Re: Godwin's So Called Law Funny. This thread is now two pages of comments past when Emperor Godwin declared 'end discussion.' Quite the commanding presence. Because when 400,000 Americans once left themselves in a blender fighting totalitarianism, it was so that some lefty weasel could someday declare it 'unfair' to point out what all that once noise was about. Modern advocates of National Socialism find it unfair to ever mention National Socialism and its once massive catastrophic fail? No kidding. I can hardly see the self serving reasons for that. No, never mind what all that state uber alles unfettered tribal bullshit was all about, because the tribe's latest statist wannabes have declared any past references to the failures of statism strictly verbotten. Well no shit, of course they would. The only puzzler is why any advocate of freedom would ever let that attempt at censorship -- at noticing the attributes of statism that make it statism -- fly at all? When Godwin wasn't pushing OSF etc. and attacking, not defending personal property rights, what exactly was his politics when he was imperially declaring that remembering why we once fought the Nazis is 'unfair?' What next? Is any reference to the failed USSR, steaming on the shitpile of history, and the suggestion that we not follow same down the failed path of centrally planned command and control 'the economy' running going to be declared 'end of discussion' by some other weasels pushing the same swill? No kidding; I'd be embarrassed by the God that Failed, too. Put that on the pile with "The Khmer Rouge were mere agrarian Marxists." ... because everyone knows that all that fresh air spoils the intent. Perhaps Godwin's optimistically named 'Law' needs to be renamed Godwin's Inneffective Speedbump; a sad roadsign around the forever endlessly necessary Cleanup in Aisle 9. Before we show our contempt and loathing for 400,000 dead Americans who helped save the world from out of control statism on the march, perhaps we should reconsider the source of all this sense of unfairness directed at noticing what makes statists 'statists' and what makes totalitarians 'totalitarians.' No, not even close, is it unfair to mention what made Nazis 'Nazis.' That war was not fought just to replace brown shirts with red shirts. Perhaps yet the 24th remarketing campaign is needed: "Totalitarianism: It's not just for breakfast anymore." Here is Godwin's Law: "Tell you what, we'll make you a deal. We won't weasel word political contexts, jack them by 180 degrees, and call Hitler(that champion of individual rights and liberty)a 'right winger', if you don't point out that his massive fail was an unfettering of the state uber alles. That is a draw, so ... ignore all that failed statism, this is round two." To which I declare, bullshit. Hitler was no 'right winger' -- in our once political context. He was a 'right winger' in his political context-- the state uber alles. Same with Stalin; same specious argument. Neither Hitler nor Stalin would be anything near 'right wingers' in the American political context. Hitler/Stalin... Nazis/Commies ... Bloods/Crips. They were fighting a totalitarian turf war, period, in pre WWII Germany. The entire nation was awash in Volksgemeinschaft goodness, cheered on by the polite Social Democrats, the enablers who helped unfetter their state. After they opened the door, the meat eaters showed up and brushed them aside. In Germany, the Nazis prevailed first by waxing violent more effectively. The unfettered state rushed in, the intellectual battlefield had been softened by German pinhead philosophers from the earlier century. America is sprinting into the same cul de sac. And Emperor Godwin can kiss my ass.
| 
