Maybe don't assist the Nazis and then genocide Poland or something, idk
20th Century History
(media.piefed.social)
First, can I say that I think we generally agree, and I don't like the feeling of being attacked by a person who is marked as a mod in their comment? It makes me feel like if I don't defend my point, then I'll receive some sort of punishment due to an imbalance of power. But it also feels like I need to walk on eggshells, because if I defend myself by, say, pointing out a mistake a mod makes, I could receive some sort of punishment, as well.
Maybe it's my experience from Reddit, but it feels bad to have a debate with a mod, even if I think it's because my comment was misinterpreted by the mod. It's the imbalance of power.
Then your comment has nothing to do with the actual meme or topic at hand?
It's a tangential point, so it has something to do with the topic, tangentially. I am talking about the idea that you can point to one good thing that changes a bad person into a good person, or even one bad thing that changes a good person into a bad person. And how I find that concept fundamentally absurd. The topic is Stalin apologists, so I brought up Hitler, instead, as a person in the same category.
If someone says “Hitler was a real shithead, take note of all these shitty things he did, and look at these people making apologia for these shitty things.” and someone walks in and immediately opens with “Without weighing in on the actual issue, I find it disappointing how everybody wants easy black-and-white answers”, what exactly do you think that would imply?
The problem is that I agree with that sentiment, first, but if you're asking how I would interpret it, I would read the rest of their comment to see what they meant specifically.
Immediately opining in a discussion about two of the worst genocidal dictators in human history that “things aren’t just black and white” incredibly strongly implies that there is a ‘less black’ interpretation of one or both of them.
If there's no "less black" interpretation of both Hitler or Stalin, then it would be impossible to compare them with each other. They're both just perfectly black. Then, there's no scale. There's no degrees. There's no room for a worse monster to arise in the future.
where do I even vaguely imply that there aren’t degrees of good and evil.
Well, my comment was about how there are degrees of good and evil, and how somebody apologizing for an overwhelmingly evil person by showing something less evil that they did doesn't excuse their behavior, and your response started with: "Fuck, man," which is a statement that you not only disagree, but that you think my point is egregious or exasperating. That is the vague implication.