Bringing up Godwins Law

For anyone involved in the Manosphere regardless of which group they belong to the word, Feminazi is almost always mentioned in regards to one activity or another done by Feminists these days. In using this word we automatically invoke Godwin’s Law!

Godwin’s law (or Godwin’s rule of Nazi analogies)[1][2] is an Internet adage asserting that “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1[2][3]that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism

When discussing Feminists or SJW’s  (This includes Radical Vegans, Aggros, BLM and a few more)  this law cannot be avoided. The actions of the two groups cannot be discussed without comparing their activities to the Nazis or Fascists. These groups rely heavily on the people that follow them not fact checking.  They also will resort to whatever means possible to silence their opposition. In the case of the Nazis, this meant control of the media apparatus in the 30’s such as it was. (Radio, Newspapers, Films and Books). Television arrived after World War II and in the 60’s the establishments inability to grasp the impact this medium caused a major social upheaval. An upheaval that I was around and alive to see, albeit as it was winding down.

So what are the key differences between what happened in the 30’s in Germany and what’s happening now? The biggest single reason has to be the internet.


Had the internet existed back in 30’s it’s highly unlikely that the Nazi’s would’ve been able to hold on to or stay in power. Simply put too many people would know what they were doing and attempting to censor the actions would’ve ended in abject failure or at best would’ve delayed response time. Had the internet not come into existence we would likely already be staring down the barrel of some fuzzy form of corporate fascism. A totalitarian state that would likely be covered by a mask that’s currently being represented by Feminists and SJW’s.


Sargon of Akkad also did a video where he described how this society would look for most men

If you follow my blog at all you know that I predicted (guessed) that as the tide began to turn against feminists and that moves to silence the opposition would get more blatant. I didn’t count on or expect the doubling down on the rhetoric. Which goes to show how much I don’t know.

I also wrote a blog a few months back about how as the level of desperation increased you were going to see tactics like this, so forgive me for using myself as a reference here

We’re only in February so far and thus far we’ve had the opposition go out and deliver a cheap shot the Men’s Movement FOUR DAYS before Christmas and then the SJW’s used the Star Wars premiere to take a shot at Gamergate DURING the holidays.

But what really flicked the switch was when Twitter started shutting down or in some cases decertifying certain celebrities like Milo Yannapoulos and Daniel Baldwin

Adam Baldwin

Or when Milo Yannapoulos got his account decertified

* for some odd reason I’ve been calling him MILOS and didn’t notice until now.



This is the part where I put on my speculative hat. All of this more or less applies to Twitter at the moment as they’ve been the ones most actively pursuing this issue. That doesn’t mean that the other social media sites can’t or won’t follow suit in this.

We had and still have all of the above going on right around the time that the Gregory Alan Elliot verdict was about to be delivered. In fact, most of this stuff started within a couple of weeks of this verdict. Fortunately, for all involved the verdict came back as not guilty

We also had the formation of the “Trust and Safety Council” shortly after this verdict was rendered.

But that is not all, not by a longshot. We also had the almost spontaneous attack done on Roosh V earlier in February as well. Regardless of how you feel about Roosh V when you look a little closer at what was happening in the background around this there’s very little doubt that someone or a group of people organized this backlash and there was nothing spontaneous about it.

Roosh V analytics

Thus on the heels of what was probably the hardest shot that feminism had taken. The Regressives* were able to swing their first victory in months. This victory though was more of a tactical retreat by Roosh in the face of sudden and overwhelming opposition.

*Regressives is likely the term I’ll be using to describe this group from now on I like the term and it fits and isn’t nearly as wordy and Feminist/SJW

So this is the scenario that I think might’ve been happening. I have to point out that while I’m not big on conspiracy theories there are a hell of a lot of coincidences that can lead someone to believe that there was a conspiracy afoot here. Draw your own conclusions though.

What some person or persons at Twitter and possibly some other social media sites were doing here were pre-empting the Gregory Alan Elliot verdict. Twitter was in effect going to use the verdict as a reason to openly crack down on what’s rapidly becoming a very large and loud group of opponents to a Cultural Marxist Agenda*. How best to do this you ask? Well a guilty verdict in the Gregory Alan Elliot case would’ve provided all the justification they needed to start a ‘Trust and Safety Council’

*Oops sorry I said I wasn’t going to get all conspiratorial but like I’ve already said DAMN there are a lot of coincidences 

Then you the ‘spontaneous’ reaction against Roosh V. Had Gregory Alan Elliot been judged guilty the Regressives this group could’ve then used this as leverage to not only openly harass Roosh V and his supporters but also potentially to put some of them in jail for pretty much the same reason that Gregory would’ve been in jail at that time. I’m a not huge fan of Roosh V by a long shot but if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck.

So in effect, the plan with Gregory Alan Elliot verdict was to use the guilty verdict to crack down on the opposition in a more open and blatant matter. Had the verdict gone against Gregory Alan Elliot we would now be on the other end of an organized counterattack. This would’ve also affected the Men’s Convention in London this June.

Now am I being crazy? Well just for the record there’s a case of a politician organizing a unilateral action in case a decision went his way. I was living in the country it happened in. Those of you who were around for the 1995 Quebec Referendum will remember this quite well


In this referendum, which the separatists almost won. Lucien Bouchard had taken steps to just unilaterally leave Canada after the vote.,_1995

This is where we get back to the Nazis which is where we got started. Almost everyone is familiar with the Reichstag Fire and The Reichstag Fire Decree

Reichstag fire
The burning of the Reichstag 1933. Germany / Mono Print

The Nazi’s used the fire to pass a decree against certain parties in the government that were opposing them.

So the question now is how many coincidences do there have to be before you start dismissing coincidence in regards to what Twitter was doing and is still doing, versus what the Nazis did during the thirties?

Not convinced yet here’s yet another video from Sargon of Akkad on this matter.


Going to say this as bluntly as I can here folks, We dodged a bullet here! Bringing up Godwins Law in this situation is entirely justified.




2 thoughts on “Bringing up Godwins Law

  1. Was it a conspiracy? Of course it was! Conspiracies are when people conspire, duh. Happens all the time. There are two important questions to ask:

    1 – were the plans made in *secret*? That is, not publicaly scrutable? This is the litmus test of whether something was or was not a conspiracy. The problem here is that secrecy is not a yes-or-no question. You don’t have to have private meetings in order to conduct your business away from prying eyes. You can conceal what you are doing under a barrage of internet noise, or by using a special jargon impenetrable to outsiders (eg: feminists, muslims, lawyers and lawmakers, scientologists – the list goes on).

    2 – were plans being made to do something *illegal*? Unfortunately, “illegal” is tricky (problematic?) on the internet. Let’s say “unethical”, or “dishonest”. Considering that these people often protest about being silenced, and their intent is to silence people, we can toss “hypocritical” in there, too.


    1. Paul I like everything you post up. Curiously enough EVERYTHING that the Nazis did in the 30’s was legal according to the laws that they themselves had written. So legal can and has been a very loose term in the past


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s