Quote:

---

Irrational connections that draw extreme parallels, like your taking the last slice of pizza is like the Nazis invading Poland, is an automatic defeat for your argument.

Godwin's law is often misapplied as "Whoever compares someone to Nazis first loses."

---

Quote:

---

When Mao Jong Il introduced the one child policy in 1983...

---

Quote:

---

If someone knows a rule that explains this point, please post it, but I think "don't be a moron" would be a good one. You know, don't state a fact you're not sure of without looking it up, and the same goes for spelling. Nothing's going to do worse for your argument than starting out
Quote:
When Mao Jong Il introduced the one child policy in 1983...
I hope everyone can spot three problems with that statement right away.
If this rule doesn't exist, I'll make it up, but I suspect its out there and I appreciate if someone could find it, you know, in a classic iconic form that will make me slap my forehead. I'm sure that everyone has seen A-G before. A bonafide netiquette rule should be familiar to most users. If you can't find what you're trying to say in one, make one up, it might be a rule that someone else can fill in, or it could be a brilliant new idea.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
I'd call that rule "FactCheck". Used in collaboration with SpellCheck, it's invaluable. Check your facts, check your sources, and if you aren't sure, say so - say, "IIRC", or "I *think* it was..." or some such.

---

Quote:

---

1) I don't want anyone to feel offended if I don't continue a debate, it's just because I think I'd be wasting everyone's time doing so. The classic cartoon is also just part of common netiquette and I stepped over that line by arguing in meaningless debates. And by meaningless I don't mean that they're meaningless issues, but that it is meaningless to argue them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Geezer,
If someone posted "Evilbush.com" says this, but look, "Evilobama.com" agrees, but it gets even stronger if "jihad.com" and "zion.com" also concur with the first two. At that point I don't necessarily need guardian.co.uk to back it up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
2. Posts that are incredibly wordy - if I have to scroll down a couple of pages, I generally give up. Most people don't write stuff that keeps my attention that long.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Rap

Good point, esp. #2. This is what I was saying I wasn't saying. I'm in 24 hour work mode, currently taking a break because inventory is making my neck hurt.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Some of my dislikes of internet discussions

1. Posting links to videos as an argument
2. Posts that are incredibly wordy - if I have to scroll down a couple of pages, I generally give up. Most people don't write stuff that keeps my attention that long.
3. Derailing a discussion into a critique of debating techniques
4. Posting links that are incredibly biased ie 'here are the stats on gun crime in the US' courtesy of the NRA's website or 9/11conspiracy.com or globalwarmingskeptics.com.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
i also see some 'why can't we all get along' pleas on this site, and while I agree that this is a better forum without insults, trolling and spamming - sometimes posters are going to post stuff that one or other finds offensive and there is going to be some heat in the posts that follow it.

Trying to find common ground isn't the only means of sorting stuff out - [close your eyes here DT - nazi reference following] but if I join a debate with a nazi who thinks that all jews should be exterminated, and we try to find common ground, we might end up agreeing that not all of them should be exterminated, as long as all of them get sent away to the north coast of Alaska, where they can lead impoverished lives in isolation (anyone read The Yiddish Policeman's Union).

Sometimes opinions are so extreme that they don't deserve the debate, only the 'your views are offensive to me in every possible way' kind of comment.

---

Quote:

---

I feel like that about a lot of the far right rhetoric in the US and elsewhere, that it deeply offends me, I disagree on almost every fundamental value and I don't want to find common ground, because that will lead me to lurching to the right and embracing a set of values which in every way goes against who I am.

---

Quote:

---

Me: Yes, you're right, some of our leaders have done manipulative things that have hurt people. OTOH, so have leaders of other groups, am I not right?

Nazi: Okay, you have a point. But Jews are the most destructive influence in the US, maybe the world! If we got rid of them, we'd be free?

Me: All jews? Or particular jews.

Nazi: A fair number.

Me: The majority? Or just a small powerful elite.

Nazi: A small powerful elite.

Me: So, if we removed this small powerful elite, can we be sure that this vacuum would not be filled by someone else?

Nazi: No. But we have to try. It's hard to do worse.

Me: But possible. So, what attracts you to Nazi Germany? Isn't that sort of a losing brand name?

Nazi: Maybe. But I just am. It's an idealistic society.

Me: Up to a point.

Nazi: Well, it's misunderstood.

