Culture Hitler is trending on TikTok again — and they’re trying to make him seem like a nice guy

Link (Archive)

Hitler is trending on TikTok again — and they’re trying to make him seem like a nice guy​

Hitler is, once again, trending on TikTok. Speeches given by the Nazi Führer, translated into English and read by an AI in a stilted accent, have garnered millions of views on the platform.

Some users lip-synched to the speeches, others simply posted them with a darkened image of Hitler in military attire; most implied or openly stated praise for the speeches and for the Nazi leader.

Media Matters, a think tank that tracks hate speech online, reported that some of the sounds and videos have since been removed, after receiving hundreds of thousands or even over a million views each, but some accounts are still active and regularly uploading content.

The virality of the videos is another instance of TikTok’s struggles to moderate posts on its platform. Though its policies prohibit praising or sharing the manifestos of “individuals who cause serial or mass violence, or promote hateful ideologies,” users are often able to find ways around the rules or fly under the radar.

On TikTok, trending videos are grouped around “sounds,” snippets of audio that users can use as a backdrop for their own videos; sounds are relatively harder to moderate, given that the speaker is often hard to identify and the content doesn’t include openly prohibited terms such as slurs. The use of AI to read Hitler’s speeches in English allowed the speeches to be produced quickly and reposted in a slightly different version if they’re removed, avoiding TikTok’s regulations. From there, numerous videos can spread the speech by using it as a background sound for their posted videos.

The videos also rarely identify Hitler by name, often using euphemisms such as “the great painter” or “the Austrian painter” — a reference to his stalled art career — instead. And the content of the speeches used in the videos is not overtly hateful; the excerpts feature Hitler saying he did not want to go to war but was forced to, as well as discussing art and culture.

This tactic of using anodyne excerpts from Hitler’s speeches serves not only to evade moderation, however, but also to frame the Nazi as a maligned hero and an great leader. Some feature such captions as “what if he won” and “just listen.”

And while some comments express skepticism that Hitler was a good leader, many applaud the speeches, saying: “he is NOT the villain,” “AH was a good and kind man,” and “now I understand why they didn’t translate this before.”

This is not the first time something like this has occurred on TikTok; last autumn, Osama Bin Laden’s antisemitic “Letter to America” also went viral on the platform. Numerous users shared it, commenting their agreement with the inflammatory letter, which contains antisemitic conspiracies in addition to criticism of the United States.

The existence of this content on the platform is obviously dangerous and breaks TikTok’s own moderation rules. But it also serves as a gateway to more overt conspiratorial content; TikTok’s algorithm is skilled at directing people to more of what they seem interested in by suggesting similar search topics, and those automated suggestions are seemingly not subject to moderation in the way the videos are.

When Media Matters looked into the videos, they found suggested search terms popping up on videos, including “the painter English speech.” This shows that the algorithm is using the same coded language — referring to Hitler as “the painter” — to help direct users to more of Hitler’s translated speeches.

Not all of the videos made with the Hitler sounds, however, were supportive. Some used the sound of Hitler’s speech to mock the Führer, captioning them with jokes such as “when I pooped in the urinal in 3rd grade.”

Until TikTok improves its moderation, poop jokes may be the best defense against users attempting to popularize Hitler’s ideology again.
 
Man. It's crazy how much of that applies to the current day.

Edit: In less than ten years, I've gone from a (fairly reasonable) liberal to "you know, this Hitler guy makes some good points."

When you watch this it's suddenly very clear why the American education system glosses over Weimar with a paragraph about war reparation debt. They are doing the same thing here, have been since 'we' sold them the country 1913. We are are the new Germans to be pillaged... I only hope that America after 80 years of Churchill worship still has enough German blood and conviction to do once more what needs be done.

Hitler may be dead but they still fear his ideas, the bankers fear the only man who had the brains and the balls to not only see their game but stand up to them.
 
Why is he a devil?
Hard mode: don't bring up the fake holocaust that never happened.
He brought about the ruination of his people. He sent boys and old men to die for his arrogance while he cowered in a bunker. He very purposefully did this by the way. In his own estimation if the German people could not prevail they did not deserve to exist which is why he refused to allow his armies to retreat from Russia until they were encircled and crushed completely.. He also had nothing but contempt for Christianity so y'know, there's that.

