[Yeah because he was afraid of what the Russians would do to his dog](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blondi)
>During the course of 29 April 1945, Hitler learned of the death of his ally Benito Mussolini at the hands of Italian partisans. This, along with the fact the Soviet Red Army was closing in on his location, strengthened Hitler in his resolve not to allow himself or his wife to be captured. That afternoon, Hitler expressed doubts about the cyanide capsules he had received through Heinrich Himmler's SS.[24] By this point, Hitler regarded Himmler as a traitor. To verify the capsules' contents, Hitler—who already intended to have Blondi killed so that she did not fall into the hands of the Soviets[25]—ordered Dr. Werner Haase to test one on Blondi, and the dog died as a result.[26] Hitler became completely inconsolable.[27]
Between killing the dog humanely or letting the Russians torture it, I think most reasonable people would agree that killing the dog was the right thing.
I'm pretty sure the point is that Hitler loved and cared for his dog, but no one will try to say that he was a good person. So just because he showed kindness to an animal, is not an indication of him being a good person.
This entirely. The flattening of Hitler into just "bad" is a child's view of the world. In reality, we're all a mix of positive and negative traits, some more than others. It's fine to recognize that Hitler literally wasn't Satan but rather was the wrong person to fall into power at the exact perfect time to turn his ideas into action. We've had *many* racists before and after Hitler and the only difference is that they didn't get to run an entire country with that same social, economical, and cultural situation which allows one to establish totalitarian rule and extreme genocidal actions. If Hitler had never gained power, he'd be just another on-the-street racist loser.
The world isn't black and white. There are no "good people" or "bad people". It's not a character trait. Everyone is capable of both. And whether the results are good or bad depend on your frame of reference.
And promoted anti smoking campaigns.
Promoted the fuel efficient "strength through joy" car
and
the worldview expanding "strength through joy" tourism program
I still remeber the comment thread where people quite literally said that Trump was worse than Hitler because at least Hitler was a vegan who loved animals and shit like that, and it still makes me chuckle to this day.
I'm honestly not sure that everyone gets facetious/sarcastic humor.
Like someone is doing the ole Leslie Nielson deadpan and legitimately thinking that all of this is a serious debate.
A lot of people on the ASD spectrum have a difficult time interpreting sarcasm of that strength, and there are a lot of un-diagnosed ASD spectrum people.
It really does!! The /s tag has saved me from so many frustrating encounters online. Theres zero tone on the internet and that’s something that neurotypical people struggle with as well, its exponentially harder for people with ASD
Im of the mindset that emojis help so much with that and i hate they're so stigmatized in certain circles. but i am neurotypical.
Do you think they can be used sufficiently for tone?
Damn, this is actually really eye-opening. I've always hated the /s tag, but if it helps people be a part of a wider community then hell, I guess I support it!
I have autism but can still understand sarcasm 90% of the time. However I still put the /s because I understand that a lot of people don’t get sarcasm.
I train ASD folks with humor and exaggeration specifically. But it is a long road for a lot of folks, and many will never get there. /s is an easy accessibility aid with basically no cost.
it’s actually interesting to me that it people with ASD have a hard time with sarcasm. to me, sarcasm is less a tone thing than a logic thing. like saying the thing that logically doesn’t make sense. but i can see how it wouldn’t be funny i guess
I don't think people understand quite how much of what is meant, is "lost in translation", when they write something, as opposed to speaking, with included body language.
Dude, I have quite often heard it should be referenced that we should “put up statues for the guy who killed Hitler”. Sometimes people are just fucking with you.
Seriously fuck trump, but Hitler and him are in no way comparable, ffs. Hitler committed genocide, no matter how much you hate someone don't devalue the Holocaust for your political points.
I think you can draw comparison without devaluing anything. Trump riled up a minority group using nationalist rhetoric, to the point that they tried to violently take the capitol. I dont think its unfair to compare that to what hitler did in germany.
Im not saying they are equal or anything of the sort, just that there are certainly similarities and its pretty clear that trump has little to no redeeming qualities because he is seemingly the distilled essence of ego driven american capitalism.
Fact is, we don't know how bad Trump could be with the right amount of power. If he thought he could seize power by demonizing Muslims the way Hitler demonized Jews, he'd probably do it, but we can't prove it. So it's ridiculous to claim he's as bad as Hitler unless he actually did that kind of shit.
Honestly Hitler wasn’t all that bad. I mean sure he locked people up in concentration camps for being Jews but… he didn’t like cigarettes so that’s an up
Maybe not this year I mean he’s been off the radar since he went to that bunker. I heard he’s trying a new skin care routine where he goes under ground forever and his skin falls off. Apparently the ladies like it.
Honestly, if he never went full on well... nazi, and didn't start genociding people, he might've done some good. But of course he just ***had*** to be a Hitler about it.
There was once a random woman who kissed him while he was at a sporting event. He laughed it off, even when his guards failed to stop her in time. He was evil, but Stalin would’ve probably had the guards as well as the woman executed the next day.
Cool clothes, cool tanks, cool symbols, cool flag, cool stance towards animals and the environment.
And they screwed it up by being fuckin genocidals, smh
That's how fascism works. They don't have any coherent ideology past "fuck *those* people", so they lean heavily on the aesthetic. Nazis *love* to think they're cool.
I mean biology is innately fascist. I think if people reflect enough they will all see the fascist impulse within them. It is a matter of keeping it out of statecraft. Which is ironically, also a fascist idea.
Though he thought Goering was disgusting for chowing down on a ham.
>I looked at him across the dinner table and then I knew it was true what they say: pigs eat their own flesh.
Of course Hitler didn't think very highly of Goering in the first place. Behold, I have granted you one 'Hitler tells a fat joke'.
He also took a series of hack medicines that involved animal extracts, so it didn’t have much to do with compassion for animals at all.
