Bryan Fischer's Godwin on Steroids

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
              - Godwin's Law, the main corollary of which is that the first person to invoke a Nazi comparison loses by forfeit.  I also use it as a verb, as in "to Godwin a discussion".

If we were holding to that standard, Bryan Fischer (and indeed the whole Teabagger movement) would have lost the debate by Godwinning long ago.  However, on Tuesday Fischer, as he does with so many things, cranked the Godwin up to 11 with this epic screed [TW gratuitous Nazi comparisons and vicious anti-gay fearmongering]:
I mean, ladies and gentlemen, they are Nazis. Homosexual activists, when it comes to freedom of speech, are Nazis. When it comes to freedom of religion, they are Nazis. ... Ladies and gentlemen, they are Nazis. Do not be under any illusions about what homosexual activists will do with your freedoms and your religion if they have the opportunity. They'll do the same thing to you that the Nazis did to their opponents in Nazi Germany.
Wow.  Just...wow.  I mean, SIX instances of the word Nazi in six sentences.  Clearly Fischer means business.  Srs bizness.  Of the bearing-no-resemblance-to-reality-or-logic variety.

The AFA yet again tried to get its pet runaway train under control; of course, since it was on his radio show, they couldn't just edit it like they do to his blog posts.  So instead, they simply removed the video from their archive.  Unfortunately, as I keep trying to remind people, once you're on the internet as having said something, it's on the record forever, no matter how much deleting or redacting you try to do.

Of course, Fischer didn't help matters by going on another unhinged rant Wednesday about DADT, how the "homosexual lobby" (immaculately decorated, natch) is "just like the Nazis", and how any soldier who "[says] a word of complaint about homosexual behavior" will be, I'm not even fucking kidding, "sent to a reeducation camp ... to get your brain washed ... you're not getting out of that room until you crumble and admit you support sexual deviancy ... that's where it's going in the military."

How long before AFA finally wises up and drops this fuckbag like a ton of bricks?  How long before right-wing politicians stop appearing on his show?  Why the fuck is anyone fucking legitimizing such raw hatred and bigotry?


VijiiS said...

IDK what's up with people nowadays. Yes, everyone is  Nazi. =.=

I know I once heard someone call Barney Frank a Nazi. LMAO@Nazifying a GAY JEW. For the love of all that is holy, people need to think before they speak.

Jadelyn said...

 I...that...Um.  Very, very special.  >.<

Sonneillon said...

 This is something that frustrates me a lot about some of the older people in the public, political sphere... they are not up to snuff on the rules.  Way back when Fischer FIRST compared teh gays to nazis, I rolled my eyes and said "Godwin, you lose."  And then he kept doing it.  And KEPT DOING IT.  And at that point it occurred to me that the younger generations have updated the rules of a civil debate, and the internet has been instrumental in that, but those rule changes have gone all but unnoticed by the people who are running our country, which at times creates a situation where it is impossible to even visualize speaking to these people  because the conversation would degenerate within five minutes to printing out a copy of 'Derailing for Dummies' and beating the hapless politician about the head with it.

That means that many times, when I watch politicians go at it, I feel like I'm watching toddlers have a schoolyard brawl.  Their techniques are akin to rubbing sand in the face, pulling hair, shoving, and stealing a lollipop just to step on it, and I am consistently throwing my hands in the air and going, "Are you fucking kidding me?"  They wonder why after the 2008 election young people seem so disinterested in going to the polls?  Besides a general disappointment in our elected officials, I think this may be a contributing reason.  We are internet generations; we know the rules, and our civil leaders do not.  This leads to many situations in which we are so embarrassed and frustrated with their complete lack of understanding, the only recourse is to turn off the TV, close the tab, or walk away.

Jadelyn said...

 *standing ovation* Bravissima.  Yes.  Also, I love the mental image of a physical copy of Derailing for Dummies to throw at someone's head.  ^_^

Ryan said...

Coming, as it is, from someone who is very conscious of language, and who endeavors to avoid words that may demean or cause offense, your use of the blatently insulting and perforative term 'teabagger' strikes me as odd.

Jadelyn said...

1: I think you mean "pejorative".  I certainly hope my words haven't perforated anyone.

2: I am very conscious of my language and careful to avoid using language that is based in devaluing and oppressing the pieces of a person's self and identity.  Things like sexual orientation, gender identity, gender, race, ethnicity, etc.  Politics are not that kind of trait.  Being a Teabagger (or "Tea Partier" if you prefer) is a choice.  Additionally, calling Teabaggers, Teabaggers does not in any way contribute to systemic oppression of Tea Party members, which is the main concern of mine when I choose not to use oppressive language.  Insults are not always oppressive language, and I do not appreciate the attempt to language-police me (via concern-trolling, no less!) on my own goddamn blog like this.

3: You do realize that the Tea Party, at its inception, actually embraced the term Teabaggers themselves, stemming from their first organized act as a movement, which was to send thousands of teabags to various Congressional offices?  The term only fell out of favor and became an overt insult once they realized the other meaning of the term. 

4: Also, I just flat out don't respect the Teabagger movement enough to call them by their preferred name.  A movement which trades in referring to their opposition as Nazis and making fried-chicken-and-watermelon jokes about the President of the United States simply because he is black, is a movement which does not deserve the respect of my using their proper name.  When the movement grows up and stops acting like a collection of children having a tantrum because the President is a black man, then I'll think about using their proper name.  Until then, Teabaggers they shall stay.  It suits them.

Ryan said...

Yeah, posting via phone does lead to some silly typos. Sorry bout that.

You make good points. And while the analogy is not nearly perfect, I am now curious. What's your opinion of the term "Obamacare"?

Jadelyn said...

Ah, posting via phone.  I understand that; I refer to my iPhone as "a handheld internet machine that sometimes makes phone calls". ;-)

As for "Obamacare", I dislike it, mostly because it's wildly inaccurate.  So-called "Obamacare" is not some new healthcare system, which is what the term Obamacare is meant to imply - riffing on the construction of terms like Medicare - it is, rather, a set of reforms to the current health insurance industry.  I personally refuse to even refer to it as health-CARE reform, but call it what it more accurately is, health-INSURANCE reform.  The term "Obamacare" is used to invoke fears of single-payer systems, what they like to call "socialized medicine" (and why that's something to fear is beyond me, tbh; I *wish* we had a healthcare system like Canada or something), by making it sound like a single-payer healthcare system.  Which it just isn't, nor anything close.

tl;dr version: it's a deeply inaccurate and fearmongering term, and I strongly dislike it for those reasons. 

Ryan said...

I agree. but also, I see it as a term that is intended to be disparaging and produce a negative connotation, without actually making any arguments. Every time I hear a Repbulican commentator using the term, I tune them out. I think it's a cheap shot. And it's the same way I view the term teabagger. It's a cheap shot at the expense of the ha-ha-dumb-Right-Wingers-who-don't-know-what-it-means. It's insulting, and has an inherently negative connotation, but doesn't actually make any argument. And I think it's degrading to anyone who uses it. It's beneath you.

Anyone has every right to keep using it, sure, but it definitely affects my opinion of anyone I hear it from.

Jadelyn said...

You are of course welcome to your opinion, and welcome to tune me out if you like.  You are not, however, welcome to concern-troll my choice of language on my own fucking blog, no matter how nicely you phrase it (and really, style points to you; it was very subtle and well-done concern-trolling, one of the best I've seen).  I've explained my multiple reasons why I choose to use the term Teabagger.  Don't like it, don't read my blog. 


Related Posts with Thumbnails