If Hitler were alive today he'd be a fedora-tipping, samurai sword carrying, trench coat wearing euphoric athiest
 
Last edited:
He brought about the ruination of his people
He didn't start the war. It took almost the entire world to unite against him to win. The German kill/death ratio was unsurpassed in that war.
He sent boys and old men to die for his arrogance while he cowered in a bunker
He was an ex soldier himself, who banned the use of chemical weapons because he had been gassed. He knew what he was doing. Also he was smuggled to Argentina at the end of the war.
He very purposefully did this by the way
He very purposefully had war declared on Germany by other countries? You're a nigger retard.
He also had nothing but contempt for Christianity so y'know,
Not according to his own words. Not that you've ever read them.
 
He brought about the ruination of his people. He sent boys and old men to die for his arrogance while he cowered in a bunker. He very purposefully did this by the way. In his own estimation if the German people could not prevail they did not deserve to exist. He also had nothing but contempt for Christianity so y'know, there's that.

Here's the "Muh 8th grade teacher Mr. Goldberg said" take.

He was a WWI veteran who was regarded as a stoic and a makeshift chaplain, many of his early supporters were soldiers who had served with him. He stood up to the establishment and was imprisoned for it. He fought a two front war to the bitter end and then chose to go out with the nation on his own terms rather than be caught and tortured. Did Churchill drunkly pull his fat ass up the jagged Italian coastline? Did FDR have an MG mounted to his fucking wheelchair?

The 'contempt for Christianity' is pure spin out of a portion of Mein Kampf were he explains why Christian Nationalist parties could not muster effective resistance to communism.
 
Last edited:
He was a WWI veteran who was regarded as a stoic and a makeshift chaplain, many of his early supporters were soldiers who had served with him
He was a base sitter and a jumped up messenger boy. Meh
He stood up to the establishment and was imprisoned for it.
What was the event that precipitated his arrest again? Jog my memory if you don't mind.
He fought a two front war to the bitter end and then chose to go out with the nation on his own terms rather than be caught and tortured.
Right. On HIS terms. Fuck what would have actually been best for his people. The Germs died in their hundreds of thousands for his pride and hubris. And here you are trying to romanticize him for it as if these are the actions of someone who is not a petulant megalomaniacal retard. If he wants to kill himself fine, but to take a nation of people down with you because you can't accept losing is just plain evil and there is no other way to spin it.

If Hitler cared for his people as much as he claimed to he would have surrendered to Eisenhower when it became clear victory was impossible. The least he could have done is save his people from the Asiatic hordes. But nope!
Did Churchill drunkly stumble his way up the jagged Italian coastline? Did FDR have a tank gun mounted to his fucking wheelchair?
I fail to see the relevance of these questions
 
Shit I never bothered to listen those before now (well except for Mein Kampf in audiobook form), and I even speak Kraut (:_(
 
His most famous and well known speeches. They don't translate him normally because he sounded so reasonable.

It's not like any of the great tyrants of history just went GRAAAGGHGHH KILL KILL KILL. They were persuasive, inspiring, and cunning, and typically played on very real felt grievances people had, which is why they were able to lead massive numbers of people to do their will. The thing is, though, the modern elites have equated intelligence and morality. A bad person can't be crafty or intelligent. He has to be crazy and stupid. So Hitler, to be a bogeyman, has to also be an insane, delusional madman who was only able to gain power by putting people into some kind of trance.
 
I fail to see the relevance of these questions

You called the man 'cowardly' for holding a command role in wartime rather than a front line deployment. I not only illustrated that Hitler was at one point a common soldier, I challenged you to apply the same standard to his contemporaries. Churchill who's great war strategy amounted to 'rope in the Americans by any means necessary' who begged and pleaded his way into 'victory.' If Adolf is such a coward, surely Whinny must be a coward several times over.

It seems like the word you want to say is 'looser,' Hitler was a looser and therefore had to shoot himself... but you insist on calling a war vet who literally started a populist revolution a coward because victors history is all you know or care to know. You call him a coward because you know that loosing a war doesn't make you wrong and winning doesn't make you right. In fact it is the loosing side that has to make the hardest decisions, face the most dire consequences, endure the most brutal hardships and make the most difficult sacrifices. You can't loose with overwhelming force.

Right. On HIS terms. Fuck what would have actually been best for his people. The Germs died in their hundreds of thousands for his pride and hubris. And here you are trying to romanticize him for it as if these are the actions of someone who is not a petulant megalomaniacal retard. If he wants to kill himself fine, but to take a nation of people down with you because you can't accept losing is just plain evil and there is no other way to spin it.

Cut the shit bro. If Hitler had surrendered early you would still be here calling him a coward with slightly altered rhetoric.