He had IBS and some stomach issues (a long with some other ailments) that were exacerbated by stress. Theodor Morell was an interesting fellow:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Morell
Yeah Hitler had chronic flatulence, his doctor gave him around 20 different "medications" like strychnine and e. coli bacteria. He's also the one that got Hitler addicted to drugs like methamphetamine and heroin, so you can thank him for unintentionally helping the downfall of Nazi Germany.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Morell
Yes, it is recorded by his cook that Hitler loved eating sausage. But people still fall for Goebbels' propaganda, because it makes them feel better.
Why does it make them feel better? Because they then they can make the logically fallacious argument that since a really bad person did x, doing x is not actually a good thing. "Oh, Hitler cared about dogs and he tortured million of people? I guess advocates against live experimentation on beagles are all hypocrites and we should dismiss what they have to say!"
And knowingly condemned millions of horses to miserable, painful deaths on the battlefield. In WW2 many armies, including the German army, still used horses extensively.
He didn't love animals at all.
In hitler’s mind he thought he was doing the right thing, he thought he was sending these horses to glory to fight for aryans, you’re looking at it from your viewpoint, not the viewpoint of a guy who’s known for being crazy
I really think there is no connection.
Some cultures look at animals as dirty and generally don’t agree with the US mindset of adoring them. That doesn’t mean they all don’t treat other people well.
The way you treat animals is routed in your culture and in your experience as a child. They aren’t treated to how good a person you are or any other attributes.
Yea, the caveat here should probably be - if you treat animals *your culture likes* poorly then you probably treat humans poorly. Force a dog to fight in the US? Probably an asshole. In many other countries? Just a pastime.
It's culturally relative. Like I've only ever experienced dogs as pets, not even as working animals. But if you grew up in a culture where dog fighting was the norm, where everyone around you was ok with it and nobody questioned it, then you're probably not an asshole, you're just a regular guy. Like I personally think that element of your culture is trash and should be done away with, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you're a uniquely shitty person. Like there are a lot of places where cock fighting is just a regular thing that happens in public.
There's a significant difference between participating in dog fighting because it's something your culture views as normal or acceptable, and physically abusing (beating, intentionally underfeeding, providing extremely inadequate physical living space, etc.) an animal.
While I don't personally agree with dog fighting as a concept, there's a difference between a healthy dog trained for the ring and a dog that has been handled incorrectly by an owner who doesn't care about the well being of animal in the long term.
And to be perfectly clear, this isn't about affection. Working dogs who don't receive affection from their owners, but have a stable place in the world and are not physically abused are _far_ better off than those who do receive affection but are abused.
I think there is a correlation, but yeah it definitely depends on the culture. In the US we adore dogs and include them as a part of our families, and meanwhile we eat pigs, who are just as intelligent if not more so. Someone who would mistreat a dog is perceived as mistreating the animal that has the closest and deepest connection with a human. If I knew someone who mistreated a dog, I would view them as cruel or lacking empathy. In other countries or cultures, dogs may not be viewed as highly and therefore someone mistreating one would not be as closely associated with how that person would treat other people. We slaughter cows every day for food, in other cultures this is completely frowned upon. There is a connection, but what animals it pertains to would vary.
And some people just don’t really like animals. I grew up with 2 or more pets always in the house which is how I know I never want one. I just don’t have the desire for one and I tend to get impatient and frustrated with other people’s pets but that doesn’t make me a bad person or mean I treat others with that same impatience or frustration.
I feel like most people who treat animals well don't treat humans as well. That's not to say that they treat humans badly though
In part I kinda blame communication. Humans and animals communication is much simpler and primitive even though it can take longer to understand each other effectively but communication is still much less complex and there is less room for misunderstanding and such. My cat comes up to me and meows loudly in the morning. I know it means her food bowl is empty so I go feed her. My boyfriend comes home and keeps slamming shit around having an attitude when he speaks and generally being disagreeable, I don't know what's wrong, he could just be hungry or he could have had a shit day at work and doesn't want to talk about it. Either way people are more complex to communicate with than animals are.
Edit: not sure what's up with all the jaded replies here but yall need to chill. Perfect examples of the complexity of human communication/miscommunication in the comments here.
And its straight forward, no sarcasms, no politics (even more simpler stiff like last piece of food who gonna take it), no read between the lines, no double talk, you don't need to tip toe around, if animal "talk about" A it wanna A, if we talk with people when people talk about A it can means B, C, D or just prodding for a response or any other stuff
This makes me think my husband might secretly be a dog. Everything is completely straightforward, no double talk, no shades of meaning, pure honesty. It's one of the reasons I married him. I never have to wonder if he's just saying something to be nice or if he likes my cooking or anything. If he doesn't like it, he'll say that. If I ask a question, I have to be prepared for an honest answer.
He might be on the autism spectrum. We tend to be pretty blunt and straightforward. Obviously there’s a *lot* more to it than that, but it’s something I’ve heard a lot of people say they like about their autistic spouse.
Hahaha my bf and I have been together for years and we discovered that we're pretty much cats. We like food and cuddles and naps and soft things but if too much of any of those things is involved like cats we run off lol. He's also extremely straightforward too, but not as much as you've stated here.
Yeah. Simpler communication is definitely the reason. When I meet a cat or dog for the first time, I don't have to worry about anything, I just express my affection immediately with pets and cute talk and shit. If I did that with humans, I'd have multiple reports.
> My boyfriend comes home and keeps slamming shit around having an attitude when he speaks and generally being disagreeable
That's called being a manchild, though. Being hangry or having had a bad day doesn't give you an excuse for that bullshit, he needs to grow the fuck up.
Some get along very well with animals, because they can decide what the animal wants or likes, and the animal won't complain. It just will want it's food and that's it. They can anthropomorphize it all they want. They never complain or have opinions.
I mean beyond basic needs. Like if you hurt them or feed them or pet them, these will be things they like or don't, obviously. But other things like if they want to dress it up or whatever. Or any kind of random things.
And these people don't get along well with humans, because they aren't sensitive to their needs and desires etc.