Me: (conceding a point again) Okay, I'll give you 1934-1937, there was some idealism, and some accomplishments, but surely 1938-1945 ended in disaster.

Nazi: Sure. But it didn't have to be this way.

Me: Yes, it never does. But often it is. Look at Lenin and the Soviet Union, in the early years. Then look how it turned out under Stalin.

Nazi: Why do you compare us to the Soviets?

Me: Not comparing you, just saying the regimes didn't end up the way they intended. Like Mao. Something went wrong. But everyone farms past failures, looking for good ideas. The VW was a good idea, and a good car. But if Toyota is drawing on that idea in creating the Prius, which I think maybe they are, they're not sticking a swastika on the side, or a rising sun.

Nazi: Of course not.

Me: But Toyota is a family business, they're big start was as an industrial power for the Empire of the Rising Sun, like Porsche's Volkswagen they're probably pretty proud of that. Why not commemorate that?

Nazi: Because it would be a stupid business move.

Me: So you concede that it's a losing brand name then. So why are you attracted to it.

Nazi: Hmm. Haven't you ever longed for something that was romantic or idealist? Rather than follow the in the drudgery of a mechanical society?

Me: (For the moment skipping the obvious fact that Nazi Germany was a mechanical drudge society) Yes, sure, I used to be a socialist. I have a Soviet flag in my room. I don't believe that any more, but I used to be pretty into it.

Nazi: Yes, like the USSR (curious reversal) It's the pageantry. It's colorful and beautiful like the ideas, it's the imagery, it's a shame that it ended so badly.

Me: Yes, it's a shame. Shame for the USSR too. So, why did it go badly? Did the Jewish peasantry shoot it down?

Nazi. No, they couldn't.

Me: No, of course not, but that's who died in the holocaust.

Nazi: It's a lie. Not nearly that many Jews died.

Me: Okay, sure, I have no idea how many jews died or didn't, but neither do you, but back to this idea of why Nazi Germany failed.

Nazi: Because Hitler went insane and invaded Russia.

Me: Okay, I'll concede that. It was a major factor.

Nazi: But the ideals themselves weren't bad.

Me: Okay, but even if I concede that, what would happen if you exterminated the Jews today? How would the US respond? Or Britain?

Nazi: I see your point.

Me: And let's say you were successful, would this make you friends in the world? or enemies?

Nazi: Some of each maybe

Me: And would your really get these elders of Zion you think are behind the conspiracy, or would they slip away and redefine themselves as something else?

Nazi: They'd probably slip away those shapeshifting lizardmen.

Me: So perhaps there's a better solution?

Nazi: I guess there has to be.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
DT, I think there is a time for not entering into discussion - for example when a person or group is using violence to force others to do their bidding/ or for the hell of it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
1) There is always time for discussion. Fighting starts when talking stops.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
3) That's fairly exceptional. Most old world Nazis were much more reasonable than their modern counterparts, because they had no idea that they were supporting the holocaust.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Magon

1) There is always time for discussion. Fighting starts when talking stops.

---

Some things are non negotiable as I stated above...

Quote:

---

3) That's fairly exceptional. Most old world Nazis were much more reasonable than their modern counterparts, because they had no idea that they were supporting the holocaust.

---

Nazis and most Germans were au fait with getting rid of the Jews and other 'undesirables'. They participated at all levels of society in persecuting Jews. The old argument that they had no idea of the death camps has been fairly extensively disproven - in so much as it was common knowledge that Jews were being sent east and not returning, that slave labour was acceptable (for Poles and Slavs and Gypsies as well)> Nazi philosophy was quite open on 'eutheniasing' those not worthy, the disabled etc. Jews were routinely hanged and murdered in very public ways. So it wasn't a great leap to make, even if the Final Solution wasn't publicised openly. Current nazis hold no significant power, they may be objectional loonies, but they're not about to invade Poland..

Quote:

---

4) We couldn't have watched Life is Beautiful because it hadn't been made.

---

Really? you surprise me. Here was me thinking it was a documentary made by Leni Riefinstahl.

Quote:

---

5) The Nazis did not really have a shot at world domination.

---

You don't think much of Europe, Asia, the Pacific, North Africa would not have constituted world domination? The Axis was immensely powerful. If Germany hadn't invaded Russia, but continued the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, much of the world would have been in deep shit. Thankfully, Hitler was a pretty terrible tactician and that if he had listen to his generals and not been so obsessed with annihilating the Jewish and Slavic population, they would have had a real chance.