He was a base sitter and a jumped up messenger boy. Meh

You have the argumentative integrity of wet toilet paper:

He was an infantryman in the 1st Company during the First Battle of Ypres (October 1914), which Germans remember as the Kindermord bei Ypern (Massacre of the Innocents at Ypres) because approximately 40,000 men (between a third and a half, many of them university students) of nine newly enlisted infantry divisions became casualties in the first twenty days. Hitler's regiment entered the battle with 3,600 men but at its end mustered only 611 men.[9] By December, Hitler's own company of 250 was reduced to 42. Biographer John Keegan claims that this experience drove Hitler to become aloof and withdrawn for the remaining years of war.[10] After the battle, Hitler was promoted from Schütze (private) to Gefreiter (lance corporal). He was assigned to be a regimental message-runner.[11][12]

Hitler served as a messenger boy after surviving one of the most brutal battles of the war on the losing side where 3/4s of his regiment were killed or wounded.
 
He brought about the ruination of his people.
Does that explain the rest of the west at this point? Hypothetically had he submitted it's likely the same outcome effecting the world today would still be happening but even quicker.

Many Germans believed world Jewry was going to end white people, and that many white's had little time left to live thanks to it, and what a surprise one of the few leaders to actually fight it only delayed the inevitable but is it any better to those who won the war and are literally bringing the ruination of their people with a speed running challenge?

Quite a few Germans believed a world without national socialism, or "white nationalism" (even without the socialism part) would be the end of the white race, and what a surprise it seems the Germans along with Hitler may have been right.

He very purposefully did this by the way. In his own estimation if the German people could not prevail they did not deserve to exist which is why he refused to allow his armies to retreat from Russia until they were encircled and crushed completely..
It's the law of nature which has been pointed out in many documentaries. The sad truth that law applies to humans as an objective fact. It's less they didn't deserve to exist, but as mentioned above it was believed they would slowly be phased out and would not exist. The "deserve" claim was merely him using an emotional appeal to Germans to fight harder to preserve their existence. A moral booster of sorts.

If Hitler cared for his people as much as he claimed to he would have surrendered to Eisenhower when it became clear victory was impossible. The least he could have done is save his people from the Asiatic hordes. But nope!
The problem is basing off his premise of world Jewry and reactions had he surrendered no whites would follow his beliefs because that would have been the ultimate cowardice, as a martyr assuming he died in the bunker at least creates again a moral posturing, those people are and were doomed either way. After the war they would have just been like the US is becoming and the rest of the west. Even if you don't believe in "world Jewy" everything stated about it for the most part has come to pass.

Whether you like Hitler or not, he was very strategic which goes according to his actions all together. He was not a coward with the enemies and puppet master he faced (whether you believe it to be true or not) and the outcome you claim didn't change even if he had surrendered seeing as the victors are suffering from the same issue he predicted about that same enemy in control of the west. You don't have to think Hitler was a good guy, but to act as if his actions and statements (including the bitter reality ones) weren't correct is impossible to deny at this point in modern clown world.
 
He'd hit a juul with them, too.

Prevatin is just the OG Adderal.

Ps. Everyone was on speed during the war BTW. There is a lie by omission where we pretend Benzedrine never existed so we can further the narrative that the axis were "sooo crazy you guys, sooooooooo crazy we can't even hear their rhetoric at all guys."
 
Last edited:
It's funny how they piss their panties when you simply say that Hitler isn't this great super, comic book-esque evil man like they portray in Hollywood.


Rounding people to work in labor camps, and expirementing on people is bad, but we did the same shit to to Germans, Italians, and Japanese during WWII too. Only reason we had different outcomes in our camps is that we weren't fighting a war on 3 fronts like the Germans were.

Normies cant wrap their head around that there aren't any TRUE and HONEST Good Guys in wars. Their brains are addled from the MCU and middle school Holocaust class.
 
You called the man 'cowardly' for holding a command role in wartime rather than a front line deployment.
His city was under siege with no way out and all over the place young and elderly are conscripted up to fight and die in his name. Why not join in the glorious last stand then since defeat is inevitable instead of going out like a total bitch? At no point was Churchill put into this situation of having his back to the wall. So it isn't the same.

Cut the shit bro. If Hitler had surrendered early you would still be here calling him a coward with slightly altered rhetoric.
There is nothing cowardly about sacrificing yourself to save your people from ruin. The officers and civil servants who faced tribunal after the war was concluded showed more courage in the face of defeat than Hitler ever did.

I stand by my point; Hitler sacrificed his people's lives for no good reason. He is evil for that reason alone without even having to bring up the Holocaust.
 
Here's the "Muh 8th grade teacher Mr. Goldberg said" take.

