• almost1337@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

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

      • Agent641@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 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!

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          33
          ·
          5 months ago

          “Hey everybody, cartoon frogs with a history of hate speech are more important to me than basic human empathy.”

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          5 months ago

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

          • jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 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

                  • Drewelite@lemmynsfw.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    The only person in this thread who seems intent on pepe being about hate speech is you. I’ve been asked in some formal settings to avoid using the OK hand sign in case it sends the wrong message. I’ve been advised by tattoo artists to avoid Nordic symbols despite the fact that I’m of Scandinavian descent. You’re enabling the worst kind of people to decide what symbols mean in our culture. Why?

              • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                4 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.

      • Shampiss@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 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

      • almost1337@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 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
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          32
          ·
          5 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
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              18
              ·
              5 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.

      • kewjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 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
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          26
          ·
          5 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
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 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
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              14
              ·
              edit-2
              5 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.

              • kewjo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 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.

                  • kewjo@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    is English your first language because you either don’t understand what I’m saying or you are too ignorant to understand.

                    swastikas being bannable outside of specific religious contexts

                    that’s literally what i said. the context around the symbol is what is important. no one in south west asia sees a swastika and think Nazis because it’s part of the religious culture. just as no one sees Pepe and thinks nazis because no one normal participated in that shit subculture of 4chan except Nazis.

                    Let’s actually look at what happened with Pepe, he was created by an artist then appropriated by Nazis. The artist then posted that he was outraged and disappointed that it was taken over by Nazis. people listened and were also outraged and did everything to normalize and take it back from the Nazis, because again it wasn’t theirs to take in the first place. now you imagine the 12 year old posting it are nazis when they have no context of any of the events your talking about. go touch grass, your brain is rotting.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 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.