Maybe we shouldn't take Mein Kampf literally?

[RightLeaningChristians]

Mein Kampf was a bore.


It was a long rant.

[Taeshan]

you saying we literally shouldn't take it literally, or figuratively shouldn't take it literally?

[Angleter]

Well, you see, with Mein Kampf the author went on to do exactly what he said he'd do in the book, so it's hard to say 'Invade Poland and Russia' was a metaphor.

[German Nightmare]

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?

Actually, Mein Kampf is one of the very few books that I believe people should have taken much more literally than they apparently have.
Hitler wasn't elected because of it, but despite of it. It's all in there if you cared to read it. But no... buy a copy, put it on a shelf, and then wonder what was going on in the world. Nah.

Yet I have to say, calling both the Bible and the Qur'an the two most hateful books of all time - that's just ridiculous.

[Taeshan]

Well, you see, with Mein Kampf the author went on to do exactly what he said he'd do in the book, so it's hard to say 'Invade Poland and Russia' was a metaphor.

[Flameswroth]

Well, you see, with Mein Kampf the author went on to do exactly what he said he'd do in the book, so it's hard to say 'Invade Poland and Russia' was a metaphor.

Perhaps the two sides can compromise and was Mein Kampf was intended as double entendre, and Hitler's literal invasions were in similitude to a psychological or sociological vexation he found to be much more severe, and wished to bring attention to.

Maybe?

[The Norse Hordes]

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?

You clearly havent read Marx.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

Well, you see, with Mein Kampf the author went on to do exactly what he said he'd do in the book, so it's hard to say 'Invade Poland and Russia' was a metaphor.

Perhaps the two sides can compromise and was Mein Kampf was intended as double entendre, and Hitler's literal invasions were in similitude to a psychological or sociological vexation he found to be much more severe, and wished to bring attention to.

Maybe?

As Freud might say, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

[Lizardiar]

All books have some things that someone, somewhere, will find offensive. Though it is true that the Bible, Quran, and other books have hate in them, we cannot censor the writing of books. For that is how we express our ideas, our dreams, our thoughts. No matter what they might be.

[Berzerkirs]

From what I kow of Marxism, it encourages the peaceful revolution of the pleitorat (common man) into a classless society.

As for the Mein Kampf, seeing as it's the best seller in the Arab community now, I wouldnt think that it can be any good.

[Rhodmhire]

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?

You..haven't read any of them...have you?

[Sleepington]

Mein kampf, the bible, the qu'ran - all three written by people who just....needed....to get.....laid.

[Rhodmhire]

All books have some things that someone, somewhere, will find offensive. Though it is true that the Bible, Quran, and other books have hate in them, we cannot censor the writing of books. For that is how we express our ideas, our dreams, our thoughts. No matter what they might be.

You always know the right words.

[Rhodmhire]

Mein kampf, the bible, the qu'ran - all three written by people who just....needed....to get.....laid.

False accusation, my friend.

Access: GRANTED.



I've been waiting for a while to use this properly.

[DrunkenDove]

My poor brain.

[Hayteria]

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?

Of all time? What exactly do you base that on? Oh, and same for the statement in the second paragraph.

[Cybach]

I think besides all the anti-Semitic bullshit riddling the book. It is wise to remember Adolf Hitler was one of the most successful politicians of the last century. Not many can claim to build up a political party consisting of 7 members, and turn it into a party of over 12 million not a decade later. That takes political prowess. Taking further into account that this was all done by a dirt-poor failed artist, born in a very rural valley area deep in the Austrian mountains. It takes on a whole new dimension of spectacular success. So obviously someone who managed something like that , probably has one or two wise quotes or anecdotes that might be worth remembering for other situations. Some quotes off the book, which might at least have some relevance for modern life or that are good for food for thought are for example these that I found. I for one found it disturbing and interesting to nitpick the complex and questionably devious mind of Adolf Hitler (or for that matter just as/or more interesting I find the quotes of men such as Churchill, Stalin, Mao and other men of prestige) as one can aptly do by taking his quotes from Mein Kampf and analyzing them;


The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force.

Faith is harder to shake than knowledge, love succumbs less to change than respect, hate is more enduring than aversion, and the impetus to the mightiest upheavals on this earth has at all times consisted less in a scientific knowledge dominating the masses than in a fanaticism which inspired them and sometimes in a hysteria which drove them forward.


Political parties are inclined to compromises; philosophies never


The vices of the parents are revealed in the sickness of the children.

