Slashdot Mirror


'Mein Kampf' To Be Republished In Germany

Hugh Pickens writes "Jacob Heilbrunn reports in The Atlantic that Germany is taking a new step toward what is often called 'normalization' as the state of Bavaria has announced that in 2015 it will publish Hitler's Mein Kampf, banned in Germany since World War II. In announcing the publication of the book, Bavarian finance minister Markus Soeder says that he wants to contribute to the 'demystification' of it. In 2015, the Bavarian state's copyright to the book will expire and the idea is to publish a scholarly version that will help stem its appeal for commercial publishers. The book is not banned by law in Germany, but Bavaria has used ownership of the copyright to prevent publication of German editions since 1945. Copyright restrictions stop at the end of 2015, 70 years after Hitler's death. By publishing in 2015 before the expiry of the copyright, Bavaria hopes to make future German editions as 'commercially unattractive' as possible. 'We want to make clear what nonsense is in there,' says Soeder and to show 'what a worldwide catastrophe this dangerous body of thought led to.'"

462 comments

  1. Heil by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Heil Erstegepostungmittlestoff!

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Heil by Pf0tzenpfritz · · Score: 1

      Very nice! Den Kerl erschiessen!

      --
      Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
    2. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      The word is "foreword", not "forward".

      Posted anonymously on account of being a grammar nazi (pun not intended).

    3. Re:Heil by flyneye · · Score: 3, Interesting

      erste Antwort, keine Erstegepostungmittlestoff.

      Oh to read "Mein Kampf" in the original Deutsch.
      Although I do not agree with all his philosophies and methods, I recognize the brilliance of Corporal Schicklgruber in attaining Germanys highest post.
      I wonder at his further being able to bend an unsuspecting country and then a continent to his will.
      But, the advent of the Volkswagon is proof that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
      His relationship with Henry Ford, noteworthy.
      His love of children, extraordinary. http://adolfhitlerbestpictures.blogspot.com/2009/12/adolf-hitler-pictures-with-children.html
        We all know Hitler hated Jews. Germany blamed Jews for the losses of WW1, as they cut the flow of money from their banks. It wasn't hard to demonize them, but probably should've been done from the perspective that they were Bankers, not Jews. That's like hating ICEEs because Muslims seem to own 7-11 corp.
      They are right, it could happen anywhere and people should see the truth. I don't think that a bunch of annotations from zealous anti-Nazis will help any more than zealous anti-drug messages have worked in America. So we should just print , as is.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    4. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, what kind of backword thinking is that?

      Posted anonymously on account of being a pedantic semite.

    5. Re:Heil by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

      AFAIK, Hitler never had the name "Schicklgruber", his father has changed the name.

    6. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, he certainly had his fans.

    7. Re:Heil by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Perhaps he thinks they're going to have a child that will grow up to be a prop or a second-row?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a bunch of pictures of Hitler with children because he was a politician, not because he loved children...

    9. Re:Heil by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'll get hate for saying this but WTF,lets be honest, if you wanna go by sheer numbers Hitler hated Ruskies even more than Jews but if you look at the man's record pretty much anyone not Aryan that didn't think EXACTLY like him got put on his shit list. Lets see...Poles, Jews, Russian, Gypsy, gay, communists...did I leave anybody out? lets face it the guy really wasn't THAT picky when it came to killing and if you look at those throughout history that racked up huge body counts that's something they all had in common. While its true he didn't like Jews once WWII started not liking someone wasn't really a prerequisite, he slaughtered for pretty much any old reason.

      Personally I'm for printing it,not because I thought the man had any great insight, far from it and one could argue that WWII was pretty much a war with all the planning of throwing darts at a dartboard without any real thought involved on Germany's part (attacking Russia without ANY winter gear? batshit much?) but because i'm a strong believer on freedom of thought, be it the little red book or Mein Kampf or the supposed "pro pedo" book. To be frightened of words on a page is to be frightened of thought and I personally find that even more scary. If you truly fear words on a page because you think they are gonna suddenly affect large numbers of your populace? then maybe, just throwing this out there, you should teach your people to think for themselves and instead of trying to hide the words make a decent counterargument instead?

      My grandfather fought in WWII and actually liberated one of the camps in Poland, not one of the big names but it was horrifying none the less, and one of the last things he taught me was not to fear words and ideas as he actually supported the Illinois Nazis right to march, even though he had suffered so much in the war and ended it with a wall dropped on him by a Werwulf squad. He said "that's what made us different, we let people speak, even if we don't agree" and I always took those and his memories he shared of that time to heart. so when i saw some neo Nazis on a street corner in Dallas in the late 80s I didn't join the protesters shouting dirty names at them, I simply bought a large piece of posterboard and made up a sign that said "My grandfather liberated one of the camps, ask me about it" and told his story, of seeing children piled like cordwood, of seeing people so starved one couldn't tell male from female, of being told NOT to feed them because they had been starved so long rich GI rations would throw their frail bodies into shock and of watching in horror because one of the other men did exactly that because he felt pity and the person went into convulsions and died. He said that was the closest he ever got to committing war crimes as he and his men were ready to execute those Nazis on the spot until one of the prisoners told them these were just some flunky recruits brought in while the monsters snuck away and they had actually been treated well by the recruits.

      Well needless to say all those nasty names didn't phase those Nazis but what DID phase them was me. They even went so far as to actually complain to a cop standing there who snickered and said "you have the right to speak and so does he" and when they saw I wouldn't go away they packed up and left. It is ALWAYS better not to sweep such things under the rug but to fight it with the truth. By keeping it hidden and banned since the Americans left Germany has simply allowed those groups to grow when a much better solution would have been to simply fight them with the reality of the past IMHO.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    10. Re:Heil by chthon · · Score: 1

      Yes, the Walloon community of Belgium, the Dutch people in 1944, the 'Hunger Winter'.

    11. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Lots of people hate the Jews for their work in international banking. But they ended up in banking, a soiled business, because in the 1200s it was forbidden to christians and muslims by their religions.

      If you're pissed about the 'dirty Jew bankers' blame your own stupid theologies for cutting you out of the action. Churches like to keep the flock poor; makes them obedient.

    12. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's like hating ICEEs because Muslims seem to own 7-11 corp.

      more like hating Muslims for seeming to own 7-11 after most 7-11s refuse to give you icees when you were hot and thirsty.

    13. Re:Heil by readin · · Score: 1

      Triumph of the Will is available on Netflix. I made my kids watch part of it because I think it is important to see how evil often arrives with a smiley face and how it can be quite charming. Fascism won't announce itself as such instead it will come making promises of easy prosperity.

      --
      I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
    14. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is a wonderful post. But what you say at the end about Germany "...keeping it hidden and banned since Americans left Germany...' may be true in the sense that Hitler/Nazi literature/paraphernalia became banned, but the facts regarding the atrocities committed by that regime were definitely not hidden. As I went through the German school system in the '70s, I recall vividly the compulsory viewing of documentaries that went into quite graphic details on what went on in the concentration camps. I actually feel that the government went overboard in this regard - a whole generation of Germans grew up with this enormous guilt complex that, IMHO, negatively impacted Germany's subsequent role in various post-war European organizations.

    15. Re:Heil by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      His love of children, extraordinary. http://adolfhitlerbestpictures.blogspot.com/2009/12/adolf-hitler-pictures-with-children.html .

      oh yeah he LOVED children... especially his niece Geli Rauba who was officially said to have killed herself but rumours persist of murder.... it was also said they had a sexual relationship with fun such as corprophilia .. google his name and hers
      hitler was a complete cock and it makes me laugh watching you say "oh but he loved children".. never mind he was a hateful,spiteful mass murdering fuckhead

    16. Re:Heil by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      I'll get hate for saying this but WTF,lets be honest, if you wanna go by sheer numbers Hitler hated Ruskies even more than Jews but if you look at the man's record pretty much anyone not Aryan that didn't think EXACTLY like him got put on his shit list. Lets see...Poles, Jews, Russian, Gypsy, gay, communists...did I leave anybody out?

      Yup, as another poster said, the Walloons, also freemasons, fortune tellers,Slavs, the disabled and a whole shed load more, basically if you didn't fit into his "criteria" and to be frank even he and his croies didn't fit into his own bloody criteria.. BOOM, you were screwed

    17. Re:Heil by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      Lots of people hate the Jews for their work in international banking. But they ended up in banking, a soiled business, because in the 1200s it was forbidden to christians and muslims by their religions.

      If you're pissed about the 'dirty Jew bankers' blame your own stupid theologies for cutting you out of the action. Churches like to keep the flock poor; makes them obedient.

      Correct.. Usury laws by the churches forbade it!..

    18. Re:Heil by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      hitler was a complete cock

      And yet he only had one ball. Now that's ironic, nicht wahr?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    19. Re:Heil by Fast+Thick+Pants · · Score: 2

      I visited the Holocaust Museum in Berlin about 5 years ago. This is a fascinating place, and even though some bits seemed a little silly to me (some weird "what is a Jew?" infographics that looked like they'd be more at home in an intergalactic zoo), I'd recommend a visit.

      The vast majority of those in attendance were German. There were about a half-dozen little interactive polling kiosks scattered around, and the one that struck me most asked "Do you believe that the Holocaust was a result of an inherent character flaw in the German people?" It was tallying at around 75% Ja, 25% Nein.

      So yeah, I believe what you say about an enormous guilt complex. But IMO it's better than constant denial, excuses, and back-blaming -- that's what most prevalent in other nations, including my own, when their various collusions and atrocities are discussed.

    20. Re:Heil by dj245 · · Score: 1

      We all know Hitler hated Jews. Germany blamed Jews for the losses of WW1, as they cut the flow of money from their banks. It wasn't hard to demonize them, but probably should've been done from the perspective that they were Bankers, not Jews. That's like hating ICEEs because Muslims seem to own 7-11 corp.


      Germany got screwed by banks in WW1, and bankers are stereotypically jews. So Germany blamed Jews. Your analogy is just odd though odd. A better one would be hating Muslims because you got a bad brainfreeze from an ICEE and Muslims generally work at convenience stores.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    21. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wanted to express thanks for what your grandfather did in the war, as well as what you did in Dallas.
      Most of the members of my family that was in Europe was killed by the Nazis.
      I am sure that the people you spoke to remembered what you told them.
      Thank you.

    22. Re:Heil by Kam+Solusar · · Score: 1

      There's a bunch of pictures of Hitler with children because he was a politician, not because he loved children...

      Except maybe with some fava beans and a nice chianti.

      --
      The Angels have the Phone Box
    23. Re:Heil by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      That information about the rations and the new recruits was very interesting. I have never heard of such a thing. They ought to make a movie about those recruits. Just bringing that bit of information to the masses should make a good impact.

    24. Re:Heil by phrostie · · Score: 2

      it's not a German problem, it's everyone's problem. it can happen anywhere.

      http://www.thewave.tk/

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4689717947890475769

      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1063669/

      the assumption that it's the Germans who were the problem is no different than blaming the Jews to begin with.
      it's just a different tribalism.

    25. Re:Heil by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      hitler was a complete cock

      And yet he only had one ball. Now that's ironic, nicht wahr?

      Bravo sir!

    26. Re:Heil by qu33ksilver · · Score: 1

      Awesome post man ! Respect for your grandfather. There is always so much to learn. People think they know so much for an incident that is so easily misunderstood.

    27. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lots of people hate the Jews for their work in international banking. But they ended up in banking, a soiled business, because in the 1200s it was forbidden to christians and muslims by their religions.

      If you're pissed about the 'dirty Jew bankers' blame your own stupid theologies for cutting you out of the action. Churches like to keep the flock poor; makes them obedient.

      Not entirely correct, the Jews were forbidden to loan money by their religion as well. The same religion where the Christian and Muslim got their doctrine from after all. The reason by the Jews end up being the bankers of Europe is that, to them, loaning money was only a sin among themselves. It was perfectly acceptable for a Jew to loan money to lesser human being (eg: someone not chosen by the one and only true God). Peoples that are pissed about the 'dirty Jew bankers' are because of their arrogant and hateful attitude toward other cult followers or even atheists.

    28. Re:Heil by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      So yeah, I believe what you say about an enormous guilt complex. But IMO it's better than constant denial, excuses, and back-blaming -- that's what most prevalent in other nations, including my own, when their various collusions and atrocities are discussed.

      And disgustingly, when people talk of atrocities, we all point towards Germany. My country forcibly rounded up people of Italian descent and shipped them to Canada. Or rather "tried to ship them to Canada, but crashed the boat and drowned the lot of them in the middle of the night". Nice. Then we slaughtered the people of Dresden with horrific incendiary devices to stop East Germans fleeing the oncoming Soviet army, before helping round up the cossacks so that Stalin could have them all shot because there weren't enough trucks to transport them all to the gulags.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    29. Re:Heil by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 2

      That was just a song. Generalísimo Francisco Franco had actually taken a bullet to the groin as a young soldier and allegedly did have only one ball. Of course, we didn't bother to depose that fascist dictator and left him to oppress and murder for almost 40 years. We have a long history of picking which countries we can be bothered to rescue....

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    30. Re:Heil by operagost · · Score: 2

      Dali called; he says your post was a bit surreal.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    31. Re:Heil by Fast+Thick+Pants · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I quite agree. I don't think there's any inherent flaw in character of the German people. I find it a little queer that the question can even be asked with a straight face, much less answered affirmatively three-to-one.

      Let me go way out on an idealistic limb here, though: I'd like to think that reflection on the horrors of the past can help lessen horrors of the present and future. Even if the conclusions reached by those reflecting are often little nonsensical. At any rate, it certainly better than whitewashing atrocities, or sweeping them under the rug.

      Germans have been held to task for WWII's military aggression, xenophobia, and genocide. Other nations, even those with atrocities of similar scale (though talking about the "scale" of genocide seems petty), have not. There are still plenty of war-waging bullys in the world, but Germany's not among them. I'm not trying to say that Germany's all rainbows and butterflies, we know better -- plenty of racial problems, etc. But the general disinclination towards war and violence is real, and if it takes a guilt complex, so be it.

      (Oh, and I can second the recommendation for Die Welle!)

    32. Re:Heil by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Additionally Jews were generally unpopular back then, they're a popular scapegoat so it didn't take much to make them a prime hate target.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    33. Re:Heil by Suffering+Bastard · · Score: 1

      I'm a bit late to the posting party, but I wanted to thank you for your story. Speaking the truth, with integrity, and not shoving it down anyone's throat, instead attracting folks to your story with a simple callout. My own experience with protest is that even if the cause is good, many people are using it as an excuse to vent anger at somebody, and who better to yell at than someone committing a real crime. But then that's not serving the truth, it's only serving an avenue for hate. I think you've modeled a highly effective form of protest, or what protest should really be about.

      --
      "Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
      - Deep Thought
    34. Re:Heil by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      I think ol' Goldberg could write this, himself!

      He was a prison camp guard, who fancies himself an arbiter on Middle-East politics, because of what? Volunteering in an occupying army!

      Yeah, and my uncles were experts on Polish-Ukrainian issues, in 1941.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    35. Re:Heil by operagost · · Score: 1

      Churches like to keep the flock poor; makes them obedient.

      Obviously not; it would make the 10% tithe rather small. Try not to be too illogical while you're painting religions with a broad brush.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    36. Re:Heil by Teancum · · Score: 1

      I've been to Topaz Mountain in Utah, and it horrifies me that the American government could do even something like that and think it might be constitutional. I certainly see no safeguards put into place to keep this from happening again, and if anything such interment camps could become much larger in the future if some undesirable group came up.

      I completely agree that this is something which is not unique to just Germany... and perhaps I admire that the German people and government admit it was something wrong that happened with the Holocaust concentration camps while the American government and people try to sweep such stuff under the rug pretending it never happened in the first place... at least pretending that the U.S. government would never do something like that.

    37. Re:Heil by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine is writing a book, and I suggested he shake things up a little bit and include multiple "forewords" as well as a "backword". Some poor bastard will get stuck with the last page.

      ...he liked my idea so much, he gave me the backword. ;_;

    38. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Churches like to keep the flock poor; makes them obedient.

      Politicians are the new friars and bishops.

    39. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that was just his propaganda. In reality he hated jews because it was a crappy artists and some of artist elite that happened to be Jewish pointed the fact out to him.

      Again I blame the evils of humanity on humanities, liberals arts and artists in general. Especially vegetarian, animal loving, types of the former..

      And I am only kidding a little.

    40. Re:Heil by P-niiice · · Score: 1

      Yeah. They only like to keep them stupid. Dumb and rich is even better!

    41. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adolf stole the idea for the VW Bug from a Jewish Engineer. Don't give credit where it's not due.

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086663/Hitler-copied-idea-iconic-Volkswagen-Beetle-Jewish-engineer-historian-claims.html

    42. Re:Heil by Creepy · · Score: 2

      In some ways it was a perfect storm - you have Jews and Gypsies who were despised historically because they were not banned from usury (moneylending) by the church, the pre-socialist party government was in shambles due to the Treaty of Versailles, part of that treaty gave the mineral rich Saarland to France which devastated their industry, their currency was in shambles and in hyperinflation, the government unable to turn things around... in other words , the perfect setup for extremists to take power.

      I read the English translation of Mein Kampf (Volume 1 and kind of read Volume 2, though it was more of a skim job) and got an FBI file when I was 14 or so, since checking it out from any library got you on a watch list. I can't say I remember much about it, though, and remember it being a tedious read - Marx wasn't much better, but Machiavelli and Greek philosophers (too many to name) were better reads and I agreed with Marx's points more than Hitler's at the time, even though I was trained that Communism was the same thing as Socialism and they both are complete evil (yeah, so much for objective teaching in America - we're dead or red here - Capitalist Democracy is the only way to go, follow don't lead and be a good little citizen robot).

    43. Re:Heil by Alan+R+Light · · Score: 1

      Absolutely agree on all counts. I might also note that out of curiosity I once looked at a few passages of Mein Kampf in English translation. The scariest thing about it was that the passages I read could have been written by just about any politician working today.

    44. Re:Heil by bratloaf · · Score: 2

      My grandfather was in WWII, in Germany, and actually spent time in a POW camp (and escaped). He went in to the army 6'1" and 225, came out of the camp weighing 92 lbs. He hardly ever would speak about the things he saw, I only got little tidbits out over the years, until one day in 2000. We were on the deck with the whole family, nice day, etc, and I just asked about the war. He started with some basic stories and talked for over an hour. Everyone listened to him. I heard stuff I never thought anyone would want to see much less live. True atrocities by any measure. When he was done he just said "Phew. You know, I haven't talked about any of that in 50 years. It kinda feels good to get it out.". That was the only time he ever talked about it, even to my grandmother. I think that was the case with a lot of guys from WWII. I'm so glad I was there that day.

      And to add to all the others on here who said so - thanks for doing what you did and standing up for what you believe in a very elegant way. I wish I had seen you do that.

    45. Re:Heil by morari · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Christopher Columbus gets a national holiday in the U.S. because he was too stupid to find India. He didn't prove that the Earth was round, nor did he beat Leif Ericson and John Cabot to North America. We push aside the negativity of indigenous genocide so that we can celebrate "European Accomplishment" instead. Well then, I propose that we institute a Hitler Day. Think about it... Hitler pushed for the creation of Volkswagen and the Autobahn. His leadership of Germany led to jet propulsion, significant advances in rocket telemetry, and laid the foundation for genetic engineering. Why not celebrate his bona fide accomplishments on behalf of humanity rather than "dwelling" so persistently on the genocidal by-products of his policies?

