Hi There Hellhole, What's Up - Ohh...Ugh

We've finally found something mods are all right with!

"Have The Hitler Protocols been relaxed? Like... a lot?"

This entry referred to a Politics board topic where someone claimed Hitler would've stopped concentration camp abuses if he knew about them, the board then basically spent the next few pages responding to the troll or telling people not to respond to the troll, then someone from Politics came over from Hellhole after a few days to ask the mods why apparently pro-Hitler messages weren't getting modded despite all that time since they were marked. While we think this is just an unpopular (but who cares) opinion, we bring it up here because 1) it's part of another Politics board rush to get people punished (more on that later) and 2) the mod response was pretty bad.

gmo7897 writes (emphasis added):

While it's a touchy subject, people are allowed to speculate things of this nature. Denying the Holocaust is one thing. We aren't going to allow that unless someone has some really good evidence. However, since evidence is unlikely to exist at this point, and there's way too much evidence saying the Holocaust did happen, we're not likely going to allow people to deny it.

However, people are allowed to speculate on things that are unpopular such as this. For what it's worth, Hitler was a very smart man and a phenomenal leader. That is... until he went all bat crap crazy. He was also a socialist, which is generally all about the government taking care of the people, so there's possible credence into the thought that camps may have been better if he knew anything about them - assuming he didn't.

I'm not saying I agree one way or another, but it's food for thought either way. Hitler is quite possibly one of the most polarizing figureheads in the last 100 years or so - if not further back.

So, in short, saying Hitler was a "good guy" for what happened or outright denying the Holocaust = bad. Saying Hitler may not have been all that bad of a guy but just got a bum rep = tolerable - assuming there's legitimate backing to the claim.

What "legitimate backing" means is anyone's guess, since all the user basically said was Hitler would've made the camps better if he knew they were bad. No sources, not exactly a thesis. gmo wasn't done. Maybe the guy was right! You can't prove Hitler's totalitarian state knew about what was going on in the camps!

I'm not saying that it has to come with a link; it just has to be something that's potentially believable. Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but there's no real evidence to say that he knew what was going on. As the president of a country (or whatever his title was at the time), don't you think there would have been some pictures or something of him at these camps? There are other pictures and videos available from that time period that show what was happening.

Like I said, it's a touchy subject, but we don't really want to stop people from having views that oppose the norm.

Ha. Haha. Hahaha. Okay, mind telling me why pro-Hitler is a touchy but acceptable subject, but I was modded within 15 minutes recently for "misgendering" (using "he" or "his" instead of "she" when talking about a guy who wanted to be a girl - yes this is what they mod). Less than 15 minutes for a joke moderation that was overturned. What the heck. If you want to veer a topic off course, argue the 40s and how maybe Hitler wasn't that bad, derail a topic, go right ahead. You're awful but go on. Yet these are the same mods who go out of their way to take sides and take down unpopular opinions on current debates, arguments that should have a lot more room for open discussion than "Hitler didn't know about his own camps."

Then again we could be reading too much into this. Here's Mith explaining what the board's about.