Hitler as a profile picture. > Likes and Comments
date
newest »
newest »
Davide wrote: "Would you talk to someone who uses Hitler’s photo as a profile picture?..."
Yawn. This again? That BBC headshot is hardly the worst avatar you'll ever see on the www.
Let me extend my apologises to Tyler, our long-suffering moderator, for yet another imbroglio with me at the center.
It's sure not the first time an aspiring author --disgruntled by my witty repartee' --singled me out for a round of ad hominem baiting.
(view spoiler)
Davide wrote: " I am convinced he does so out of ignorance..."
Your conviction would be incorrect. I've been a student of history and philosophy since probably before you drew your first breath on this Earth.
Specifically --when it comes to advanced Russian Studies --you definitely don't want to debate me.
(view spoiler)
Davide wrote: "precisely because they never experienced its horror firsthand...."
I've been in jail (in capitalist) countries, and I've been free (in communist) countries. What firsthand experience have you ever sought out?
Davide wrote: "But what I think, in the end, matters very little...."
That's for certain. The real crux between us is that I'm not posing as an erudite author.
Feliks wrote: "Davide wrote: "Would you talk to someone who uses Hitler’s photo as a profile picture?..."
Yawn. This again? That BBC headshot is hardly the worst avatar you'll ever see on the www.
News Flas..."
You should be ashamed of yourself. Don’t reply.
As for the rest, don’t tell lies.
[Is it possible he doesn't realize it's a photo from a television production? The mind boggles ...]
Well, I want to chime in that - as frustrating as it may be - it is essential to speak to those with opposing views to us. Otherwise we are choosing to live inside an echo chamber where nothing can ever have the chance to change for the better. I do agree that harmful behavior must be confronted, considering staying quiet is the reason people (usually with privilege) get away with this intimidating behavior. It is also crucial to learn from history, otherwise we are bound to repeat it.
Cassidy wrote: "Well, I want to chime in that - as frustrating as it may be - it is essential to speak to those with opposing views to us. Otherwise we are choosing to live inside an echo chamber where nothing can..."I also believe that aggressive and offensive behavior should be confronted, and that if we forget history, we are doomed to repeat it. A butcher who caused the deaths of millions of people must be remembered for what he was.
Feliks wrote: "[Is it possible he doesn't realize it's a photo from a television production? The mind boggles ...]"
I repeat, you should be ashamed. Especially because you claim to know whose photo and name you are using.
I've seen a half dozen accounts which used pictures of Mao as their profile picture. And about twenty which used pictures of Robespierre. Nobody seemed to care about them. I guess some make allowances for ideology, regardless of the butcher's bills.As a practical matter, are we supposed to purge the vile from our midst? That shares a philosophical tenet with the people whom you don't want to see as profile pictures. Though it does open the ignorant to self reporting. I remember not too long ago a Hollyweird actress decided she couldn't own a car associated with a Nazi. So, she sold her Tesla and bought a Volkswagen.
What are the limits of this purge? What about logos for Porsche and Volkswagen? Should we boycott Hugo Boss and Bayer Crop Science? Should our Indian members eschew anyone with Queen Victoria or Benjamin Disraeli as a profile picture? Should NASA scrub its pictures of Wernher von Braun?
J. wrote: "I've seen a half dozen accounts which used pictures of Mao as their profile picture. And about twenty which used pictures of Robespierre. Nobody seemed to care about them. I guess some make allowan..."As far as I’m concerned, people can do whatever they want. But if you use the photo of Mao, Stalin, Hitler, or a criminal like Felix Dzerzhinsky, it is difficult to see you as a credible interlocutor, and you are probably trying to send a very specific message.
I believe there is a point beyond which we must have the courage to confront intolerance and expose its true nature. It is a paradox, I know.
In this specific case, I think we are dealing with a boy — perhaps young and ignorant — playing at being a revolutionary. But do we not have a responsibility? Should we not make clear who the figures are that these people choose as their models?
Should we waste our time speculating about the life and psychology of strangers on the web?Shame is a useful societal tool. But only when used in a fair and dignified fashion. Yelling at randos on Al Gore's internet is iffy at best.
