Photo: MattGo74

In the early days of the internet, discussion boards were all the rage. These discussions took place on the Usenet long before chat rooms or blogs even existed. During this time Mike Godwin made a simple observation that people were being maliciously being compared to Hitler or the Nazis across a wide array of topics.

There are some discussions that practically beg for these comparisons – for example arguments pro gun control or censorship (both supported by Hitler). But no matter the topic, as the online discussions grew longer the participants resorted to attacking each others credibility. From there it is a only short and eventual hop to call someone a Nazi.

More generally, reductio ad Hitlerum (dog Latin term – made up Latin to make it sound official) extends this principle beyond the realm of the internet. Comparisons to Hitler and the Nazis show up in all types of debates – even if you think you are in a civilized discussion where such an immature comparison wouldn’t take place.

It was Godwin’s contention that these comparisons only serve to weaken the intended point and make the entire debate look like childish name calling. To quote the great Jay-Z – “A wise man told me don’t argue with fools cause people from a distance can’t tell who is who.”

Herein lies the problem: if you stay in the debate forever a comparison to Hitler will eventually be made and you will look like an idiot, even if you were not the one saying it. The takeaways: avoid YouTube comment debates at all costs, stick to areas of the internet where mostly intelligent people congregate, end the debate as soon as possible, and don’t be surprised if you still end up falling pray to Godwin’s Law of Nazi Analogies.

Read more:

• Wired
• Usenet FAQs
• Wikipedia