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.
"Does Hitler have a right to privacy?" and other big questions in research ethics.
Submitted 2 weeks ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/0dcea8d8-1e61-49ca-9e8a-34e827eec523.jpeg
Comments
frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
roguetrick@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Maybe we want to clone Hitler but raise him to be antifa.
ordnance_qf_17_pounder@reddthat.com 2 weeks ago
Reminds me of a classic AskReddit aneurysm post.
If Hitler was Hitler today, and Hitler cloning machine. You hold world hostage with Hitler Clone Hitler Unlimited Hitler. What hold hostage with exchange for Hitler Hitler?
MooseWinooski@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
I’ll allow it.
TheFogan@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
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”.
DaedalousIlios@pawb.social 2 weeks ago
I don’t think this is about “is evil genetic.” The first psragraph of the article states it’s about his underlying health conditions. Which I think is absolutely worth studying, if it means spotting the early warning signs and intervening before another person ends up like Hitler.
But then I remember the world we live in and realize it’s probably not at all going to end up like that. So who knows? But they’re definitely not going to find “the Evil Gene.”
infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 2 weeks ago
The “underlying health conditions” they mention are a possible predisposition for schizophrenia, autism, bipolar disorder, and kallman syndrome. Things that most certainly do not create hilters, and if it’s being argued by anyone that they may then it is indeed apologia for fascist ideology. The thing that actually does create hitlers.
I think that his genetics can significantly illuminate or inform historical events, but having it out there in our media environment just begs to have it abused and misconstrued by the wrong people for the wrong reasons.
Grimy@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
We learned he had a micro penis, a potent weapon against his neo-nazi fans. The value is already immense.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
And monorchidia
etherphon@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Is there any value to make 2 million Hitler documentaries? No, but they do it anyways.
ozymandias@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
not really… identifying and/or ruling out genetic origins of diseases isn’t racism.
my moral objection to this is: we shouldn’t be scanning and storing hitler’s dna; that’s how you end up with Hitler clones.
smh@slrpnk.net 2 weeks ago
The sort that would make a Hitler clone would be happy with a direwolf-style pseudo-clone with good marketing.
BananaTrifleViolin@piefed.world 2 weeks ago
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.
Quibblekrust@thelemmy.club 2 weeks ago
Nazis will take any data they want and turn it evil, even if it’s only half true. And they’ll ignore data that conflicts with their belief. It doesn’t matter what science discovers.
We already have evidence that some forms of “evil” are inheritable. This isn’t new. For instance example, I saw a documentary like 20 years ago that showed how one adopted baby—in a nice suburban family, with a couple other perfectly normal kids—was a criminal at a young age. Like stealing-a-school-bus-at-age-nine criminal, and that was just one of many examples. They showed two family trees: his adopted and his biological, and highlighted people who had been arrested, convicted of crimes, etc. They used a few different colors, and sometimes colored in one person’s node with two or more colors. His adopted family had like one spot going back 3 generations. His biological family was a rainbow! Remember, he was adopted as a baby and raised with love, and the other kids were fine.
Now what do we do with this kind of data? Be proactive about helping certain kids if they have certain genes. Give them safe outlets for their impulses, or what have you. Extra monitoring. I dunno.
What would a Nazi do? Nothing. Nazis don’t care if people are evil. What are they going to do, eugenics themselves? They’re the ones with the most colorful family trees.
Just some food for thought. I don’t think we should suppress science just because Nazis exist.
einlander@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
Venat0r@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
that’s how you know the whole argument is a dog whistle…
rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Does this neolithic prehuman have a right to privacy? If they can’t give consent, what does it say about this project?
Tiempo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
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
ameancow@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
It’s both deeply essentialist, and insulting to people’s intelligence. If you’re planning on studying hitler’s DNA, who cares, knock yourself out. But it’s ridiculous to think all but the worst people are going to believe there’s an “evil” gene.
If you’re a scientist planning on cloning hitler, you have a lot more problems on your hands, and are obviously not pursuing any kind of scientific results and just want attention and deserve all the ridicule from other that idiots you will get.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
Donkter@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
Njos2SQEZtPVRhH@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
If it turns out Hitler had some bad genes his relatives’ descendants will get a bad name. This is obviously a joke, but it’s actually true as well. They’ve all distanced themselves from the name Hitler, but surely some people know about their relation to Adolf. I guess the questions is: how bad is it when you’re grandfathers half-brother or whatever his DNA is public. There is a legitimate privacy concern there, that shouldn’t be too easily dismissed because ‘haha hitler & privacy’.
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
the question if you need relatives consent to make your dna public is interesting. I have my opinions, but the question of an historical dead figure has rights to privacy is another.
However, seeing if there’s an “evil” gene is both cartoonishly naive and smells of eugenics. Hitler would have approved said study.
philpo@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
His relatives actually decided to not have children collectively afaik.
