• @almost1337@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      376 months ago

      I’m pretty sure Pepe was only temporarily coopted by the far rights, and has since been reclaimed.

        • @almost1337@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          176 months ago

          Almost every meme template has been used to make alt-right nonsense, do we just abandon any symbol they pick up for their misdeeds? Or do we push back and refuse to allow them that kind of control over our culture?

          • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            -296 months ago

            Very few and far between were exclusive to the right. Pepe was. It started as theirs and continued to be theirs for a long time, in my opinion still continues to be theirs. You few fighting for the symbol’s continued use in good faith (if you are) are not the majority.

              • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                -156 months ago

                It started as a french cartoon and got coopted into the feelsbadman meme format in 2009 and then skyrocketed in popularity and mainstream use in 2015-2016 by pro-trump conservatives.

                Even if it were present in every single greentext like some sort of bizarre requirement, it still would have more use by nazis and propogandists than anyone else.

        • @Shampiss@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          18
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          An icon represents what the people think it represents.

          An icon can also have different meanings to different people. It’s ok if you don’t like it. But I don’t think it’s fair to say that the majority of people that use or share Pepe are from one specific ideological group

            • @jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              116 months ago

              Lmao, what a wild assumption that they could take whatever icons they like, with no basis in reality.

              that’s…. exactly what they do buddy. you don’t seem the type to care for counter-examples so i won’t even try and list any of the many, many fucking instances of this happening irl

              • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                -126 months ago

                Ohmygod you’re right just look at the countless examples:

                • Pepe the Frog 2015

                • Swastika 1907

                • ??

                They can really just take whatever they want! /sarcasm

                • @Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  76 months ago

                  Degenerate, 88, 14, the Roman salute, multiple names, the fascista, shaven heads, lighting motifs, runic symbols.

                  That’s just what I came up with off the top of my head. The other person is right, and I say we should reclaim every symbol because those fuckers shouldn’t be allowed to call anything their own or have anything to ralley around or identify each other with. The only symbol I’m aware of that the made was the black sun which is itself simply the ss symbol repeated around a circle, which itself is an appropriated rune.

                  Reclaim every symbol.

                  • @Ziglin@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    46 months ago

                    I do believe 88 was just 2x the 8th letter of the alphabet which is H, which was short for what they say in the Hitlergruß.

                    This is a perfectly reasonable explanation to me and fits too well for this to seem like a coincidence.

        • @Agent641@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          25
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          You’re right. Hey lemmy, lets all accommodate this one guys specific likes and dislikes so he doesn’t get his lil feels hurt!

        • @kewjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          176 months ago

          the swastika was originally a religious icon used and still used in Hinduism, Buddhism and Jianism, i wouldn’t consider them Nazis… Context matters

          • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            -266 months ago

            Imagine unironically saying we should normalize nazi swastikas. If that’s not what it takes for you to reevaluate your stance, then you’re a lost cause.

            • @kewjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              96 months ago

              the symbol predates Germany, initial findings date it back to 3300-1300 BC. you’re telling me all historical religious symbols in Asian countries should wiped of the icon because of Nazis misappropriating their symbol? you would literally deface ancient sites that predate nazis by thousands of years because you can only see it as a symbol of hate?

              you can use context clues such as actual hate speech, nazi slogans and genocide to distinguish those that are actually racist. the whole point of nazism is to erase culture and replace it with only the “one true race”. by allowing nazis and white supremacists to appropriate symbols you’re actively giving them power.

              • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                -12
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                So then, you think Nazi Swastikas without context should be allowed without any repercussions. I saw your first comment, I don’t see why you think using more words to say the same thing would make it any different.

                Here are some questions: How does punishing nazis for using symbols of hate and intolerance empower them? How does allowing them to do so freely harm them in contrast?

                You do not need to use a nazi swastika. A world where they are not allowed in public is a world where people feel safe and comfortable. Just as you do not need to use the frog. The frog is unimportant and only continues to exist because people like you fight for it.

                • @barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  So then, you think Nazi Swastikas without context should be allowed without any repercussions.

                  That’s incoherent. “Nazi swastika” and “without context” doesn’t mesh because “Nazi” is a context for “swastika”.

                  That aside, I’m going to take German law as an example: No, non-nazi swastikas are very much not outlawed. You can see them on stray Hindu temples or shrines in the country, for example. “Without” context they’re generally assumed to be Nazi ones over here because historical context, also, only Nazis draw random swastikas over here. You also see ones broken in pieces getting thrown in the trash or in a crossed-out circle, those come from the Antifa side.

                  Both the Hindu and Antifa uses are legal, the Nazi ones aren’t. That’s because German law doesn’t outlaw the swastika as such, it outlaws “using symbols of unconstitutional or outlawed organisations in a manner suitable to further their aims”. A Nazi painting a Swastika on a Jewish gravestone is considered furthering the aims of the NSDAP, which had the swastika as their logo. A Hindu chiselling a swastika into their gravestone is a completely different matter. (Do Hindus use gravestones? Anyway doesn’t matter it’s a hypothetical example).

                  In another country, where the historical context is different, those “without” context swastikas won’t be interpreted the same as in Germany. So even under German law those would arguably be legal, there.

                • @kewjo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  66 months ago

                  literally my first comment said context matters. if you see an image with hate speech maybe its the speech that you should pay attention to.

                  • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -86 months ago

                    Yes, again, I’ve read your comments and understood them. Maybe you’re the one having comprehension troubles, here?

                    I don’t see how this comment in any way argues against any of my statements. You either never disagreed with me to begin with about swastikas being bannable outside of specific religious contexts, or you want contextless hate speech to be allowed as a blanket rule. There is no in-between.