Godwin's Law states that as online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison to Hitler or Nazis reaches 1.  In other words, the longer a discussion, the more likely it is that someone invokes Uncle Adolf. 

If the concept is still a bit fuzzy, then find an internet liberal with whom you disagree, and you'll see more clearly.  It's mental lethargy posing as scholarship.  Its true purpose is to attack political rivals without the bother of coherent argument.

For example, a liberal might say that President Trump's so-called "Muslim ban" is another rendition of Hitler's Nuremberg Laws banning Jews from any role in German society.  Of course, this comparison is nonsense.  But that isn't the point.  Now Trump is Hitler, his supporters are Brownshirts, and liberals are free to fist-bump their solidarity posters.

It's the liberal equivalent of the child's "doo-doo head."  Sure, it may trivialize the suffering of millions, but hey, it's a useful tool to combat those dreaded conservatives.

But if such comparisons are to be made, then let's make them fairly.  And they might not cut the way liberal-progressives want. 

Let's consider the events in Munich on September 14, 1921.  Adolf Hitler and the paramilitary arm of the Nazi Party, the SA (the Brownshirts), stormed a meeting of the Bavarian League and demanded the floor.  This meeting was led by Hitler's political rival, Otto Ballerstedt.

After refusing to yield, Ballerstedt was brutally beaten and pushed from the stage.  Eventually, the police arrived and arrested Hitler, who said, "It's all right.  We got what we wanted.  Ballerstedt did not speak."

This sounds familiar. Last week, hundreds of liberal activists stormed the campus of U.C. Berkley to protest conservative speaker Milo Yiannopoulos.  They destroyed property, set fires, and attacked several people before campus police canceled the event.  Mr. Yiannopoulos did not speak.

Not all left-wing assaults on freedom of speech are violent.  The rise of the safe-space and trigger-warning culture across college campuses is a more moderate shredding of the First Amendment.  Students must adhere to "speech code" and "speech zone" policies so that nobody's feelings are hurt.

Basically, students aren't allowed to say anything that might offend the liberal intelligentsia.  Ironically, this is one of the topics Mr. Yiannopoulos discusses during his speeches.

If this madness isn't troubling enough, then the move by Democrats to examine the legality of prosecuting climate change "deniers" should be.  Yes, the egregious act of disagreeing with liberal pet policies may land one in court.

And if you're waiting for the candid camera people to pop out and say, "Just kidding," then don't hold your breath.  It's all very real – and far more consistent with the schemes of fascists than anything President Trump has done.

Our democracy exists because of safeguards like freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and the free exchange of ideas.  Anyone who opposes these things should be called out for doing so – and doing so with tactics that resemble those used by a man whose name they wield like a political mace.