5 ms·
Are Nazi analogies to be rejected out of hand, even when grounded in fact? How does this hurt the conversation, in your view?
by okal 12y ago
Are Nazi analogies to be rejected out of hand, even when grounded in fact? How does this hurt the conversation, in your view?
- davidw 12y agoPolitics are off topic here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6120530 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6120530 You have the whole internet to talk about politics - do you really need to wreck this site with this stuff? Also, haven't you people ever heard of Godwin's law?
- geographomics 12y agoThat link is about appropriate submissions, not the comments below the submissions. As this article has already been upvoted over 200 times (implying some interest from hackers), trying to stifle further discussion is rather a lost cause.
- okal 12y agoThe guidelines don't unequivocally support your position, IMHO. Your comment, though, makes a good case for it. I'll stop now, since this is getting off-topic, but I appreciate you taking the time to clarify your stand. EDIT: I think everyone on HN has heard of Godwin's Law. It's useful, but can also be a lazy way to quash meaningful discussion.
- davidw 12y agoHonest question: on average, how much "meaningful discussion" happens after you make a Nazi comparison, even if you happen to be correct?
- okal 12y agoOn average? Not a lot, I'd imagine. But it occasionally will. This tangent we've gone on off on, for example, though I'm not sure you'd agree. I think @hemantv's assertion would have served the discussion better had it been framed as a question: "Isn't this a lot like the Nuremberg defense?", for example.
- npizzolato 12y agoIt was going fine here until you started whining about someone mentioning the Nazis. This went off topic because of you, not him.