Quote:

---

6) The majority opinion of Nazis was that they should not own anything that did not speak German,

---

You've lost me on that...are you talking about other countries? have you not heard of the Nazi idea of 'Lebensraum'...living space. Their idea was to invade other countries, particularly where the 'subhumans' such as slavic people lived, enslave or exterminate the population so that ordinary Germans could populate those areas. They wanted the land, but the people who lived there were expendable.

Quote:

---

7) The spread of Nazi Germany and the saving of the jews, as well as many more Russians and Poles could have been easily accomplish through an economic treaty that granted them economic self determination.

---

At what point do you think a Treaty should have been entered into? After Hitler was in power or before? Because Adolph had his plans laid out pretty clearly for the Jewish people in Mein Kampf

Quote:

---

The reality is that western powers were salivating at the idea that Germans and Russians would exterminate each other in a genocidal war with a little push, and might cleanse the earth of its jewish infection in the process.

---

Again, when are you talking about? Once Germany reached its pact with Russia and began invading, much of the world was pretty anxious.

Quote:

---

Top among all world leaders ruminating this wet dream nightly was Winston Churchill. FDR would have joined Churchill in bed if he could have. He was too busy focusing on his own Manifest Destiny empire of the Pacific.

---

Yeah, well I have a few problems with Churchill, but I think I can safely say that he well onto the threat that the Nazis posed fairly early on - much before Roosevelt, and wanted to go to war with the Soviets after Germany was defeated, but the general population was pretty curdled on the whole war business.

Damn, a long post.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
That's funny. Because "using violence to force others to do their bidding" is exactly what legislation is all about. And exactly why I oppose GW legislation. By your standards, I probably shouldn't enter into a discussion with yourself.

Very interesting.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
1) There is always time for discussion. Fighting starts when talking stops.

---

I agree completely.

I think talking is especially important for those who value ending violence and force.

How else can you end it?

Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

]I spent some time (several days) talking to a German veteran of WWII. I had never seen things from that point of view before. He had been drafted. He had no choice but to put on that uniform and fight. He said that from time to time, they would hear rumors of extermination camps. At the time, everyone dismissed those claims as urban legends, hoaxes, paranoid nutter conspiracy theories. Their government was many things, but it wouldn't do THAT. The few people who believed those stories were wackos of the lunatic fringe.

I can see how that could happen. I think to paint them all with one broad demonization brush is not quite accurate.

---

I think that a lot of Germans from that era have done a bit of revising of their own. It would be a brave and stupid man who would say, "oh yeah, we knew about the death camps, but we all hated the Jews any anyway we made a lot of money purloining their stuff once they were carted away"

I'm sure there were many Germans who did not support the Nazi position on the Jewish people nad there were Nazis who thought that Hitler was taking things too far, but hatred of the Jews was indoctrinated into the German population - through a very successful propaganda campaign run for many years and particularly through indoctrinating the youth.

Richard J Evans "The Third Reich at War" http://www.amazon.com/Third-Reich-at-War/dp/1594202060 is an excellent account, which makes particular use of primary sources, letters from civilians and soldiers to demonstrate how viciousness and callousness towards other races had been successfully planted within the German psyche of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I've never really understood that idea that legislation = being forced at gunpoint

---

Quote:

---

Again, when are you talking about?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
That's funny. Because "using violence to force others to do their bidding" is exactly what legislation is all about. And exactly why I oppose GW legislation. By your standards, I probably shouldn't enter into a discussion with yourself.

Very interesting.

---

I've never really understood that idea that legislation = being forced at gunpoint

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I've never really understood that idea that legislation = being forced at gunpoint

---

Why not ?

I mean, that's essentially what it IS.

I wrote up a good bit about that here before, about how even a measly parking ticket could, if someone refused to comply, result in a bloody and lethal confrontation, but damned if I can seem to find it at the moment and I don't have time to re-write it this insant...

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
maybe that's the US. I don't see people being forced to comply at gunpoint, unless they themselves are due to committ violence.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I still assert that it's not always possible or desirable to find middle ground on extremist views, but carry on if you will about the history of WW2.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
3) There was a distinct change in power structure and influence that suggests to me a changing of the guard at some level.

