GWB Invokes Godwin’s Law, Loses.

In lieu of our usual FMLS, I bring you just one link.

BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5318204.stm

George Bush apparently has never heard of the InterTubes or at least does not know about Godwin’s law, which is that if you invoke Hitler or Nazis in order to win an argument that has nothing to do with Hitler or Nazis and/or mention Hitler or Nazis for the purpose of hyperbole or a straw man argument, you invalidate your argument and lose.

Admittedly, this is a fine line to skate. You can validly use Hitler, Nazis, or The Holocaust in an argument about said subjects, or in which the subject himself is one of the above. Margaret says:

Godwin’s law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one’s opponent) with Hitler or Nazis or their actions. It does not apply to discussions directly addressing genocide, propaganda, or other mainstays of the Nazi regime.

Therefore, saying, for example, that Pol Pot was Cambodia’s Hitler, does not invoke Godwin’s law and therefore negate the argument. Saying, for example, that if pacifists who believe war is always wrong were alive in the 1940s, Hitler would rule the world, does. It is a straw man being tossed about to stir up feelings and evade the actual argument, which is a pro vs. con of pacifism and war/conflict. Unless, of course, it isn’t and the argument is one of time and space and we’re talking about time travel where the pacifist would travel back in time to try and kill Hitler, but then the argument would be about Hitler and Godwin’s law would not apply.

Having said all that, this week, George Bush took Godwin’s Law and thrust it into real life: “Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them,” he said.

One may, of course, argue that this is a valid comparison like the Pol Pot example above, except for the following:

1. Osama Bin Laden has not committed genocide.
2. Osama Bin Laden is not the leader of a country or a significant number of people. In fact, but most accounts, Al Qaeda isn’t even a threat anymore.
3. Osama Bin Laden is impotent. Well, power-wise. He releases a videotape (what, you can’t go digital and put it on YouTube? Some terrorist!) and we sit and wait. And wait. And wait some more. Nothing happens because his words do not mean anything. He’s just like the crazy old homeless man on the street who used to be somebody, a contender perhaps, but is now just a crazy old man who lives out in the elements spouting out non-sensical rhetoric.

“I personally don’t believe Al Qaeda exists as a robust organization anymore.” –Wayne White, a former Bush Administration top intelligence official for the State Department.

A more apt comparison for Bin Laden would be a bunny boiler, like Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction: he had this great and massive love affair with the United States when we used Afghanistan to fight the Russians we didn’t like, but then we left him for wars on other fronts, used up and wasted. Like a Kleenex: soft, strong, and disposable. And like every jilted woman, Bin Laden wants payback, except instead of being short and feminine, this is a hulking 6′6″ guerrilla fighter we’ve fucked and run from, and the man’s going to have his revenge, served cold. He doesn’t care about dozens of virgins in some metaphysical paradise; he wants his love back, and if he can’t have us (US), then no one can!

Now, see, that is an apt comparison to strike fear in the hearts of men. Few of us alive today were alive for Hitler, but damn, we know about Fatal Attraction! Watch out, Michael Douglas, he’s coming for you!!!