To set you up fort the hymlar line, because i think this plays in really well with, you know, the end of the book, very interesting in how you reconcile the seeming, i mean, not the seeming, the contradiction between a de humanization that treats people and thinks of people as subhuman, but also the people that have those attitudes clearly exhibitand and practice in keeping with the idea that they are also human. And so you actually, there's a psychological reason for this. It might be logically contradictory, but it is both. It's true that they both think, a, the people being dehumanized in their minds are fully human and fully subhuman at the same timeytisiswere, this is where the monstrosity comes in. So if you want to speak to that a little bit, be sure. So let's, let's do it through himler, because i i

never addressed the point that an began with. So a the holicoust began. The actual killing began with bullets. The holicast of bullets took place in eastern europe as the einsatcop and the mobile killing units swept through behind the army and rounded up those whom they consider to be commissars, influential communists and jews, and put a bullet in the back of their heads. So there are these huge killing pits, basically like babiar a. But this took a lot psychologically out of the killersthe germans who were, you know, doing their duty. They drank a lot. They they suffered from what the natis called selbelaston, the burdening of the soul. It was driving them nuts, a lot of them, not all, but a lot of them. And there was an occasion, according to the reports, that himler came, and himler, of course, was the the richfer ss leader of the ss a, to witness one of these killings. And he, he, like, freaked out. He couldn't handle it. And it became clear to him that what was needed was a more and this is how they talked, a more humane way of exterminating the jews of europe. And that was the inspiration for the det s and the use of sycombe gas ray. It was cleaner, it was, it was less tramatic for the germans who were germans and the ucranians and others who were doing the killing. So so ya, i mean, when whenever people commit atrocities, they have to find ways around the completely understandable and natural human response of revulsion to the commission of these acts. Now, that's related a alexios to the question that you just asked me. So if lhat's kind of re wind the e video to 20 11, when i wrote less than yuman, when i wrote, less human, have this idea that what's going on with thesation it is we conceive of others as as sub human animals. There's a lot of analysis on what sub human means and so on. Well, there're a a couple of problems with that. One problem is that, a if you actually look at demonizing discourse, humanizers don't consistently

refer to

those whom they dhumanize as rats or lice or whatever. Whut they tend to do is flip flock between describing them as human beings and describing them as some human creatures, often in the space of a single sentence. So that's led some philosophers to be sceptical of the whole idea of dumanization, right? The well, they obviously acknowledge these people's humanity, so they couldn't be humanizing. I call that the problem of humanity. The other point, the other criticism of my 20 n thesis, which, as far as i know, i'm the only one that's made of my own work, is that when people are dehumanized, certainly in the most dangerous, the most toxic forms of dumanization, they're conceived not just as non human creatures in the sense of non human animals, but as something a lot scarier, demons and monsters, either explicitly or implicitly.