The issue with this kind of stuff is history. As a 40 you’re old American, whose grandfather served in World War II, I had no idea what that tattoo meant before this whole scandal.
The only symbolism we ever went over in school was the flag and swastika. I believe they thought dumb kids would mimic the iconography to look edgy.
Yeah, I keep saying this but idiots keep telling me I must have been a dumbass not to recognize it. I told them to show me a single screenshot of this symbol appearing in any media that depicts nazis or WWII and they couldn’t provide one, they just kept deflecting and calling me a dumbass.
You asked for “a single screenshot” and claimed people couldn’t produce one, I showed you a whole sketch specifically about the symbol, and now the goalposts have moved to “high definition photos that I personally see on a daily basis.”
Okay, so what’s that sketch from? I’ve heard the quote before but I couldn’t tell you what it’s from. I’ve never seen the video, and I’m sure I’m not the only one
Also, what year did it come out, and was it before Platner got the tattoo? Cause if that’s the only media representation you’re gonna rely on, obscure as it is, it doesn’t help your argument that he knew what it was if it wasn’t even out yet
You asked for “a single screenshot” and claimed people couldn’t produce one, I showed you a whole sketch specifically about the symbol, and now the goalposts have moved to “high definition photos that I personally see on a daily basis.”
it doesn’t help your argument that he knew what it was if it wasn’t even out yet
Oh great, you’ve proven that there’s a wikipedia article for it. This is proof that anyone who hasn’t already stumbled upon it by chance is clearly a willfully ignorant nazi! /s
The only reason you’re even linking it now is because we’re already discussing it. My whole point is that hardly anybody knew what this symbol was prior to the discussion around Platner.
Now find a movie, TV show, book, comic, or video game that depicts that symbol on a nazi. Because that’s what I meant from the start and you know it.
I fully admit I am not the smartest or best student of history. However I recall no lessons un symbolism in any history class other than ancient Egypt and Neolithic era or late Stone Age.
Make not mistake I am not supporting any hatred other than towards Nazis. However when I first saw the image I honestly thought it was from Warhammer or something.
Yeah, I thought it looked tacky and stupid. I wouldn’t have gotten it myself. But I also didn’t know it was a nazi symbol until I read about it in the context of platner. Never would have guessed.
The British symbol looks nothing like a totenkopf, the tattoo looks exactly like a totenkopf, 1-to-1 on every detail, no matter how much people try to pretend otherwise.
If you have an image that shows that much detail, please provide it. I really want to see it. I have not seen any. I see some black blobs/outlines that’s all.
And from what I can see, the eyes would be different than on the SS version, and details in the bones are also not visible.
Still, it could be like you said the exact version. I can not tell.
And of course does the UK skull not look like this. But: skull on bone is a common symbol. Look for the example at this pre-nazi Symbol.
If we don’t question the given facts, and form our own opinion, we are not better then the real Nazis.
Discrediting political opponents was part of their playbook.
(I am a German anitfaschist, breaking Nazi bones since 2000, and I am not here to defend anyone, just to animate independent thinking)
But: skull on bone is a common symbol. Look for the example at this pre-nazi Symbol.
First off, that symbol is less similar to the tattoo than then totenkomf (that it 100% is). Second, you could also pull up images of swastikas that predate the Nazis. Should I also suspend judgement if I see someone with a swastika tattooed on their chest?
If we don’t question the given facts, and form our own opinion, we are not better then the real Nazis.
This is an absolutely ridiculous thing to say in this context. I’m seeing a picture that is, very clearly and obviously, a totenkomf, a Nazi symbol. And all I’m doing is calling it a Nazi symbol. And somehow, describing the thing that’s right in front of my eyes makes me “no better than a Nazi.”
I don’t think it’s a totenkopf because I was told it was by some influence campaign to discredit a politician, I know it’s a totenkopf because I have eyes.
I mean, come on! “The Nazis discredited their opponents too.” Ok then, should I not consider Trump discredited, for fear of being like a Nazi? Sure, my eyes have seen him palling around with Jeffery Epstein, but there’s any number of excuses people use, if they really want to. I think there was one narrative that he was just infiltrating the secret pedophile ring to take it down from the inside.
The reality is that there’s this enormous pushback whenever anyone tries to hold any politician to any standard whatsoever. It’s like some kind of internalized authoritarianism. It’s “boys will be boys” dialed up to 11.
I can say with 100% certainty based on the pictures presented that that was a totenkomf. Hell, if it wasn’t, why didn’t he provide pictures to prove otherwise? But no matter what evidence is presented, it’s always possible to just demand high and higher standards of proof to protect politicians from any scrutiny.
First, i never said YOU did not think! How do you assume i have this opinion of you?