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    46. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The tithe was paid out of your harvest. Even today only poor people pay taxes.

    47. Re:Heil by CycleMan · · Score: 1

      Having been to Manzanar and Dachau, I can say they are dramatically different. Manzanar had no break-you-down exercises like "Move all the rocks to the west side of the camp today. And move them back to the east side tomorrow." Manzanar permitted those interned to practice their faith. And the only ovens at Manzanar cooked food.

      Of 11,000 people who were relocated to Manzanar, only 146 died in 4 years, 0.25%/year. Official records for Dachau are 206,206 prisoners and 31,951 deaths over its 12 years of operation, but those records have problems.

      I hoped, by visiting Dachau, to come to a greater understanding of why Germany played mind-games and death-games with its prisoners, while America was content with simply isolating Japanese-Americans. I didn't. The displays and presentations at Dachau offer no insight into what drove the barbaric actions of the Nazis, and offers no lessons on how to prevent it from recurring. Only the memorials erected there offer hope with their charges of "Never Forget."

    48. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gypsies were despised? Not too much has changed for them, Jews came out of the holocaust with a huge loss of life and a lot of goodwill to improve their image. Gypsies... how often do you hear about them when people discuss the holocaust, WW2 or anything but petty street crime?

    49. Re:Heil by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      Not to disagree with your overall point, or to condone book burning, but part of the intellectual defense for open publication and freedom of the press is the idea that sharing thoughts via written words empowers individuals by exposing them to external ideas, possibly contradictory or controversial ones.

      Either that is true, in which case books may affect large numbers of your populace, or they are absolutely inert and useless. You can't have it both ways.

      The scary part is not that they may affect the population--that should be expected, for better or worse. The scary part is when the populace is prevented from accessing information (whether that information is good or bad), shrouding the topic in mystic, and inadvertently depriving them of the tools of reason that could help them avoid the mistakes of the past; or of contrary arguments or context that could allow them to frame their understanding accordingly.

                -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    50. Re:Heil by ElusiveJoe · · Score: 2

      So Muslim nations have most oil resources, because Allah is fond of it? What a stupid theory.

    51. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jews came out of the holocaust with a huge loss of life and a lot of goodwill to improve their image.

      Which may have been the most unfortunate consequence of WWII of all.

    52. Re:Heil by swillden · · Score: 1

      it's not a German problem, it's everyone's problem. it can happen anywhere.

      That in no way contradicts the notion that it's an inherent character flaw in the German people. It just supports the notion that the flaw is much more widespread, even universal.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    53. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The phenomenon was quite well documented(pdf) while it was happening.

    54. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    55. Re:Heil by mcneely.mike · · Score: 1

      Personally I'm for printing it,not because I thought the man had any great insight, far from it

      Have you read it? Wow, he could not hold a coherent thought, at least in verbally dictating it. What a rambling mess it is... except that all his plans and hate are in there. Hard (HARD) to read, but in reading between the lines you can see what Churchill and his spies, etc, saw coming. So yes, i am for printing it as his 'insights' ARE far from great... but the foreshadowing of something wicked this way coming (at least back then).............

      --
      soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
    56. Re:Heil by omfgnosis · · Score: 1

      Backeword?

    57. Re:Heil by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Well all I can tell you is what I remember from his stories since sadly he passed away in the late 70s, but from what he told me he and his squad (He was a Sargent at the time and ended up a Chief Master Sargent at the end of the war) was tasked with helping with the liberation of one of the smaller polish camps and for setting up lines of communication between their forward lines and the HQ.

      According to what the medic told him they have been starved for some damned long their hearts were severely weakened and that dumping the very rich GI field rations into their systems would cause too much strain on their frail bodies and it could kill them so they made thin broths from field ration stew to give to them as they tended to them. he and some of his men actually had to check bodies for life because some were so weak the Nazis just threw them on the piles without even bothering to check if they were dead. he said despite all the horrors he had seen, such as a guy he was talking to a few minutes earlier get hit dead bang by a PAK-88 (which he said left nothing but a red mist and the guys lower legs) that seeing the horrors of the camp was the closest he came to actually just executing unarmed men.

      But according to a prisoner that spoke English the real guards stuck raw recruits, some as young as 15 or 16, in charge of the camp a few days before and had ran for the west during the night a few nights before. Once they saw they had no superiors they shared what little they had and basically opened the camp, not that the prisoners had enough strength to leave. According to the prisoner they were just kids with almost no training that were frankly clueless as to what to do and simply sat down with them and waited on the war to end.

      But I was always proud of what my grandfather and his brothers did in WWII, they truly went through hell in both the EU and the Pacific, yet even when my great uncles were dying of cancer they got from going in with the troops to help after Japan surrendered they never had any regrets. To them it wasn't personal and once the battle was over they did what they could to help, to me they will always be true heroes.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    58. Re:Heil by flyneye · · Score: 1

      I know but I like to recall the connotation of his heritage. It helps put his psych profile in order for me too. Artistic license.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    59. Re:Heil by flyneye · · Score: 1

      Theres an abnormal amount of other pictures as well on other sites.
      He was known to love children. Took his friends children boating. Even before infamy, he would stop to play "soccer" with kids. Of course, he had political motivations too, but I'd venture they merely hyperbolized an existing trait.
      Come on, even Manson loved children.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    60. Re:Heil by flyneye · · Score: 1

      In the same way Sun Tsus "Art of War" was a valuable manual of war to ancient China, later it was valuable to the modern business world as a training manual for "suits". Mein Kampf is an imprint of a man who rose to gigantic power and accomplishment, however badly executed, and has value as such. Also not to be missed is some insight into the life and times through the propaganda lenses that we already know are there, appreciation of this is not missed. There are probably as many reasons to study this from different angles as there are reasons to dislike what the man begot. No one sets out one morning to make violent whirled shit of the world, one sets out to make the world a better place and fails miserably. Was it the mental illness? Was it his peers? Did his daddy touch him too much or not enough?
      There is much to be gleaned from any information that can be made available. If you don't learn from mistakes , they tend to reoccur. Hitler is fairly recent and not enough is left about Caligula or other Caesars. We still have politics, but we need to recognize the signs of creeping Nationalist Socialism, like mandatory health care.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    61. Re:Heil by flyneye · · Score: 1

      No shirt
      No shoes
      No dice.
      Can't you read the sign Spicolli?

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    62. Re:Heil by flyneye · · Score: 1

      The Repubmocrats aren't impressing me much and I point out just as much of their antics as the Nazis or Rome to my daughter.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    63. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm - no - they have the most oil resources because they are located in oil rich territory.

      However, jewish people were more likely to engage in banking in trade rich areas (e.g. venice, etc) in the middle ages due to religious
      codes, and this actually a fact - see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury

      And OP said nothing about oil..

      However, assuming a Jewish person is evil or that jewish bankers 'control the world' is a stupid theory.

    64. Re:Heil by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      Wow...that's impressive.

      I really want to write a story about this, since I'm an aspiring novelist. Are you able to flesh out details of the concentration camp?

      Unfortunately, I don't have any stories to tell. My grandparents on my mom's side burned all their photos, except 2 of them, so that the Japanese wouldn't think that they were Chinese. That is the furthest back that my history goes on that side. My dad's side is quite vague. It follows the Christian lineage, and the education, but that is about it.

      I was in the Canadian Forces, but it was more of an experience in bureaucracy, and I was not a good solider.

    65. Re:Heil by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      Hi again.

      Never mind about the details of the concentration camp. I forgot that you wrote, "Well all I can tell you...". Thanks, though, for all the information that you did give.

    66. Re:Heil by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Well I can tell you a little more, i just didn't think it was relevant for the story. He said the stench was like...well it was like nothing you could imagine and that it had looked like they had been trying to burn some of the bodies outside the place but as the Russians approached they had abandoned that and just piled them up. That was an image he said he'd never forget, to see human skeletons piled up like cordwood. He said disease was rampant, hundreds of sick and dying, and that the children looked almost like aliens with these huge heads and sunk in eyes on these walking skeletal bodies.

      Sorry i can't give you more but you can imagine this period was something he wasn't the most fond of telling, the only way i got it out of him was when the Nazis wanted to march in Chicago and I asked about what real Nazis were like. If you want to write an interesting story that hasn't been told those that were in communications like he was would be a VERY interesting story to tell, just imagine having to go out and repair lines of communication between the front and HQ with snipers and booby traps and all kinds of hell.

      BTW if you want one more story i know of one my great uncle told, he was just a grunt in a different division in the race towards Germany when they were stopped on the side of the road and in mid sentence his CO and buddy got half his face blown off right onto my great uncle from a sniper. After getting to a position he and a couple of men managed to drop the sniper...only to find a pregnant woman was the sniper who they had to finish off because she reached for the rifle. I asked if that had bothered him and he said it didn't, by that time he had lost so many guys that he had served with they all just wanted to make it home alive and were frankly pissed that by this time it was obvious they had NO chance of winning...yet they just wouldn't stop. My other great uncle in the pacific also talked about the insanity of it, how the Japanese would Banzai charge when they were dug in with M1s and BARs, he said it was just slaughter yet they just kept doing it over and over AND OVER.

      anyway good luck with your story, I'm sure if you look around you can find others like me that tried their best to remember the stories that were passed down and if anybody deserves to be called heroes those guys were it. Frankly after hearing some of their stories i'm shocked they didn't all go nuts, i know i couldn't handle that much horror and death.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    67. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse yet: Jews were forbidden from most other trades. They landed on money lending and general business trade because it was one of the only things they were allowed to do.

    68. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What?

    69. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't intent to belittle the other ethnic groups that were murdered by the Nazis but I believe WW2 was a genocide of the Jews in the way that is not true for any other group.

      An estimated 1.4 million Jews died in the USSR during WW2. Consider: this is in spite of the fact that Germany never succeeded in its invasion. People forget that many countries piggybacked on the atmosphere of the time in order to murder their Jews way before Germany ever managed to invade. Russia was no different in this regard.

      The Holocaust was the only time in history where a nation carried out a genocide in such a calculated, systematic fashion. They developed scientific methods for tracking down, tabulating and murdering Jews in the most efficient way possible (with IBM and Ford's help, no less).

    70. Re:Heil by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      Again, wow.

      I really wonder what I'd be like if I were there. Would I be able to tell stories like this over and over again? When I'm healthy and normal, I would, but who knows what I'd be like after fighting.

      Thanks, man.

    71. Re:Heil by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      I just thought of a question. Did he tell you what camp he liberated?

    72. Re:Heil by craigtp · · Score: 1

      Agreed, it's definitely not because of an inherent character flaw of the German people.

      If Stanley Milgram's experiment has taught us one thing, it's that as human beings and irrespective of our race, colour, creed and country of birth, we are all fallible and potentially open to coercion to do the bidding (or at least silently allow it to happen - something that Martin Niemöller expressed so beautifully in his "First they came.." statement) of "evil" men.

    73. Re:Heil by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

      Unless you grandfather fought in the Red Army I'm calling BS on your story. Western Allies never set foot on Polish territory.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
    74. Re:Heil by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      If I saw a list of the camps i could maybe tell you but I can't recall the name off the top of my head, i just remember it wasn't one of the big named ones they always talk about in TV and movies. you have to remember those stories were told to me when I was a kid in the late 70s, so needless to say trying to recall something that far back isn't easy. I can tell you it was either in Poland proper or on the border, the soviets were being given Berlin so many of the troops were given other duties and as one of the communications guys his job was to go into these places and fix or lay down communication lines and to help out any way he could. And needless to say he didn't like to talk about such things, you could tell it would pain him to recall such horrible things and loving my granddad i naturally didn't want him to dwell on such things.

      I have a neighbor downstairs that does genealogical searches for folks and one of these days I'll have to see how much she'll charge to do a background search on my granddad as i'm sure the USAF (when given the choice after the split of the army air core he chose USAF) would have plenty on him, he served in both WWII and Korea before retiring when Vietnam came around because as he said "I had pushed my luck twice, if I would have went again i probably wouldn't have come back". he was a hell of a guy, and the ironic part is after all that hell he saw in WWII you know what he said was the scariest part for him of the whole war? Coming home.

      He had had a wall dropped on him by a Werwulf squad, which he said their propaganda tried to say was this big force but in reality was these small pockets of soldiers without any real leadership because everything was destroyed (he said Germany looked like those shots of the moon for all the craters) and he and some guys were in this bombed out building cooking some rations when one of those squads set off a charge and made the building fall. he ended up in a full body cast and said "All i could think of in that damned plane was what if this damned thing gets shot down or crashes? I can barely wiggle my fingers, i sure as hell ain't gonna swim in this damned thing, i'll sink like a rock!" so he said THAT was truly the scariest thing he had experienced. he said in actual battle you don't have time to be scared, too many things are happening for your mind to really deal, its only afterwards when everything is over that you find yourself shaking like a leaf from all the adrenaline and almost numb from all the gore around you. he said that it was almost like seeing doll pieces, that your mind can't really absorb, its kinda like being in shock until you've had a day or two to come down, which he said on the rush to Germany time was one thing you never had.

      Anyway sorry I can't recall more for you but as I said my grandfather and great uncles really didn't talk about such things too much, it was too gory. They weren't at the famous battles, no flag raising on Iwo or riding with Patton, they were just the grunts but they were heroes to me.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    75. Re:Heil by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Thanks but I just felt I was doing as granddad would have wanted, and spoke the truth. I have seen the same as you at protests, indeed there was already a mob spewing hate at the Nazis and that I thought was the most pointless thing I had seen, making BOTH sides look to me like barking dogs more than anything. I wish i could say it was some divine inspiration, some well thought out plan, but I simply couldn't see myself screaming out what my granddad had told me, not when he was a reserved and stoic man. So instead i simply made my little sign and stood behind it and found it worked more effectively than all those dirty names they screamed at each other.

      As I said my granddad was big on the right to speak and assemble, but I think all these protests do nothing but let folks scream at each other, and what does that accomplish? Personally i'd be more impressed if those that wished to speak simply did as i did, make a simple sign stating their position and let those that want to learn more approach them so they can then speak one on one as human beings. Maybe the cynicism hasn't completely gotten me yet, but wouldn't it just be more...well civil that way?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    76. Re:Heil by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      That's amazing stuff. It all seems so small in the grand scheme of the war, but the average doesn't go through anything like that. The average person doesn't even go through anything like basic training, which is actually quite safe.

      Thanks for sharing.

    77. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gypsies are still despised.
      I live in a place with a number of the Palm Reading, shop lifting, scam artist, burglars.
      Believe me they despise anyone who isn't a gypsy and call them fair game.
      Someone up there said something about Hitler was like a stopped clock, right twice a day. This was the other time he was right.

    78. Re:Heil by Suffering+Bastard · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's exactly it. That you didn't come up with a plan or over think an agenda, you simply went with your heart and followed the truth without letting your head get in the way. I mean, of course you needed to think about how to tell your story and what to write on your sign, but the impetus wasn't a formulated plan, you were spurred on by a silent but powerful truth that you couldn't ignore. To me, that's the place from which we can create the most effective positive change.

      I think it's becoming clear that shouting at the powers that be simply doesn't work, and certainly violence makes things worse. The powers that be (bankers, CEOs, news media, presidents, Nazi leaders) are too insulated, untouched by the shouting, and can easily overpower any attempts to use force for change. Yet by courageously following our own truth without dressing it up in big agendas and sensationalist language we set more subtle forces in motion that will play out in ways we can't even begin to imagine. I wonder how many people were touched by your message and then passed it on. Perhaps there's a bit less hate in the world thanks to your simple act.

      --
      "Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
      - Deep Thought
    79. Re:Heil by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I just can't for the life of me understand how screaming at someone is supposed to change anything. I mean you see supposedly religious people screaming profanity at abortion clinics, what does it accomplish? i have never once had my mind changed by someone yelling at me, but I have had it changed by someone simply speaking to me one on one and making good arguments, if nothing else they did make me think about my position.

      And I think you are right that yelling at bankers is never gonna change a single thing, if anything it will only harden them further. its just a shame that more don't simply put up a little sign and then let those that are curious come forth, I bet they would get a lot more actual dialog happening if they did that for one hour than if they screamed all day. Maybe its just me, but I think its all gotten too...coarse. people simply don't show even the most common respect for one another, they just look at them as "the enemy" and that accomplishes nothing.

      in the end i couldn't look upon those Nazis with hate, even when they cursed at me, instead i looked upon them as my grandfather did, with pity. as he told me when he watched the Nazis in Illinois "If they had had to spend even a day at one of those camps there is no way they could look upon Nazism as anything but pure evil" and since he wasn't there i simply took his place and would do so again. One doesn't have to smack someone in the face with it, simply never forget what those that were there witnessed and to rebut lies with the truth. One can do that while still being human, not some barking dog shouting out profanity.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    80. Re:Heil by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      You are welcome, and if you don't mind a little advice? if you are doing a story on WWI in EU look up the PAK weapons, because he said those were what really put fear into a GI's heart. he said they opened up with the PAKs as they were retreating and when those shells, which were designed to actually punch holes in tanks, would hit into a pile of infantry it was like doll pieces strewn everywhere, just surreal. he of course would have to go in afterwards and lay down the lines or repair damaged cables while...well like I said, doll pieces. BTW did you know they all carried a dog tag in one of their boots? that was so if they got hit in the head you could still ID the body, just surreal that average guys like my grandfather, who was the classic "gentle giant", could go through such things and end up living a peaceful life.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    81. Re:Heil by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the advice. I'm not much of a gun geek, so every tidbit helps.

      I honestly don't know how I would react in those situations. A lot times, I don't get grossed out like other people, but when there are bullets flying, I might react differently.

      I would have never guessed about dog tags in boots. That just shows us how real those situations are.

    82. Re:Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you fucking mental?

    83. Re:Heil by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Well it just shows that war never changes. When my mother was little she used to help take care of my great great grandfather as he was in his late 90s when she was a child and he fought in the civil war. He was a rebel but not because he believed in slavery, in fact he never owned a slave, it was Sherman burning as he went that got him involved. But what struck me was how alike both of their stories were in some respects. Both great great grandfather and my grandfather said it wasn't the bullets that scared them, with both it was the cannons that gave them fear. With great great grandfather according to mom he said it was the "whistling" sound, they would use nails, chains, anything they could stuff down the barrel and it would make this whistling sound and of course what a chain shot out of a cannon did to a human body was just horrible, and with grandfather it was the PAK weapons because he said they made this roar, like some monster, and when they hit it was all red mist and doll pieces. Anyway i just thought that was interesting and of course when I found out mom had heard great great grandfather's stories I wanted to hear them too and thought it was amazing that a century later and it was the same thing causing both men fear.

      So to get a feel for your subject matter take a look at the weapons the GIs faced, especially the PAKs and MGs which were the terror weapons of their day. Also look at their day to day lives, because for the grunts at the front it was just nuts. I mean can you imagine trying to eat while shells are going off, or having to learn to smoke with your head down at night because the coal would give you away to a sniper? just nuts. Anyway good luck on your story, and remember that for every Patton or Rommel there were a million grunts like my granddad, just ordinary guys trying to stay alive.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    84. Re:Heil by Crosshair84 · · Score: 0

      He was a rebel but not because he believed in slavery, in fact he never owned a slave, it was Sherman burning as he went that got him involved.