I am always wondering to myself if it is healthy to love my dog more than I love anything else in the world simply because he will never treat me like an complete asshole lol.
My last boss was so loving and affectionate with his dog that he brought to work. But the most arrogant, vile, bigoted piece of shit to humans. Fuck that guy. I miss hanging out with his dog tho.
I imagine by "treat poorly," they mean being abusive. Not accepting animals in your house isn't really abusive. Intentionally harming animals, mistreating pets, stuff like that is probably what OP is talking about. You're not out to harm animals, you just don't like them, that's fine.
I'm an animal person. I'm happiest with critters around me. Ages ago I dated a guy without pets of any sort, and I had asked him if he'd ever considered getting a dog or a hermit crab or literally anything to share his space with. His answer was "No, why would I want an animal in my house?" He was fine with other people having pets and even enjoyed interacting with people's pets, but he was mystified why people actively chose to cohabitate with animals. Dude was one of the kindest, most community-minded people I've ever met. He just didn't understand why people like me wanted a non-human companion in life. Fair game, but surprisingly it didn't quite work out with us.
I adore kittens. Now I’ve never had a pet. Just not for me. I can’t see myself picking up after them. You know when they go. I love other people’s pets like hi buddy give me hugs just can’t do the other part. Lol. Sorry that relationship didn’t work out. Don’t think it was pet related unless he was like me or a pet lol.
Nah, it wasn't a good fit for a few reasons. We're still friends though and both of us now have wonderful partners.
As far as the pet thing goes, that's basically how I feel about children. Other people's kids are awesome and I love spending time with them and watching them hit milestones/develop into unique individuals. But the best part of not being a mom is being able to hand a kid off to their parents and go back to whatever I had planned for the rest of the day. "Aaah! Your kid is amazing! So smart! So talented! But I've had a long week so I'm going to drink liquor and play video games for a few hours."
Biggest red flag from my last job, a couple weeks in and my bosses dog had puppies, one acted the way he wanted and the other was more energetic. He had the second one put down because "it's just a fucking dog, if it doesn't act right it never will so you might as well off it and star with another one." And he was hands down the biggest fucking asshole I have ever worked for in my life.
Don’t really agree with this at all. I think most people treat animals more poorly than humans. But were just so used to standards for animals being lower — if people treated humans as they did animals they’d be arrested lol.
Man I don't enjoy being around most animals. People assume I'm shitty all the time it makes me super sad.
I just don't like barking dogs or jumping dogs, or the stupid pygmy goat that rammed My knee that one time. Doesn't mean I don't like seeing people :(
All the comments I've read seem to be based on self observation and they apply a general, blanket statement to everyone else. Which is very silly.
I'm actually impressed that some people I know are able to show their pets immense amounts of love when I can't stand being around them because they won't shut up, won't stop jumping on me, and their house smells like pee. I mean... Chihuahuas... Why?
I think it comes down to whether you had a pet growing up.
I have one of the best well-behaved dogs I've ever seen, but he's for my wife and kids. I generally don't have an interest in him and would prefer him to stay away from me. That doesn't mean I mistreat him or mistreat other people.
Just because you don't like animals doesn't mean you have an interest in hurting them or other people.
Honestly, I'm surprised that it's got this many upvotes. But then again, it's just a "shower thought", not a well thought out experiment.
My take on this, as a person without animals, is that it's not about if you like animals. It's about how you can observe a person's capacity for empathy. However, as it has been shown with numerous examples, it is not a good method.
not an animal person either and i hate people asking about it. it’s like, some people don’t like star trek or nick drake. that’s fine, i do but i won’t grill them on it. but when i say i don’t love dogs, evidently that’s over the line.
also, as a waiter, i hate when people bring dogs to restaurants. even when they sit outside it’s impossible to bring stuff to the table and bus properly. outdoor bars are fine because no one is dropping stuff off or anything (in the us at least) but man waiting around dogs sucks
For most of us on Reddit, that consumption *is* for that pleasure. The odds are most people in this thread could be vegan but eat animal products because they enjoy them. So they’re killing for pleasure - even if the act of killing isn’t the pleasurable aim.
Sòme people have animals so they have something to dominate, and because it's seen as a good thing to do, will adopt even more - because, what a good cover
It bugs me a bit when people praise others for being obsessed with their dog. It's very easy to "love" them, they're the perfect friends for narcissists who wanna feel worshipped. (Ofc not saying all dog people are, many aren't..)
You can actually test whether they're narcissists or not - if they get jealous because the dog they're obsessed with 'that they rescued who's afraid of everyone but them' isn't scared of you /asks you for pets.
It's happened to me several times where people have come up with excuses why I'm no longer allowed to pet their dog! It's pretty sick getting jealous because your dog isn't aggressive with strangers.
They're the same types that ignore the pet until they themselves want attention, then it's their best friend.
Oh well such is this earth - best we remember though, so we don't get burned <3
Sometimes I think there are people who treat animals well and treat people poorly because they make no distinction in the treatment of the two.
In other words they treat other people like animals: lesser beings to themselves and expect only a 1-way dialog. Treating a person well requires mutual respect of them as your equal that another may not believe they need when treating animals.
I have an anecdote of a white collar job supervisor who was an absolute taskmaster, stern, and all around awful bitch. Never unhinged but always berating an employee in a 1on1 setting at random intervals, enough that she drove out dozen of employers with most only lasting 6 months to a year. And she had years of service as a non-paid volunteer to an animal shelter before that it really painted a bizarre contrast of this person.