In the monotony of everyday life even significant men often seem insignificant, hardly rising above the average of their environment; as soon, however, as they are approached by a situation in which other lose hope or go astray, the genius rises manifestly from the inconspicuous average child, not seldom to the amazement of all those who had hitherto seen him in the pettiness of bourgeois life – and that is why the prophet seldom has any honour in his own country.


The broad mass of a nation does not consist of diplomats, or even professors of political law, or even individuals capable of forming a rational opinion; it consists of plain morals, wavering and inclined to doubt and uncertainty.


Isn’t every deed of genius in this world a visible protest of genius against the inertia of the mass?


To change a thing means to recognise it first.

The great mass of the people cannot see the whole road ahead of them without growing weary and despairing of the task.

Any attempt to combat a philosophy with methods of violence will fail in the end, unless the fight takes the form of attack for a new spiritual value.

Great men are only the marathon runners of history; the laurel wreath of the present only touches the brow of the dying hero.

State power can only guarantee law and order when the content of the state coincides with the philosophy dominant at that particular time, so that violent elements possess only the character of individual criminal natures, and are not regarded as proponents of an idea in extreme opposition to the state views.


The world [success] is not for cowardly peoples.

It was better to be a little old-fashioned, but honest and loyal, than enlightened and modern, but of inferior character and, as is often seen today, ignorant and incompetent.

The fall of man in paradise has always been followed by his expulsion.

A man can change his language without any trouble – that is, he can use another language; but in his new language he will express the old ideas; his inner nature is not changed.

The greatness of every might organisation embodying an idea in this world lies in the religious fanaticism and intolerance with which, fanatically convinced of its own right, it intolerantly imposes its will against all others. If an idea in itself is sound and, thus armed, takes up a struggle on this earth, it is unconquerable and every persecution will only add to its inner strength.

A people of scholars, if they are physically degenerate, weak-willed and cowardly pacifists, will not storm the heavens, indeed they will not even be able to safeguard their existence on this earth.

Terror is not broken by the mind, but by terror

It is not the mass that invents and not the majority that organises or thinks, but in all things only and always the individual man, the person.


Just as a courageous man can more easily conquer women’s hearts than a coward, a heroic movement will sooner win the heart of a people than a cowardly one which is kept alive only by police protection.

The first foundation for the creation of authority is always provided by popularity. But an authority which rests solely on this foundation is still extremely weak, uncertain, and shaky. Every bearer of such an authority based purely on popularity must, therefore, endeavour to improve and secure the foundation of this authority by the creation of power. In power, therefore, in force, we see the second foundation of all authority. It is already considerably more stable and secure, but by no means always stronger than the first. If popularity and force are combined, and if in common they are able to survive for a certain time, an authority on an even firmer basis can arise, the authority of tradition. If finally, popularity, force, and tradition combine, an authority may be regarded as unshakeable.

Never forget that the most sacred right on this earth is man's right to have the earth to till with his own hands, the most sacred sacrifice the blood that a man sheds for this earth....

[Basement-Cat]

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?

You clearly havent read Marx.

I think he has.

"As for slavery, there is no need for me to speak of its bad aspects. The only thing requiring explanation is the good side of slavery. I do not mean indirect slavery, the slavery of proletariat; I mean direct slavery, the slavery of the Blacks in Surinam, in Brazil, in the southern regions of North America. Direct slavery is as much the pivot upon which our present-day industrialism turns as are machinery, credit, etc. … Slavery is therefore an economic category of paramount importance."
- Karl Marx
(Letter to Pavel Vasilyevich Annenkov, December 28, 1846)

I'd say: guilty as charged.

[The Norse Hordes]

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?

You clearly havent read Marx.

I think he has.

"As for slavery, there is no need for me to speak of its bad aspects. The only thing requiring explanation is the good side of slavery. I do not mean indirect slavery, the slavery of proletariat; I mean direct slavery, the slavery of the Blacks in Surinam, in Brazil, in the southern regions of North America. Direct slavery is as much the pivot upon which our present-day industrialism turns as are machinery, credit, etc. … Slavery is therefore an economic category of paramount importance."
- Karl Marx
(Letter to Pavel Vasilyevich Annenkov, December 28, 1846)

I'd say: guilty as charged.

As I said to you in your telegram, thats a cherry picked quote from a letter where Marx goes on to explains the importance of slavery to the development of human history and industrialization. You can acknowledge something was important to the current trend of history without approving of it or supporting it.

Lucky for you, Ive read Marx.