Godwin's Law (also known as
Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)
[1] is a humorous observation coined by
Mike Godwin in 1990, and which has become an
Internet adage. It states: "As a
Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving
Nazis or
Hitler approaches 1."
[2][3]
Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a deterrent against the use of arguments in the widespread
reductio ad Hitlerum form. The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to
Adolf Hitler or the
Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that the likelihood of such a reference or comparison arising increases as the discussion progresses. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued,
[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.
Although in one of its early forms Godwin's Law referred specifically to
Usenet newsgroup discussions,
[5] the law is now applied to any
threaded online discussion:
electronic mailing lists,
message boards,
chat rooms, and more recently
blog comment threads and
wiki talk pages.
There are many
corollaries to Godwin's law, some considered more
canonical (by being adopted by Godwin himself)
[2] than others invented later.
[1] For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever
debate was in progress. This principle itself is frequently referred to as Godwin's Law. It is considered poor form to raise such a comparison arbitrarily with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized
codicil that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin's law will be unsuccessful (this is sometimes referred to as "Quirk's Exception").
[6]
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. The corollaries of the law would presumably not apply to discussions covering
genocide,
propaganda, or other mainstays of the
Nazi Germany, or – more debatably – to discussion of other
totalitarian regimes. Whether it applies to humorous use or references to oneself is open to interpretation, because although mentioning and trivializing Nazism in an online discussion, this would not be a fallacious attack against a debate opponent.
However, Godwin's Law itself can be abused, as a distraction, diversion or even censorship, that fallaciously
miscasts an opponent's argument as
hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate. A 2005
Reason magazine article argued that Godwin's Law is often misused to ridicule even valid comparisons.
[7]
?