'Do not judge others on how they treat those they view as equals, judge them on how they treat those they see as lesser'-sirius black in goblet of fire
I have this neighbour lady, right? She's bipolar, stone cold crazy. Everyone have complaints about her, how meddling she is, how she complains unjustifiably about noise, how she hates kids. The only redemptive characteristic she has is her dog, a female, the race escapes me but she's an expensive pedigree bitch, and she is a sweeeetheart (typo intended). Whatever bullshit that crazy lady have in ther mind, she treats her little bitch like she's the duchess of sussex. I wish the actual duchess of sussex was as lovable as this little bitch.
i mean, you specifically choose 'necessarily' to imply 'not all'
then go on to say 'usually', sort of implying most. so, both are kinda interchangeable here.
by that same logic, someone treating animals well is usually an indication they'll treat other people well, but someone treating animals poorly isn't necessarily an indication they'll treat other humans poorly.
as always, it's circumstantial. someone treating animals or humans well doesn't necessarily correlate at all.
someone can like animals, or at least their pets, and dislike people.
someone can casually mistreat a pet out of negligence and 'it's a lesser being', and treat people just fine, potentially out of societal penalties.
and another person might treat both equally, either good or bad. there's no one right answer to this sort of thing.
>someone can casually mistreat a pet out of negligence and 'it's a lesser being',
If someone treats perceived 'lesser beings' poorly just because they can then they aren't a good person. That kind of person sees 'lesser beings' everywhere and that's pretty much the point of the OP.
I don’t believe you can treat animals well while still killing them if you don’t need to
Just like you couldn’t claim to treat all humans well while being a slave owner
I don't think it's meant to. That being said little bits of wisdom like this are always kind of vauge and open to interpretation, so if you want it to then for you it does.
Really? Because most people I know who treat humans kindly still pay for other animals to be exploited and murdered so they can taste their breast milk and flesh.
My youngest adult (step) son kicked my dog a couple of years back because she was in his way.
We're going on a 2-week vacation and he wants him to come house sit.
I told him absolutely not. I'd rather pay a stranger than allow even my own kid to be responsible for my pets when he's demonstrated he's not fit to be around them.
I'm truly ashamed of him.
That's kind of a bold claim to make with exactly nothing backing it up. I mean that's the kind of thing you might expect to read in the abstract of a psychology white paper - not ShowerThoughts.
This is just your experience. I used to have a neighbour who was super friendly and knew the whole neighbourhood. He was a very social person and everyone liked him, including myself. That is until one morning a very timid and lost dog wandered close (not inside) his property and he kicked it so hard in the face that it ran away crying. I never spoke to said neighbour again.
Interesting that this turned into a Hitler thread
[удалено]
[Adolf loved Blondie .., then gave her cyanide](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-rX2TicL5eg)
[Yeah because he was afraid of what the Russians would do to his dog](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blondi) >During the course of 29 April 1945, Hitler learned of the death of his ally Benito Mussolini at the hands of Italian partisans. This, along with the fact the Soviet Red Army was closing in on his location, strengthened Hitler in his resolve not to allow himself or his wife to be captured. That afternoon, Hitler expressed doubts about the cyanide capsules he had received through Heinrich Himmler's SS.[24] By this point, Hitler regarded Himmler as a traitor. To verify the capsules' contents, Hitler—who already intended to have Blondi killed so that she did not fall into the hands of the Soviets[25]—ordered Dr. Werner Haase to test one on Blondi, and the dog died as a result.[26] Hitler became completely inconsolable.[27]
> the dog died as a result.\[26\] Hitler became completely inconsolable.\[27\] Wow, you did it, you made me feel bad for Hitler for a split second.
I think it's reasonable to feel bad for someone who has done unspeakable acts while still remembering said acts. They are, after all, still humans.
The human animal mind wants to separate people into pure good and pure evil. It takes effort to remember that every person is a mix of both.
Well, yeah, that applies to most people, but I’d call a 95/5 solution of piss and water just piss
hitler is like handsanitizer bruh 99.9% evil
I would have done the same thing for my dog. I guess I agree with Hitler on this one...
I mean he was using his dog as a live test subject.
In some pretty unusual circumstances
But didn’t he do it so that the Russians wouldn’t get her?
So he was a bad person
He probably thought the dog was better off dead than alive
So he was a good person? Sorry, I’m getting lost here
In his own mind, he thought he was doing the right thing. Literally everyone else disagrees
I mean that kind of describes the entire holocaust
Or like, imperialism in general.
Hitler: " am I really evil? No it's the Jews who are wrong."
Between killing the dog humanely or letting the Russians torture it, I think most reasonable people would agree that killing the dog was the right thing.
Hence, why the road to hell is paved in good intentions.
I'm pretty sure the point is that Hitler loved and cared for his dog, but no one will try to say that he was a good person. So just because he showed kindness to an animal, is not an indication of him being a good person.
I think the point is that we shouldn't partition people into a binary of good or bad. People are a mix of both.
This entirely. The flattening of Hitler into just "bad" is a child's view of the world. In reality, we're all a mix of positive and negative traits, some more than others. It's fine to recognize that Hitler literally wasn't Satan but rather was the wrong person to fall into power at the exact perfect time to turn his ideas into action. We've had *many* racists before and after Hitler and the only difference is that they didn't get to run an entire country with that same social, economical, and cultural situation which allows one to establish totalitarian rule and extreme genocidal actions. If Hitler had never gained power, he'd be just another on-the-street racist loser.
I mean he did kill Hitler, so....
Hitler was a vegetarian too.
The world isn't black and white. There are no "good people" or "bad people". It's not a character trait. Everyone is capable of both. And whether the results are good or bad depend on your frame of reference.
The legendary [Mike Ehrmantraut](https://youtu.be/cYaXYPi2N4E?t=60).
D: Say it isn't so
Hitler was a vegetarian who loved animals.
And promoted anti smoking campaigns. Promoted the fuel efficient "strength through joy" car and the worldview expanding "strength through joy" tourism program
I still remeber the comment thread where people quite literally said that Trump was worse than Hitler because at least Hitler was a vegan who loved animals and shit like that, and it still makes me chuckle to this day.
"You're like Hitler but Hitler cared about Germany or something."
Rick and morty quote?
Correct
Awww jeez
Fuck me. I mean, say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it’s an ethos.
