Is there any value to analyzing his DNA? The idea that evil is genetic is itself feeding into some Nazi ideas about eugenics that are deeply wrong.
Maybe we want to clone Hitler but raise him to be antifa.
I’ll allow it.
Yeah to me that’s the biggest objection… he’s long dead, he has no surviving family that wants good for him to my knowledge. So to me that’s kind of on the same level as, digging up mummies. The evil actions he commited in life don’t really come into play here, and agreed it’s really stupid idea to think that his behavior is genetic.
Kind of reminds me of when most of the nazi generals swore to have no kids to not carry on their DNA, except one, who said “No I won’t sign that pledge, that’s eugenics which is nazi ideology”.
We learned he had a micro penis, a potent weapon against his neo-nazi fans. The value is already immense.
And monorchidia
Is there any value to make 2 million Hitler documentaries? No, but they do it anyways.
It’s historically interesting to maybe understand who he was as a human being. He’s often painted as a monster but he was a human, and is a warning to all of us what evil human’s can achieve.
For example, they’re revealed he had Kallmann Syndrome (which can cause a micropenis and undescended testes) - he may have essentially been essentially asexual which may explain some of his life choices and why he was so dedicated to politics and gaining power. They’ve also shown he had high genetic risks for psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia, as well as ADHD, autism.
Sensationalist reporting aside, these findings do add something to our understanding of a historical figure who had massive influence on human history.
Removed by mod
The sort that would want a Hitler clone would be happy with a direwolf-style pseudo-clone with good marketing.
I find it curious that they talk about privacy for Hitler but don’t mention Henrietta Lacks who this very thing happened to. Her cell cultures are being used to this day.
that’s how you know the whole argument is a dog whistle…
Does this neolithic prehuman have a right to privacy? If they can’t give consent, what does it say about this project?
For fuck sake… Genetists needs to read some social science. What is all with this making Hitler the biggest reason for the existence of Nazism and the occurrence of the Holocaust? This is why people believe that you can beat fascism with a vote, as if it is a leadership problem and not a complete social movement and social transformation problem
deleted by creator
What if it turns out Hitler saliva cures cancer, all you gotta do is make out with a Hitler clone? You know, like with lizards and limey disease.
Now I imagine limey disease. Prime symptom is talking like “Oi guvnor, u wot?”
deleted by creator
Government and bureaucracy is the duct tape and glue we made to hold society together but actual societal change is a more natural force that is completely separate from government.
Does Tutankhamun’s DNA need consent?
Disregarding the fact that he was evil, Im not sure historical figures qualify for the same rights as we average people do. I think at most, we should respect what they respected, and Hitler did not respect privacy, so get fucked nazi, your DNA is ours.
Ew, undersmencht dna
The whole study is weird. Do they think there is a correlation between his DNA and the horrible acts he did? Are we going to start rounding up anyone with that genetic marker? Put them in camps?
He’s been dead for 80 years, that’s plenty long enough for anyone’s feelings to not matter.
USA: IP right is 100 years after the creators death.
So when did hitlers parents die?
US IP rights are only a good example of a bad example.
Also, it is internationally generally agreed upon that criminals forfeit their rights to personally identifying information, such as fingerprints and DNA evidence.
Given Hitler’s regime has been internationally agreed to be war criminals and have committed crimes against humanity, even if Hitler himself chose the coward’s way out to avoid being convicted for these crimes, I think we can all agree on him being responsible for these crimes thus is essentially convicted posthumous.
Therefore combining the two, Hitler was and is a criminal therefore privacy protection laws don’t apply, therefore his DNA should be freely usable by the scientific community.
Why are we even talking about Hitler’s DNA? Out of all the news why this. We are seriously weird.
Researchers sequenced his DNA recently from a bloodstained couch cushion, we’ve been getting glimpses into it lately.
Presumably the insights are just that he was a human and not a space alien.
What are they looking for exactly?
They are trying to track down the genocide gene. Then we can screen all of our politicians for it
The Nazis couldn’t have done their genocide without the support of thousands of people, all who made the decision to actively support it for their personal gain, believes, or just plain complacency. What is a genocide supporting gene in one time is a normal suburban life gene in another time.
deleted by creator
That sounds like latent serial killer genes talking
deleted by creator
Just a weird topic especially with all this neo-nazism happening in the US government.
I am not saying it isn’t newsworthy at all of course. It is just the timing is suspect.
According to the GOP, since the dead pay no taxes to America, they have no rights.
Fetuses don’t pay taxes either and yet the GOP are really interested in making sure they have rights.
What a pointless question. There’s literally nothing we could hope to learn from examining his specific DNA.
This is like how some scientist stole Einstein’s brain to see what made him so smart and didn’t find anything. Pointless.
The fact that this is being used as an argument against right to privacy is an ad absurdum strawman.
I think that’s an easy one: Hitler is dead and, as far as I know, never had any direct descendants or relatives that could object on valid reasons.
Hitler’s (half?) nephew served in the US Navy during WW2.
I don’t think William has any remaining kin though.Looks like William has four children, 3 of whom may still be alive. None of those 4 have had any children of their own.A niece or nephew isn’t a direct descendant
Who is harmed by this? No one living. Maybe you could argue Hitler has some right to not have his remains disturbed, but DNA testing isn’t very invasive and we do it at crime scenes without consent all the time, so it’s minor even if relevant.
What could we learn? Nothing of value. Even if there is some “psychopath gene” or “genocide gene” you’d need 100s of examples to show the effect and far easier to just pick such candidates from living, diagnosed people who can consent.
So then should we do it? Probs not. No real reason to, even though there’s little reason not to.
There’s propaganda value to “Hitler was quasi-Trans” as same revisionist demonism as “Hitler was a socialist” to revive a (neo) naziism without the baggage of Hitler, that can better serve Zionist first Christofascism in erradicating Islam, humanist governance, and whatever “the woke” needs to mean.
Beyond privacy rights, is what is the usefulness of the messaging, and could that usefulness be more important to someone/agenda than the moral failures of completely fabricating it.
deleted by creator
Yes, fascism negates the rights of the fascists. It has to in order to protect free society.
It’s call the Paradox of Tolerance, and is very difficult for centrist liberals to understand.
The faster you string fascists up, the better off society will be. The body? Who cares, do what you want with it.
It’s not fascist, to be “fascist against fascism”.
The way I’ve reconciled the Paradox of Tolerance for myself is to view tolerance as part of a social contract. The social contract demands that tolerance be extended to everyone who in turn accepts that social contract themselves. “Being tolerant” doesn’t necessarily require that tolerance to be given out indiscriminately. Like how I wouldn’t consider a vegan any less a vegan if they ended up having to kill something in self-defense, even if they had to kill it by biting chunks out of it.