      If only people would understand it is THAT kind of stuff that motivates the majority of people attacking our troops in the Middle East today. (and the troops that fought us in Vietnam.)

      I paid attention during History class and I don't recall them sending suicide fire ships into our harbors in the 1840's. I don't remember them sending suicide bombers to our cities in the 1920's. There was piracy around their shores sure, but they weren't crossing the Atlantic and raiding coastal towns.

      Only after we had overthrown the elected Iranian government in 53, because the British weren't getting the oil profits they used to, and installed and defended puppet dictators elsewhere did people there suddenly start to have a hatred for the US. Hmmmmm. I wonder if the two are POSSIBLY connected? Why all of a sudden, after centuries of killing each other, and not caring about us, did they suddenly more-or-less stop and start attacking us?

      Yes one can make the argument that this was all necessary to thwart the Soviet Union, I don't buy that argument though. However, now that the Soviet Union is gone there is no need for us to be in the region. All the money blown on the wars we could have instead spent BUYING the oil and still had change to spare. We'd get the oil, they'd go on killing each other and not us. Win-Win.

      It took 800+ years for the West to get this whole representative secular government thing figured out. Not gonna happen in 6 months over there and forcing it on them will only make them fight it even more.

    85. Re:Heil by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Dude do NOT even get me started on the ME and all the bullshit! this is why my grandfather retired rather than going to nam, with WWII we were fighting a guy who was trying to take over the planet, with Korea he said the Koreans asked for our help, but he said Vietnam was nothing but a puppet that the CIA was jerking around and we didn't have a damned reason to be there.

      Sadly I too have looked at history and this map says it all. The CIA have run amok since the end of WWII and "US interests" have become a codeword for some corp that wants cheaper bananas or to raid a country for some resource. of course that doesn't change the fact that just like with the USSR that Islam is a threat, as we have seen in EU and the UK with all the riots Islamists just don't play nice with others, but that doesn't change the fact that we shouldn't even be there in the first place. And don't even get me started on AIPAC which bribes the living shit out of congressmen and throw so much money into our campaigns that BOTH the Dem and the Rep candidate for president goes to kiss the ring before running.

      Sadly to me this is proof that capitalism like all other isms are simply doomed to die, because just like communism promoted party loyalty over competences and promoted apathy and stagnation so too does capitalism promote an elite class of multinationals that attain God like powers and can literally start wars or have laws written by simple bribes and edicts. as much as I miss him I doubt seriously my grandfather would find much to be proud of what has happened to his country he fought so hard for. Maybe this is why no society lasts, the corruption gets so bad people would rather let it fall apart than try to fix it, who knows. But you can't blame any of those countries in red for not liking us none too much.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    86. Re:Heil by Crosshair84 · · Score: 0

      Sadly to me this is proof that capitalism like all other isms are simply doomed to die, because just like communism promoted party loyalty over competences and promoted apathy and stagnation so too does capitalism promote an elite class of multinationals that attain God like powers and can literally start wars or have laws written by simple bribes and edicts. as much as I miss him I doubt seriously my grandfather would find much to be proud of what has happened to his country he fought so hard for. Maybe this is why no society lasts, the corruption gets so bad people would rather let it fall apart than try to fix it, who knows. But you can't blame any of those countries in red for not liking us none too much.

      I agree with much of what you said in the above post, but I would point out that what we have today is crony capitalism/soft fascism where the winners are the ones who have control of the government gun.

      You saw nothing like that during the 19th century when we were the closest we ever were to free market capitalism. Heck, during the War of 1812 northern banks actually REFUSED to lend to the US government to fund the war. (Imagine if that were possible today.) There were no lobbyists in Washington because there was nothing to buy there. There was indeed some corruption at the state level, but that influence stopped at the state line, making it easy for business and people to flee states with stupid policies. In the name of "helping the people" the government grew to "control" the corporations....yea, and the fox wants to guard the hen-house to keep the hens safe.

      It was the corporations who wanted that government regulation because it protects them from having to compete. Even at its peak, Standard Oil had dozens of competitors, some quite large and had to continually innovate to stay ahead. The forward thinking leadership of Rockefeller kept Standard Oil one step ahead of anyone else, once he retired in 1896 conservative management at Standard oil led to a sharp decline of their market share as they were outmaneuvered by smaller competitors well before the Anti-Trust laws, which are nothing more than a tool for corporations to beat up on their competitors via the government, came into play. (Seriously, go look up who files the anti-trust claim, it's mostly one business wanting to beat up on another business.)

      Just TRY to set up an oil company today, even a non-profit, you'll be buried by the regulations, which is exactly what the large firms want. The solution is to take away that government power and make firms actually compete, but still too many people think that the regulations are there to protect the environment or the people. They aren't. The purpose of those regulations, just like the current political system, is to protected the large firms and shut down any start-up competition. Just like the establishment tries to shut down Ron Paul, the regulations are designed to shut down small time business that could pose a threat to large firms.

  2. The English version is good for this by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The current English edition is actually peppered with footnotes calling out every time Hitler lies or exaggerates. It's like a side by side refutation.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
    1. Re:The English version is good for this by Gib7 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sort of like the Skeptics Annotated Bible ?

    2. Re:The English version is good for this by Grayhand · · Score: 1, Funny

      Wait a minute, blond haired, blue eyed muscular men aren't serious stud muffins? You mean Hitler was lying? Next thing you'll be telling me "The Producers" was a comedy and "Spring Time For Hitler" was played for laughs and he wasn't the vaguely gay character they represented him as. I mean what are you to do when your niece that you were sleeping with commits suicide? I guess after you kill a few million people, and are responsible for the deaths of tens of millions, you marry the maid and blow your brains out in a bunker. I can totally understand why the skin heads idolize him, they are morons.

    3. Re:The English version is good for this by David+Gerard · · Score: 5, Informative

      Pretty much. Like any bible, Mein Kampf isn't actually meant to be read by its believers. I tried to read it because I thought it'd be good to know what Nazis were about, and in my student activist days I spent a bit of time working against neo-Nazis. IT'S TERRIBLE! It's boring, repetitious, tedious, egowank ... so yeah, it's a perfect bible. The footnoting is the only use it has. Hitler starts bullshitting from the very first page.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    4. Re:The English version is good for this by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      IT'S TERRIBLE! It's boring, repetitious, tedious, egowank

      I came here to say the same thing. Banning publication is a service to anyone who, like me, might have the misguided belief that they'd learn something by reading it. Other than that Hitler was a semi-literate drooling moron with a god complex, I mean, which can be learned from other far less painful sources.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:The English version is good for this by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I came here to say the same thing. Banning publication is a service to anyone who, like me, might have the misguided belief that they'd learn something by reading it. Other than that Hitler was a semi-literate drooling moron with a god complex, I mean, which can be learned from other far less painful sources.

      Why do people insist on calling him a moron? Hitler was a homicidal sociopath, a racist and a right wing fanatic but he was also an astute politician, quite intelligent and strangely enough, judging from statements by people who met him, he was also very charming. Just because somebody is a Nazi doesn't make them stupid. The French and the British made assumptions about Hitler and it turned out to be an expensive mistake. If this publication helps to dispel myths about Nazism I'm all for it. Strangely enough there is now an effort being made to pronounce the Nazis a left wing movement which is pretty funny if you know anything about the Freikorps, Anton Drexler and the rest of that ilk. Nazism was an attempt to create a right wing counterpart to communism.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    6. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      egowank

      At least I've got a name for my new death metal band!

    7. Re:The English version is good for this by Bromskloss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's interesting that you mention left wing, because already when you said right wing, I wondered what you meant by it. I'm often fuzzy regarding what should be called one or the other (if the terms are at all relevant outside the French revolution), so I'm collecting samples of how other people use the words. Today, I'm sampling you. :-) What do you have in mind when you call Hitler the movement right wing? (Amusingly, we're talking about the National Socialist German Workers' Party, but what's in a name?) Supporting the crown and the estates? Dismantling the state ("taxation is theft")? Encouraging capitalism? Belief in Christian ideals? Those are traits that I see as characterising the Right in one context or another. (Though I don't see them as particularly representative of the Nazis.)

      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    8. Re:The English version is good for this by flyneye · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd like to read it in the original Deutsche though. There is no perfect Bible. Even the bible must be researched from the original languages and translations, compared to Archeological facts and Socialogical history before it can be defined into a version that seems to meet someones dogma. That is why there are so many translations and editions. Politics and Church Politics play a great role in all this. That is why it is terribly important that there be a scholars neutral edition( which doesn't exist,guess why?). We would find that the "resilient" inherit the earth.( Early church wanted meek parishioners as they are easier to control than resilient ones)
      The temple priests used cannabis rather than "calmus" as an unguent. Scattered throughout are warnings for man to follow Gods governance rather than mans, even that bit about "rendering unto Caesar" gets misconstrued as instruction to obey mans governance rather than highlight the unimportance of earthly joys compared to the everlasting glory, which is what it was meant to do until "politically modified".

      So, my longwinded point is, Get your hands on the original and ignore annotations of the politically motivated.

         

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    9. Re:The English version is good for this by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I would describe it (admittedly based on a very very small sample) as turgid, but that doesn't go nearly far enough.

      But who'll do the movie? Bay? Boll? Lucas?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    10. Re:The English version is good for this by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      He was very smart at politics, but incompetent at running a war. This is pretty well documented. He had excellent generals and he didn't listen to them.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    11. Re:The English version is good for this by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why do people insist on calling him a moron?

      Judging by his writing style, which is incoherent, rambling, and in a lot of places just plain wrong. He was charismatic, but from what I've read about the Nazis most of the successes (e.g. the invasion of most of Europe and the militarisation of Germany) were either orchestrated by other people, were blind luck (and failed miserably when he tried to repeat them), but most of the disasters for them (e.g. the invasion of Russia) happened when Hitler overrode the opinions of the people he'd previously let get on with running the empire.

      The allies didn't underestimate Hitler so much as underestimate the ability of competent people to ride the coat tails of a charismatic leader. If he'd been assassinated in the late '30s, most of Europe would probably be speaking German now...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    12. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you assist on the translation of the SNES game ZeroWing? Your English is awful.

      The NAZI party supported the wealthy, dismantled several sovereign states, did encourage capitalism, and absolutely was based in Christian ideals. Is your knowledge of history as bad as your knowledge of English? Hitler had the blessing of the pope and openly spoke of his christian devotion. GOTT MIT UNS (God with us) was on the official seal and even stamped on the money of NAZI Germany.

      "Taxation is theft" is a poorly contrived Neo-con idea that makes absolutely no sense what so ever to anyone that understands what tax money is used for. If one doesn't want government services then they are invited to use only private roads (good luck, they don't connect), put out their own house fires with water from private companies not municipal water supplies, and seek vigilante justice against those that harm them instead of calling the cops. Taxation is very clearly payment for services rendered, not theft. Anyone wishing to not pay taxes is free to do so as long as they stop using the country's public services entirely, preferably by leaving.

      I get the feeling arguing with you would be like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter the quality of my argument, all you will do is knock pieces over, shit on the board, and strut about victoriously.

    13. Re:The English version is good for this by voss · · Score: 2

      Broms, your confusing American and European conservatism. In that era European conservatives tended be traditionalists who favored protectionism,pro-state and pro-religion. In the early 20th century Capitalism tended to be in the liberal parties(in Europe "liberal" still refers to what we call classical liberalism).

    14. Re:The English version is good for this by vlm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's boring, repetitious,

      Been there read that. Read it for a liberal arts survey holocaust senior year class in school... quite a while ago.

      The last two words I'd use would be boring and repititious.

      Hard to describe the plans and beliefs of the guy who pretty much ran WWII as boring. I guess if all you pay attention to is the Kardashians and fashion shoes, this wide reaching social geopolitical stuff could be a bit dull, but I found it extremely interesting.

      The repetitious stuff, again, is the readers fault. I'm sitting there reading and thinking "this is a pretty shitty WWII textbook" and realizing it was written well before WWII. Its kind of like calling 20000 leagues under the sea by Jules Verne from 1870 boring, because everyone knows the history of cold war era submarines and I've seen better modern agitprop movies and books about nuclear subs..

      Him being naughty and evil is not an excuse or justification or (good) rationalization for basically making stuff up to make his book look bad and by connection his actions. He makes himself look bad quite well all on his own, by his beliefs and actions without you making stuff up about his very interesting book.

      An example of a slightly less inflamatory subject: I'm the opposite of a bible thumper (which has the weird political effect of making me an anti-republican... they kicked me out, I didn't wanna leave...). Objectively it has some pretty decent poetry in it. Aside from the poetry I think its completely full of it, mostly false WRT anything important, and generally has been a net negative on society. If you don't like that, search and replace with any other religious text until it matches your personal dislikes. That dislike of what believers have done and disagreement with their beliefs does not mean I should make stuff up about their book being "unpoetic" in an attempt to make them look bad. They make themselves look bad very well all by themselves.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    15. Re:The English version is good for this by Raenex · · Score: 1

      We would find that the "resilient" inherit the earth.( Early church wanted meek parishioners as they are easier to control than resilient ones) [..] So, my longwinded point is, Get your hands on the original and ignore annotations of the politically motivated.

      OK, so did you do that for "meek"? Because I can find no reference to "resilient". Alternatives I've seen mentioned are "gentle" and "humble", which would fit in with the surrounding text.

      But if you're talking about the Bible, in particular the New Testament, you have to realize even that is second-hand, third-hand, or more removed from the source.

      Scattered throughout are warnings for man to follow Gods governance rather than mans

      Now there's a reference to the supposed original source, "God", yet for some reason he doesn't directly talk to most people, and prefers instead to send conflicting messengers of dubious veracity.

    16. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nazism and Facism in general is usually about using the state to support the current capitalist economic power and ownership and keeping the workers down, as opposed to using the state to bring down the current capitalist power and move ownership to the workers.

      So they both advocate authoritarian regimes, but differ in how they claim to utilise this authority.

      In reality, power and authority corrupts (or attracts the wrong sort of person to begin with), and authoritarian regimes tend to converge on the same type of ownership; everything is owned and operated by the leaders and their friends.

      So the real question isn't about left vs right wing, but about authoritarian versus non-authoritarian (democracy if you wish).

    17. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hitler was a homicidal sociopath, a racist and a right wing fanatic

      vs

      Strangely enough there is now an effort being made to pronounce the Nazis a left wing movement

      There's no contradiction. He's saying Hitler was a right winger, then he says some people are trying to call him a left winger.

    18. Re:The English version is good for this by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Right wing: tending toward fascism. Left wing: tending toward socialism. Since both ideologies are dedicated to crushing personal freedom it is easy to confuse the two. It's *how* they want to crush your freedom that distinguishes them.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    19. Re:The English version is good for this by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Hitler was pretty lucky to meet so many incompetent opponents early on.

      Stalin was a paranoid loon. He'd shot almost all officers above the rank of colonel when he came to power, meaning the Red Army was largely led by people who didn't have much in the way of experience or talent. If he'd bumped off Zhukov after one of their rows things might have turned out rather differently.

      Churchill weakened the north forces in the middle east (to reinforce Greece, already a lost cause) just as Wavell was on the verge of victory. There'd have never been an Afrika Korps - this was before Rommel had even arrived.

      As for the French ...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    20. Re:The English version is good for this by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      IT'S TERRIBLE! It's boring, repetitious, tedious, egowank

      I came here to say the same thing. Banning publication is a service to anyone who, like me, might have the misguided belief that they'd learn something by reading it.

      This is an argument in favour of publishing it, not suppressing it. Anyone with neo-nazi pretensions who tries to read this pile of crap (I gave it a go out of curiosity when I saw our University library had a 1933 copy, never made it past the first chapter) will pretty quickly give up and follow some other agenda. It's the best inoculation against Hitler-ism I know of.

    21. Re:The English version is good for this by ukpyr · · Score: 1

      What a valuable read then, first hand proof that it was written by a mediocre min,d twisted by his own goals and able to manipulate people with shoddy literature. A VERY valuable lesson in today's sound-bite world.

    22. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've read that Hitler was only charismatic in public, and when he was communicating to people on a personal level, one-on-one, he was very forgettable.

    23. Re:The English version is good for this by Bromskloss · · Score: 2

      Wonderful reply! I like the symmetry of it and how you manage to bash both sides. :-) Perhaps you're even right. I mean, correct.

      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    24. Re:The English version is good for this by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      What do you have in mind when you call Hitler the movement right wing? (Amusingly, we're talking about the National Socialist German Workers' Party, but what's in a name?)

      I meant only that it would be strange if something left wing came out of something as resolutely right wing as the Freikorps. Are you trying to make the argument that: socialist==left wing therefore everything with socialist in it's name must be left wing? If that is the case the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (that's North Korea) must be a constitutional republic and representative democracy (like the USA). There are many takes on both the left and right wing of politics and the both wings have borrowed heavily from each other. The Nazis were no exception. What I meant by: Strangely enough there is now an effort being made to pronounce the Nazis a left wing movement is that modern day conservatives are desperate to push Nazism out of their niece (the right wing) by blaming the Nazi movement and all of it's atrocities on the political left. If the best they can do justify this claim is to point at the word socialist in National Socialist German Workers' Party I'm not impressed.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    25. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right Wing: Kill Jews because they don't believe in the right God. Left Wing: Kill Jews because they believe in God. Jew: Kill all non-Jews you can get away with and blame God.

    26. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      desperate to push Nazism out of their niece (the right wing) by blaming the Nazi movement

      I think you mean niche.

    27. Re:The English version is good for this by swalve · · Score: 3, Interesting

      He called it the socialist party to get the people on board. But by pretty much all accounts, there was nothing socialist about it.

      Left and right are unclear ways to describe people's political tendencies. You have to add in a second dimension, that of "use of the state" or libertarian versus authoritarian. Left and right describe "how things are", and authoritarian and libertarian describe "what you are going to do about it".

      Left and right, according to one definition, says that the right believes in the various social structures, and that they are there for a reason. The unfortunate are that way for a good reason. The left would say the unfortunate are that way for not a good reason, and seek to change the social structures. Authoritarian people would use the power of the state to further their left or right goals, and libertarian people want to limit or destroy the power of the state.

      Hitler was right wing, authoritarian. Use the power of the state to cleanse the social structures of people and institutions that were messing it up.

    28. Re:The English version is good for this by mseeger · · Score: 1

      I think "intelligent" is the wrong term here. He was unconventional in his ways of thinking and capable of smartness. But he was completely incapable of adapting to changes during the war and a stranger to anything resembling "thinking it through" or "systematic".

    29. Re:The English version is good for this by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      I wish I could mod you up.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    30. Re:The English version is good for this by findoutmoretoday · · Score: 2

      Europe would probably be speaking German now...

      Don't overestimate the intelligence of the average European, German is just too difficult to learn for most of us.

    31. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do people insist on calling him a moron? Hitler was a homicidal sociopath, a racist and a right wing fanatic but he was also an astute politician, quite intelligent and strangely enough, judging from statements by people who met him, he was also very charming.

      Well, he did have 18 Charisma...

    32. Re:The English version is good for this by readin · · Score: 2

      Right wing: tending toward fascism. Left wing: tending toward socialism.

      It can be confusing because in America conservatives are often called "right-wing" and the more libertarian a conservative is the more likely he is to be labeled "far right-wing" yet such people are directly opposed to fascism.

      --
      I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
    33. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Originally, all 'right wing' and 'left wing' meant was where you sat in the French National Assembly. The folks on the right tended to prefer the status quo, while the folks on the left tended to prefer changing things.