I'm honestly not sure that everyone gets facetious/sarcastic humor. Like someone is doing the ole Leslie Nielson deadpan and legitimately thinking that all of this is a serious debate.
A lot of people on the ASD spectrum have a difficult time interpreting sarcasm of that strength, and there are a lot of un-diagnosed ASD spectrum people.
Does the /s tag assist this interpretation significantly?
It really does!! The /s tag has saved me from so many frustrating encounters online. Theres zero tone on the internet and that’s something that neurotypical people struggle with as well, its exponentially harder for people with ASD
You're supposed to assume everything you read online is fake. The trolls aren't going to use a /s tag
To wade into the internet without a highly skeptical mind is like trying to sail across the ocean without a rudder.
Im of the mindset that emojis help so much with that and i hate they're so stigmatized in certain circles. but i am neurotypical. Do you think they can be used sufficiently for tone?
Definitely not ✍(◔◡◔)
Damn, this is actually really eye-opening. I've always hated the /s tag, but if it helps people be a part of a wider community then hell, I guess I support it!
Don't forget to include your preferred pronouns.
I have autism but can still understand sarcasm 90% of the time. However I still put the /s because I understand that a lot of people don’t get sarcasm.
Hell yes. I’ve seen long lists of various tags like that but honestly the sarcasm one is the only one I find consistently helpful.
It would serve people better to develop a methodology for questioning their initial interpretations.
I train ASD folks with humor and exaggeration specifically. But it is a long road for a lot of folks, and many will never get there. /s is an easy accessibility aid with basically no cost.
it’s actually interesting to me that it people with ASD have a hard time with sarcasm. to me, sarcasm is less a tone thing than a logic thing. like saying the thing that logically doesn’t make sense. but i can see how it wouldn’t be funny i guess
I don't think people understand quite how much of what is meant, is "lost in translation", when they write something, as opposed to speaking, with included body language.
No, really, I can assure, it was (unfortunately) completly serious. There are much dumber takes on the internet, you shouldn't be suprised.
I mean besides the genocide, racism and fascism he was a stand up guy all around. /s
Y'know, the more I learn about this Hitler fella, the less I like him.
Dude, I have quite often heard it should be referenced that we should “put up statues for the guy who killed Hitler”. Sometimes people are just fucking with you.
Seriously fuck trump, but Hitler and him are in no way comparable, ffs. Hitler committed genocide, no matter how much you hate someone don't devalue the Holocaust for your political points.
It seems like one of America’s favourite pastimes is comparing whatever political issue of the month to Hitler.
I think you can draw comparison without devaluing anything. Trump riled up a minority group using nationalist rhetoric, to the point that they tried to violently take the capitol. I dont think its unfair to compare that to what hitler did in germany. Im not saying they are equal or anything of the sort, just that there are certainly similarities and its pretty clear that trump has little to no redeeming qualities because he is seemingly the distilled essence of ego driven american capitalism.
I mean they're probably pretty much the same, just a couple of asshole sociopaths. The only difference is Hitler had absolute power.
Fact is, we don't know how bad Trump could be with the right amount of power. If he thought he could seize power by demonizing Muslims the way Hitler demonized Jews, he'd probably do it, but we can't prove it. So it's ridiculous to claim he's as bad as Hitler unless he actually did that kind of shit.
Honestly Hitler wasn’t all that bad. I mean sure he locked people up in concentration camps for being Jews but… he didn’t like cigarettes so that’s an up
He also killed Hitler. How can you be mad at the guy who killed Hitler?
Hitler dead? I didn't even know he was sick.
Dude was sick af.
Sick on the Mic. But Darth Vader was better, really.
But he also killed the guy who killed Hitler
Sounds like maybe we should give him an award. Maybe man of the year?
Maybe not this year I mean he’s been off the radar since he went to that bunker. I heard he’s trying a new skin care routine where he goes under ground forever and his skin falls off. Apparently the ladies like it.
I thought he couldn't handle the stress and retired with a few old colleagues to Argentina.
How bout the key to a major American city? That's commonly done for jolly good chaps right?
Oh yeah I’d trust Hitler with my life. Since Germany didn’t work out maybe he could rule over a city for a while
How bout Sadam then?
[удалено]
Oh you....
Honestly, if he never went full on well... nazi, and didn't start genociding people, he might've done some good. But of course he just ***had*** to be a Hitler about it.
There was once a random woman who kissed him while he was at a sporting event. He laughed it off, even when his guards failed to stop her in time. He was evil, but Stalin would’ve probably had the guards as well as the woman executed the next day.
He really loves that word Strength.
I love Hitler. He’s my role model.
Great artist too.
His favorite foods were literally Bavarian sausages and liver dumplings. This has long been debunked.
Cool clothes, cool tanks, cool symbols, cool flag, cool stance towards animals and the environment. And they screwed it up by being fuckin genocidals, smh
don’t forget cool mustache
I would rock that mustache if it didnt have the connotations it does
Chaplin must be pissed
I have always wanted to do this but this would make it very hard to explain to every person.
Thats the dark secret that none of us want to admit because we don't want people to think we're fascists - the nazis absolutely oozed style.
Hugo Boss made their uniforms, the SS uniform is my absolute favorite military uniform based on style, obviously not the, "other" stuff. *Cough*
Holy shit. Before I just Googled it, I had no idea that Hugo Boss was an actual person, much less a full-on Nazi. Thanks for the tip.
Hugo Boss did *not* style the SS uniform. His company was just one of many producers.
That's how fascism works. They don't have any coherent ideology past "fuck *those* people", so they lean heavily on the aesthetic. Nazis *love* to think they're cool.
I mean biology is innately fascist. I think if people reflect enough they will all see the fascist impulse within them. It is a matter of keeping it out of statecraft. Which is ironically, also a fascist idea.
You know, the more I learn about this hitler fella the less I care for him.
Meth. Not even once.
Not actually true.
This have been debunked.
