this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2024
5 points (100.0% liked)

Flippanarchy

1629 readers
286 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Rules

  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.

  7. No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.

Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
5
Taboo (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 10 months ago by db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
36 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So many white people are thinking this is somehow praising Hitler for stating "Murdering millions is bad when it happens to anyone or is done by anyone, we don't see it talked about because it wasn't to Europeans."

Fuckin' bizarre. Murder is bad. When European powers did it to Africa, no one remembers who did it because everyone did it. We know Hitler because he used the same imperialist justification on Europeans. "I will improve your lives and civilize you the German way."

If Hitler did it to Africa, no one would have complained or had a leg to stand on without being hypocritical. Italy, France, England, Portugal, Denmark, all did the same heinous acts to who was justified towards.

[–] TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Good time to remind everyone that the Nazis were inspired by Jim Crow laws and the poor treatment of African Americans that was prevalent for the time, especially in the southern US.

[–] Dragonborn3810@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

And that the British were one of the first to run national concentration camps https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War_concentration_camps

[–] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago

Lest I go down a reading rabbit hole I don't have time for today, what's the TLDR on churchills evils? my history education was lackluster

[–] SpiceDealer@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'll probably (and rightly) get downvoted for asking this but was Churchill's crime. Does it have to do with how he treated Ireland?

[–] LotrOrc@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

He caused massive famines across India just to fill coffers of the British empire. 6 million people at a conservative estimate

Destroyed Bengal and Bangladesh

Ask most Indians- Churchill and mother Theresa are two of the most hated people in our history

[–] carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago

hitler did to europe what europe had done to the rest of the world for centuries

[–] lath@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No, it's because Hitler pretty much conquered Europe. None of the other people managed to do that.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Napoleon is not taboo last time I checked

[–] lath@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Napoleon was from a time when monarchies were still the mainstream. Hitler is post 1848 revolutions and series of reforms that gradually changed perceptions and general education of the populace.

Though Napoleon's wars caused a large amount of destruction and received appropriate criticism, it was still considered pretty much the norm at that time of imperial dominance.

Hitler on the other hand acted when democracy and civil rights were heading towards full growth. The people's thoughts and general knowledge were very different from Napoleon's era.

As a side note, France before and during Napoleon lost most of its foreign colonies. So his wars in large majority had European victims. Yet that wasn't enough to make him taboo, which means having European victims isn't the main issue that caused Hitler to be taboo.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Nonsense. Hitler is taboo in EU and US because of the atrocities he committed towards Europeans. Not because they "conquered democratic Europeans". Americans have done and are doing the same and more towards latin america, asia and middle east without anything close to that condemnation. It's not about the conquest, it's about westerners being OK with imperialist atrocity as long as it's done against the "other".

[–] lath@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

That's bullshit and you should know it. No powerful nation reached its status without oppressing and exploiting the weak, no matter the direction of the compass you're watching. And the more ambitious, the greater the horrors committed.

You think the US isn't being condemned? Have you been on the internet? It's been and being condemned every day from the start. They just don't give a fuck because they're the foremost global military power.

Please. Out of sight, out of mind is a general human condition. Don't excuse all others by making it an exclusive trait of a certain group you happen to dislike.

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago

Well, as long as other nations do it too, I suppose it’s ok.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Not exactly. Hitler is taboo in EU because he did to the Europeans what they were doing to the rest of the world until then. But he's certainly not taboo in a lot of the colonies, which see him as the unlikely anti-hero which pretty much destroyed the colonial powers which were oppressing them until then.

And no, the US is not nearly as condemned as Nazi Germany, except by radical leftists which are the ones making memes like these.

The point of this meme is to point out the European hypocrisy, and I don't get your urgent need to discount that.

[–] belastend@slrpnk.net -1 points 10 months ago

Iranians greeted the german national team with the hitler salute. In 2004. Not because he "destroyed the colonial powers that oppressed them". But because he killed people who werent Iranian. And half of them were Jewish.

You know, the people werent considered to be European in the 40s and who still arent considered European by the right.

Every continent, every region ignores the atrocities of those who did not kill them, lol.

[–] RecursiveParadox@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

I agree with the other commenters that Hitler was extra, super "special" evil. But Black Autonomist has a point. Popular history is a bit selective sometimes.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works -1 points 10 months ago

I guess Mao and Pol Pot aren't mainstream?