      Therefor, by that metric, the Nazis were rather left wing, as they weren't exactly satisfied with the status quo of the time...

    34. Re:The English version is good for this by GameboyRMH · · Score: 0

      I dunno, Atlas Shrugged doesn't dissuade people from becoming libertarians...I dare anyone to say that it isn't a horribly written egowankfest. Say it with a straight face.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    35. Re:The English version is good for this by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it was dictated in prison and completed over the course of some months. Obviously he wasn't an intellectual genius, but compared to the drivel modern politicians produce with the help of editors and ghostwriters...

    36. Re:The English version is good for this by Pax681 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Right Wing: Kill Jews because they don't believe in the right God. .

      it's the same god as christians and muslims....you know ,that god of Abraham they all revere ~sighs~

    37. Re:The English version is good for this by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      I dunno, Atlas Shrugged doesn't dissuade people from becoming libertarians...I dare anyone to say that it isn't a horribly written egowankfest. Say it with a straight face.

      I dunno, it certainly dissuaded me (although mostly just from reading another Ayn Rand book). It was like some revenge fantasy written by a hyperactive 14-year-old. It's actually a good comparison to Mein Kampf, the main difference being that Hitler had the good grace to shut up hundreds of pages before Rand did.

    38. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find that oddly unnecessary. From what I remember from the obligatory reading in Danish public school, the book is mostly Hitler whining excessively and explaining in details how he will lie to people to get them to support him.

    39. Re:The English version is good for this by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      I dare anyone to say that it isn't a horribly written egowankfest. Say it with a straight face.
      How many tries do I get?

    40. Re:The English version is good for this by msobkow · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I can't agree with you that the goal of socialism is to crush personal freedom. In fact, I'd take the direct opposite stance.

      Full-on socialist policies (which some refer to as a "nanny state" because the essentials of life are provided by the government) actually free the citizenry from having to worry about the very trials and tribulations that consume the time and energy of a capitalist society: survival.

      Even fascism isn't so much about "crushing" personal freedom as it is about whipping the population into a fanatical frenzy of support for the state and it's purported mission.

      Had you said that they try to manipulate people into giving up the ideals of capitalism, I'd have agreed. But I don't see capitalism as the be-all and end-all of society. Never have, and never will.

      Primarily because I grew up in and live in a country that has had socialist leanings pretty much since the 1930's -- Canada. Having grown up in such an environment, I can see definite benefits to society from a government which generally considers the welfare of society as a whole to be more important than some ideology of freedom to rape, pillage, and rob your neighbours without restriction so long as it's profitable.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    41. Re:The English version is good for this by Bromskloss · · Score: 1

      Are you trying to make the argument that: socialist==left wing therefore everything with socialist in it's name must be left wing?

      Absolutely not. My Shakespeare quote was there precisely to ensure you that I do not automatically believe that someone is what they say they are.

      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    42. Re:The English version is good for this by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Hell, I'll give you 10. If you fall on the ground you lose your remaining tries though.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    43. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a politics line, calibrated that socialism is on the left side, you will find fascism to the right of socialism. However significantly furthur to the right you will find things like Lazy Governing (I don't care to spellcheck the French of it), a little left of lazy governing is the US Constitution.
      Anarchists for anarchy's sake are somewhere much furthur to the right, and true communisms can theoretically be found anywhere, but what you usually find labelled a communism is either socialist or fascist with a PR campaign.

    44. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's the same god as christians and muslims....you know ,that god of Abraham they all revere ~sighs~

      There is no god, therefore if you chose to believe such nonsense you also can chose to believe they are not the same god. They are all made up stories, it is no contradiction to hate one group because they don't believe the same thing as you do. All religious peoples are equally stupid.

    45. Re:The English version is good for this by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that you mention left wing, because already when you said right wing, I wondered what you meant by it. I'm often fuzzy regarding what should be called one or the other (if the terms are at all relevant outside the French revolution), so I'm collecting samples of how other people use the words. Today, I'm sampling you. :-) What do you have in mind when you call Hitler the movement right wing? (Amusingly, we're talking about the National Socialist German Workers' Party, but what's in a name?) Supporting the crown and the estates? Dismantling the state ("taxation is theft")? Encouraging capitalism? Belief in Christian ideals? Those are traits that I see as characterising the Right in one context or another. (Though I don't see them as particularly representative of the Nazis.)

      The cure for ignorance is to read. Here's a place to start... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_politics or go to the library and use a regular encyclopedia.

      The short version: Traditionally, the Left includes progressives, social liberals, social democrats, socialists, communists and anarchists. The Right includes conservatives, reactionaries, capitalists, monarchists, nationalists and fascists.

    46. Re:The English version is good for this by NonUniqueNickname · · Score: 1

      But who'll do the movie? Bay? Boll? Lucas?

      Gibson

    47. Re:The English version is good for this by gslj · · Score: 0

      Easy. In the French parliament, the party of the ruling class was on the speaker's right, the party representing the poor on his left. The political positions you would expect from these two constituencies on taxes, foreign wars, universal education, universal health care, the established church, etc are right wing and left wing to this day.

      In short, right wingers believe that people exist to serve their country; left wingers believe the country exists to serve its people.

      I think Hitler's documented policies on forced sterilization, foreign wars, political pluralism, etc make clear that he belongs on the right.

      -Gareth

    48. Re:The English version is good for this by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Put it into a historical context. The NSDAP arose in the Weimarer Republik, an instable new democracy forced in place by the allied victors. The right wing of Germany in those times was advocating a return to the feudal structures of pre-WW1 Germany and abolishing democracy, most of the parties wanted their emperor back. Also Germany used to be larger before WW1, the right wing wanted to take those lost territories back.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    49. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Must be an American.

      s/socialism/communism/

    50. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IT'S TERRIBLE! It's boring, repetitious, tedious, egowank...

      Sounds like my company's Operations Manual.

    51. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We would find that the "resilient" inherit the earth.( Early church wanted meek parishioners as they are easier to control than resilient ones)

      That sounds like the focal point of Nietzsche's critique of the Christian condition. That condition was likely a political artifact of the religious wars and the reformation movements of the area.

    52. Re:The English version is good for this by KDR_11k · · Score: 2

      Full-on socialist policies (which some refer to as a "nanny state" because the essentials of life are provided by the government) actually free the citizenry from having to worry about the very trials and tribulations that consume the time and energy of a capitalist society: survival.

      That was the reasoning behind the first social system and general health care in the world. It was introduced by a liberal (the pro-economy European kind) in order to increase economic activity and prosperity by reducing the impact of those basic worries on the workforce.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    53. Re:The English version is good for this by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      We would find that the "resilient" inherit the earth.( Early church wanted meek parishioners as they are easier to control than resilient ones)
      The temple priests used cannabis rather than "calmus" as an unguent.

      Interesting if true. Citation?

      that bit about "rendering unto Caesar" gets misconstrued as instruction to obey mans governance rather than highlight the unimportance of earthly joys compared to the everlasting glory, which is what it was meant to do until "politically modified".

      Um, which bible does that? Not the KJV or the NIV, the two most popular versions. Both say "render unto ceasar that which is ceasar's and to God that which is God's". Both texts are plain in that they are speaking of the question "is it ok to pay tax?"

    54. Re:The English version is good for this by operagost · · Score: 2

      It doesn't really matter whether you call fascism right ring or left wing. The fact is that Nazism and Italian Fascism weren't conservative. A conservative wants to keep government control of individual citizens to a rather low level, and fascism evaluates every idea first on whether it benefits the state. A Social conservative tries to exert some moral control on individuals for moral reasons, but it's not for the benefit of the state per se.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    55. Re:The English version is good for this by DesScorp · · Score: 1

      Pretty much. Like any bible, Mein Kampf isn't actually meant to be read by its believers.

      That's nonsense. Of course Bibles are meant to be read. That's why they were put to paper in the first place, so that worshipers didn't have to depend on oral tradition, or depend on one guy. There's a long tradition of "read it for yourself" in Judaism and Christianity. Many Christians have the "Berean test". Paul wrote that the Bereans neither accepted nor rejected his message until they had the chance to go through the scriptures themselves, and then decided to follow him. Christianity and Judaism depends on people reading the Bible for themselves. This is why the publishing of the King James edition was so historically important: for the first time, subjects of the realm could read it in their own tongue. They didn't have to rely on priests who knew Latin. And in do so, printing the KJV also spread literacy. Many people learned to read by learning the Bible, right up to the 20th century. Since then, it's been published in pretty much every language on Earth. Reading it for yourself is the whole point. So to say that Bibles "aren't really meant to be read" is the most ludicrous of statements, reflecting your hostility, not reality.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    56. Re:The English version is good for this by DesScorp · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Right wing: tending toward fascism. Left wing: tending toward socialism. Since both ideologies are dedicated to crushing personal freedom it is easy to confuse the two. It's *how* they want to crush your freedom that distinguishes them.

      Except that fascism and socialism are relatives, ideologically speaking. Fascism was spawned from socialism. Benito Mussolini was a socialist as a young man. He didn't leave socialism. He mutated it into another form. He saw Fascism as the next logical step of political evolution, with socialism the previous iteration. It still had collectivist impulses, and deference to the state.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    57. Re:The English version is good for this by operagost · · Score: 2

      He called it the socialist party to get the people on board. But by pretty much all accounts, there was nothing socialist about it.

      Volkswagen? KdF? Winter relief? Eugenics? "Reich Nature Protection Act"? The anti-tobacco campaign? The animal protection laws? The state-run film industry?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    58. Re:The English version is good for this by doston · · Score: 1

      Hitler was a homicidal sociopath, a racist and a right wing fanatic

      vs

      Strangely enough there is now an effort being made to pronounce the Nazis a left wing movement

      There's no contradiction. He's saying Hitler was a right winger, then he says some people are trying to call him a left winger.

      These never ending arguments about whether a tyrant is a left or right winger. Easy to solve. Look, if a dictator sees an opportunity to get into power using left wing ideals and sees a scapegoat he can take advantage of to rile up the left wing, he'll use it to get into power. He'll promise real socialism or real communism, whatever appeals to the people who can get him elected . That doesn't mean he's a socialist, a communist or left winger. Conversely, if say an American politician sees an angry, stupid right wing he can take advantage of, he'll tell them whatever it is they want to hear. He'll say he's religious, pro gun rights, pro family values (whatever that really means)...whatever to get elected. Does that mean he's going to shrink government and eliminate taxes....Nope. It just gets him into office. None of these guys in history were any of the things they used to get elected. They're just dictators, usually with a fascist bent and they end up instituting a totalitarian government. They only called it the USSR because the people wanted socialsm, that doesn't mean that's what the USSR was, for example. The fact that people can't see this is scary. We'll end up with another Hitler, as easily mislead as people seem to be.

    59. Re:The English version is good for this by acid06 · · Score: 1

      I actually saved this quote for posteriority - sums up my personal beliefs pretty well.
      Thanks for writing the idea in a such concise manner.

    60. Re:The English version is good for this by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      "There's a long tradition of "read it for yourself" in Judaism and Christianity."

      Actually, no - the Catholic Church didn't let people read the Bible itself until printing and Martin Luther forced their hand.

      The KJV followed (and used) large chunks of the Tyndale bible. Now, what happened to Tyndale?

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    61. Re:The English version is good for this by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      Or to put it another way, the Romans invaded most of Europe, and look how badly the conquered nations fared at trying to learn Latin...

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    62. Re:The English version is good for this by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Just FYI.. the wikipedia link you linked to contradicts your viewpoint, if you also consider right wing as conservative:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

      Fascism opposes multiple ideologies: conservatism, liberalism, and two major forms of socialism—communism and social democracy.[8]

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    63. Re:The English version is good for this by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      It was not written. He dictated it, which is why it has that rambling, conversationally-telling-a-story feel.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    64. Re:The English version is good for this by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      KdF was socialist. The rest of it was not.

      Hint: socialism != authoritarianism. It does not even equal "state run". And, of course, not every authoritarian policy is socialist. For example, Jim Crow laws in U.S. were authoritarian as hell, but they were definitely not socialist.

    65. Re:The English version is good for this by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The problem is that it is boring and repetitious. And this has nothing to do with it being mistaken for a "WW2 textbook" and such. It's purely about the writing style. They say the guy was a great speaker, and it's probably true, but as a writer he's certainly not stellar.

      It's true that some information that can be gleaned from the book is interesting, in that you can see reflections of pretty much all the later Nazi policies in it - and to think that people actually voted the guy into power, after that book was available for several years. But that's a different thing - it is something that, again, stems from the context you place it in, and not from the literary quality of the book itself.

    66. Re:The English version is good for this by Japie_H · · Score: 1

      They did not only make assumptions about Hitler, but early on they (The French, British and also Americans) did not disagree that much with the German eugenics practice. There were even articles published in respected medical journals in which American doctors decried that they were lagging behind Germany with respect to forced sterilisation. See for example: Eugenic Sterilization and a Qualified Nazi Analogy: The United States and Germany, 1930-1945 (sadly behind a paywall)

      In the eugenics program they first sterilized and later developed methods to mass murder "disabled" people. (with gas, first with carbon mono-oxide from exhausts later with the pesticide Zyclon-B) They later used the methods of the eugenics program in the concentration camps as part of the final solution.

    67. Re:The English version is good for this by DesScorp · · Score: 1

      "There's a long tradition of "read it for yourself" in Judaism and Christianity."

      Actually, no - the Catholic Church didn't let people read the Bible itself until printing and Martin Luther forced their hand.

      The KJV followed (and used) large chunks of the Tyndale bible. Now, what happened to Tyndale?

      Your argument is with Catholic policy of old, not Christianity as a whole, as any Protestant or pre-Nicean Christian would tell you. Again, reference the Bereans here, where Paul praised them for reading and deciding for themselves. There's a reason why so many split off from Catholicism to form different branches... Eastern Orthodox, Protestant, etc. And it's been almost 500 years since Luther nailed the 95 Theses to the door at Wittenberg. So it's not like freedom to read scripture for yourself is a recent thing.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    68. Re:The English version is good for this by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Not sure I agree (disclaimer, I dont claim to be an expert on politics).

      From wikipedia:

      Fascism opposes multiple ideologies: conservatism, liberalism, and two major forms of socialism—communism and social democracy

      There is a running dispute among scholars about where along the left/right spectrum that fascism resides.[31][32][33][34] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who combined left-wing and right-wing political views,

      More to the point, if you asked the average left-wing person if they support numerous government programs to promote the greater social good, you will generally get a positive response-- left-wing truly is socialist at its extreme. I dont think this needs to be a negative-- socialism has some correct ideas regarding societal good, but as with most things it goes awry when taken to its extreme. To be clear, I think some government programs for "the greater social good" can be justified.

      On the other hand, if you were to ask your average right-wing person whether they support basically any aspect of fascism, you will get varied responses. Certainly I am republican (which is generally regarded as "on the right"), and I do not at all support a large expansive government, nor basically any of the attributes wikipedia assigns to fascism. I am conservative, very much inclined towards protection of individual (as opposed to group) freedoms, very much opposed to centralized power, etc etc etc.

    69. Re:The English version is good for this by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      I would add in great orator. I have seen and heard his speeches and I don't understand a single word but what every he was saying I felt like it was important and was needed. Maybe that was just part of his charisma, or being a good politician but if you haven't seen one of his speeches I highly suggest it.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    70. Re:The English version is good for this by Nimey · · Score: 1

      Hitler didn't actually give the NSDAP its name. NSDAP was a pre-existing party that he hijacked, but you're right that he kept the "socialist" part as cover.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    71. Re:The English version is good for this by Nimey · · Score: 1

      Not a moron! Just mentally ill.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    72. Re:The English version is good for this by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      Oh, indeed. I was originally alluding to the fact that people who call themselves Christians don't actually read the Bible. It's like they got the Bible, said "tl;dr" and ticked "I accept the EULA."

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    73. Re:The English version is good for this by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      ... and similarly (my original reason for mentioning it), neo-Nazis don't actually read Mein Kampf either.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    74. Re:The English version is good for this by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      I can't agree with you that the goal of socialism is to crush personal freedom. In fact, I'd take the direct opposite stance.

      Full-on socialist policies (which some refer to as a "nanny state" because the essentials of life are provided by the government) actually free the citizenry from having to worry about the very trials and tribulations that consume the time and energy of a capitalist society: survival.

      Much in the same way that slavery 'frees' the slave of the need to worry about making any decisions on their own at all.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    75. Re:The English version is good for this by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      The logical conclusion being that all politicians would spout less drivel if they spent some time in prison. Worth a try IMO.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    76. Re:The English version is good for this by Luke+has+no+name · · Score: 1

      some ideology of freedom to rape, pillage, and rob your neighbours without restriction so long as it's profitable.

      Just in case you're implying as much, Anarchy isn't very popular in America. Libertarianism, as usually defined, wouldn't allow any of the actions you describe.

      (Just in case you were taking a shot at those of us who would see the U.S. become a free country again).

    77. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Full-on socialist policies (which some refer to as a "nanny state" because the essentials of life are provided by the government) actually free the citizenry from having to worry about the very trials and tribulations that consume the time and energy of a capitalist society: survival."

      Totally. I mean everyone with a brain agrees that freedom is when you depend on someone else to provide the essentials of life for you.

    78. Re:The English version is good for this by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Given that even the post-Roman Empire invaders romanised their languages (what's left of the German Frankish in French?), I think you're barking up the wrong tree. Unless I misunerstood, of course.

      Mart

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    79. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that Hitler lost, you'll now get the opportunity to try your hand at Farsi. Maybe Europe should have learned German when it had the chance....

    80. Re:The English version is good for this by bentcd · · Score: 1

      Judging by his writing style, which is incoherent, rambling, and in a lot of places just plain wrong.

      This only really tells you that his editor sucked, possibly on account of the editor either worshipping him or being in mortal fear of him.

      No one who never wrote a book before is going to be able to write a decent one on their own the first time they try. Even most people who wrote several books before won't be able to do it. You need an editor who isn't afraid to tell you when your writing sucks and to fix it and Hitler may not have had that.

      I did try reading Mein Kampf at one point and I think I got about a third of the way into it before I concluded it was a colossal waste of my time. Senseless politics, doomed ideas, and terrible writing combine to make it a real pain. You'd think you might be able to get a sense of the propaganda value of the contents, that there may be some kind of evilly grandiose political manifest in there that you could study. Maybe there is, I couldn't find it but then I didn't finish it either.

      I am leaning towards thinking of it more as a fundraising exercise than as a work of political significance: Make everyone buy your book, and watch the old bank account grow into the sky. Captive audiences don't get much more captured than that ...

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    81. Re:The English version is good for this by BancBoy · · Score: 1

      We have a winner!

      Our posts would be modded higher, if it wasn't for the Jews controlling the internet and Hollywood!

      Full disclosure - Jewish and a Californian.

      --
      [UID-HeinzIntel]
    82. Re:The English version is good for this by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      French is my point. It's basically the result of learning Latin badly. See also Spanish, Portuguese, etc...

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    83. Re:The English version is good for this by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Come on, the Austrians can do it. Well, almost.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    84. Re:The English version is good for this by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I managed to complete it [1]. It doesn't remotely hang together as a coherent whole and lots of its assumptions are implausible to say the least, but there are a few good bits here and there.

      I didn't get past chapter 1 of MK.

      [1] which is more than many Randroids have, i suspect.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    85. Re:The English version is good for this by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Ok, I misunderstood; just assume my post is a 'me too!' piggybacking on yours then.