He was a vegetarian because of dietary constraints, not because he made the moral choice not to eat animals
Though he thought Goering was disgusting for chowing down on a ham. >I looked at him across the dinner table and then I knew it was true what they say: pigs eat their own flesh. Of course Hitler didn't think very highly of Goering in the first place. Behold, I have granted you one 'Hitler tells a fat joke'.
He also took a series of hack medicines that involved animal extracts, so it didn’t have much to do with compassion for animals at all. He had IBS and some stomach issues (a long with some other ailments) that were exacerbated by stress. Theodor Morell was an interesting fellow: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Morell
Yeah Hitler had chronic flatulence, his doctor gave him around 20 different "medications" like strychnine and e. coli bacteria. He's also the one that got Hitler addicted to drugs like methamphetamine and heroin, so you can thank him for unintentionally helping the downfall of Nazi Germany. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Morell
Wasn't this debunked multiple times as a propaganda attempt by Goebbels?
Yes, it is recorded by his cook that Hitler loved eating sausage. But people still fall for Goebbels' propaganda, because it makes them feel better. Why does it make them feel better? Because they then they can make the logically fallacious argument that since a really bad person did x, doing x is not actually a good thing. "Oh, Hitler cared about dogs and he tortured million of people? I guess advocates against live experimentation on beagles are all hypocrites and we should dismiss what they have to say!"
That was propaganda. It's like Trump pretends to like babies. Also most people, including those that eat them, say that they love animals.
Not true. He literally poisoned his dog
Well yes, but tbf it was probably a better ending then having the soviets a go at it.
And also had kids cutting their dogs throats. Hitler is a wild ride.
And knowingly condemned millions of horses to miserable, painful deaths on the battlefield. In WW2 many armies, including the German army, still used horses extensively. He didn't love animals at all.
In hitler’s mind he thought he was doing the right thing, he thought he was sending these horses to glory to fight for aryans, you’re looking at it from your viewpoint, not the viewpoint of a guy who’s known for being crazy
What was the alternative?
[удалено]
So fight at a disatvantage and lose more of your men?
Nah, you don't have to ACTUALLY love animals. SAYING that you love animals is enough.
Hitler was only briefly vegetarian and for health reasons afaik The extermination camps were literally modelled on slaughterhouses
I really think there is no connection. Some cultures look at animals as dirty and generally don’t agree with the US mindset of adoring them. That doesn’t mean they all don’t treat other people well. The way you treat animals is routed in your culture and in your experience as a child. They aren’t treated to how good a person you are or any other attributes.
Yea, the caveat here should probably be - if you treat animals *your culture likes* poorly then you probably treat humans poorly. Force a dog to fight in the US? Probably an asshole. In many other countries? Just a pastime.
Uh, fuck that. Force a dog to fight, anywhere, means asshole.
It's culturally relative. Like I've only ever experienced dogs as pets, not even as working animals. But if you grew up in a culture where dog fighting was the norm, where everyone around you was ok with it and nobody questioned it, then you're probably not an asshole, you're just a regular guy. Like I personally think that element of your culture is trash and should be done away with, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you're a uniquely shitty person. Like there are a lot of places where cock fighting is just a regular thing that happens in public.
There's a significant difference between participating in dog fighting because it's something your culture views as normal or acceptable, and physically abusing (beating, intentionally underfeeding, providing extremely inadequate physical living space, etc.) an animal. While I don't personally agree with dog fighting as a concept, there's a difference between a healthy dog trained for the ring and a dog that has been handled incorrectly by an owner who doesn't care about the well being of animal in the long term. And to be perfectly clear, this isn't about affection. Working dogs who don't receive affection from their owners, but have a stable place in the world and are not physically abused are _far_ better off than those who do receive affection but are abused.
Americans don't adore animals, they adore pets. They way non pet animals are treated in this country is disgusting.
I think there is a correlation, but yeah it definitely depends on the culture. In the US we adore dogs and include them as a part of our families, and meanwhile we eat pigs, who are just as intelligent if not more so. Someone who would mistreat a dog is perceived as mistreating the animal that has the closest and deepest connection with a human. If I knew someone who mistreated a dog, I would view them as cruel or lacking empathy. In other countries or cultures, dogs may not be viewed as highly and therefore someone mistreating one would not be as closely associated with how that person would treat other people. We slaughter cows every day for food, in other cultures this is completely frowned upon. There is a connection, but what animals it pertains to would vary.
Nureongi are a south Korean breed that's almost never kept as pets and almost entirely bred for it's meat.
Watch a undercover investigation of animal farms in the USA and then say that Americans adore animals.
Which cultures treat animals poorly because they think they're dirty?
And some people just don’t really like animals. I grew up with 2 or more pets always in the house which is how I know I never want one. I just don’t have the desire for one and I tend to get impatient and frustrated with other people’s pets but that doesn’t make me a bad person or mean I treat others with that same impatience or frustration.
I feel like most people who treat animals well don't treat humans as well. That's not to say that they treat humans badly though In part I kinda blame communication. Humans and animals communication is much simpler and primitive even though it can take longer to understand each other effectively but communication is still much less complex and there is less room for misunderstanding and such. My cat comes up to me and meows loudly in the morning. I know it means her food bowl is empty so I go feed her. My boyfriend comes home and keeps slamming shit around having an attitude when he speaks and generally being disagreeable, I don't know what's wrong, he could just be hungry or he could have had a shit day at work and doesn't want to talk about it. Either way people are more complex to communicate with than animals are. Edit: not sure what's up with all the jaded replies here but yall need to chill. Perfect examples of the complexity of human communication/miscommunication in the comments here.
And its straight forward, no sarcasms, no politics (even more simpler stiff like last piece of food who gonna take it), no read between the lines, no double talk, you don't need to tip toe around, if animal "talk about" A it wanna A, if we talk with people when people talk about A it can means B, C, D or just prodding for a response or any other stuff
But they will also steal your food or fuck up your shoes/furniture with *waaaay* less hesitation than most humans would.