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

And he isn’t mainstream taboo in the rest of the world because he only killed Europeans. What’s your point? People cosplay as Nazi for shits and giggles in places where the Nazi had no impact at all. But go cosplay as emperor Hirohito in China while waving the Japanese Naval flag and see how well you’d be treated. While nobody outside of the Asian pacific would give a damn or even know who he is.

[–] Entropywins@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

I just walk around with a unit 731 patch when I'm in the Asian pacific...

[–] Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The actual reason is the industrial killing. Only the nazis searched for the cheapest and most efficient way to kill as many people as possible

[–] LotrOrc@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Nah Leopold and Churchill both did it too

[–] ActualFactual@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago

I kinda feel like the rationing of bullets and redemption exclusively for severed human hands in would count as trying to find greatest efficiency.

In reference to King Leopold's reign in the Congo. It was.... Unbelievably brutal and quite modern in their pursuit of "efficiency".

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I’m not sure why people are struggling with this one. The reason Hitler is at the top of the evil ruler foodchain is because of his ideology and specific intent.

He wasn’t some common racist who thought his own race was superior and others were inferior. He specifically believed that Jews (as well as Roma people, gays and lesbians, people with disabilities and mental illnesses) were vermin. Worse than insects. He openly made it his goal the complete annihilation of all these peoples who he hated with all the virulent, vitriolic, frothing-at-the-mouth passion he could possibly muster. He engineered the industrial killing of over 11 million people.

There is no other person more deserving of the label “enemy of humanity” than Hitler. There is absolutely nothing for which any decent person can relate to him, never mind understand him.

[–] x0x7@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Are you sure it isn't because of who has influence in media in the West? Last I checked Zimbabwean blacks don't have significant influence in media in the US.

Cecil Rhodes would threaten to chop off your children's arms if you didn't work harder. Don't pretend Hitler has a monopoly on unrelatability.

[–] Licksrocks@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

Cecil Rhodes didn't start a world war. Considering the scope of impact is important.

[–] belastend@slrpnk.net -2 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Horray, we are the point of "actually, a lot of people were as bad as Hitler".

No, you dickwads. The man murdered 11 million people in 12 years outside of combat action, most of them within the last 5 years of his terror. Thats not counting any of the victims of the war itself: You know, 900.00 People starving in Leningrad alone and so forth. Thats why he is vilified.

Dont know why this reflex to downplay his atrocities is always there.

Oh and i have plenty of hate for the other fucks on that list. And Stalin. And Mao. And Pol Pot. And Idi Amin. And Netanyahu. And Kissinger. Because some people actually managed to dislike genocide as a concept and not just when it hits the people who look like them.

[–] ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Dont know why this reflex to downplay his atrocities is always there.

i don't think that's the thrust of the OP? they aren't saying, "hey, c'mon mate, hitler wasn't all that bad!"

they're saying a lot of men did evil deeds, but only one of them is called out for it and their conjecture for why the others escaped scorn and scrutiny is because the skins of their victims had additional levels of pigmentation.

personally, as an indian, more of my countryfolk were killed by churchill than by hitler, but i still don't see the austrian psycopath as a good person; i still don't see him as better than churchill. all it means is that i have enough hatred in my heart for them both. and for the others of their kind.

yes, hitler may be the worst of them all by orders of magnitude, but that doesn't mean the others are saints -- and that's the narrative which shouldn't be lost.

[–] LotrOrc@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Churchill caused the deaths of 6 million Indians at a conservative estimate

Leopold killed 20 million in the Congo. That's pretty equivalent numbers

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago

That doesn't work for the narrative, so those deaths don't count.

[–] belastend@slrpnk.net -1 points 10 months ago

Leocunt clocks in at between 1.5 and 13 million.

Thats, at most, Hitlers numbers OUTSIDE of the war.

[–] kaffiene@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

White people hardly mention Leopold at all.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Who here is downplaying any atrocities?

[–] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Anyone who implies that all these people with astronomically lower body counts than Hitler are just as bad as him, like OOP.

[–] kaffiene@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Leopold was responsible for 1.5 to 13 million deaths. And a slave trade that effected many many more lives than that.

[–] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago

And every single one is due to Hitler? The Japanese men fighting American men was Hitler's micromanagement?

No one is saying Hitler was less evil, we're saying "No one cares about these people's murder because it wasn't to the normalized default of white people."