      Mart

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    86. Re:The English version is good for this by u64 · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Another nifty way to explain the Right/Left, from
      politicalcompass.org/analysis2
      Note the image
      http://politicalcompass.org/images/axeswithnames.gif

      For comparison to some current political choices
      http://politicalcompass.org/charts/us2012.php

    87. Re:The English version is good for this by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      No one who never wrote a book before is going to be able to write a decent one on their own the first time they try.

      The only changes the editors made to my first book were fixing a few grammatical errors and typos (an average of about two per page), it got good reviews - they've just translated it into Korean (there are already Chinese and Japanese translations). Sure, the editor had some useful input, but nowhere near the amount that would be required to turn Mein Kampf into something other than a rambling mess (i.e. a complete rewrite).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    88. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More to the point, if you asked the average left-wing person if they support numerous government programs to promote the greater social good, you will generally get a positive response-- left-wing truly is socialist at its extreme. I dont think this needs to be a negative-- socialism has some correct ideas regarding societal good, but as with most things it goes awry when taken to its extreme. To be clear, I think some government programs for "the greater social good" can be justified.

      On the other hand, if you were to ask your average right-wing person whether they support basically any aspect of fascism, you will get varied responses. Certainly I am republican (which is generally regarded as "on the right"), and I do not at all support a large expansive government, nor basically any of the attributes wikipedia assigns to fascism. I am conservative, very much inclined towards protection of individual (as opposed to group) freedoms, very much opposed to centralized power, etc etc etc.

      And yet, the politicians of your tribe routinely prescribe crushing individual freedoms (see: widespread advocacy of theocracy by almost anyone of significance in the Republican Party), and love a large expansive government (the current presumptive Republican nominee is on record many times that if elected he will make damn sure military expenditures are increased so OUR MILITARY CAN CRUSH ANYONE ELSE'S LIKE A BUG, which is hilarious since it kinda already can).

      What you Republicans are very good at is doublethink: you claim to be for small government and anti-fascism, but you always, always vote for fascist free spenders. You'll fall for any two-bit liar so long as he shouts the correct tribal identifiers so you can tell yourself you're doing the right thing.

    89. Re:The English version is good for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right Wing: Controlling anti-liberal (take away as many freedoms as we can get away with to exert populace control and obediance)

      Left Wing: Non-Controlling Liberal (not take away any more freedoms/rights than we need to and try to give back those that have been taken away as the populace is better at controlling themselves - oh, and give a helping hand to those who may need it).

      This should stir debate!

    90. Re:The English version is good for this by LienRag · · Score: 1

      The line of demarcation between left and right is collective property of means of production... The left demands it (with variations in the calendar towards collective property and how to organize collective properties - e.g., state, cooperatives, or anything you can imagine) while the right oppose it.

  3. Demystification by mseeger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They should have started demystifying it 67 years ago.....

    1. Re:Demystification by million_monkeys · · Score: 0

      word

    2. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      German politicians are not interested demystifying Hitler or the Nazis, they did their best to stop any publication of old Nazi propaganda, that includes almost any scientific text about them. Even mentioning that not all Hitler did was downright evil gets you labeled as a Nazi, that Hitler needed a more or less functional country to fulfill his plans and that evil(TM) is not enough to run a world war are things that are best not mentioned. If a German politician wants to end a discussion quickly he will just mention that the Nazis did it that way.

      I would not be surprised if they use the new publication to claim that everyone else selling "Mein Kampf" or related texts violates the copyright of the new (possibly censored) edition. (IAAGVDAGP - I am a German voter demystified about German politicians).

      In contrast to many people I believe it is a crime to forget the past (especially if it is something our politicians do their best to make us forget ).

    3. Re:Demystification by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny

      If a German politician wants to end a discussion quickly he will just mention that the Nazis did it that way.

      That works on the internet, too.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:Demystification by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Germans basically want to eliminate anything that would make Hitler look "human", including of course Mein Kampf, but even things like the Fuhrer bunker(whose destruction was sad, not at least for the reason that it was a marvelous piece of engineering). Even the wax figure of Hitler they put in a museum of famous Germans was covered in shadow, lest people believe he is an actual human.....

      I guess its easier to reconcile with their past of they paint Hitler to be a monster. Monsters are pure evil and can force us to do things that we wouldnt do otherwise. Humans on the other hand are weak creatures who cannot do anything without the willing help of other humans(the German people in this case)....

    5. Re:Demystification by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Even mentioning that not all Hitler did was downright evil gets you labeled as a Nazi,

      Even worse: just saying that your party had the fastest raise in popularity since the Nazis also gets you labeled as one... The subject of Hitler and Nazis is best avoided altogether if you don't want to be confused with one.

      Oddly enough most Germans still enjoy their fast cars and cruising down the speedlimitless Autobahnen...

      If a German politician wants to end a discussion quickly he will just mention that the Nazis did it that way.

      On the Internet, that's called invoking Godwyn's law...

    6. Re:Demystification by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Even mentioning that not all Hitler did was downright evil gets you labeled as a Nazi,

      Curse the Volkswagen beetle!

    7. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      The last two decades since the reunification of Germany have been about Germany's economic conquering of Europe through

      (i) a massive sustained process of industrialisation;

      (ii) weakening neighbouring economies by a Union which encourages them to reduce self-sufficiency (become "service" or "finance"-oriented economies, i.e. empty shells reliant on foreign imports) while taking on massive debt.

      Hitler's stupid racial bullshit was his Achilles' heel - his consequential belief that he could militarily conquer "inferior" races was his downfall. Post-WW2 Germany has learnt from this, applying merely economic strategy. In the short term this is better - no millions of dead bodies - but in the long term it's much worse, as dominance will be sustained.

      You can deny this or shout "Godwin!" as much as you want, but it it what has already happened. Germany has led Europe in the same way that winning powers post-WW1 once treated Germany.

      You've got to admire it. Then do something about it.

    8. Re:Demystification by benjfowler · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I feel sorry for people like my grandfather. He grew up in Hamburg and saw things that any human should EVER see, because that madman chose to sacrifice his country and people for his own conceit.

      The real tragedy that might be hard to see now (the universal belief that (rightly) the Nazis were 100% evil), was that the German people believed in him and thought he was on a mission to 'save Germany', right to the bitter end.

      BTW, just writing the Nazis off as pure evil is intellectually lazy; we don't examine how they got to where they got, and how they were able to brainwash so many people and do so much damage.

    9. Re:Demystification by benjfowler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The fact that the Nazis were once a very human reality, is what made them so monstrous: otherwise average, nice people being turned into delusional mass murderers for the sake of a warped ideology.

    10. Re:Demystification by benjfowler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Crazy talk. Germany is a big country and its people work hard and smart. They exercise economic leadership as a consequence; it's to be expected.

      It's an iron law of nature, is that sometimes the big kids get to tell the little kids what to do. Compared to China, I'll take Germany any way, because by and large, they innovate, play fair and work hard.

    11. Re:Demystification by David+Gerard · · Score: 2

      That's completely wrong. Europe is the revlval of the Belgian Empire, and has even crowned a new Belgian emperor.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    12. Re:Demystification by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Although Hitler was a human, indeed he was a monster. It is human to unfairly dislike something sometime in your life. I am sure most of us may have at one point in our past had a muttering of dislike for a particular race/religion/etc. However, what makes a monster is taking that dislike, then acting on it and killing over a million Jews and other undesirables in the clinical and orchestrated manner he and his cronies did it in.

      AS for the German people, yes they need to shoulder some of the blame for supporting him at the time, but weigh in the fact that they were at the time suffering the effects of the Allies excessive sanctions and punishments of World War 1, and the failure of the Wiemar Republic. A form of Stockholm Syndrome occurred, and they saw Hitler as a savior. It is the mark of most "popular" monsters to be able to convince their citizens to follow their madcap means. Also remember many Germans did see through Hitler and tried to fight back, and most paid with their lives (see the white rose group).

      Going back to the topic, I agree that this book should be published, so that people can see how a monster is formed, and with the disturbances currently going on in Europe and the world, maybe its a warning to prevent the same thing that happened in the past happening again. We do not know* of any monsters on the scale of Hilter since he died, but that doesn't mean we will never see one again, and maybe the next one will be worse.

      *Note i said "know of" rather than outright say that such a monster does not exist. The reason is, even in the case of Hitler, the world in general only knew how much of a monster he was AFTER he was defeated.

      --
      Have a nice day!
    13. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Even mentioning that not all Hitler did was downright evil gets you labeled as a Nazi
      If interpreted literally, yes, when Hitler was picking his nose that was not downright evil. But that's probably not what you mean if you say that. There's not only the literal meaning, but also the act of you speaking, wanting to convey a message. If you say something like "Not all Hitler did was downright evil", everybody will assume you want to justify him and his politics. If that's not what you want to say, you have to formulate it differently - that's how language works.

      BTW I don't think that he did that much good in those parts of his politics that were not merely pragmatic, that is those that not any other (socialist, conservative, liberal [in the european sense]) politician also would have done in his place.

    14. Re:Demystification by kbg · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Hitler planned and built the Autobahn. Or did he?

      In reality, the first section of what would later become the legendary German autobahn network was constructed and built before Hitler came to power. Construction on the Köln-Bonn Autobahn began in 1929. During opening ceremonies on August 6, 1932, none other than Konrad Adenauer was on hand to inaugurate the 20 km (12 mi) section of autobahn running between Cologne and Bonn. Adenauer, then the Oberbürgermeister (mayor) of Cologne, proclaimed: "So werden die Straßen der Zukunft aussehen." ("This is how the roads of the future will look.") Adenauer supported the autobahn project partly as a way to create jobs during hard economic times. Later he would become West Germany's first Bundeskanzler (chancellor, from 1949 to 1963)."

      From: http://german.about.com/library/blgermyth08.htm

    15. Re:Demystification by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The most truly terrifying source I've read from the second world war was (a translation of excerpts from) the diary of a concentration camp guard. Simple, banal, entries about his family, the same sorts of concerns as anyone else in wartime, and the occasional entry about how many people had been 'processed' by his camp. If you'd met him, he'd probably have seemed like a friendly and reasonable person, doing a job just like any other. It just happened that his job involved working people to death. Reading statements like the recent comment by an Apple exec about how great Foxconn's ability to get people up in the middle of the night to make a change to a product design reminds me that this attitude is still alive in senior positions.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    16. Re:Demystification by lattyware · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think that you have to cut Germany some break. Everyone in the world has a tendancy towards knee-jerk politics, and let's face the reality where people have done a lot worse than censorship of nazi propaganda for a lot less. I'm not saying it's right, just saying I can see why some people would think (misguidedly) it was a good idea.

      --
      -- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
    17. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And reading comments such as this one reminds me that some people will say anything to try to win an argument on the Internet, even if their throwaway comparisons are completely ridiculous. Unless you have evidence that Apple is engaged in a system of organized mass murder that only incidentally involves working a small percentage of its victims to death, while outright murdering the vast majority, you should probably sit back and drink a giant cup of STFU. The two situations are not remotely comparable.

    18. Re:Demystification by dkleinsc · · Score: 0

      Or you can always look at Adolf Eichmann, who was just your regular family man, doing his job to the best of his ability, with his job including wiping out all the Jews in Europe. His ordinariness that serves as a warning to everyone else not to just follow orders and rules and assume that you will be morally correct.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    19. Re:Demystification by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Interesting, didn't know this... but what about the Volkswagen Käfer?

    20. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like the US does for oil and power.

    21. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Construction on the Köln-Bonn Autobahn began in 1929. During opening ceremonies on August 6, 1932, none other than Konrad Adenauer was on hand to inaugurate the 20 km (12 mi) section of autobahn running between Cologne and Bonn.

      Ahh, the good old Köln-Bonn-Autobahn. I suppose that five minutes later the first traffic jam occurred.

    22. Re:Demystification by garaged · · Score: 1

      Probably the point was that both things are bad, and people ignores that bit of info about it, which in turns ends up making a substantial amount of damage

      --
      I'm positive, don't belive me look at my karma
    23. Re:Demystification by foobsr · · Score: 1

      the Nazis were once a very human reality

      In fact they still are; it is just applied Social Psychology.

      http://www.documentary24.com/watch-the-wave-online-a-real-life-student-experiment--113/

      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1063669/

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    24. Re:Demystification by MrAngryForNoReason · · Score: 1

      The summary makes a right hash of stating the issue and manages to contradict itself within the same couple of sentences by stating that Mein Kampf is both "banned in Germany since World War II." and "The book is not banned by law in Germany". The linked articles contradict each other as well with theatlantic.com stating that is is banned and the BBC stating that it isn't.

      While I am inclined to believe the BBC is any clarification of this available?

    25. Re:Demystification by drinkypoo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Although Hitler was a human, indeed he was a monster. It is human to unfairly dislike something sometime in your life. I am sure most of us may have at one point in our past had a muttering of dislike for a particular race/religion/etc. However, what makes a monster is taking that dislike, then acting on it and killing over a million Jews [...] AS for the German people, yes they need to shoulder some of the blame for supporting him at the time

      Pop quiz: How many Jews did Hitler kill?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    26. Re:Demystification by martin-boundary · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Then let me stand up and say it's right.

      There's nothing knee-jerk about the German policy. It's easy for Americans to pretend to be superior and allow "free" speech to extremist minorities when there's no chance that they can be taken seriously nation-wide, but the Nazi and fascist ideologies have been *proven* to be dangerous and *proven* to be realistic alternatives if given the chance to spread.

      The idea that Germany isn't allowing discussion of the Nazi past is ridiculous. The only thing it isn't allowing is the Nazi side a free voice in the matter, but there are plenty of discussions about Nazism and everything related.

      For slashdotters, the closest present analogy is probably the teaching of intelligent design in schools. The intelligent designers should *not* be given a voice in the school science curriculum, as doing so 1) legitimizes their delusion, and 2) it confuses school children on the *actual known facts*.

      Similarly, giving the Nazis a free voice in Germany would lead to lies being spread as fact, thereby confusing people and weakening the historical consensus in the public mind.

      No, there is, and there should continue to be, plenty of discussion of Nazism. However, the Nazis themselves and their sympathisers don't deserve a place in that discussion. They can rot on the sidelines - they lost the war, and that is part of the penalty - it's still better than being "disappeared" or shot in the night, which is what they did with minorities who didn't think like them.

    27. Re:Demystification by Truedat · · Score: 1

      Oooooh, so ... close ... to Godwins law

    28. Re:Demystification by mseeger · · Score: 1

      Well, if it were so easy:

      - Main approach to control the book is by the copyright. Violationg copyright (espescially when lot of money is involved) is a crime by itself. The kino.to-guys got 4 years of prison for their part.

      - Ownership of the book (historical issues, even if hand signed by Hitler) is not punishable.

      - Distribution of new prints may be punishable if the court determines that the intent was to promote the ideas of the national socialists.

      Should you redistribute the book without any scientific interpretation to engulf it, chances for trouble would be high.

      If you ask two lawyers on the legal issues, you'll get three opinions (minimum). The content is not wort that hassle, the author surely had severa case of brainrot.

    29. Re:Demystification by lattyware · · Score: 0

      That's a rediculous analogy to draw. 'Intelligent Design' shouldn't be taught in schools because it's a flawed premise without any proof, and schools are a place for learning facts and provable information. School is not a place for any ideology to be taught, and I agree that nazi beliefs should not be taught in schools as fact. That doesn't change the fact that people should be allowed to believe what they want to believe, and say what they want to say.

      "I dispise what you say, but I defend to the death your right to say it."

      --
      -- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
    30. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      herp derp, TheRaven64 got one of his usual Apple jabs in. In a nazi article! Is that even Godwins law?

      You have leveled up your tool-ness!

    31. Re:Demystification by readin · · Score: 1

      Right wing: tending toward fascism. Left wing: tending toward socialism.

      How much was ideology and how much was people doing what they would do given the chance?

      It makes me wonder what the nice people I associate with everyday are capable of and how much of their decency is self-interested following of social conventions simply because it is convenient.

      I was a nerd and picked on in school. To some extent I've seen how people can behave one way in polite society and seem perfectly sweet to other popular kids but be vile and nasty to those they perceive as powerless.

      --
      I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
    32. Re:Demystification by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      If a German politician wants to end a discussion quickly he will just mention that the Nazis did it that way.

      The German version of "Think of the children/what about terrorists"

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    33. Re:Demystification by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      So even the Nazis, who starved, shot, burned, and medically experimented on people to achieve their will thought that abortion would be going too far...

    34. Re:Demystification by martin-boundary · · Score: 1
      The facts about Nazism have long been settled and must be taught as they are, and discussed without denying them. They are not subject to interpretation or ideology, and that is the basis for the analogy with intelligent design.

      It's a false principle to give Nazis a voice as if their point of view is valuable - they only use that voice to spread lies: that the concentration camps didn't exist or didn't exterminate people, that Hitler was misunderstood, that Nazism is really an ideology of peace, etc. (And that's perfectly logical, since that's the only way they can rehabilitate and gain adherents in the open, ie listen to us we're misunderstood).

      The quote attributed to Voltaire makes sense for contrary points of view and beliefs that aren't settled, but never applies to known facts. "The truth brooks no compromise" applies to Nazism.

    35. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And I wonder what the diary of a guard at Guantanamo would be like?

    36. Re:Demystification by lattyware · · Score: 1

      So you are saying people that are wrong shouldn't be allowed to have free speech? Who decides what is wrong?

      --
      -- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
    37. Re:Demystification by martin-boundary · · Score: 1
      Yes. People who deny proven facts shouldn't be allowed to spread lies.

      In the case of Nazism, the Second World War decided who was right and wrong. The Nazis were wrong.

    38. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or you can always look at Adolf Eichmann, who was just your regular family man, doing his job to the best of his ability, with his job including wiping out all the Jews in Europe. His ordinariness that serves as a warning to everyone else not to just follow orders and rules and assume that you will be morally correct.

      Ordinary people scare the shit out of me. Are they sheep in human clothing or are they monster hiding behind an unassuming facade to trick you into complacency??!! TELL ME!!

    39. Re:Demystification by lattyware · · Score: 1

      So then the ruling party controls what people can say. That's the path towards the very Nazi censorship that you claim to hate.

      --
      -- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
    40. Re:Demystification by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. There's no ruling party. There are facts, and people can say what they like provided the facts are accepted. That's how rational societies progress.

    41. Re:Demystification by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Tea party much?

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    42. Re:Demystification by lattyware · · Score: 1

      So what, mob justice when someone states something that isn't 'accepted fact'? That's even worse.

      --
      -- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
    43. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe just one, iunno. I don't know how many he himself killed.... I know that his regime killed many many innocent people (not just Jews) though.

    44. Re:Demystification by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? Where do you see a mob? And why do you allude to historical facts about Nazism in quotation marks? You're not making sense.

    45. Re:Demystification by Kam+Solusar · · Score: 1

      If a German politician wants to end a discussion quickly he will just mention that the Nazis did it that way.

      The German version of "Think of the children/what about terrorists"

      Except that in Germany too, "think of the children" will get you a lot of people agreeing with your position - whereas mentioning Hitler, the Nazis and the 3rd Reich in a way that could be interpreted as positive or comparing contemporary political figures to Hitler and the Nazis will heavily damage or even end your political career (see Herta Daeubler-Gmelin and others).