They appeared to be fairly nice chaps - a friend of mine interviewed one of them 20 years ago for a uni research project.
KeenFlame@feddit.nu 2 weeks ago
I feel like you still haven’t explained what the privacy concern is
Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
DNA is basically your identity. Your health, your ancestry, everything. But its also, not just you. Its your family, past and future. If we start talking the DNA of the dead, and Im pretty sure we already do as the dead have no rights, then at some point someone is going to challenge the right to privacy of the living in this area. After all, we’re all going to die sooner or later, so why not get that sweet, sweet data just now?
Basic harms would be health insurance. If a provider has your DNA, it might show that your great, great granny got cancer. And they use that data to increase your rates. Or worse, deny your treatment, because your granny had the same treatment, and it didnt work.
What about work? Your ancestor has his history of health issues, and so refuses to hire you because you might get that too.
DNA from you or your relatives can also be use to track you, identify you, connect you to certain locations.
But heres the big one. Cancer. Your DNA holds the key to curing cancer. Some company has your DNA, and using your DNA creates a cure for Cancer. They then make trillions of money off of it. And you get fuck all, even though it your DNA. You dont even get to say that it should be given away. Its theirs now.
Also, once a company has your DNA. They have it forever. That you and your family, easily profiled, tracked, and whatever else until the end of time. What if, at some point, some targets you or a descendant with a DNA targeted virus? Science fiction now, but maybe not in the future.
Basically, the damage that can be done is limitless.
ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 2 weeks ago
the same as with 23andme and other genetic analysis services
nathanjent@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
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?
underscores@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Hitler had it, Walt Disney had it.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I rest my case
ryathal@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
He’s been dead for 80 years, that’s plenty long enough for anyone’s feelings to not matter.
Valmond@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
USA: IP right is 100 years after the creators death.
So when did hitlers parents die?
ryathal@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
US IP rights are only a good example of a bad example.
FiskFisk33@startrek.website 2 weeks ago
US law is an interesting response to an ethics question
fonix232@fedia.io 2 weeks ago
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.
Droechai@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Did he get convicted or does the ICC or ICJ need to do a court process? If any state can just allege someone being a criminal to exhume and extract dna without judicial oversight we open a door quite wide for abuse
gedaliyah@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
Harvey656@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Someone who was alive in the last hundred years may well have identifiable descendents or cousins. Someone from 3,350 years ago, less likely.
Since we often tend to consider the next of kin or manager of an estate to be the legal entity able to make certain decisions following the death of the person in question, whether there is a known/discoverable agent to ask may be relevant in this kind of matter.
KeenFlame@feddit.nu 2 weeks ago
What privacy do you guys think your dna has???
Harvey656@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
While im alive? Don’t touchy, I don’t even want people taking pictures of me without permission let alone a strand of hair or skin flakes.
But once im dead who cares, not my problem anymore.
Phineaz@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
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.
thessnake03@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Hitler’s (half?) nephew served in the US Navy during WW2. I don’t think William has any remaining kin though.
Corpsman Hitler, U.S. Navy? - Lyon Air Museum share.google/EyrJMOCp1ocHntkl7
Beacon@fedia.io 2 weeks ago
A niece or nephew isn't a direct descendant
apotheotic@beehaw.org 2 weeks ago
Why should doing experiments on ones bodily components be an opt-out situation?
Phineaz@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
Whether it be an opt-out or -in situation is beyond the topic of this question, but neither are applicable here.
BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 2 weeks ago
The results, which are now under peer review, are indeed fascinating.
It is the first time Hitler’s DNA has been identified, and over the course of four years, scientists were able to sequence it to see the genetic makeup of one of the world’s most horrific tyrants.
What is certain, experts say, is that Hitler did not have Jewish ancestry - a rumour that had been circulating since the 1920s.
Another key finding is that he had Kallmann syndrome, a genetic disorder that, among other things, can affect puberty and the development of sexual organs. In particular, it can lead to a micropenis and undescended testes - which, if you know the British war-time song, had been another rumour flying around about Hitler.
Kallmann syndrome can also affect the libido, which is particularly interesting, said historian and Potsdam University lecturer Dr Alex Kay, who is featured in the documentary.
“It tells us a lot about his private life - or more accurately, that he didn’t have a private life,” he explains.
Hi, yes, question from the back of the room here: why is Hitler’s right to privacy the main controversy and not the fact that this work in no way shape or form represents an advancement in scientific knowledge? What’s “fascinating” about findings that he “might have” had a micropenis or the possibilities that entails for his sex life? Why is this how supposedly intelligent people are choosing to spend their time?
ZeroHora@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Nazism is when no sex? Great study. Anything negative or positive they can find changes nothing, is pure bullshit.
BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 2 weeks ago
I’m not really seeing any purpose other than trying to paint him as some sort of aberrant freak, and I don’t see any purpose in that beyond trying to absolve the greater social milieu (which included a great many Brits!) in what happened.
Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Why are we even talking about Hitler’s DNA? Out of all the news why this. We are seriously weird.
BanMe@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Researchers sequenced his DNA recently from a bloodstained couch cushion, we’ve been getting glimpses into it lately.
faintwhenfree@lemmus.org 2 weeks ago
Also he’s dead, why do dead people deserve anything, any rights? What harm happens to Hitler? He’s dead. Did we ask dinosaurs to look at their DNA, for all we know they were sentient? The whole argument is stupid.
echodot@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
Presumably the insights are just that he was a human and not a space alien.
What are they looking for exactly?
Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
Honytawk@feddit.nl 2 weeks ago
Doesn’t a criminal give up their right to freedom by doing crimes?
So why wouldn’t a war criminal give up their right to privacy by doing war crimes?
_cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Uh, IDK about anywhere else, but in the US prisoners are supposed to retain their bodily autonomy even while imprisoned. the actual reality is that that is often ignored by the government, but that’s what the law says, at least.
Honytawk@feddit.nl 2 weeks ago
Sure they still have rights.
But not their right to freedom. That is why they are in prison. They aren’t allowed to leave.
I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Ok, but only to an extent. Prisoners 100% get fingerprinted. Not sure if they collect their DNA too, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised; to the point where I already assume they do.
Piafraus@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Is it already proven that they are criminals or do you want to remove someone right in order to prove they are criminals?
Stitch0815@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
Rights of people are regularly taken away to prove they are criminal.
Searching peoples homes for evidence is probably the most common way.
It’s also proven that Hitler was one of the worst human beeings ever to walk the earth.
ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 2 weeks ago
that sounds good until laws are weaponized against freedom and normal people
Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 weeks ago
Do dead people have rights? 🤔
kn0wmad1c@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
According to the GOP, since the dead pay no taxes to America, they have no rights.
7bicycles@hexbear.net 2 weeks ago
or his descendants
this is a stupid question even removed from the hitler conundrum. love to say “no, fuck off” my whole life until they can track down a twice removed cousin failson to say “he didn’t mean it like that” after I croak
plinky@hexbear.net 2 weeks ago
There have also been raised eyebrows at the very name of the documentary, especially the second part: Blueprint of a Dictator.
Prof King said it wasn’t a name she would have chosen, and historian Prof Thomas Weber, who is featured in the programme, told the BBC he was surprised at the title, given they had stressed there is “no dictator gene”.
“We should do whatever we can to understand past extremism,” Prof Weber believes.
did the dictator gene infect 12 million german army, ignoring volunteer corps in all of europe as well? smh, some twerp will clone hitler probably in not so distant future.
Atlas_@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
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.
chgxvjh@hexbear.net 2 weeks ago
No but not because he deserves privacy but because some freaks would try to clone him.
frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 2 weeks ago
I know my institution wouldn't allow this without informed consent from himself pre-death or legally responsible family members. Plus you have to be able to withdraw consent at any time and we have to destroy all data, including sequencing analysis, upon request. Not sure how that affects published data but we'd have to strip it out of any data repositories the publications may point to as well.
DarkCloud@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
JoMiran@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Nice try, but I watched The Boys From Brazil. No Hitler DNA for you!
AnarchoCummunist@hexbear.net 2 weeks ago
Yes. It does. Fuck his privacy.
Someone asking that should suck on diese hoden.
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
Data protection only covers the living IIRC.
ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Most arguments for using Hitler’s DNA end up supporting the eugenicist trash Nazi scientists espoused. There is little practical use for it.
Nomorereddit@lemmy.today 2 weeks ago
“But who prays for Satan? Who, in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most?” Mark Twain
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 2 weeks ago
drolex@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
And additional question: even if it was technically feasible, was it really ethical to surgically implant Hitler’s cloned brained into the body of a silverback gorilla and make it fight against Tigerstalin?
state_electrician@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
Everybody’s so concerned with preserving Hitler’s brain. But when you put it into the body of a great white shark, ooh, suddenly you’ve gone too far.
drolex@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
Ah! I knew it was not a novel approach. Thanks Pr. Farnsworth, you crazy sciency trailblazer.
user224@lemmy.sdf.org 2 weeks ago
I see what you did here.
Wilco@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
A great white shark with fricken laser beams!
MeThisGuy@feddit.nl 2 weeks ago
nah, put it in a Greenland shark so that piece of shit can wallow the depths for 300 yrs
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
But in the 80s, we transplanted Donald Trump’s brain into a house cat addicted to cocaine.
Image
Image
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
That’s ridiculous cocaine was addicted to Bill
SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
It would be to more unethical to not do that.
ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Stalin disappeared thousands of people. Tiger Stalin “disappeared” a few, but there was no hiding it, the pile of intestines and bones was a dead giveaway.
ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I would unironically watch that on TV.