He was a WWI veteran who was regarded as a stoic and a makeshift chaplain, many of his early supporters were soldiers who had served with him. He stood up to the establishment and was imprisoned for it. He fought a two front war to the bitter end and then chose to go out with the nation on his own terms rather than be caught and tortured. Did Churchill drunkly pull his fat ass up the jagged Italian coastline? Did FDR have an MG mounted to his fucking wheelchair?

The 'contempt for Christianity' is pure spin out of a portion of Mein Kampf were he explains why Christian Nationalist parties could not muster effective resistance to communism.
History doesn't give out participation awards, at the end losers are still losers. Hitler died like a dog and handed over Germany to the Soviets. Germany still hasn't recovered, and probably never will.

I think it's pretty funny seeing what Hitler did to the German people, but maybe that's just me, I'm biased.
 
His city was under siege with no way out and all over the place young and elderly are conscripted up to fight and die in his name. Why not join in the glorious last stand then since defeat is inevitable instead of going out like a total bitch? At no point was Churchill put into this situation of having his back to the wall. So it isn't the same.

Tell me again how you don't know history. Churchill entered a war with Germany using Danzig as a caucus belli and had his ass kicked. He put himself in a corner and did not 'go to the frontlines to die valiantly!' He literally fought a war by guilt tripping and gaslighting Americans. Churchill gave up nearly all of the British empire to FDR to fight a war we pretend was about the Poles (he threw them to the Soviets anyway) but we know was about international finance keeping it's yolk on the Germans. In the end the Brits got nothing for it, an entire generation of British boys were spent in Europe and the Beatles sung songs about the tax man.


There is nothing cowardly about sacrificing yourself to save your people from ruin. The officers and civil servants who faced tribunal after the war was concluded showed more courage in the face of defeat than Hitler ever did.

I stand by my point; Hitler sacrificed his people's lives for no good reason. He is evil for that reason alone without even having to bring up the Holocaust.

We are going in circles. If not for Hitler someone else would have lead the revolution, or the commies would have won and had their revolution but in either event the Weimar government was totally unstable and war was inevitable. This is not even really disputed by the modern American hegemony since Truman makes such a big deal out of not repeating the same mistake of burdening Germany/Japan with insurmountable debt in order to prevent the exact same cycle.

You can't have a cult of personality without the cult, rhetoric about hyper-inflation doesn't work unless there is hyper-inflation. The conditions existed independent of the man. Again you have this Star Wars view of history where Hitler is ontological evil incarnate and has Germany under a magic spell. "If only a time-traveler could off him the whole century would have been sunshine and rainbows!" When in reality Hitler was a street artist before Franz Ferdinand got fragged. He returned from the front to unemployment, hyper-inflation, shortages, rampant prostitution, fighting in the streets... just like every other German man of his age. The rage you feel emanating off of Hitler is not just his own.

Furthermore in the ~10 years leading up the war he did revitalize Germany, he cleaned up the streets, drove out sick fucks like Hershfield, broke free from the yolk of international finance and turned the entire economy around. You can argue that it was all a financial illusion or that it was only possible through war but people were absolutely willing to die for Adolf Hitler... and again the sentiment of the times agrees seeing as how we prosecuted scores of them at Nuremburg (except the ones that we needed to make rockets).

Even the post war Brits themselves had a more nuanced and unbiased understanding of Weimar than the average Amerimutt, I swear: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHZk29-IIwv3F6UOGTlWT5dBnlqG7B7OS (I watched this as an intact documentary a few years back I don't know how much has been cut)
 
Last edited:
Tell me again how you don't know history. Churchill entered a war with Germany using Danzig as a caucus belli and had his ass kicked. Churchill gave up nearly all of the British empire to America to fight a war we pretend was about the Poles but we know was about international finance keeping it's yolk on the Germans.
He also never commited suicide in the face of defeat. So he's at minimum still a braver man than Hitler, even if he was also a total fool. You'll get no argument from me on that. Primarily because its inconsiquential to the point I'm making. You came in late so let me show you what this conversation is actually about:

Why is he a devil?
Hard mode: don't bring up the fake holocaust that never happened.
This is really all I care about. I was issued a challenge to make a case for Hitler being a devil without mentioning the holocaust.

Generally speaking people will agree with me when I say pointlessly sacrificing the lives of others for your ego while killing yourself to escape responsibility is devilish behavior. Its also cowardly and narcissistic.

The particulars of Hitler's war service are entirely irrelevant. You only bring it up because I hit a nerve when I called Hitler a coward. Which what's that about anyway? Why are you so emotionally invested in my estimation of this person?
Edit: Btw the truth of yesterday isn't necessarily the truth of tomorrow. You can be a brave war vet one day and a craven the next. Those two positions are not in any way contradictory.
 
Last edited:
Back