      --
      The Angels have the Phone Box
    46. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the name of the law saying that bringing up Apple in a competely unrelated conversation ... Oh, never mind.

    47. Re:Demystification by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      How did I know, as I wrote that, people would fixate on the Apple part of my post, and not think of any other examples? That was the first that came to my mind, but there are hundreds of others.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    48. Re:Demystification by allo · · Score: 1

      nazis do it on the internet that way.

    49. Re:Demystification by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Yes but they looked at it more like "Children are future manpower. We need that".

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    50. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I noticed that this discussion ended after your comment.

    51. Re:Demystification by quacking+duck · · Score: 2

      Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland is a book that looks at exactly what it took to turn perfectly good, reasonable people into cold-blooded killers.

      It's been over a decade since I read it, but IIRC most of the people the book follows were neither delusional or consciously following a warped ideology. They did what they were coaxed and coerced to do at first, but in very short order it became routine to them and they thought nothing of orders to continue.

      A very chilling read, and like the Stanford prison experiment, a reminder of how thin the veneer of humanity and civilization is in all of us, no matter how much we think that WE personally are a good person and would never do such a thing.

    52. Re:Demystification by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      BTW, just writing the Nazis off as pure evil is intellectually lazy; we don't examine how they got to where they got, and how they were able to brainwash so many people and do so much damage.

      I totally agree, and the same can be said of modern terrorists. But try even suggesting we look beyond the suicide bombings, 9/11 etc, and look at *why* they're doing it, and you will be labeled a terrorist sympathizer, bleeding heart liberal, and worse by the right wing (ironically).

      They always fail to see that understanding their past and motivations is NOT excusing them (Nazis or terrorists) for what they did.

    53. Re:Demystification by Lithdren · · Score: 1

      Its thought processes like this that lead to Word War 2 to begin with.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cause_of_world_war_ii

      Much of what allowed a crazy group like this to take power in germany was, in large part, how germany was treated after WWI. They lost the war. They pay the price. They suffer for what they did.

      I'm not saying we should act like what happened was a good thing, or reasonable, or rational. It wasn't, it cant be. What im saying is, open discussion is nessisary. The only reason inteleligent design in schools causes issues is because it keeps the actual facts from being known. Likewise, supressing stuff like this book, or discussion on why the Nazi's did what they did, or why they felt it was justified, keeps discussion from explaining WHY what they did was NOT justified.

      If you dont learn from the past, you're doomed to repeate the past. Thats wisdom almost beyond words.

    54. Re:Demystification by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Hard to say: he served in WW1, so he may have shot at a few himself back then.

    55. Re:Demystification by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      How do you know they are facts, if you're not allowed to approach them from a critical point of view?

    56. Re:Demystification by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      AS for the German people, yes they need to shoulder some of the blame for supporting him at the time

      The last one I knew who fought in WWII died a few years ago at age 87. How is a 70 year old German in any way responsible for what his parents' generation did?

      No, the only Germans who shoulder the blame for Hitler are either did or very, very old. Today's Germans are no more responsible for Hitler than I am responsible for slavery.

    57. Re:Demystification by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      Except in Slashdot. This thread seems to be immune to the mention of Nazis in the summary.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    58. Re:Demystification by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      Reading statements like the recent comment by an Apple exec about how great Foxconn's ability to get people up in the middle of the night to make a change to a product design reminds me that this attitude is still alive in senior positions.

      Wow! You, sir, win the Godwin Award of the Interwebz. Not only for your analogy, but for the sheer temerity of trying to divert the discussion into an Apple-hate direction--a discussion about Nazis, no less!

      I'm impressed.

                          -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    59. Re:Demystification by skine · · Score: 1

      If you hire a hitman, and the hitman fulfills his contract, then you are still guilty of murder.

    60. Re:Demystification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cause he's a leftist! And leftists always own the facts, from global warming to the Nazis! How dare you question a leftist's moral authority?

    61. Re:Demystification by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I'm a leftist myself, so I'll proceed to question with impunity.

    62. Re:Demystification by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If you hire a hitman, and the hitman fulfills his contract, then you are still guilty of murder.

      In fact, both you and the hitman are guilty of murder.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    63. Re:Demystification by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 1

      Read my comment again, I clearly said "at the time" in regard to the German people!

      --
      Have a nice day!
    64. Re:Demystification by martin-boundary · · Score: 1
      There's a good point in there but you're not expressing it. People certainly are allowed to, and encouraged to, approach the facts from a critical point of view, but it isn't something that requires or is helped by Nazis being explicit discussants.

      What does it mean to approach facts from a critical point of view? It means applying the rules of logic, the methods of science and deductive reasoning to a set of (purported) facts and investigating them for yourself. These standard methods are well known and widely taught today, and anybody can apply them correctly with training. In particular, being Nazi or not is irrelevant, one either follows the standard of reasoning, or one doesn't.

      And that is why Nazis aren't needed to represent their "side". The facts can be investigated and discussed rationally, the evidence can be collected and inspected, the ruins and museums can be visited, by most everybody.

    65. Re:Demystification by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      You have just substituted one problem with another. Now you're saying that Nazis shouldn't be allowed. Who decides who is a Nazi and who is not? How can I verify that their decision is indeed correct?

    66. Re:Demystification by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      discussion is nessisary. The only reason inteleligent design in schools causes issues is because it keeps the actual facts from being known. Likewise, supressing stuff like this book, or discussion on why the Nazi's did what they did, or why they felt it was justified, keeps discussion from explaining WHY what they did was NOT justified.

      I don't know why you think there isn't precisely this sort of discussion in Germany. Those questions are standard topics in high schools, etc.

      The German laws ban the Nazi party (so that Nazis can't make laws or enter government), collection and selling or displaying of Nazi memorabilia (so that Nazis can't make money to fund activities, or build public shrines to Hitler), and holocaust denial (so that Nazis can't lie about the past, and pollute the known facts with untruths, which can always be debunked eventually but cause damage nevertheless, kind of like spam).

      None of this impacts learning from the past. To learn from the past you look at and discuss the facts, which occurs in schools, in the media, in museums, etc. There are no facts to be gained from modern Nazis themselves (all the original ones are dead), but allowing a Nazi party to exist legitimately today is much too dangerous for society.

    67. Re:Demystification by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      You have just substituted one problem with another.

      What problem would that be?

      Now you're saying that Nazis shouldn't be allowed.

      I've been saying that all along. That's the German law, and also the law in France, Austria, Italy, etc. There are places like America where Nazis are allowed, but so what?

      Who decides who is a Nazi and who is not? How can I verify that their decision is indeed correct?

      Precisely as I explained. You use deductive reasoning and investigate the facts. Anybody can do it, that's one of the principles of the Enlightenment.

    68. Re:Demystification by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      You use deductive reasoning and investigate the facts. Anybody can do it ...

      ... except for the Nazis (well, they can do it, but we won't listen to them).

      It's much like that Finnish Internet blacklist. It's there to protect the citizens against the evils of child pornography, but no-one except for the maintainers of the list knows what's actually on it, because its contents is itself forbidden for distribution as CP. So in practice the list can have any random website on it.

      Same here. Suppose I do use deductive reasoning, investigate the facts, and come to some conclusion that you don't like. You then call me a Nazi and exclude me from the decision making process. You can also do it to anyone who tries to use deductive reasoning etc to determine whether your pronouncement of me as a Nazi was valid in the first place.

      Now, I'm not saying that it's actually what's happening, but the system is certainly set up in a way that makes this a plausible attack vector. The fundamental problem here is the ability to complete exclude a group of people from discourse. You can't have that ability while guaranteeing that it will always be used against the "right" group (i.e. the one that you personally want to see excluded) - so long as the ability is there, it can, and eventually will, be used to exclude whatever is convenient - just as that Finnish Internet blacklist ended up blacklisting sites that criticized its existence.

    69. Re:Demystification by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      It's much like that Finnish Internet blacklist. It's there to protect the citizens against the evils of child pornography, but no-one except for the maintainers of the list knows what's actually on it, because its contents is itself forbidden for distribution as CP. So in practice the list can have any random website on it.

      There is no blacklist on Nazi facts. The facts are on the ground in Germany for all to see. What is forbidden is to glorify the Nazis, or propose Nazi political ideas as legitimate, etc.

      This is like if the Finnish Internet blacklist is completely publically viewable, but the owners of the blacklisted websites cannot make money from Finnish commerce, and cannot make proposals to add or remove new items on the list.

      Same here. Suppose I do use deductive reasoning, investigate the facts, and come to some conclusion that you don't like. You then call me a Nazi and exclude me from the decision making process. You can also do it to anyone who tries to use deductive reasoning etc to determine whether your pronouncement of me as a Nazi was valid in the first place.

      Not at all. If you investigate and come to the conclusion that 6 million Jews weren't murdered, then I don't need to look closely at your reasoning to be sure you have made a mistake somewhere. But if you investigate and find that one person's grandfather was accused of being a Nazi and wasn't, then your investigation is worth publishing so that many people can read and verify your work.

      Calling people Nazis on the internet during a discussion is not the same as having laws to ban holocaust denial. Some facts are so well established that it's obvious that people who dispute them have an agenda. Most facts aren't nearly so well understood, and there are no laws that apply. Somebody like David Irving can write and say all sorts of things for many years without it being clear what his true motivation is. However, sooner or later, if he is a Nazi sympathizer, he will say something grossly incorrect and stand by it, and he will get identified and caught as a result. That is what happened to him.

      The fundamental problem here is the ability to complete exclude a group of people from discourse. You can't have that ability while guaranteeing that it will always be used against the "right" group (i.e. the one that you personally want to see excluded)

      You're overgeneralizing. If you replace Nazis with Hippies and war crimes with free love, you can criticize the idea of not letting Hippies fuck and have long hair, but it's an irrelevant generalization. The facts matter. Nazis aren't Hippies, and war crimes aren't free love, and laws intended to prevent Nazism from gaining legitimacy don't make sense for Hippies.

      There is no Nazi detector, there are simply a number of red lines which are far from the mainstream, and if anyone crosses those lines (holocaust denial, public Nazi worship, creating a Nazi party, etc), then it is beyond reasonable doubt that they are promoting Nazism. It is very easy for secret Nazis to stay far away from those red lines, but it is frustrating for them because the lines also prevent the Nazis from rehabilitation and having public influence. Sooner or later, frustrated secret Nazis become careless and cross the lines, and are caught.

    70. Re:Demystification by gmanterry · · Score: 1

      The last two decades since the reunification of Germany have been about Germany's economic conquering of Europe through

      (i) a massive sustained process of industrialisation;

      (ii) weakening neighbouring economies by a Union which encourages them to reduce self-sufficiency (become "service" or "finance"-oriented economies, i.e. empty shells reliant on foreign imports) while taking on massive debt.

      Hitler's stupid racial bullshit was his Achilles' heel - his consequential belief that he could militarily conquer "inferior" races was his downfall. Post-WW2 Germany has learnt from this, applying merely economic strategy. In the short term this is better - no millions of dead bodies - but in the long term it's much worse, as dominance will be sustained.

      You can deny this or shout "Godwin!" as much as you want, but it it what has already happened. Germany has led Europe in the same way that winning powers post-WW1 once treated Germany.

      You've got to admire it. Then do something about it.

      Holy crap. He's talking about us, The U.S.A. We have become a "service or finance oriented economy" and the government, past and present, has made sure that we have massive debt. "He" wants to raise the debt ceiling again because $400,000 per citizen isn't enough debt.

      --
      Since when is "public safety" the root password to the Constitution?
  4. a slashdot story that godwin's itself

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:wow by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      Definitely gotta be a first, eh?

      Yeah, it's the end of the world as we know it & I feel...

      ... mildly amused.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    2. Re:wow by BenoitRen · · Score: 1

      Please stop abusing the apostrophe.

    3. Re:wow by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      a slashdot story that godwin's itself

      It doe's not.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:wow by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      a slashdot story that godwin's itself

      It doe's not.

      At least we can all join hands and agree that the proper plural for nazi is nazii.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  5. You know who else... by Intropy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know who else liked to suppress books they considered dangerous or "un-German?" The Nazis.

    1. Re:You know who else... by million_monkeys · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why can't we make it through a single story without someone bringing up Nazis?

    2. Re:You know who else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fear is the path to the Dark Side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate; hate leads to suffering. I sense much fear in you.

    3. Re:You know who else... by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      godwin's law just exploded

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    4. Re:You know who else... by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Godwins. Erry time.

    5. Re:You know who else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FATALITY.

    6. Re:You know who else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, Dr. Jones

  6. Let them read it by Kokuyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, you don't even need annotations. Everyone with enough brain cells to rub together will start rolling their eyes in the first chapter already.

    Hitler reinterpreted his whole life to match his ideology to such a degree it just becomes hilariously stupid to read... and boring, by the way.

    And frankly, those who lack the necessary brain power to recognize the inherent worth (or lack thereof) of the book will not be dissuaded by annotations, true as they may be.

    1. Re:Let them read it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Everyone with enough brain cells to rub together will start rolling their eyes in the first chapter already

      Better annotate it then.

    2. Re:Let them read it by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      Seriously, you don't even need annotations. Everyone with enough brain cells to rub together will start rolling their eyes in the first chapter already.

      Particularly those who can't read German.

    3. Re:Let them read it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, you don't even need annotations. Everyone with enough brain cells to rub together will start rolling their eyes in the first chapter already.

      Not everyone has enough brain cells.

    4. Re:Let them read it by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Not being able to understand German is actually a mercy when trying to read Mein Kampf. The writing style is atrocious.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    5. Re:Let them read it by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      And frankly, those who lack the necessary brain power to recognize the inherent worth (or lack thereof) of the book will not be dissuaded by annotations, true as they may be.

      Most of those types will probably never actually read anything but quotations taken out of context by spinmeisters anyway. If the government really wanted to fight the idiocy they'd run a website with straightforward rebuttals instead of just annotations in a printed copy. That way should any particular quotation become "popular" the website could be updated with a persuasive rebuttal to not only the quotation but whatever larger point the spinmiester was trying to make by citing the quotation. Do a good job with such a website and google's algorithms will probably make it the first hit on searches for any popular quotation - kind of like how snopes is frequently the top hit for any random urban legend.

      It wouldn't be perfect and it wouldn't change the minds of the hardcore, but it would give those who are on the fence easy access to counter arguments - and really that's the best you can hope for in a free society.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    6. Re:Let them read it by wickerprints · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think Mel Brooks understood it best. Ridicule and parody are really the most powerful weapons we have against tyranny, hatred, violence, and terror.

      When someone or some group commits atrocities that are unbelievably horrific as a means to paralyze reason and incite fear, and when society reacts with predictable anger, disgust, and outrage, we play into their sick game, for that's precisely the response they hope for. That's what al Qaeda, Hitler, Charles Taylor, and Anders Behring Breivik all share in common. Sociopaths do what they do in order to provoke, knowing full well that no amount of justice or outrage could make up for what they've done, while their ascension in notoriety helps disseminate their cause.

      But when we LAUGH at them, when we are able to rise above the hatred they wish to foment by turning their ideals into the butt of jokes (and you gotta admit, "Springtime for Hitler" from The Producers is a masterstroke of comedic genius), that's how we win. We win by taking their manifestos and turning them into fodder for stand-up comedy. To be sure, we aren't trivializing the destruction and deaths they cause, but rather, we mock the basis for their crimes, we take their self-importance and sense of empowerment and simply brush them aside with a dismissive sneer. That's what Breivik, for instance, would hate the most--not to be judged fairly under Norwegian law, or to be jailed, or even to be executed. He himself has stated he hates the idea of being labeled "insane." And the reason is because in his view, insane = not to be taken seriously.

    7. Re:Let them read it by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      But when we LAUGH at them, when we are able to rise above the hatred they wish to foment by turning their ideals into the butt of jokes (and you gotta admit, "Springtime for Hitler" from The Producers is a masterstroke of comedic genius), that's how we win.

      Problem with this approach is, such "humor" hurts the victims (or their survivors) just as much as the Nazis. Turning concentration camps into the butt of jokes cheapens the human suffering that happened therein...

      To be sure, we aren't trivializing the destruction and deaths they cause,

      ... but it's a very thin line to walk, and it takes lots of skill to pull this off without offending the wrong parties...

    8. Re:Let them read it by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Ridicule and parody are really the most powerful weapons we have against tyranny, hatred, violence, and terror.

      So just publish it under its original title, Wehn Kopf.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    9. Re:Let them read it by Kokuyo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      OTOH, there is no right to not be offended. Life is offensive. I agree that it's not a good thing to hurt Breivik's victims even more by making fun of it all but thinking of the big picture... will it dissuade other sociopaths from doing similar things if ridiculing them and their ideals becomes the new status quo?

      Does preventing more deaths make adding pain to the already hurt acceptable? Especially when you cannot, ever, be sure that you really prevented deaths or how many?

      I sure don't want to have to answer that question.

    10. Re:Let them read it by Tom · · Score: 2

      Problem with this approach is, such "humor" hurts the victims (or their survivors) just as much as the Nazis. Turning concentration camps into the butt of jokes cheapens the human suffering that happened therein...

      The victims are mostly dead, the survivors of old age by now.

      But the ideology lives on. So at one point you have to make a decision as to who is more important - the past victims, or the future victims if you don't do something about it.

      I'm all for respecting people's feelings. I don't want my own trampled, either. But there's a point where real danger of bodily and much more severe harm outweighs that. I'm very sure that the victims and survivors would agree that every step should be taken to make sure nobody suffers their fate.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    11. Re:Let them read it by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      While I somewhat agree that this could work, there's also another pitfall: We already have trouble taking people with outrageous ideas seriously... not because their ideas are bad but because they go against established conventions... they go against what we're used to.

      Without someone magnitudes more impartial than average people nowadays are to judge such things, how will we stop people from applying this idea of yours to just about anything that does not immediately fit their worldview?

    12. Re:Let them read it by Tom · · Score: 4, Interesting

      a website with straightforward rebuttals instead of just annotations in a printed copy.

      Rebuttals are known to not work against believers. Why are you bringing up a proposal for which we have ample evidence of failure?

      If rebuttals would work, there wouldn't be any christians left in the world, nor many climate-change deniers.

      but it would give those who are on the fence

      These people are always quoted, but I've yet to meet a single one. No matter if it's child porn or nazis, there is this straw man. Do you really think there is much of a fence to sit on? I think the boundary is much less defined than that, and that people aren't sitting there, wavering, undecided. I rather have an image of a grey zone that people pass through on a trajectory. Some faster, some slower, some straight and some not so straight, but very few tangentially. I don't think we really have so many people thinking "this neo-nazi thing sounds interesting, but I'm not certain, I need more information".

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    13. Re:Let them read it by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Well I hope your'e right but making it just a matter of intelligence sounds terribly naive to me. My problem is with what's commonly called "Agenda setting". I know little about the book's content but I know that I know that there is a lot of "blaming the Jews for things they did". Now if you take identifiable group X , and if they have some political relevance, and if you start listing all the things you think they are doing wrong, the average reader will dismiss some items, will agree with other items, and will partially agree with other items. And then you notice that the discussion revolves around "what they really did wrong" with people agreeing and disagreeing on it. And the people disagreeing sometimes taking unreasonable positions in defense because (you happen to know any group of people that are completely innocent?) really they allowed the central issue to shift to whether group X is totally innocent or not innocent at all. The degree of innocence shouldn't matter. When someone is inclined to a strategy of radical eliminating the undesirable people, do you want the discussion to shift to how real the problems are/were with the Roma, the Jews, the Communists, the gays, the handicapped, or the violent psychopaths and the child rapists? The central problem is the kind of radical thinking that wants to purify the population, the culture, the language and everything else. The central problem isn't hate either. It's possible to have this radical philosophy without any feelings of hate, and in fact to perceive them as very positive.

