This is something that could probably go in Great Debates or maybe The Pit. I really wanted to put it in GQ, because I’d really like a factual answer, but based on the nature of what I’m going to ask, I don’t really think that’s likely, and I’m not really that certain that there is a factual answer at this time.
So, Godwinizing a discussion, comparing someone who is participating, that you disagree with, to Hitler and
or nazis, and thus ending any possible hope for a reasonable talk. That’s my basic understanding.
Is there a similar principle(in the US at least) for trump?
I think the political Trump is too new for this yet. Twenty years from now, after he is discredited and his supporters go elsewhere or hide themselves, such a conversation tactic may evolve.
That’s somewhat surprising in a limited sort of way. Certain segments of the population would have picked this up by now among themselves at least, I would have thought. Not surprising so much for the population at large.
When or if it happens, I wonder what it will be called, trumps derivative? The maga principle? Hitlerizing? No way to know until we get there I suppose
There’s a similar idea for any evil person or group, really. It’s just that Hitler/Nazis happens to top the list.
I’ve been told before on this very board that something I said was going to help Trump win, with literally no other response to my points. And it was a rather weird response given that said poster was taking the same position Trump himself takes on said issue, while I was taking the opposite.
And since that was their only response, without any response to the actual logic I used, that did pretty much end my hope for a reasonable talk about the subject. But that was more due to the lack of actual counterargument.
I actually tend to believe that this means they didn’t have a counterargument but still felt compelled to reply anyways. But I believe that about most low-content replies. If I say something you so strongly disagree with, I would expect you’d want to give an actual counter if you could actually think of one.
The problem is that if one is never allowed to make a comparison to the Nazis, that makes it very hard to prevent Nazism or its equivalent from taking hold again.
I believe Godwin himself has said [ETA: not in these exact words] that what he meant was that making inaccurate comparisons, claiming somebody is behaving like a fascist only because you disagree with them and not because they actually are, is a bad idea and ends hope for a reasonable talk; but that it is indeed reasonable talk to point out when someone is, indeed, doing what the Nazis did.
We now seem to instead have some people trying to ‘end[ . . .] any possible hope for a reasonable talk’ by shouting Godwin, even if the people being discussed are not only behaving like fascists but also waving around Nazi symbols while they do it.
thorny, you gave a better, more detailed description than I did. Thank you, I tend to leave out a lot of details sometimes for brevity, not thinking that sometimes some people might need those details.
And your synopsis of how it seems to be used quite a bit these days also seems spot on to me
Well, in my op I said people making the comparison to hitler/nazis, but Thorny Locust pointed out that there does seem to be a tendency for some to complain about godwinizing, legitimately or not, to effectively end the discussion, so a bit of both I’d say. I dare not to hazard a guess as to how the numbers tally up on who is doing the accusing and who is doing the comparing.
He seems to have tired of the constant, lazy/casual Nazi comparisons watering down their meaning and impact, and wished that people would save them for when thoughtful analysis showed they were apt. In the process, it would also improve discussions about things not of a Nazi-like nature.
The problem is, people have an awfully low threshold for wanting to use a Nazi comparison. It’s like an arachnophobe being handed a can of spider-killing spray and seeing a spider, but having first been instructed, “Don’t spray every spider; only spray if it’s a nasty spider.” By that arachnophobe 's criteria, every spider is nasty.
Similarly, to someone who is already naturally deeply opposed to the other side’s viewpoints (whatever they may be), everything already looks Nazi-ish.
Invoking Nazis, Hitler or fascism is a temptation that lazy debaters can’t resist, so it’s not impossible that “Trumpist” or similar appellations will come into use, just unlikely on any routine basis. As with Bush II, the perception of Utter Evil isn’t sufficient to long survive Trump’s tenure (assuming no second term, or major consequential meltdown before the new Pres. takes office).
-Maybe Godwin does us a favor. A ‘you-know-who rally’ recalls Hitler at Nuremberg. But, Hitler was really good at it and ‘you-know-who’ is such a bungling amateur. Kayleigh McEnany is not Lennie Riefenstahl and Pence is hardly Donitz. So, our comparisons are weak at best.
Not sure if 20 years is enough, but I’m going to expand on that. Trump was part of a wave of “populist” elections - Brexit; Johnson; Trump; Bolsonaro; etc. I think the entire MOVEMENT is going to have it’s own “Godwin” parallel. It could be around the movement; it could be around social media; it could be around foreign interference, especially through social media. It’s not going to be soon; that type of introspection takes time. 20 years will be the least amount of time before the general population goes “What were we thinking???” Remember - much of the populist support for Trump right now is coming from white supremacists and their ilk, and that’s been “answered” how many years ago? Heck, the Supreme Court decided that systemic racism is no longer an issue and that all states were free to change their voting requirements…
I’m going to predict that in 20 years, there’s still going to be a HUGE block of “Trump Supporters”, and that the Godwin parallel won’t happen for 40 years.
That is why I call his administration the Cosplayer Nazi one. Still thinks that there are lots of “nice people” among the fascist supporters.
As Godwin puts it:
But Mr Godwin has said that the white nationalists who took over the streets of Charlottesville over the weekend can fairly be compared to Nazis, given that many of them openly voice support for a Nazi ideology.
“By all means, compare these shitheads to the Nazis,” he wrote. “Again and again. I’m with you.”
He also said: "If you’re thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler when you talk about Trump, or any other politician.”
But what about the people that say that they would rather be a Jew in Nazi Germany than a Person of Color in Trumps America? Have we now gone past Godwin?
Nobody is more politically opposed to Trump than I am. But – What has Trump actually done, as serving president, that has materially harmed America or the well-being of Americans? This does not mean speculative executive acts that someone else might have don better, but things he actually did that caused harm.