Chambers wrote:
> In theory, democratic governments are meant to represent the will of the
> people*.

That's why we have a constitutional republic here, rather than a democracy.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> Darren New wrote:
>>> Chambers wrote:
>>>> I'd be interested in knowing, who do you think had a significant
>>>> negative effect on society by not being censored?
>>> Hitler?
>> Godwin's law, here we go?
> 
> 	Godwin's Law does not imply a faulty argument.

But it does imply *comparing* someone to Hitler, rather than simply 
referencing Hitler as an example of ... well, Hitler.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

somebody wrote:
>> In other words, Germany as a societal whole had been moving towards the
>> Holocaust for some time.
> 
> You can say the same thing for positive changes as well. Society as a whole
> has been moving towards democracy, freedom, equality... etc. In other words,
> no individual had a significant positive effect on society by not being
> censored.

Yes. If you're going to discount my Hitler example, I'll say "Ehn. Martin 
Luther King wasn't any great deal. People were moving towards equal rights 
even before him."

Hitler was generally acknowledged to be a wonderful orator. (Actually, our 
governor got in trouble once saying he admired Hitler's skills at oration.) 
We might have had the holocaust, the war, etc, but I suspect it would not 
have gone on as long or been quite so terrible had Hitler not inspired the 
german people to keep it up for as long.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

On 23-Dec-08 18:30, Darren New wrote:
> somebody wrote:
>>> In other words, Germany as a societal whole had been moving towards the
>>> Holocaust for some time.
>>
>> You can say the same thing for positive changes as well. Society as a 
>> whole
>> has been moving towards democracy, freedom, equality... etc. In other 
>> words,
>> no individual had a significant positive effect on society by not being
>> censored.
> 
> Yes. If you're going to discount my Hitler example, I'll say "Ehn. 
> Martin Luther King wasn't any great deal. People were moving towards 
> equal rights even before him."

And that weasel of a Mandela, apartheid would have ended anyway. 
Probably with less blood shedding.

> Hitler was generally acknowledged to be a wonderful orator. (Actually, 
> our governor got in trouble once saying he admired Hitler's skills at 
> oration.) We might have had the holocaust, the war, etc, but I suspect 
> it would not have gone on as long or been quite so terrible had Hitler 
> not inspired the german people to keep it up for as long.

I read your 'Hitler' also as a sort of pars pro toto for the whole group 
around him including e.g. the propaganda group.

Post a reply to this message

On 23-Dec-08 1:03, Chambers wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mueen Nawaz [mailto:m.n### [at] ieeeorg]
>> 	If you want to invoke this, you have to provide a sense of all
>> those
>> people who did likewise and had a negative effect on society, which I
>> suspect occurred much more frequently than the people you speak of.
> 
> I'd be interested in knowing, who do you think had a significant
> negative effect on society by not being censored?
> 
> 
> ...Ben Chambers
> www.pacificwebguy.com
> 
Osama bin Laden?

Is there already a Godwin type law for him?

Post a reply to this message

andrel wrote:
> Osama bin Laden?
> 
> Is there already a Godwin type law for him?

	It's known as the Second Form of Godwin's Law.

-- 
Cut my pizza in six slices, please; I can't eat eight.


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

On 24-Dec-08 7:10, Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> Osama bin Laden?
>>
>> Is there already a Godwin type law for him?
> 
> 	It's known as the Second Form of Godwin's Law.

Can't find much confirmation for that. None at all actually. ;)

Post a reply to this message

> -----Original Message-----
> From: andrel [mailto:a_l### [at] hotmailcom]
> On 24-Dec-08 7:10, Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> > andrel wrote:
> >> Osama bin Laden?
> >>
> >> Is there already a Godwin type law for him?
> >
> > 	It's known as the Second Form of Godwin's Law.
> 
> Can't find much confirmation for that. None at all actually. ;)

I don't believe you.  You're as bad as Bin Laden!

...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

andrel wrote:
>>     It's known as the Second Form of Godwin's Law.
> 
> Can't find much confirmation for that. None at all actually. ;)

	See povray.off-topic, message ID: <4951d23b$1@news.povray.org>

	I'd add it to Wikipedia, but unfortunately this newsgroup is not easily
accessible by the public and hence people will needlessly dispute the
reference. Not my battle if people insist on acting like Stalin...

-- 
Cut my pizza in six slices, please; I can't eat eight.


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> I'd add it to Wikipedia, but unfortunately this newsgroup is not easily
> accessible by the public and hence people will needlessly dispute the
> reference. Not my battle if people insist on acting like Stalin...

Plus off-topic posts expire much faster than in other groups in this server.

Post a reply to this message