    14. Re:Let them read it by MacTO · · Score: 1

      I don't know whether to support or refute your arguments because I have both more faith and less faith in human intelligence than you imply.

      In some senses I have less faith since our emotions tend to override any attempts of rational thought. In those cases, neither annotations nor persuasive rebuttals will accomplish much.

      In other senses, I have more faith. Those who are willing to look beyond their immediate emotional responses are more likely to interpret the primary sources in an appropriate context without annotations. Adding annotations simply reduces the amount of footwork that they have to do.

      And, FWIW, I wouldn't call Neo-Nazis "hardcore". The label "extremist" seems much more appropriate since they are taking mostly verifiable observations and intepreting them in a way that does not accept alternative explanations.

    15. Re:Let them read it by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1

      Fine - let's make a movie about Afghanistanis defending their country against invading Nazis, and the Afghanis all speak Polish and Yiddish, and the Nazis all speak with American Accents and dress like Marines.

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    16. Re:Let them read it by Truedat · · Score: 0

      Rebuttals are known to not work against believers. Why are you bringing up a proposal for which we have ample evidence of failure?

      That's pretty arrogant. Have you thought that maybe it's because you are consistently on the wrong side of the argument? Just a thought.

    17. Re:Let them read it by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's sometimes called the "Overton window".

    18. Re:Let them read it by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      That's pretty arrogant. Have you thought that maybe it's because you are consistently on the wrong side of the argument? Just a thought.

      Explain then the inability of many Christians to understand modern evolutionary biology even when it is explained in terms that a nonreligious high school student understands. No matter how illustrative examples you use, no matter how approachable models you choose to present them, they always make you think that they simply decided not to use their cognitive abilities anymore.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    19. Re:Let them read it by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Ridicule and parody are really the most powerful weapons we have against tyranny, hatred, violence, and terror.

      No they aren't. Not outside of fairy tales.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    20. Re:Let them read it by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting concept, I'd never heard of it. But it's not what I mean. The Overton window would be what makes the Mighty Wurlitzer successful. For example in the case of Iran's nuclear weapons it currently means that if a person wants to be reasonable, it's impossible to claim that Iran does not want nuclear weapons. It makes you sound naive and ignorant. The most extreme position that is deemed acceptable is that it is perfectly understandable for Iran to want them.

      The agenda setting mechanism is different. It can happen on a very individual level. It's about what questions you ask, or what questions someone makes you ask. The perception of a situation can change wildly if you ask different questions.

    21. Re:Let them read it by danaris · · Score: 1

      Rebuttals are known to not work against believers. Why are you bringing up a proposal for which we have ample evidence of failure?

      That's pretty arrogant. Have you thought that maybe it's because you are consistently on the wrong side of the argument? Just a thought.

      Right, because he totally just said, "I know rebuttals don't work, because they've never worked for me," and not, "we have [scientific] evidence that rebuttals will not convince believers."

      Dan Aris

      --
      Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
    22. Re:Let them read it by Tom · · Score: 1

      That's pretty arrogant. Have you thought that maybe it's because you are consistently on the wrong side of the argument? Just a thought.

      Let me think about that... ah yes: "No"

      If I am on the wrong side of the argument, then the other side should be able to prove me wrong unless a) they are right, but so completely incompetent and stupid that they can't demonstrate it or b) they are wrong and the assumption fails, ergo, I am right.

      Given that I know quite a few smart christians, for example, I'll go with b)

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    23. Re:Let them read it by Tokah · · Score: 1

      The two largest groups of christians in the world, the Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox, accept evolution. Christianity is not limited to american evangelicals.

    24. Re:Let them read it by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Right. It's somewhat like framing then?

    25. Re:Let them read it by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      So all religions are simultaneously true, global warming is a grand international conspiracy, evolution is a hoax, the moon landing was a hoax, Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya, the world is a flat disc with an ice wall...

      No I'm pretty confident GP was correct.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    26. Re:Let them read it by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      This is why I hope he's found insane, and I think it's lulztastic that the terrorist organization he claims exists and has made a uniform for is basically just himself.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    27. Re:Let them read it by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Yes, framing fits. And people have very little skill when it involves taking control of framing.

      My general feeling is that people aren't as immune as they think for nazi era ideologies. Dismissing 'Mein Kampf' for its bad writing? Easily fixed with a good ghostwriter. The hate issue? Not essential at all. Nazism was to a large extent a feel good ideology. With unfortunate collateral victims. When you decide some people are lesser people and you strive for a pure and superior people, then the decision to eliminate all the lesser people really doesn't have to be a matter of hate. And thinking you're safe because you're not hating, really does not offer much protection.

    28. Re:Let them read it by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      "The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to texts of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear scorn."

      --Martin Luther

    29. Re:Let them read it by Truedat · · Score: 1
      Tom, here is a clue: you can't tar all of the people of the world who happen to have a religious bent with the same brush. You can't say that all such people form a control group of "known wrong specimens". You can't then conclude that when they fail to fall in line with your viewpoint it because they refuse to accept the truth of your rebuttal, no matter how masterful, and not because you happen to be on the wrong side of the argument.

      Except here on slashdot apparently you can and get modded up for it.

    30. Re:Let them read it by Truedat · · Score: 1

      The GP argued that "believer" is a synonym for "unreasonable" and on that issue the GP incorrect. And arrogant. Reeling off a list of facts that many religious people would also refute doesn't change that.

    31. Re:Let them read it by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Rebuttals are known to not work against believers. Why are you bringing up a proposal for which we have ample evidence of failure?

      Maybe because I DID NOT PROPOSE THAT. Seriously, WTF is wrong with you?

      These people are always quoted, but I've yet to meet a single one. No matter if it's child porn or nazis, there is this straw man. Do you really think there is much of a fence to sit on?

      People are not born bigots, they are the product of their environments. Through constant exposure to bigotted opinions they become more and more bigotted themselves. That process is much easier when there is no one there to say otherwise.

      But if you have a better idea, then let's hear it. All I see from you is fatalism, the kind that leads directly to censorship.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    32. Re:Let them read it by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      The GP argued that "believer" is a synonym for "unreasonable" and on that issue the GP incorrect. And arrogant. Reeling off a list of facts that many religious people would also refute doesn't change that.

      He appears to be trying to prove his claim about rebuttals not working on true believers by demonstrating it personally.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    33. Re:Let them read it by Tom · · Score: 1

      you can't tar all of the people of the world who happen to have a religious bent with the same brush.

      Actually, I can. As long as I understand that what I am saying about them is a generalisation and what it applies to.

      You can't say that all such people form a control group of "known wrong specimens"

      But of course I can. We always work with incomplete samples. We are pretty certain of gravity thanks to experience with it as far back as humans have recorded anything, and experiments too many to count - but of course you can always come up with a place or an object or a combination of both where we haven't tested whether the theory of gravity applies.

      And yet, it is not unreasonable to assume that it does, given the evidence we have. What is unreasonable is to assume it doesn't. And what is almost as unreasonable is to claim that we don't know, can't know or the verdict is still out on that question. In short: All the usual fallback non-arguments of believers.

      Same with god (any god, not just the christian one. jews, muslims, hindus, etc.: I'm an equal-opportunity insulter, so you're always included). We have massive evidence that none of the testable claims regarding any deity have ever checked out. We have no evidence whatsoever of any deities existence. Any evidence brought forth so far has been debunked, and explained sufficiently without having to resort to deities.

      Just like gravity, you can always come up with a specific place or object - but the same argument applies, except that the amount of history and evidence isn't quite so crushing, as we've not been collecting it for so long.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    34. Re:Let them read it by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      The problem is that in the past, it was edited down by the Nazi party, so as to be unobjectionable --- arguably even admirable.

      It was such a condensed version which was published in the U.S. before Word War II and which had many Americans admiring Hitler.

      Sen. Alan Cranston, on his return to the U.S. from Germany, finding this version for sale, translated all the unpleasant parts, and published them:

      http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people/Cranston/cranston-con2.html

      There needs to be a control in place so that only the compleat text is published, preferably w/ footnotes detailing the inaccuracies and lies and putting forward the unambiguous facts.

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    35. Re:Let them read it by Truedat · · Score: 1

      There's a lot of truth in what you are saying, but it's largely off topic. You have made a sweeping generalisation of about five billon people - analogies of physics just aren't applicable, people are much more complex than that and the definition of religion is far, far more slippery than you are running with.

    36. Re:Let them read it by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      I have received what amounts to a virtual death threat from a group of Catholics the other day. I barged into their online discussion regarding punishments for apostates. I inferred from their conversation that their intent in case of becoming a majority population group would be to change the constitution, to abolish religious freedom, and to institute harsh punishments for religious transgressions, namely death to apostates. I asked them whether my reading between the lines of their conversation was correct. They confirmed it. They just couldn't agree whether the death penalty would apply to atheists and other kinds of unbelievers or whether it would apply to apostates only. Cue a lot of biblical arguments and quotations from both sides.

      Screw the denominations, they're a bunch of fscking lunatics, every single one of them. Jesus would weep.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    37. Re:Let them read it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite the contrary in fact, there IS a right TO be offended.

  7. They want to de-mystify it? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Then they should bring it out into the open and make it as readily available as possible. Have it available in paperback. Make it freely available in .epub and .mobi formats.

    If the country has done its job properly, most German people already know what (truthfully) happened in the 1920s, 30s, and 40s. They already have the context - so what's the big deal about letting them see that evil man's writings?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:They want to de-mystify it? by Hans+Adler · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's not so much that Germany has done a good job about that, but the US did an excellent job of reeducating Germans after the Second World War. They treated the general population fairly and helped them survive. But they also had a reeducation scheme in which they forced groups of ordinary people to look at piles of dead bodies found at concentration camps, etc.

      The Soviet Union, in contrast, had a different scheme that did not work. Essentially it amounted to drawing as much profit from the country as possible and torturing random people. This is why nazism is very strong in the east of Germany even today, long after reunification.

      Unfortunately, the US seems to have lost the knowledge of how to deal with a conquered nation. In Iraq, for example, they behaved essentially like the Soviet Union did in East Germany.

    2. Re:They want to de-mystify it? by Asic+Eng · · Score: 3, Informative

      Unfortunately, the US seems to have lost the knowledge of how to deal with a conquered nation.

      Part of the problem is that the US probably didn't have that knowledge in the first place - at least not to the extent it's commonly thought of today. Most of us probably think that after the end of WWII, Germans basically accepted the new government and went back to work. Unfortunately that's a propaganda legend of sorts - there was actually a lot of guerrilla fighting, murdering "collaborators", attacking allied troops and destroying infrastructure. However it was decided not to give these events any press in order not to encourage the resistance. Which made a lot of sense at the time.

      The result today is that we have a distorted view of the way things went in Germany, and that may have contributed to the ill-fated decision to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan.

      There is a documentary available on youtube about the German "Werwolfs". It's quite an eye opener.

      Of course another problem of applying the "German approach" to Iraq, is that the Germans had genuinely done something wrong, and you could appeal to human morals as part of an occupation strategy. That doesn't work in Iraq, because the criminal action in this war was on the US side. In Afghanistan that angle would be possible, but nobody actually voted for Bin Laden or the Taliban, so it's hard to claim that an ordinary citizen had any involvement in that.

      It might have helped if similar education had been provided for Americans - perhaps it would have changed the approach to engage the population with more humility "we messed up but we need to fix the situation now". But generally US politicians are too afraid to tell the population that the US can be morally wrong, too.

    3. Re:They want to de-mystify it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is more of less entirely false. The US has never succeeded in building a democracy where none were before, and neither will anyone else. Read The Independent Review's James Payne:

      "The lesson is clear: if you invade and occupy a country where elites have already evolved to nonviolent politics, then democracy will continue after you leave. On the other hand, if you invade a politically violent society, you have to expect more violence—civil strife, terrorism, and repressive dictatorship—after you leave."

      http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=2083 and http://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_11_02_03_payne.pdf

    4. Re:They want to de-mystify it? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      The German democracy that elected the Nazis was forced in place after WW1 so while it may take multiple attempts and time it's certainly possible to start building a democracy by force.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    5. Re:They want to de-mystify it? by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

      Seriously? After WWII West Germany became a heaven for former Nazis, many even keeping positions in the military and civil administration. Failure to de-nazify was one of the main reasons behind student riots in the 60s.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
    6. Re:They want to de-mystify it? by Hans+Adler · · Score: 1

      True. But the situation is very complicated and subtle, and what you are saying only superficially contradicts what I said.

  8. Copyright.. by Bert64 · · Score: 2

    The mere fact that a book written by someone nearly 70 years ago is still under copyright is ridiculous... The only reason there is any interest in this book at all is because it was written by possibly the most well known and infamous man in history.

    How many other works were written during the same time period, which have become completely lost to history due to excessively long copyrights?

    Also by keeping a work like mein kampf under wraps for so long, they have created a taboo subject around it, which will actually result in more people wanting to read it. In many other countries where talk of hitler and nazis is not restricted, hitler is considered a joke and is openly mocked, hardly an image that's going to generate any support for his ideas.

    And as someone else pointed out, suppressing books containing ideas they didn't agree with was something the nazis did.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    1. Re:Copyright.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And as someone else pointed out, suppressing books containing ideas they didn't agree with was something the nazis did.

      In the US, schools want an "edulcorized" version of the Adventures of Tom Sayer and the publishers are but happy to oblige.
      So no, the Nazis aren't the first nor the last to suppress books either physically by burning them or by censoring them.

    2. Re:Copyright.. by lloydchristmas759 · · Score: 1

      The mere fact that a book written by someone nearly 70 years ago is still under copyright is ridiculous...

      It's even worse than that: the copyright expires 70 years after the author's death. Mein Kampf was written 87 years ago, in 1925...

      --
      I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
    3. Re:Copyright.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who said they were the only ones? Pointing out that someone did something does not mean you are saying everyone else never did it.

    4. Re:Copyright.. by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      you can't godwin a story that godwin's itself. nice try

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    5. Re:Copyright.. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      you can't godwin a story that godwin's itself. nice try

      People always talk about "grammar nazis"... are there "godwin nazis" too?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    6. Re:Copyright.. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny

      The mere fact that a book written by someone nearly 70 years ago is still under copyright is ridiculous

      Count on Slashdot to turn a story about naziism into an anti-copyright rant.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    7. Re:Copyright.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Announcer voice] : Reverse godwin (+50pts)!!!

    8. Re:Copyright.. by Kidbro · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The mere fact that a book written by someone nearly 70 years ago is still under copyright is ridiculous

      Count on Slashdot to turn a story about naziism into an anti-copyright rant.

      The story is a copyright story. The book hasn't been banned. The book has simply not been published, because the people sitting on the copyright refused to publish it. The reason it is now about to be published is because the copyright is finally expiring.

      How much more deserving can a story be of triggering anti-copyright rants than when copyright is explicitly and directly used to enforce censorship?

    9. Re:Copyright.. by jareth-0205 · · Score: 1

      The mere fact that a book written by someone nearly 70 years ago is still under copyright is ridiculous

      Count on Slashdot to turn a story about naziism into an anti-copyright rant.

      Is this an example of reverse-Goodwin's law?

    10. Re:Copyright.. by bky1701 · · Score: 1

      Hitler was so evil, it was like he worked for the RIAA!

    11. Re:Copyright.. by Truedat · · Score: 1

      And as someone else pointed out, suppressing books containing ideas they didn't agree with was something the nazis did

      Won't somebody think of the Hitler?

    12. Re:Copyright.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know who also had copyright? The NAZIS!

  9. Doesn't sound right... by religious+freak · · Score: 1

    Anyone from Germany on at this hour? I went to a friend's house in Germany about 10 years ago and his Uncle had the book sitting in his bathroom. He said it was required reading for anyone in Germany in grade-school. To teach the errors in it, or something along those lines.

    I'm not sure if I was in Bavaria though - perhaps it varies by state?

    --
    If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    1. Re:Doesn't sound right... by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 3, Informative

      It wasn't required reading and it wasn't exactly banned either - the copyright was state-owned and Bavaria simply decided not to print or license it. We did read some excerpts in history class - subjecting anyone to slouch through the whole mess would probably be considered abuse. Hitler couldn't write for shit...

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    2. Re:Doesn't sound right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This book is not available legally in the whole of Germany due to the Bavarian copyright. And in no case and no state it is an allowed let alone required reading at school. May be the uncle of your friend was a little older and referred to his childhood in Nazi-Germany...

    3. Re:Doesn't sound right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I definately never read this in school. It is probably not a problem to get your hand on an old, used copy -- it was mass-produced after all. But to my best knowledge, up to now Bavaria does not grant licenses for creating new (annotated or not) copies of "Mein Kampf". As copyright is international, this of course affects all of Germany -- and other states, too.

    4. Re:Doesn't sound right... by philip.paradis · · Score: 1

      0101010101110010011011010110111101101101

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
    5. Re:Doesn't sound right... by Tom · · Score: 2

      Wasn't required reading when I went to school here, so no. I've never heard about that from anyone else, either.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    6. Re:Doesn't sound right... by Golden_Rider · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Definitely not required reading in school. Would be no point in doing that anyway, since the whole book is just crap, nothing to learn there except that Hitler was not good at writing :-) Maybe some excerpts are used in history class somewhere to show how delusional Hitler was.

      The book could not be bought anywhere because of the mentioned copyright, but it never was any problem getting your hands on an old version of it - basically every household back then in Germany had one, and many of those books survived to this day on some grandma's / grandpa's bookshelf. I know that my grandmother had one (she said that most people threw theirs away after the war, but she kept hers because it had an autograph in it), I think my uncle has it now.

    7. Re:Doesn't sound right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finn here. It was required reading for us in highschool. The book is not very good but the concepts are definitely important, much can be learned from His life.

  10. Nazi ideas in vogue again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But not this one!

    The interesting thing about is is that while it was fashionable all these decades to spit on any White Racist Neo-Nazis who were anti-Semitic, in the last few years, becoming anti-Semitic has become fashionable again, courtesy Muslims at large, and Nation of Islam members in the US. As a result, anti-Semitic slurs that had all but vanished in polite company are making a comeback, as is support for Judenrein, especially among Muslims.

    Speaking of which, Germany seems to be behind the curve, and Mein Kamph, which was not easily available for decades, has been a bestseller in Muslim countries such as Turkey and Egypt. Even while pro-Hamas and pro-Hizbullah activists accuse Israel of being like the Nazis, they openly endorse what Hitler did, and only regret that he didn't get to finish the job. In fact, given that most Whites have pretty much abandoned racist views, groups like the Aryan Nation, which were once closed to non-Whites, are today dominated by Muslims, who have both the money and the membership numbers to flood those groups and determine their policies and directions.

  11. TLDR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's safe all right ... just don't make a movie.

    1. Re:TLDR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's safe all right ... just don't make a movie.

      Too Late.

      Blah, blah blah, not enough text. Slow down cowboy. Fucking Slashdot nazis...

