Introducing: Franklin’s Law

Many of you may be familiar with Godwin’s Law, a semi-serious adage originally written by Mike Godwin in 1990: “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.”

That law is undeniably true. And, the popularity of the law — it’s well-known enough that I don’t know if I had to link the Wikipedia entry above — probably has stopped people from making analogies to Nazis or Hitler in things unrelated to things about Nazis or Hitler. And for that, Mike Godwin should be thanked and praised.

And now, I’d like to carry on with his work, so to speak. Follow me after the jump.

I was reading a thread on Phillyblog about the shooting at the Navy Yard Monday night.

It was pretty normal until I reached a post where a person insinuated that we need to give up some of our freedom to prevent things like the Navy Yard shooting. I’m not quite sure how this works — broken window theory? — but let’s read. This post is by MarconiParkRez:

And I did not say just take away the “F” word away. We need some kind of control on public safety even if it means comprimising our freedom. What good does it do when one has all the rights and freedom of whatever, but he or she can’t hardly walk outside the neighborhood to enjoy the freedom. The only freedom he or she gets to enjoy is to freely watch whatever on TV. And then the world wonders why most Americans are overweight. “I stay home all the time because it’s unsafe to go out for a walk” is a poor excuse to tell foreigners for being obese and most free country in the world.

I’ll ignore the argument. Here was the first reply to this post, from one Marc:

“They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security” — Ben Franklin

That quote was kind of cute when I was a Penn student right after the 2001 terrorist attacks. Oh, I get it! The founder of our college said this kind of clever yet annoying line and now it’s up on peoples’ dorm rooms. And if there’s any description I feel fits Penn, it’s “kind of clever, yet annoying.”

But it’s gotten a little out of hand. There are ~42,000 hits on Google for it. (Some of them are from quote pages.) There are matches on Google News and 508 results from horrible blog search engine Technorati. To be honest, I don’t know if this is a lot or a little.

But, look: This quote does nothing to add to an argument about security, liberty, terrorism or pretty much any other debate unless you’re debating Benjamin Franklin’s most annoying quotes. Look at Franklin’s expression in that painting. He’s pissed about it, too! (Hence the name: Franklin’s Law. Please. I’m not about to name something after myself.) You’re not making a point if you quote Benjamin Franklin. You’re just copying and pasting from a QuoteWorld.com or something.

Consider this the law: “As an online discussion about freedom grows longer, the probability of someone posting that stupid fucking Ben Franklin quote approaches one.”

Do you remember how Benjamin Franklin asked you to think of him before sex? Well, next time you’re going to post that stupid fucking Ben Franklin quote, please think of me and this post. And help make the Internet a better place.