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.
 
He definitely hated the Treaty of Versailles and believed it should never have been signed. He believed Germany was subverted by communists and international Jewery while he was on the front. In Mein Kampf he states that the war was all but won and that his efforts were invalidated by the weak government at home. Considering the mid war revolution(s) in Russia I don't know how far off he was... but that is besides the point. He no doubt held absolute distain for Versailles and the repatriation of Danzig would be the final nail in that coffin. He would have restored Germany to it's former glory and unmade Weimar and I think that was the legacy he wanted.

I also think the chain of events just follows pragmatically, if you are going to tell the banks holding your reparation debt to fuck themselves then you need to have war industry... and when you have war industry you need returns on those investments... and when you need ROI you start chasing after the lines you held in WWI. In for a penny, in for a pound.

Actually the better question is, where would Hitler have stopped? Would he have been satisfied with Danzig, with Poland or would he have pushed until he got a war with the French.

wish he would have just kicked the jews out of Germany. send them home and tell them to behave.

IIRC Hitlers Germany pre-war was an early supporter of Israel and wanted to use it in order to do just that. He had reservations of course but saw it as a potential solution to his problems with the tribe. I think they even had some sort of program involving tractors they were exporting/subsidizing.
 
Last edited:
This is the most god damn retarded thing I've ever read within the past week.
No nation on the face of the Earth would spend limited resources invading another country because of "cultural reasons".
Have you heard about the word "nationalism"? It is all the rage within the Europe of the 19th century
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coldgrip
hate the art, not the artist.

wish he would have just kicked the jews out of Germany. send them home and tell them to behave.
Shipping them all off to Madagascar which was a French colony at the time (was seriously considered but decided to be impractical because of logistics) would make for a really interesting alternate history scenario.

Imagine an Israel in Indian Ocean off the east coast of Africa. And probably no Israel in Middle East. Oh the butterflies...
 
Imagine an Israel in Indian Ocean off the east coast of Africa. And probably no Israel in Middle East. Oh the butterflies...

On one hand "Oy Vey My Malaria!" ... on the other hand at least it's not a barren wasteland... but you then you would be left alone on a quiet backwater island, unable to leverage your proximity to the most important trade route in the world to make the US fund your nation building projects.
 
Wikipedia's article on Nazi economics backs your position on the war being an economic-rooted matter.
You know we have these things call "books", right?
Have you heard about the word "nationalism"? It is all the rage within the Europe of the 19th century
Am I going to start hearing about the 3rd Crusade soon?
 
you just know hes smiling while looking down on all the kids learning why he was needed and why he or rather his successor is still needed, looking down inbetween sips of a martini on an argentinian beach
 
  • Feels
Reactions: 2020chan
>using wikipedia as a source
:story:
It's such a basic fact that even using wikipedia is okay in this scenario, you don't even need to look back that far to see states attacking one another for those exact reasons (hint: It even happened just a few months ago!)
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Foreverial
It's such a basic fact that even using wikipedia is okay in this scenario, you don't even need to look back that far to see states attacking one another for those exact reasons (hint: It even happened just a few months ago!)
Shut the fuck up.
1727166475786.png
 
Keep on cherry-picking libtardation to try and smugly counteract the basic fact that wars are fought for a multitude of reasons, even today, you have Muzzies shooting themselves in the foot to even get a slight chance of owning kikes. Perhaps if you spent less time telling people to read and actually reading, you'd actually know this.
 
Yeah you can order Mein Kampf in America and read it. But you will be seen as an absolute pariah for even having it on your bookshelf, even if your interest is purely academic. Your reading it will jeopardize your job if it becomes common knowledge. But
What's fucked up is that Mein Kampf on your shelf will demonize you but having Lolita on your shelf is a-ok. My own professor has it on her shelf at home and she's a Democrat. I don't think she's a pedophile by any means but she hates trump and I'd be willing to say she'd look at me differently for having Mein Kampf on my shelf.
 
What's fucked up is that Mein Kampf on your shelf will demonize you but having Lolita on your shelf is a-ok. My own professor has it on her shelf at home and she's a Democrat. I don't think she's a pedophile by any means but she hates trump and I'd be willing to say she'd look at me differently for having Mein Kampf on my shelf.
Lolita itself is not a pro-pedophilic work, but the venn diagram of the people who own it and those who want to diddle kids is almost a circle
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Mukhrani
What's fucked up is that Mein Kampf on your shelf will demonize you but having Lolita on your shelf is a-ok. My own professor has it on her shelf at home and she's a Democrat. I don't think she's a pedophile by any means but she hates trump and I'd be willing to say she'd look at me differently for having Mein Kampf on my shelf.
I wouldn't see Lolita the book as a sign of pedophila. Some of the Hollywood adaptions kind of made it very sexual and porn-ified the concept, but Nabokov had mixed feelings about the adaption that was published when he was alive (the other was even worse). He was a weird author - his books often have protagonists who are bizarre mentally and have a strange, surreal feel - I remember reading one where a chess player goes insane cause he sees the whole world in terms of chess and the game consumes him.

Anyway, Lolita is a literary masterpiece and it does the opposite of glorifying pedophilia. Nabokov wrote Humbert Humbert, the pedophile character, as a literary study in loathsomeness. He wrote him to be disgusting, the kind of character that crawls under your skin, that even when he tries to be touching has the same effect that a person wearing a skin suit would illicit. You're not supposed to sympathize with him, you're supposed to recoil at him. Lolita in the book is supposed to be a victim and what happens to her is supposed to be heartwrenching. Someone who actually reads the book and comes away with the idea that it's an endorsement of pedophilia either has very bad reading comprehension or is fucked up in the head. Same thing with Pale Fire - the text may read sincere but the subtext screams that the narrator Kinbote is a highly delusional pedant.

Lolita itself is not a pro-pedophilic work, but the venn diagram of the people who own it and those who want to diddle kids is almost a circle
This is due to the age-old problem of people using unread books as interior decorating accessories to say something about themselves.
 
Back