this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2025
476 points (97.8% liked)

politics

26127 readers
3223 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Broadfern@lemmy.world 31 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Weren’t hitler and co. constantly on loads of drugs too?

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 28 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I mean... basically everyone was back then. Everyone knows the fun fact that Coca Cola used to contain cocaine. Fewer people think about the implications of that or how soda was generally sold at the pharmacy.

But yeah. nazi leadership is generally accepted to have been on WAY more drugs than most of their contemporaries.

[–] BruisedMoose@piefed.social 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm not sure if you're just trying to illustrate some point or intentionally trying to link Hitler and Coca-Cola. But Coke was down to trace amounts of cocaine by 1904 and none before 1930.

[–] TheAsianDonKnots@lemmy.zip 10 points 3 days ago

They didn’t link Hitler to Coke. They said (in the context of the 20th century) loads of people were on drugs AND that Hitler & Co were on more drugs than most.

[–] ultranaut@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Meth had recently been invented so lots of Germans were tweaking the fuck out, especially during the beginning. The blitzkrieg was literally a bunch of methed up Germans. Hitler had a quack who in addition to shooting him up with meth and other stims, was also loading him up with hormones extracted from bull testicles and other wacko shit like that.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago

Nazis were pioneers of meth abuse. Allies used it a bit too, mainly for bomber pilots and others in extended combat situations where alertness was needed.

[–] Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

He was. A lot of others were, too, but he was an outlier even by 1940s srandards.

LSD pills were as ubiquitous a Tylenol pills are today. Everyone was taking them.

Heroin and morphine were quite common as painkillers, and Hitler did do them quite often.

He did draw the line at tobbaco, though.

[–] NotSteve_@piefed.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Do you mean something other than LSD? I'm pretty sure LSD wasn't invented until like the 60s and I don't think people were just tripping non stop

Yeah, it was meth. Sorry.