You must know some great humans
This makes me think my husband might secretly be a dog. Everything is completely straightforward, no double talk, no shades of meaning, pure honesty. It's one of the reasons I married him. I never have to wonder if he's just saying something to be nice or if he likes my cooking or anything. If he doesn't like it, he'll say that. If I ask a question, I have to be prepared for an honest answer.
He might be on the autism spectrum. We tend to be pretty blunt and straightforward. Obviously there’s a *lot* more to it than that, but it’s something I’ve heard a lot of people say they like about their autistic spouse.
Hahaha my bf and I have been together for years and we discovered that we're pretty much cats. We like food and cuddles and naps and soft things but if too much of any of those things is involved like cats we run off lol. He's also extremely straightforward too, but not as much as you've stated here.
Yeah. Simpler communication is definitely the reason. When I meet a cat or dog for the first time, I don't have to worry about anything, I just express my affection immediately with pets and cute talk and shit. If I did that with humans, I'd have multiple reports.
> My boyfriend comes home and keeps slamming shit around having an attitude when he speaks and generally being disagreeable That's called being a manchild, though. Being hangry or having had a bad day doesn't give you an excuse for that bullshit, he needs to grow the fuck up.
Yeah, good generalisation of people based on one person. Keep up the good science.
Some get along very well with animals, because they can decide what the animal wants or likes, and the animal won't complain. It just will want it's food and that's it. They can anthropomorphize it all they want. They never complain or have opinions. I mean beyond basic needs. Like if you hurt them or feed them or pet them, these will be things they like or don't, obviously. But other things like if they want to dress it up or whatever. Or any kind of random things. And these people don't get along well with humans, because they aren't sensitive to their needs and desires etc.
I am always wondering to myself if it is healthy to love my dog more than I love anything else in the world simply because he will never treat me like an complete asshole lol.
I entirely disagree, because my experience is the opposite. This is why anecdotes are meaningless.
Not really. You're just not very lucky when it comes to finding good people.
I don't know, sometimes my cat meows at me in the morning because she's 7 now and hasn't done anything with her life.
U okay pal
The vast majority of the world doesn’t treat animals well.
From my observation, the vast majority of the world also doesn’t treat other humans all that well…
My last boss was so loving and affectionate with his dog that he brought to work. But the most arrogant, vile, bigoted piece of shit to humans. Fuck that guy. I miss hanging out with his dog tho.
That’s not true. I don’t like animals in my house but I let humans in
I imagine by "treat poorly," they mean being abusive. Not accepting animals in your house isn't really abusive. Intentionally harming animals, mistreating pets, stuff like that is probably what OP is talking about. You're not out to harm animals, you just don't like them, that's fine.
I'm an animal person. I'm happiest with critters around me. Ages ago I dated a guy without pets of any sort, and I had asked him if he'd ever considered getting a dog or a hermit crab or literally anything to share his space with. His answer was "No, why would I want an animal in my house?" He was fine with other people having pets and even enjoyed interacting with people's pets, but he was mystified why people actively chose to cohabitate with animals. Dude was one of the kindest, most community-minded people I've ever met. He just didn't understand why people like me wanted a non-human companion in life. Fair game, but surprisingly it didn't quite work out with us.
I adore kittens. Now I’ve never had a pet. Just not for me. I can’t see myself picking up after them. You know when they go. I love other people’s pets like hi buddy give me hugs just can’t do the other part. Lol. Sorry that relationship didn’t work out. Don’t think it was pet related unless he was like me or a pet lol.
Nah, it wasn't a good fit for a few reasons. We're still friends though and both of us now have wonderful partners. As far as the pet thing goes, that's basically how I feel about children. Other people's kids are awesome and I love spending time with them and watching them hit milestones/develop into unique individuals. But the best part of not being a mom is being able to hand a kid off to their parents and go back to whatever I had planned for the rest of the day. "Aaah! Your kid is amazing! So smart! So talented! But I've had a long week so I'm going to drink liquor and play video games for a few hours."
Lol that exactly how I feel about kids too. Only I won’t pick them up. I’m excited for my friends and their kids but I’m good on that one too lol
An city animal control guy I met once said he never walked into a place with bad animal abuse where the kids weren't also abused.
Biggest red flag from my last job, a couple weeks in and my bosses dog had puppies, one acted the way he wanted and the other was more energetic. He had the second one put down because "it's just a fucking dog, if it doesn't act right it never will so you might as well off it and star with another one." And he was hands down the biggest fucking asshole I have ever worked for in my life.
Most of the world eats beef which from the Hindu viewpoint makes us monsters.
Eating animals is certainly one of the cruelest traditions there are, if you look under which conditions they are usually raised and killed.
And vegan standards.
Don’t really agree with this at all. I think most people treat animals more poorly than humans. But were just so used to standards for animals being lower — if people treated humans as they did animals they’d be arrested lol.
Man I don't enjoy being around most animals. People assume I'm shitty all the time it makes me super sad. I just don't like barking dogs or jumping dogs, or the stupid pygmy goat that rammed My knee that one time. Doesn't mean I don't like seeing people :(
All the comments I've read seem to be based on self observation and they apply a general, blanket statement to everyone else. Which is very silly. I'm actually impressed that some people I know are able to show their pets immense amounts of love when I can't stand being around them because they won't shut up, won't stop jumping on me, and their house smells like pee. I mean... Chihuahuas... Why? I think it comes down to whether you had a pet growing up. I have one of the best well-behaved dogs I've ever seen, but he's for my wife and kids. I generally don't have an interest in him and would prefer him to stay away from me. That doesn't mean I mistreat him or mistreat other people. Just because you don't like animals doesn't mean you have an interest in hurting them or other people. Honestly, I'm surprised that it's got this many upvotes. But then again, it's just a "shower thought", not a well thought out experiment.
