Maybe we shouldn't take Mein Kampf literally?

by **Landover Baptist** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:29 am

If the two most hateful books of all time (bible and quran) can get the 'should not take literally' treatment, why not extend that to Hitler's Mein Kampf, which (after all) contains decidedly less hatred then the bible and quran do.

Or Marx's writings in which he gloriously approves of black slavery, and advocated race war and the elimination of all those who do not agree with him?

by **Yootopia** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:30 am

Maybe we should just disregard all of those books as Genuine Crap. There we go.

by **Konakimo** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:34 am

Landover Baptist wrote:Or Marx's writings in which he gloriously approves of black slavery, and advocated race war and the elimination of all those who do not agree with him?

lolwut

by **Druidville** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:38 am

I'm kind of suprised you think "we shouldn't take Mein Kempf literally" but that the Bible and Quran are "books filled with hate".

Have you actually read any of the three?

by **Blouman Empire** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:40 am

It is threads like these which begin to make me think about leaving this forum.

by **Phenia** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:43 am

Take what in Mein Kampf literally?

by **Soratsin** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:49 am

Phenia wrote:Take what in Mein Kampf literally?

Chapter 4, paragraph 7

"It is the duty of all aryan peoples on the internet to deny sustenance to the trolls, for they are instruments of world jewry."

by **Desperate Measures** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:54 am

"Sooner will a camel pass through a needle's eye than a great man be 'discovered' by an election."
Adolf Hitler
Mein Kampf
I found that on the internet. It was the least "Jews are the personification of the devil" that I could find.

by **Phenia** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:57 am

Desperate Measures wrote:"Sooner will a camel pass through a needle's eye than a great man be 'discovered' by an election."
Adolf Hitler
Mein Kampf
I found that on the internet. It was the least "Jews are the personification of the devil" that I could find.

Ah. I agree, on this case, with the OP then. The statement should not be taken as a literal claim that camels are going to pass through the eyes of needles.

by **North Suran** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:59 am

Desperate Measures wrote:"Sooner will a camel pass through a needle's eye than a great man be 'discovered' by an election."
Adolf Hitler
Mein Kampf
I found that on the internet. It was the least "Jews are the personification of the devil" that I could find.

Even if it was just a rip-off of "[I]t is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God".

by **Hairless Kitten II** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:03 am

Blouman Empire wrote:It is threads like these which begin to make me think about leaving this forum.

Look at such people as forum pets

by **Kobrania** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:03 am

Actually it is 'rope' not 'camel', it was a mis-translation.

by **Kanabia** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:21 am

Landover Baptist wrote:Or Marx's writings in which he gloriously approves of black slavery, and advocated race war and the elimination of all those who do not agree with him?

Um...where?

by **The Skeletal Plague** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:27 am

Kobrania wrote:Actually it is 'rope' not 'camel', it was a mis-translation.

Camels would still be harder

by **The Alma Mater** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:36 am

Druidville wrote:I'm kind of suprised you think "we shouldn't take Mein Kempf literally" but that the Bible and Quran are "books filled with hate".

I do not understand the "but that" in your sentence. Bible and Qu'ran ARE filled with hate, which they glorify and pretend is "love".

However - to the op- is there any reason to assume mein kampf is a metaphorical work ?

by **Unchecked Expansion** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:46 am

The Alma Mater wrote:
Druidville wrote:I'm kind of suprised you think "we shouldn't take Mein Kempf literally" but that the Bible and Quran are "books filled with hate".

I do not understand the "but that" in your sentence. Bible and Qu'ran ARE filled with hate, which they glorify and pretend is "love".

However - to the op- is there any reason to assume mein kampf is a metaphorical work ?

Theres also a fair bit of non-hate in the bible, especially the new testament. I'm firecely atheist, and I acknowledge that some of the stories of jesus are actually good ideas (jesus being a a huge socialist, I like his advice on charity) And the 5 pillars (I think it's 5) are fundamentally sound principles to live by. The problem is that both books are used selectively by the intolerant. However Mien Kampf is an intolerant book by a paranoid racist that documents his personal ideology. Theres no real worth to it other than as historical insight

by **Desperate Measures** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:46 am

The Skeletal Plague wrote:
Kobrania wrote:Actually it is 'rope' not 'camel', it was a mis-translation.

Camels would still be harder

Depends on the thickness of the rope.

by **NotRust** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:01 am

Unchecked Expansion wrote:And the 5 pillars (I think it's 5) are fundamentally sound principles to live by.

Only one of them, really.

by **Call to power** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:01 am

I also support the idea that WWII was actually a form of interpretive dance after all the Nazi party was made up of pomp and theater

it sickens me how little NS grasps fun these days

Desperate Measures wrote:
The Skeletal Plague wrote:
Kobrania wrote:Actually it is 'rope' not 'camel', it was a mis-translation.

Camels would still be harder

Depends on the thickness of the rope.

and how many humps the camel has naturally

by **Unchecked Expansion** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:04 am

NotRust wrote:
Unchecked Expansion wrote:And the 5 pillars (I think it's 5) are fundamentally sound principles to live by.

Only one of them, really.

True, but 4 of them are just displays of faith. I don't mind people praying, as long as they stay quiet to me about it. It's been a looong time since RE class, I forgot charity was only one of them, I thought more were about generosity. Still, religiously mandated charitability from both of them

by **The Alma Mater** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:07 am

Unchecked Expansion wrote:
NotRust wrote:
Unchecked Expansion wrote:And the 5 pillars (I think it's 5) are fundamentally sound principles to live by.

Only one of them, really.

True, but 4 of them are just displays of faith. I don't mind people praying, as long as they stay quiet to me about it. It's been a looong time since RE class, I forgot charity was only one of them, I thought more were about generosity. Still, religiously mandated charitability from both of them

An awful lot of people (see e.g. the Obamacare thread) think that "you MUST aid the less fortunate" is the most horrible concept ever devised though

by **LOL ANARCHY NUBZ** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:12 am

Maybe we shouldn't.

by **The Alma Mater** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:16 am

LOL ANARCHY NUBZ wrote:Maybe we shouldn't.

Probably not. But the point the OP wants to make is probably (but I could be totally mistaken here) - if we don't do if for mein kampf - why do we do it for other books that promote hatred ?

by **NotRust** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:34 am

The Alma Mater wrote:
Unchecked Expansion wrote:
NotRust wrote:
Unchecked Expansion wrote:And the 5 pillars (I think it's 5) are fundamentally sound principles to live by.

Only one of them, really.

True, but 4 of them are just displays of faith. I don't mind people praying, as long as they stay quiet to me about it. It's been a looong time since RE class, I forgot charity was only one of them, I thought more were about generosity. Still, religiously mandated charitability from both of them

An awful lot of people (see e.g. the Obamacare thread) think that "you MUST aid the less fortunate" is the most horrible concept ever devised though

Not to get off topic, but when you pay for health care through taxes, you're paying YOUR share, and there's a pretty high chance you'll end up using it.

by **Sarkhaan** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:40 am

Landover Baptist wrote:If the two most hateful books of all time (bible and quran) can get the 'should not take literally' treatment, why not extend that to Hitler's Mein Kampf, which (after all) contains decidedly less hatred then the bible and quran do.

Or Marx's writings in which he gloriously approves of black slavery, and advocated race war and the elimination of all those who do not agree with him?

Two of those were written in poetic language, using parables and metaphores. When using such structures, it is difficult, if not impossible to take the writing literally.