The Big Lie

Tell a big enough lie long enough and people will believe it. -- Stitches 77

All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true within itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big liethan the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

—Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X^[1]

If you tell a big enough lie and do it long enough, you can fool the ignorant masses to do believing damn near anything. Each of the groups and people targeted by this blog have not only bought the BIG LIE, they help propagate it. In the case of the closely knit groups tied to Absolute Zero United, the CREATE the BIG LIE.

The easiest way for Hitler to silence the Jews was to dehumanize them and blame them for everything under the sun, praying on the general fear and inorance of a people still recovering from WW1. AZU type groups attack by dehumanizing, comparing all opponents to "NAMBLA". Consider the following statement from Stitches 77:

Patty Wetterling's "crime" that drew the ire of AZU? She released an article calling for reforming sex offender laws. It is a common tactic to dehumanize someone by comparing them to the worst possible person out there. Ironically the man who made this technique popular is the the person most point to as the most evil person in history. This is the person AZU mimics the most, after all. 

"These teens were caught having consensual relations with each other!
Quick, brand them as sex offenders, then deny we do it!"

Each group I tagged have done the same, exploiting the fear and ignorance of the populace for fame and fortune. People believe those lies, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. However, there will come a time when people begin to see through those lies and see the truth behind the Big Lie. For the Germans, it took utter humiliation and their misdeeds exposed for the world to see. 

Thankfully, people are beginning to see the truth. Maybe that is why most of these groups, except the NCMEC, are considered fringe groups with few members and little support. Stand up to the BIG LIE and demand the truth.

Today's word lesson: hyperbole

hy·per·bo·le   [hahy-pur-buh-lee]
noun Rhetoric .
1.
obvious and intentional exaggeration.
2.
an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.”

Today's showcase is hyperbole. Hyperbole is an exaggerated statement. You see a lot of that on the AZU website or during those rare times the trolls venture from their little nests. See the following statement from Stitches 77, the queen of cognitive distortions:

AZU intentionally looks for the numbers that look the largest and run with it, despite having no references, only exaggerations. That is why armchair vigilantes cannot understand the complexity of statistics. Stats are college level courses. AZU consists of bored housewives with no credentials and no education. Sadly, so are many other so-called child victim advocates.

WHO claims 60 MILLION survivors? Besides AZU, just a handful of other misguided groups. Thankfully most people understand that as bullshit. When was AZU ever quoted as a legitimate reference? Answer: NEVER.

Logical Fallacies: The Weak Analogy

AZU hasn't been discussed here much any more. Quite frankly, they are no longer relevant, though they flounder with the same playbook like a noob Madden player who picks the Hail Mary pass over and over again. But they make plenty of good examples for studying logical fallacies.

Today's lesson is known as the "Weak Analogy:"

AZU argues because so-called "hard-core pedophile activists" and sex offender reformists share some common goals then they must be one and the same. The Black Panthers and Martin Luther King both shared some common goals like the eradication of discrimination against African-Americans, therefore MLK was a militant racist thug who believed in killing to get what he wants, right? According to AZU logic, the answer would be yes.

I don't follow NAMBLA, but facing the same general direction does not make "pro-pedo" groups and SO reformists the same. The terms pedophile and sex offender are not mutually exclusive terms, and the two groups are not mutually exclusive.

It is entirely possible for someone with ulterior motives to join a group contrary to their status in life. For example, Absolute Zero United has two repeat sex offenders in their dwindling group. 

More on this fallacy below.

http://writingcenter.unc.edu/resources/handouts-demos/writing-the-paper/fallacies

Weak analogy

Definition: Many arguments rely on an analogy between two or more objects, ideas, or situations. If the two things that are being compared aren't really alike in the relevant respects, the analogy is a weak one, and the argument that relies on it commits the fallacy of weak analogy.

Example: "Guns are like hammers—they're both tools with metal parts that could be used to kill someone. And yet it would be ridiculous to restrict the purchase of hammers—so restrictions on purchasing guns are equally ridiculous." While guns and hammers do share certain features, these features (having metal parts, being tools, and being potentially useful for violence) are not the ones at stake in deciding whether to restrict guns. Rather, we restrict guns because they can easily be used to kill large numbers of people at a distance. This is a feature hammers do not share—it would be hard to kill a crowd with a hammer. Thus, the analogy is weak, and so is the argument based on it.

If you think about it, you can make an analogy of some kind between almost any two things in the world: "My paper is like a mud puddle because they both get bigger when it rains (I work more when I'm stuck inside) and they're both kind of murky." So the mere fact that you can draw an analogy between two things doesn't prove much, by itself.

Tip: Identify what properties are important to the claim you're making, and see whether the two things you're comparing both share those properties.