This is the part that I responded negatively to:
If we don’t question the given facts, and form our own opinion, we are not better then the real Nazis.
Discrediting political opponents was part of their playbook.
To me I came across like, “If you discredit a politician you’re no better than a Nazi,” even though in some situations, like this one, there are legitimate reasons to consider a politician discredited.
Here we go, 5 minute gimp job. But asking for proof is considered hostile now?
The proof was already there. I guess you needed to see it on the specific location the see the similarities? Generally, asking for proof when there’s already proof is going to get a negative reaction.
To me I came across like, “If you discredit a politician you’re no better than a Nazi,” even though in some situations, like this one, there are legitimate reasons to consider a politician discredited.
Sorry, that was not my intention. Let me rephrase this: We are living in a political environment, where old Nazi tactics are applied, based on my observations mostly from the political right. I see many echoed statements from people, that never even had a look at the images, his comments and more.
This is bad. We should assume that everything anybody says about a politician is a lie until proven otherwise. Thats the assumption of innocence and always true, but especially now.
Also, again, not claiming YOU do this.
The proof was already there. I guess you needed to see it on the specific location the see the similarities? Generally, asking for proof when there’s already proof is going to get a negative reaction.
As i stated multiple times, i could not say if it is the same or not. I am autistic, so, it maybe a personal thing, but for me it was not clear at all. Proof is not “i can see it, trust me!”, but, "Here it is, everybody now has the same facts and information, independently from his personal feelings, past experiences and interpretation.
And my conclusion currently: This dude did some very uninformed, very stupid stuff. I can not see that he is or was a rightwinger or Nazi, even in comments used against him (defining idiots that have “bolt” tattoos) he makes it political position clear.
Do i think somebody that defends people with literal SS tattoos is somebody that should have political power? No, but not because he is a Nazi, no, just because he is stupid AF.
Also it’s not like he denied having it, he for sure had a Totenkopf-tattoo that he put a “celtic knot” over.
https://jewishinsider.com/2025/10/graham-platner-ss-tattoo-maine-senate/
The issue with this kind of stuff is history. As a 40 you’re old American, whose grandfather served in World War II, I had no idea what that tattoo meant before this whole scandal.
The only symbolism we ever went over in school was the flag and swastika. I believe they thought dumb kids would mimic the iconography to look edgy.
Yeah, I keep saying this but idiots keep telling me I must have been a dumbass not to recognize it. I told them to show me a single screenshot of this symbol appearing in any media that depicts nazis or WWII and they couldn’t provide one, they just kept deflecting and calling me a dumbass.
It’s on every SS uniform
It’s prolific enough that’s it’s specifically mentioned in that “are we the baddies” video. They’re wearing it too.
Yes, we all see so many of those on a day-to-day basis, and photos from the time are such high-def it’s astounding that anyone could miss it!
(/s, just in case)
You asked for “a single screenshot” and claimed people couldn’t produce one, I showed you a whole sketch specifically about the symbol, and now the goalposts have moved to “high definition photos that I personally see on a daily basis.”
Okay, so what’s that sketch from? I’ve heard the quote before but I couldn’t tell you what it’s from. I’ve never seen the video, and I’m sure I’m not the only one
Also, what year did it come out, and was it before Platner got the tattoo? Cause if that’s the only media representation you’re gonna rely on, obscure as it is, it doesn’t help your argument that he knew what it was if it wasn’t even out yet
I feel like you didn’t read this:
You asked for “a single screenshot” and claimed people couldn’t produce one, I showed you a whole sketch specifically about the symbol, and now the goalposts have moved to “high definition photos that I personally see on a daily basis.”
Where exactly did I make that argument?
Okay, I guess you’re just gonna ignore the entire context of this conversation and call it “moving the goalposts.” Whatever.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totenkopf_(Symbol)#/media/Datei:German_SS_uniform._Peaked_visor_cap_with_skull_emblem_(Totenkopf)._Norwegian_Armed_Forces_Museum_(Forsvarsmuseet)_Oslo,_Norway_2019-03-31_DSC01646_(cropped).jpg
Oh great, you’ve proven that there’s a wikipedia article for it. This is proof that anyone who hasn’t already stumbled upon it by chance is clearly a willfully ignorant nazi! /s
The only reason you’re even linking it now is because we’re already discussing it. My whole point is that hardly anybody knew what this symbol was prior to the discussion around Platner.
Now find a movie, TV show, book, comic, or video game that depicts that symbol on a nazi. Because that’s what I meant from the start and you know it.
Read my other comments. I link this because this is the only real source, and for reference. A German! Wikipedia article.
No, nobody was an idiot for not seeing this, most Germans would not know that this was a Nazi symbol. And wearing those symbols is illegal here.