J. wrote: "Should we waste our time speculating about the life and psychology of strangers on the web?Shame is a useful societal tool. But only when used in a fair and dignified fashion. Yelling at randos o..."
I don’t think I yelled at anyone, but I do tend to become very polemical, especially with people who come looking for a fight. That is what happened, and I probably would have found it amusing if I hadn’t seen a guy using the photo and name of a criminal accusing half the world of being fascist demagogues. It is almost certainly a young guy who has no idea what he is doing or saying. I believe he should know. Someone has to tell these kids the history, otherwise we cannot complain about the return of the Illinois Nazis.
J. wrote: "Should we waste our time speculating about the life and psychology of strangers on the web?Shame is a useful societal tool. But only when used in a fair and dignified fashion. Yelling at randos o..."
I assumed it was a young guy because I can’t believe an adult man would use the photo and name of a historical figure as a social media identity. It strikes me as the sort of thing teenagers do.
Assumption is the mother of all f*** ups. Don't assume anything about others. Assumptions leave you open to far worse injuries than what you would otherwise suffer from a simple engagement.Don't claim he came looking for a fight on a thread which you created to attack him. Even if the beef started elsewhere, he looks like the defender here.
On a side note: There's a good chance that any reemergence of American Nazis was funded by the Southern Poverty Law Center. That means they were propped up as straw men for the anointed to battle. Therefore, they are not the danger they want to be.
J. wrote: "Assumption is the mother of all f*** ups. Don't assume anything about others. Assumptions leave you open to far worse injuries than what you would otherwise suffer from a simple engagement.Don't ..."
Some assumptions are more reliable than others. The goal was precisely to provoke him. He is the one who should be defending himself. And he is not doing it very well, because he is not stupid enough not to understand what he is doing. That is already a good start.
He probably had no idea who Felix Dzerzhinsky was when he decided to “become” him. Now he knows.
Listen to me: I am Italian, and I have known many people who claimed they could use fascists or communists for their own purposes. They all eventually lost control of the situation. Fanatics cannot be controlled.
Just BTW --in case anyone was still unaware --New York City just elected a socialist mayor.So technically --according to this kid --23m Americans are now living under communism, but naturally "without really knowing what we're doing", or "this mayor doesn't know what he's doing" ....the usual do-re-mi.
"No one knows what they're doing" ... except this callow youth who wants to sell more of his self-published e-books.
Everyone else except him, is merely a fortune-hunter seeking their-fifteen-minutes-of-fame.
But oh no, not he.
You mean the commie nepo baby mayor who balanced the books by asking Mommy Hochul for a loan?
Feliks wrote: "Just BTW --in case anyone was still unaware --New York City just elected a socialist mayor.So technically --according to this kid --23m Americans are now living under communism, but naturally "wi..."
I appreciate being called a kid. I’m old — I would gladly go back.
Zohran Mamdani is not comparable to Felix Dzerzhinsky, the founder of the Cheka, the first Soviet secret police.
Zohran Mamdani is a populist. Like many Americans, I do not think he really understands what socialism is. It would never occur to him to organize summary trials, public executions, or kill anyone suspected of dissent, as Felix Dzerzhinsky did.
Would you talk to someone who uses the photo of Felix Dzerzhinsky — or Feliks Ėdmundovič Dzeržinskij, to use his original name? Probably many people do not even know who he was. The West knows very little about Soviet criminals, and the fact that the USSR helped defeat Nazism erased many of their crimes from public memory. In Eastern Europe, however, many people know that name well. It is the name of a butcher: the main architect of the Red Terror during the first years of the Bolshevik Revolution and the founder of the Soviet secret police.
There is a user in this group who uses his image as a profile picture. I am convinced he does so out of ignorance, because he is fascinated by that idea of society in which many people in the free West once believed — and many still believe today — precisely because they never experienced its horror firsthand. I think this person should be called out and should know that he is using the photo of one of the worst criminals in history merely to look provocative or sophisticated. But what I think, in the end, matters very little.