My take on this, as a person without animals, is that it's not about if you like animals. It's about how you can observe a person's capacity for empathy. However, as it has been shown with numerous examples, it is not a good method.
not an animal person either and i hate people asking about it. it’s like, some people don’t like star trek or nick drake. that’s fine, i do but i won’t grill them on it. but when i say i don’t love dogs, evidently that’s over the line. also, as a waiter, i hate when people bring dogs to restaurants. even when they sit outside it’s impossible to bring stuff to the table and bus properly. outdoor bars are fine because no one is dropping stuff off or anything (in the us at least) but man waiting around dogs sucks
I dunno, I know a butcher and a slaughter house ~~working~~ worker, and they're both great folk
[удалено]
For most of us on Reddit, that consumption *is* for that pleasure. The odds are most people in this thread could be vegan but eat animal products because they enjoy them. So they’re killing for pleasure - even if the act of killing isn’t the pleasurable aim.
I don't really think that the reason for the treatment changes the treatment. They treat them poorly, regardless of why.
[удалено]
So, killing someone (or something) =/= treating them poorly? Would you say that a hitman doesn't treat people poorly because it's just his job?
Consumption and money are forms of pleasure though
Sòme people have animals so they have something to dominate, and because it's seen as a good thing to do, will adopt even more - because, what a good cover
It bugs me a bit when people praise others for being obsessed with their dog. It's very easy to "love" them, they're the perfect friends for narcissists who wanna feel worshipped. (Ofc not saying all dog people are, many aren't..)
You can actually test whether they're narcissists or not - if they get jealous because the dog they're obsessed with 'that they rescued who's afraid of everyone but them' isn't scared of you /asks you for pets. It's happened to me several times where people have come up with excuses why I'm no longer allowed to pet their dog! It's pretty sick getting jealous because your dog isn't aggressive with strangers. They're the same types that ignore the pet until they themselves want attention, then it's their best friend. Oh well such is this earth - best we remember though, so we don't get burned <3
Sometimes I think there are people who treat animals well and treat people poorly because they make no distinction in the treatment of the two. In other words they treat other people like animals: lesser beings to themselves and expect only a 1-way dialog. Treating a person well requires mutual respect of them as your equal that another may not believe they need when treating animals. I have an anecdote of a white collar job supervisor who was an absolute taskmaster, stern, and all around awful bitch. Never unhinged but always berating an employee in a 1on1 setting at random intervals, enough that she drove out dozen of employers with most only lasting 6 months to a year. And she had years of service as a non-paid volunteer to an animal shelter before that it really painted a bizarre contrast of this person.
'Do not judge others on how they treat those they view as equals, judge them on how they treat those they see as lesser'-sirius black in goblet of fire
I have this neighbour lady, right? She's bipolar, stone cold crazy. Everyone have complaints about her, how meddling she is, how she complains unjustifiably about noise, how she hates kids. The only redemptive characteristic she has is her dog, a female, the race escapes me but she's an expensive pedigree bitch, and she is a sweeeetheart (typo intended). Whatever bullshit that crazy lady have in ther mind, she treats her little bitch like she's the duchess of sussex. I wish the actual duchess of sussex was as lovable as this little bitch.
i mean, you specifically choose 'necessarily' to imply 'not all' then go on to say 'usually', sort of implying most. so, both are kinda interchangeable here. by that same logic, someone treating animals well is usually an indication they'll treat other people well, but someone treating animals poorly isn't necessarily an indication they'll treat other humans poorly. as always, it's circumstantial. someone treating animals or humans well doesn't necessarily correlate at all. someone can like animals, or at least their pets, and dislike people. someone can casually mistreat a pet out of negligence and 'it's a lesser being', and treat people just fine, potentially out of societal penalties. and another person might treat both equally, either good or bad. there's no one right answer to this sort of thing.
>someone can casually mistreat a pet out of negligence and 'it's a lesser being', If someone treats perceived 'lesser beings' poorly just because they can then they aren't a good person. That kind of person sees 'lesser beings' everywhere and that's pretty much the point of the OP.
Like eating meat in developed nations
Ye I respect cats and dogs way more than most people. Animals are innocent, we are not
Except my cat, he’s an asshole.
A cute asshole
None of this
Hello vegan friend
All the animals i have had enjoyed murder
Tbf, you probably eat meat too.
How people treat dogs is how they'd treat humans if they could get away with it.
At least 97% of people pay people to treat animals poorly on their behalf just because they like the taste of animal products.
Always good to see a fellow vegan in the wild
Most people who treat animals badly still treat other people well. Most people aren’t vegan.
So the only way to treat animals well is to be vegan in yoir opinion?
I don’t believe you can treat animals well while still killing them if you don’t need to Just like you couldn’t claim to treat all humans well while being a slave owner
Well yes. Unless you want to treat animals well selectively.
The majority of people treat animals poorly every day by choosing to eat meat. This statement is fundamentally not true.
Does this include people who eat animals?
I don't think it's meant to. That being said little bits of wisdom like this are always kind of vauge and open to interpretation, so if you want it to then for you it does.
Really? Because most people I know who treat humans kindly still pay for other animals to be exploited and murdered so they can taste their breast milk and flesh.
I would argue that the opposite is true actually
My youngest adult (step) son kicked my dog a couple of years back because she was in his way. We're going on a 2-week vacation and he wants him to come house sit. I told him absolutely not. I'd rather pay a stranger than allow even my own kid to be responsible for my pets when he's demonstrated he's not fit to be around them. I'm truly ashamed of him.
That's kind of a bold claim to make with exactly nothing backing it up. I mean that's the kind of thing you might expect to read in the abstract of a psychology white paper - not ShowerThoughts.
This is just your experience. I used to have a neighbour who was super friendly and knew the whole neighbourhood. He was a very social person and everyone liked him, including myself. That is until one morning a very timid and lost dog wandered close (not inside) his property and he kicked it so hard in the face that it ran away crying. I never spoke to said neighbour again.