"the meme gives Internet users a clear opportunity to think critically about shallow references to the Nazis or the Holocaust. And it exposes glib Nazi comparisons or Holocaust references to the harsh light of interrogation."

not due to the meme's fault, but due to incessant glib and spurious invocation of Nazis, have all modern comparisons, however thoughtful, lost all ability to be taken seriously and lead to thoughtful consideration? I worry the latter. due to the large number of valid comparisons not being made, we've somehow lost the ability to learn the ample lessons this egregious historical example allows.

do people "use Godwin’s Law to force one another to argue more thoughtfully" or to off-hand dismiss legitimate comparisons to Nazism because they bear superficial similarity to spurious comparisons, and don't bother with the difficulty and emotional burden to consider the harsh reality that there may be some truth to the comparison?

"The best way to prevent future holocausts, I believe, is not to forbear from Holocaust comparisons; instead, it’s to make sure that those comparisons are meaningful and substantive."

I hope people do make those difficult comparisons. and he gives some examples of such. I much more worry about the willingness of the public to consider such harrowing and extreme-sounding ideas.

"But I’m hopeful that we can prod our glib online rhetorical culture into a more thoughtful, historically reflective space"

I wonder what he thinks now, having made that statement in 2015.