I see. Thanks for clarifying
I fully admit I am not the smartest or best student of history. However I recall no lessons un symbolism in any history class other than ancient Egypt and Neolithic era or late Stone Age.
Make not mistake I am not supporting any hatred other than towards Nazis. However when I first saw the image I honestly thought it was from Warhammer or something.
Yeah, I thought it looked tacky and stupid. I wouldn’t have gotten it myself. But I also didn’t know it was a nazi symbol until I read about it in the context of platner. Never would have guessed.
Ok, after some closer look, it could resemble the SS “Mützenabzeichen”, but it could also just be a generic skull.
BTW, the British atme are no nazis are they? https://www.army.mod.uk/learn-and-explore/about-the-army/corps-regiments-and-units/royal-armoured-corps/royal-lancers/
I can not say what exactly that tattoo was there is no clear image I found, so I can not jump to conclusions in any direction.
The British symbol looks nothing like a totenkopf, the tattoo looks exactly like a totenkopf, 1-to-1 on every detail, no matter how much people try to pretend otherwise.
If you have an image that shows that much detail, please provide it. I really want to see it. I have not seen any. I see some black blobs/outlines that’s all.
And from what I can see, the eyes would be different than on the SS version, and details in the bones are also not visible.
Still, it could be like you said the exact version. I can not tell.
And of course does the UK skull not look like this. But: skull on bone is a common symbol. Look for the example at this pre-nazi Symbol.
If we don’t question the given facts, and form our own opinion, we are not better then the real Nazis.
Discrediting political opponents was part of their playbook.
(I am a German anitfaschist, breaking Nazi bones since 2000, and I am not here to defend anyone, just to animate independent thinking)
First off, that symbol is less similar to the tattoo than then totenkomf (that it 100% is). Second, you could also pull up images of swastikas that predate the Nazis. Should I also suspend judgement if I see someone with a swastika tattooed on their chest?
This is an absolutely ridiculous thing to say in this context. I’m seeing a picture that is, very clearly and obviously, a totenkomf, a Nazi symbol. And all I’m doing is calling it a Nazi symbol. And somehow, describing the thing that’s right in front of my eyes makes me “no better than a Nazi.”
I don’t think it’s a totenkopf because I was told it was by some influence campaign to discredit a politician, I know it’s a totenkopf because I have eyes.
I mean, come on! “The Nazis discredited their opponents too.” Ok then, should I not consider Trump discredited, for fear of being like a Nazi? Sure, my eyes have seen him palling around with Jeffery Epstein, but there’s any number of excuses people use, if they really want to. I think there was one narrative that he was just infiltrating the secret pedophile ring to take it down from the inside.
The reality is that there’s this enormous pushback whenever anyone tries to hold any politician to any standard whatsoever. It’s like some kind of internalized authoritarianism. It’s “boys will be boys” dialed up to 11.
I can say with 100% certainty based on the pictures presented that that was a totenkomf. Hell, if it wasn’t, why didn’t he provide pictures to prove otherwise? But no matter what evidence is presented, it’s always possible to just demand high and higher standards of proof to protect politicians from any scrutiny.
First, i never said YOU did not think! How do you assume i have this opinion of you? I said as much as you may be right!
Second, i did the work to CONFORM your statement, something i asked for repeatedly from people that state “trust me bro, this is true”.
Here we go, 5 minute gimp job. But asking for proof is considered hostile now? WTF???
This is the part that I responded negatively to:
To me I came across like, “If you discredit a politician you’re no better than a Nazi,” even though in some situations, like this one, there are legitimate reasons to consider a politician discredited.
The proof was already there. I guess you needed to see it on the specific location the see the similarities? Generally, asking for proof when there’s already proof is going to get a negative reaction.
Sorry, that was not my intention. Let me rephrase this: We are living in a political environment, where old Nazi tactics are applied, based on my observations mostly from the political right. I see many echoed statements from people, that never even had a look at the images, his comments and more.
This is bad. We should assume that everything anybody says about a politician is a lie until proven otherwise. Thats the assumption of innocence and always true, but especially now.
Also, again, not claiming YOU do this.
As i stated multiple times, i could not say if it is the same or not. I am autistic, so, it maybe a personal thing, but for me it was not clear at all. Proof is not “i can see it, trust me!”, but, "Here it is, everybody now has the same facts and information, independently from his personal feelings, past experiences and interpretation.
And my conclusion currently: This dude did some very uninformed, very stupid stuff. I can not see that he is or was a rightwinger or Nazi, even in comments used against him (defining idiots that have “bolt” tattoos) he makes it political position clear.
Do i think somebody that defends people with literal SS tattoos is somebody that should have political power? No, but not because he is a Nazi, no, just because he is stupid AF.
Thanks a lot!