• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Using Hitler as a tool in argumentation and debate

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It is perhaps a good thing to remind ourselves of Hitler and the Nazis from time to time.
Their route to power and methods of control are well documented. and they still have have thier imitators, as their methods do work.
It is a lesson and comparison that bears repeating.
I plan to watch Jojo Rabbit.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
It is perhaps a good thing to remind ourselves of Hitler and the Nazis from time to time.
Their route to power and methods of control are well documented. and they still have have thier imitators, as their methods do work.
It is a lesson and comparison that bears repeating.

Of course, but that is a different topic
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Of course, but that is a different topic
And it shouldn't be over-done.
So many of our friends on the left feared that Trump would
be the next Hitler, & predicted that we'd all be goose stepping,
invading Poland, & firing up the ovens by now. Well, that
hysteria has largely passed, but it was an unhealthy stressful
time for them.
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
1. Why do people do this? What is the point?

To justify a questionable base, to gain supporters, to enrage, to prevent thinking, lack of historical knowledge, to insult, etc.

2. Does using Hitler in the context of modern politics display an ignorance of history, WW2, who Hitler was and the nation he ruled?

Yes and no. Could be targeted to undermine another position, could be to produce outrage, gain support and prevent actual thinking and discussion, could be lack of knowledge as to who and what Hitler and World War II

3. Could it have the effect of distorting history?

I don't know, that is a good question

4. Does a comparison to Hitler justify and validate any number of attitudes and political actions (up to and including violence, torture, and assassination) which wouldn't normally be considered justified against an ordinary human being?

No, I don't think it justifies any action. I think it is used more to undermine that justify, an attempt to produce an indefensible position. Person A refers to Person B as Hitler thereby opening the door to attack anyone who supports Person B as supporting Hitler, thereby putting supporters in a position of having to now defend themselves

5. Does one side play the Hitler card more than the other? Or are both sides (left and right) equally guilty of using it to suit their ends?

Don't think so, it all depends on who is in power politically at the time. Those in power are more likely to be compared to Hitler by those who are not

6. Does Hitler give a good name to war?

Nothing gives a good name to war, especially Hitler
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Several reasons.

Hitler was a legit threat to the free world and the fact remains that he almost won.

One could say WW2 was the apex mother of all wars and the sober lessons of allowing a rouge country to accumulate so much military power.

To me the biggest lesson psychological: why people followed him to ruin. There are things being done today with lies that are to me the same as the propaganda techniques employed back then.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
To me the biggest lesson psychological: why people followed him to ruin. There are things being done today with lies that are to me the same as the propaganda techniques employed back then.
Here we go again....
everyone-i-dont-like-is-hitler-the-emotional-childs-the-25434153.png
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
I think most of us are familiar with Godwin's Law, but for those who haven't: Godwin's law - Wikipedia

It comes up in a variety of different contexts, but much of the time it's brought up in the context of international relations and how we deal with other countries. We might single out some leader of some rogue nation, declare that he's "just like Hitler," and this somehow justifies any number of hostile or violent actions against them or their country. (i.e. "what if we could have used a drone to kill Hitler?")

It's also used in arguments and debates regarding domestic politics, as our current president has often been associated with Hitler.

So, my questions to the peanut gallery are as follows:

1. Why do people do this? What is the point?
Godwin's Law simply doesn't hold. I don't know how long a discussion has to go on for before it invalidates the law, but there have been discussions here with over three thousand posts and nary a single mention of Hitler. Simply stated, it's no law at all, but a silly assertion.

.
 
Last edited:

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
To me the biggest lesson psychological: why people followed him to ruin. There are things being done today with lies that are to me the same as the propaganda techniques employed back then.

Propaganda.....then the comparison should be to Goebbels, not Hitler
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
I think most of us are familiar with Godwin's Law, but for those who haven't: Godwin's law - Wikipedia

It comes up in a variety of different contexts, but much of the time it's brought up in the context of international relations and how we deal with other countries. We might single out some leader of some rogue nation, declare that he's "just like Hitler," and this somehow justifies any number of hostile or violent actions against them or their country. (i.e. "what if we could have used a drone to kill Hitler?")

It's also used in arguments and debates regarding domestic politics, as our current president has often been associated with Hitler.

So, my questions to the peanut gallery are as follows:

1. Why do people do this? What is the point?

2. Does using Hitler in the context of modern politics display an ignorance of history, WW2, who Hitler was and the nation he ruled?

3. Could it have the effect of distorting history?

4. Does a comparison to Hitler justify and validate any number of attitudes and political actions (up to and including violence, torture, and assassination) which wouldn't normally be considered justified against an ordinary human being?

5. Does one side play the Hitler card more than the other? Or are both sides (left and right) equally guilty of using it to suit their ends?

6. Does Hitler give a good name to war?
Hitler has been propped up into being this one-dimensional catch-all demon that all sides pin their fears on. He's a caricature at this point and it's silly.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Godwin's Law simply doesn't hold. I don't know how long a discussion has to go on for before it invalidates the law, but there have been discussions here with over three thousand posts and nary a single mention of Hitler. Simply stated, it's no law at all, but a silly assertion.
You're taking it too seriously.
It's not rocket science.....it's humorous commentary.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Then I'm clearly a victim of Poe's law. :oops:

.
I considered that, but discarded it.
Searching the internet for a law about humorous laws being
treated as strictly as the laws of physics, I couldn't find one.
I propose....
Skwim's Law
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I think most of us are familiar with Godwin's Law, but for those who haven't: Godwin's law - Wikipedia

It's a nice way of saying you've "lost" the argument.

Anyway, all that aside... Hitler wasn't the worst guy on the planet at least his cruelty stopped with those whom he considered German, or closely related people. (Like Austrians, etc...) You have situations in the modern day like Iran, China, or North Korea where even that doesn't matter. Say the wrong thing and in either place and even if you're a native or of some certain pure blood of race or origin you're still getting your *** kicked. Also, worth mentioning that while Hitler is blamed for a lot of atrocity much of it was at the hands of his lieutenants and not within his daily purview. Hitler himself was a nationalist, a socialist, and very progressive. He loved animals and was a vegan. Though certainly the war had taken a toll on his mental stability and it's hard to say how much of what happened in the late years of the war was by his hands or someone else's. I'm guessing someone else's based on his personal troubles that would have effectively made him unable to be anything more than a figurehead at that juncture.

As for political leanings, I've never actually heard many people on the center or right invoking Hitler to make their point. It seems to be a bleeding heart leftist thang... :D
 
Top