that if you ever get a restraining order put on you by your favorite author, just use a pseudonym and post a 1-star review on Amazon to get your message across.
Aug '10
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
No, Godwin's Law is a fundamental property of internet conversations and is established through empirical observation. It relates to the probability that the term Nazi will be invoked the longer a conversation goes on regardless of the conversation's original topic. Rescinding it is like trying to recind Boyle's Law (or Smeed's).
You are objecting to the corollary to Godwin's Law that declares the conversation over once the Nazi reference is made. Then there is Quirk's Exception: Intentional invocation of Godwin's Law is ineffectual.
Edited on Sep 27, 2011 at 2:47pmDec '10
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
Agree.
Something Godwin’s Law has not produced, regrettably, is a wider array of references to Stalin, Mao, much less the Greens, or, surprisingly, Castro. Even as attenuated in appearance as the latter’s ghostly bloodstained silhouette has now become, nonetheless, he is alive and giving legitimacy to his brother’s brand of unrepentant despotism.
Nothing in modern times anyone could pretend to understand compares to the Holocaust, except Stalin’s soviet communism and Mao’s red revolution. Hitler’s undisputed ubiquity does not trivialize the Holocaust at all and what it lets off the hook are not only modern Green Nazis but the Russians, Chinese, and Cuban communists.
While it might offend in its unfairness that Hitler is undisputed in his popularity among murderous, centralizing collectivists, it is too lugubriously distasteful to begin to dispute who is worse. Yet, in addition to Hitler, also deserving of some law of opprobrium are Stalin, Mao, Castro, and their regimes. This would reinforce Godwin’s aim to remind everyone that, hand-in-hand with government, their satanic avatars could strike almost anywhere at anytime—and reinforce the warning that animating the zealotry of the Greens might be the spirit of the Reds.
Jun '11
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
There are simply not enough references to Lysenkoism these days. In fact, isn't Lysenkosim at the core of today's "watermelons?. No actual science to be seen... then throw so much BS out so fast that by the time you've discredited one approach/theory they've come up with five more.
Mar '11
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
I do not believe "weird" is the proper word to describe that particular smear, it points to something a bit more disturbing.
Edited on Sep 27, 2011 at 7:03pmSep '10
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
C. U. Douglas
Ethan Safron: Hey James, I hope you can answer this because I've always wanted to know.
Do you read the comments on Amazon? More specifically, do you read the "1 star" comments? As is the case with every one of these silly "rating systems," it goes quickly from 5 stars to 1 stars. · Sep 27 at 11:26am
I love reading the comments for political and religious commentaries on Amazon, as they generally do elicit such black and white responses. The best 1-star comment for this book starts, "I don't have to read the book ..." and then proceeds to criticize the book for several paragraphs. · Sep 27 at 11:33am
If he doesn't have to read the book then I don't have to read his review!
May '10
Re: Godwin? Schmodwin!
David Williamson
Devin Cole
As mentioned above, check out Liberal Fascism by Johan Goldberg if you have not read it.
Would that be Jonah's long-lost Austrian cousin (who did the translation into Austrian)? · Sep 27 at 1:31pm
Yes, I picked up the version in Austrian before I boarded the Intercontinental Railroad for the trip from Vienna to Atlanta.