The third one is one I need to research. Who changed at what positions that made the swing towards a radical policy change.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Let me give you an example. If you and someone else have an argument about, say GW, and to get their point across they start to beat the crap out of you. Do you keep trying to debate GW with them, or do you get them to stop in anyway you can -

---

Quote:

---

DT, thank you for taking the time to describe this view of WWII history. Some of it was consistent with what I know so far, but there was a lot that I wasn't aware of. It certainly peaks my interest to research it more. Thank you.

---

Quote:

---

I have German friends who complain about the unending demonization of the German people and German WWII politics, esp in movies. I understand their point. After so much vilification, Germany has become a caricature. I think analyses like yours are important understand the complexity of the issues.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
3) There was a distinct change in power structure and influence that suggests to me a changing of the guard at some level.

The third one is one I need to research. Who changed at what positions that made the swing towards a radical policy change.

---

If you ever find this out, please let me know.

---

Quote:

---

I do know that after this change, apparently things got very bad, very quickly. My high school German teacher left Germany at this point and never went back because the country carried too many bad memories.

---

Quote:

---

I am afraid the same type of change might occur in the USA, where it goes from mild to moderate prejudice against Muslims and illegal aliens to radical policies and actions against them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
I also disagree that legislation equals forced at gunpoint. Sure, some legislation would put you in jail, but most legislation involves financial penalties, etc., which is far from gunpoint.

---

Quote:

---

Refusing to comply to a parking ticket would only turn into a “bloodbath” if the person refusing made it so, otherwise it would be a legal matter.

---

Quote:

---

To view it that way would be to say that not fastening my seat belt means a cop would shoot me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Also, piques. Spell check doesn't catch everything.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
I also disagree that legislation equals forced at gunpoint. Sure, some legislation would put you in jail, but most legislation involves financial penalties, etc., which is far from gunpoint.

---

Niki, what happens if I don't pay my "financial penalties"?

Quote:

---

Refusing to comply to a parking ticket would only turn into a “bloodbath” if the person refusing made it so, otherwise it would be a legal matter.

---

OK, let's pursue this. I refuse to comply with my parking ticket. I get a summons to go to court. I am ordered to pay it in court, but I still refuse to pay it. (Now let's assume I am a pacifist and refuse to resort to violence. But I also refuse to pay that parking ticket.)

What happens next?

Quote:

---

To view it that way would be to say that not fastening my seat belt means a cop would shoot me.

---

Eventually, the cop will use violence against me to enforce the seat belt law. He may not shoot me, but he will assault me, kidnap me, and incarcerate me against my will. If I resist being imprisoned with any force at all, even if it is to push back when he pushes me into his kidnap-mobile, he will MOST DEFINITELY put a gun to my head. If I resist with any more force than that, and he WILL shoot me.

That is where the "force" in "enforce" comes in.


--Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

---

Quote:

---

Wow. You’re entitled to your reality, but I’m glad I don’t live in it.

---

Quote:

---

How you believe that an economic treaty could have saved the jews and others is beyond me…

---

Quote:

---

and did you mistype that, or were you actually saying “the spread of Nazi Germany could have been accomplished through economic treaty”? You really believe that?

---

Quote:

---

I also disagree that legislation equals forced at gunpoint.

---

Quote:

---

I might add that many countries in the world don't have police with guns, and still have legislation

---

Quote:

---

That “The holocaust was largely a corporate operation” is well documented; well, I’d question the documentation, I’m afraid.

---

Quote:

---

It’s just not possible with people who are truly extremists; they can’t hear you

---

Quote:

---

they wouldn’t listen if they could; and nothing will change their minds.

---

Quote:

---

It’s commendable that you try, but a flat statement that communication is always possible isn’t logical

---

Quote:

---

I’ve tried to have discussions with any number of them

---

Quote:

---

they respond with insults and attacks, and only repeat their points adamantly, no matter how hard you try to communicate.

---

Quote:

---

I don’t think you could communicate with those of the Wesboro Church, for example.

---

Quote:

---

I didn’t finish your last two posts, DT

---

Quote:

---

I don’t get through many of your threads DT because of their length, and the same for Frem’s, so I don’t expect anyone to necessarily want to get through mine.

---

Quote:

---

Lol. I'm sorry. Allow me to appreciate the absurdity of the situation. I try to pin evil on international corporations, and you insist on pinning it on socialist big government. I think I woke up in bizarro world.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
You make too many assumptions as to what I think and state them as fact. I wish you would stop doing that.

---