  12. cool beans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this will give hillary something to read as she preps her run to succeed obama in 2016

  13. Some corrections. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sale never was banned. Only using copyright you could not have it banned either. Only reprinting is not allowed. There are still more than enough copies around, so anyone can grab a copy anyway (and you do not want to allow anyone making profit from this). (Actually not all reprinting was forbidden, the copyright holder AFAIR gave already several decades ago a permission for a isreali annotated reprint).

    I'm also not sure if the allies gave the rights to the state of bavaria. The story as I read it before is that as Hitler died without heirs and relatives, his private posessions (including the copyright) end up as property of the state he was registered to live in, which was Bavaria.

  14. well, on reflection, it's not a real godwin by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the point of godwin's law is to point out the essential wrongness of comparing someone's opinion to something hitler or a nazi would do. it's just derails an argument into hysteria and absurdity

    however if someone were to get really upset here and yell and scream that what the bavarian government is doing here is something hitler or a nazi would do... well, yeah

    and i just learned a great phrase: "Reductio ad Hitlerum"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

    which sounds like a spell voldemort would cast

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:well, on reflection, it's not a real godwin by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      Afaik there's an exception for legitimate nazi comparisons and discussions involving the actual thing.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    2. Re:well, on reflection, it's not a real godwin by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Afaik there's an exception for legitimate nazi comparisons and discussions involving the actual thing.

      But how often does someone need to say that NAZIs are like NAZIs?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:well, on reflection, it's not a real godwin by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Funny

      You know who else published Mein Kampf? The NAZIs!

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:well, on reflection, it's not a real godwin by trout007 · · Score: 1

      I didn't know about this Godwin but I'd apply this to all people in both a positive and negative sense. I think it stems from people unable to make a logical argument. So the speaker invokes a person they believe would agree with an idea and then use that person as the focus to either attack or promote the idea. The problem with this technique is that by doing this you open all of that persons beliefs as a target for criticism.

      I am pretty libertarian in my views. But I cringe when someone invokes a founding father in their libertarian argument. The reason is because many of them were slave owners and if you use Jefferson to promote a libertarian idea you by default get people that disagree with you attacking the fact he owned slaves.

      You should strive to make your argument on logical grounds only. Also when someone does invoke a historical person in an argument you disagree with try to focus on the idea being discussed and don't let it devolve into Reductio ad Hitlerum.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    5. Re:well, on reflection, it's not a real godwin by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Also when someone does invoke a historical person in an argument [...]

      If somebody invokes a historical person in an argument, they'd better have their explicit written word to back them up.
      Unless ofcourse the argument is about being able to read the minds of people who died centuries ago.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    6. Re:well, on reflection, it's not a real godwin by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      You'd be surprised. Just like there are people who think "Nickelback" is just a derogatory term for a bad band there are plenty of people who think that "nazi" is just an insult and not a real group of people.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  15. Godwin's law by worip · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing the invocation of Godwin's law is inevitable for this article...

    --
    A picture is worth exactly 1024 words.
  16. Actually... by YuppieScum · · Score: 1

    ... it was first published in 1925/6.

    The 70 year restriction is based on when he died... presuming, of course, that it was actually *his* body in the bunker and he didn't escape to South America as some of his henchmen did.

    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
  17. The State of Bavaria Holds the Copyright? by GumphMaster · · Score: 1

    The State of Bavaria holds the copyright? Can someone explain how the single state of Bavaria, to the exclusion of the other states that together formed the republic of Germany, came to hold the copyright in this work. Hitler's last will allocated his possessions:

    What I possess belongs — in so far as it has any value — to the Party. Should this no longer exist, to the State, should the State also be destroyed, no further decision of mine is necessary.

    http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/My_Private_Will_and_Testament

    --
    Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
    1. Re:The State of Bavaria Holds the Copyright? by stefanb · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Federal Republic is the successor to the Weimar Republic, so the state was not "destroyed". Apparently, when an estate goes to the state, it goes to the state (Bundesland) where the deceased was last registered to live, not Germany; Hitler was registered as living in Munich. That's why it's Bavaria.

    2. Re:The State of Bavaria Holds the Copyright? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But wasn't Hitler's last residence the Fuhrerbunker in Berlin?

    3. Re:The State of Bavaria Holds the Copyright? by rainer_d · · Score: 1
      Yeah, but he had a (rather nice) flat in a posh part of Munich. That's where he was registered.

      It's a police-station, nowadays (guess why - the State of Bavaria inherited it, too)

      --
      Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
  18. Ford translation accuracy by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

    Would anybody care to comment on the Ford translation? I've been curious about this book and have read different things about the accuracy of existing translations. The Ford translation claims to be the most accurate, but some reviews on amazon claim otherwise. However none of those making these claims for or against seem to be native German speakers. Any native German speakers care to chime in?

    I want to read this book one day, but I don't want to read one that sugar coats what he says, or one that makes it look more bigoted than it is (which the Mannheim translation supposedly does.)

    --
    Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  19. Books and books.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The idea that all books should be public is weird. Not all books are public, specifically those not yet written.

    How would the public respond to a captivating narrative that induces readers to commit suicide? Not possible? Koran.

    I think there is a vague territory in writing where the narrative creates a false sense of reality to which the response is nontheless real, Hitler does that with his book. Books can do that and people are apprehensive about it. Needless antaginism and animosity or resentment and especially unearned pride are bad for society.

    Until everyone can be educated enough and is treated well enough to not be a breedingground for resentment and dumb hatred I think there is a definite point in keeping certain narrative from the public sphere.

  20. Re:Pity some communist books weren't banned too by EnsilZah · · Score: 1

    The ideology of regimes like North Korea has more to do with what you're suggesting than with Marx's ideas.

  21. Re:Pity some communist books weren't banned too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Banning books doesn't work.

  22. Muslimrein Deutschland? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Muslimrein Deutschland?

  23. Read It Cover To Cover by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The book is worth a read. The orignal & not the porposed "scholarly" version.
    Gives you the views from the other side too.
    Powerful!

  24. Good by JockTroll · · Score: 0

    If enough people manage to read through all of that drivel, maybe they won't be so keen on putting on the Reich.

    --
    Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
  25. Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I started saying after east and west Germany were reunited that it is just a matter of time before they invade Poland. Here we go.

  26. Oh, this'll be interesting. by Cazekiel · · Score: 1

    Everyone's going to interpret things in their own way. That's why this is both dangerous and enlightening, the latter weighing in most, I believe. Neo-Nazi types will celebrate and revel in its publication and read-away--perhaps some of them thinking, 'Okay, huh?' in getting the real-deal and the fucked-up psychosis that comes with it--and others simply interested in history (and not repeating it)... well, will get the real-deal and the fucked-up psychosis that comes with it. 'Guess we'll see.

    --
    You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
    1. Re:Oh, this'll be interesting. by MacTO · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At this point in history, it is bound to be more enlightening than dangerous.

      My high school education in the subject of Nazi Germany was likely more intellectual than most because I had a teacher who was brave enough to stand up and claim that the holocaust wasn't the most important feature of the 20th century. Instead, that teacher claimed, the genocides that came afterwards should play a stronger role in history courses because they are both more contemporary (thus more relevant) and demonstrate how society needs to make a much more concerted effort to learn from the mistakes of our past.

      The publication of Mein Kampf in Germany at this stage of history is important for a couple of reasons. One is that access to primary sources will allow the general population to more directly learn what the mistakesh of Nazi Germany were. But this will only work out because we have had a handful of generations to sort out why such policies represent an unforgivable evil. Both reasons are essential, because we need both information and a temporal/emotional distance to evaluate things rationally.

      Publishing this work in this day in age isn't an apology to the Nazis. It does not represent a forgiveness due to social relativism, nor any other extremist ideology. It simply acknowledges that the only way to learn from the past is to understand the past from their perspective.

    2. Re:Oh, this'll be interesting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was wondering where you were going with that, but then realised you have a point. One genocide/holocaust is a horrible tragedy, but a continuing series of them is surely something we should consider to be a greater tragedy (magnitudes of infinity?), and yes, our continuing willingness to let them happen is flaw in current society.

      Some people I know decry the spread of the internet as part of a growing homogenisation of human culture, however increasing communication can/will (I hope) lead to faster action when these things happen, as more people have access to technology and the means to spread the news and thus pursuade others to action.

    3. Re:Oh, this'll be interesting. by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1

      Your teacher was only half right. The holocausts of WW2 were not the most important part of it, but DOES make WW2 the pivotal moment of the 20th century (if not the entire modern period) was the emergence of the USA as a global empire, the use of atomic weapons, and the centralisation of petroleum as an energy source in industrial economies, which spawned the suburbs, possibly the single greatest misallocation of wealth in the history of the world.

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    4. Re:Oh, this'll be interesting. by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      the genocides that came afterwards should play a stronger role in history courses

      Let's not forget the genocides that occurred BEFORE the holocaust as well. After all it was the Armenian genocide that convinced Hitler the world simply wouldn't care if he killed millions of Jews.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
  27. What, no copyright extension? by Shoe+Puppet · · Score: 2

    I was fully expecting a push for copyright extension. Just so this book wouldn't be freely available. Anything else would have been "collateral damage".

    --
    (+1, Disagree)
  28. No , sorry by Viol8 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're not going to get away with a fatuous statement like that. The communist idea that all should work for the good of the state and put the good of the state above their own wellbeing is indelibly part of the way places such as North Korea work.

    1. Re:No , sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not going to get away with a fatuous statement like that. The communist idea that all should work for the good of the state and put the good of the state above their own wellbeing is indelibly part of the way places such as North Korea work.

      That's how the people in power sell it, not how it works for them.

    2. Re:No , sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He'd have to be doing more than talking out of his ass to do that. On behalf of the intelligent ACs on /. I appologise for the idiots who down-modded you. Blind-faith to any ideology is the hallmark of the slow-witted with mod points to spare, your criticism of GP is perfectly valid.

    3. Re:No , sorry by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      The communist idea that all should work for the good of the state and put the good of the state above their own wellbeing

      See, that's the problem. You want communist books banned when you haven't even read them yourself. How do I know that? Because if you did, you'd know that the above is not a "communist idea", and cannot be one, because Marx's definition of communism is "a classless and stateless society".

    4. Re:No , sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      North Korea has done a shit-ton to distance themselves from Socialism, Communism, Marxism and whatever else you want to smear. They are firmly into magical-leader-worship with a side of incomprehensible Juche. Not that anyone cares to actually look into the issue.

  29. The opposite is true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The exact opposite is true. While there are some anti-nazi laws in Germany, (West) German politics, administration, foreign office, police, justice and intelligence services were being run by nazis until the last of them retired. The effects of nazi-friendly post-war Germany still become visible in our time, the latest being the German interior intelligence service ('Verfassungsschutz') proving, along with the police, its inability and unwillingness to notice, control and stop neonazi terrorist militia who were killing foreigners, first they suspected was that it had been foreigners fighting foreigners.

    1. Re:The opposite is true by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      To be fair honor killings are more common/likely than nazi terrorists.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  30. Oh my life... by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

    A slashdot thread that Godwins itself?

    --
    Operation Guillotine is in effect.
  31. finally by Tom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If the book had been readily available, there would be fewer neo-nazis in Germany.

    I've read it (my parents own a copy, from their grandparents, as Mein Kampf was regularily given as presents at weddings, etc.). It's interesting in parts and revolting in most. It's also pretty badly written. As an author, Hitler was much worse than as a speaker.

    There was a comedian here in Germany, of turkish origin, who read from Mein Kampf for school classes and other audiences. He got attacked pretty badly, but in every discussion, he leaves his critics in the dust with his wit and intelligence. In one, he told a former MinisterprÃsident (our equivalent of american governors) that her anti-nazi initiatives had pretty much no effect whatsoever on the youth, because the young people distrust authoritarian stuff that's being forced down their throats. But his readings had a profound effect. Oh and also, the neo-nazis hated him for it, up to death threats.

    You can not resolve history by hiding it, only by discussing it.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you happen to know the name of the comedian you mentioned? It would be interesting to check his work out on youtube.

    2. Re:finally by HTD · · Score: 2

      Serdar Somuncu

    3. Re:finally by Tom · · Score: 1

      As the other commentator said.

      This here is where they're discussing his Mein Kampf reading. You'll notice how he utterly destroys everyone else. He's the only guy in the room who knows how to talk:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=669CVEvy9VY

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    4. Re:finally by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      It's interesting in parts and revolting in most. It's also pretty badly written.

      So is the Bible. Which is largely irrelevant to the establishment of the Church, just like Hitler's hasty prison notes were irrelevant to his actual work, the German Reich.

  32. and just by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in time for the collapse of European Socialism!

    1. Re:and just by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the rise of national socialism.

  33. Re:stop lying to yourself !! by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

    hilter and the nazi germany is the 'legitimate,legal whatever you wanna call" of the western culture and their hardcore philosophies of modern and post-modern ages ! stop lying to yourselves ! the only difference between hitler and chrchil or bush junior for example is that hilter did it "here to us not there to the "others" " !!

    signed,
    Wayne Kerr

    FTFY

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  34. It took them 43 years by Shivetya · · Score: 1
    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:It took them 43 years by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a shame that a big part of the reason for it being banned in Germany was the statement that Nazi germany was a very efficient system of government. That's something that really needs repeating, every time someone proposes a law aimed at increasing the efficiency of their government...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:It took them 43 years by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with governments being efficient? If they're doing the right thing, I'd rather it didn't cost twice as much as necessary.

      In fact, even if they're doing the wrong thing I'd still prefer them to do it as cheaply as possible. It's our money, after all.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:It took them 43 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you kind sir for that efficient and insightful comment,

    4. Re:It took them 43 years by olau · · Score: 1

      It's wrong if it leads to dictatorship and ensuing madness. Like for instance mass-murdering of un-likeminded people? Is it not self-evident that there's overhead in democracy as government? Even if it may lead to a more efficient society because it's harder for the ruling structure to keep a lid on new developments? Some people forget the big picture.

    5. Re:It took them 43 years by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure it's true that the Nazis were efficient, after all they had a lot of trouble with the big boss interfering with well laid plans for bullshit reasons.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    6. Re:It took them 43 years by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The more efficient a government is, the more power it accumulates. If it is more efficient than private enterprise, then companies (small or large) have no chance of competing. There are some things that private companies suck at (for example, providing healthcare and long-term research), where your only options are to have the government do it or have no one do it well. The more efficient a government is, the more things fall into this category. This has a few seriously negative side effects. The first is that it gives the government more control over the lives of the individual (at extremes, cases like Soviet Russia, where the state provides everything so the state gets to tell you exactly how to live your life). The second is that is makes more complex systems homogeneous and therefore difficult to adapt. If there are lots of competing options, it's easy for the bad ones to die off and the good ones to succeed. If there is just one - and it is backed by the force of law - then it may suffer long-term problems through lack of adaptability. Finally, there is the concentration of power. The government may be elected, but the high ranking civil servants are usually not, and are not directly accountable. The more you put in the hands of the government, the more power you give to these individuals. Good luck finding some who won't be corrupted by this...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  35. Just have to wait 69 more years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not sure if I'll be alive when Osama's slightly less known, "Mein Jihad", is released.

  36. nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a non event.

  37. for dummies by shadesOG · · Score: 1

    I'll wait for the 'Mein Kampf' for dummies.

    1. Re:for dummies by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 2

      here ya go:
      Ch.1. Hitler is Cool.
      Ch2. Kill the Jews
      Ch3. Hitler is Cool.
      Ch3. Germany is great.
      Ch4. Hitler is Cool.
      Ch5. Kill the Jews.
      (repeat 30 times in the most purple boring prose imaginable)
      Mein Kampf was a terrible book by a monstrous asshole.
      TFTFY

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  38. let's be clear by khipu · · Score: 1

    the point of godwin's law is to point out the essential wrongness of comparing someone's opinion to something hitler or a nazi would do. it's just derails an argument into hysteria and absurdity

    That may be true if that person has no connection with the Third Reich. But many of the post-war German academics, judges, secret service members, and police used to support the Nazis. Those people made laws, taught the next generation of students, and wrote history textbooks. Several of the (conservative) political parties in Germany that supported the Nazis simply reconstituted themselves after WWII, adopted similar programs to their pre-war programs, and pretended like they had nothing to do with the Nazi regime. And Neo Nazis and right-wing extremism are widespread in Germany.

    Pointing out analogies and connections between Nazis and modern German political and social institutions and figures is justified and not an ad hoc comparison.

  39. Hitler's copyright? by m.alessandrini · · Score: 0

    What is surprising to me is that the copyright is still recognized to Hitler (up to 70 years since his death). I thought that Germany had someway revoked him his civil rights. For a parellel example, when Italy defeated fascism and rejected monarchy, the dictator was killed, and the king (and all his future male descendants) were exiled, their properties confiscated, and they were prohibited to even reenter Italy, until few years ago.

  40. Well by ledow · · Score: 1

    In my local bookshop, for less than a pound, I can read books written directly by any number of serial killers, gang-leaders, rapists, you name it, about their murder and torture of others.

    Next to them, I can read many more written by others ABOUT the same thing, usually with some sort of endorsement. Next to that, I can read stories, true or fiction, about child abuse, neglect and a myriad other things. One that I did see was from someone who became a US politician after growing up in the ghetto and basically being used as a child prostitute (It was a while ago - something about her name being Cookie, I think).

    So, in that climate, I don't see exactly what the release of such a book would do that couldn't already be found elsewhere. Sure, Hitler actually managed to bring a whole country down using his ideology, but that was AFTER it was written.

    I've always held that the German/French stance of stopping people talking about, reading about, selling "memorabilia" of these things only makes things WORSE.

    What they should have done is renamed all toilets "Nazi's". And then use the Nazi symbol as that to denote a toilet. The world would see the change in opinion of the country that did so, the Naziists would immediately stop "worshipping" the name/symbol (and hopefully the ideology), and you solve the problem of what to do with the car park that's believed to be the modern location of Hitler's "grave". Turn it into a giant public toilet.

    Do you really think that children (or adults) would "get the wrong message" or want to be associated with the word Nazi or its symbology after that?

    1. Re:Well by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      I've always held that the German/French stance of stopping people talking about, reading about, selling "memorabilia" of these things only makes things WORSE.

      I don't know if that's true. In any case I think there's no "law" that makes things improve or get worse by either bringing things in the open or hiding them. You can bring things out and try to make people understand them correctly, but there is no guarantee things will turn out for the better and certainly not without effort. So while I approve of the policy not to suppress things, I don't believe it will always give good results.

  41. Re:this book should be published by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Informative

    It already is! Once again the Net sneaks up on our old school habits! "(Blah blah blah copyright runs out in 2015 blah blah blah)". Remember that thing called countries, and how they have different laws? (Up until the US "fixes" that anyway!) Well, for now Australia's copyright laws are a lot shorter than the US, so Gutenberg Australia has some editions of texts that are still locked in copyright elsewhere. Here is Gutenberg Australia's copy of Mein Kampf, so have at it!

    http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt
    Oh wait, there is this eerie clause:
    http://gutenberg.net.au/submissions.html

    "Of course, works may remain copyrighted in other countries. One cannot legally download or read books posted at Project Gutenbrg of Australia if one is in a country where copyright protections extend more than 50 years past an author's death. The author's estate and publishers still retain their legal and moral rights to oversee the work in those countries."

    So, I guess you'd better not follow that link. Isn't copyright wonderful.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  42. Treated fairly - not from the start... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sadly there is a side to the Allies occupation of Germany which is not as bright and shiny as it is often recollected today. The occupied population was not really treated fairly in the early years of the occupation (1945 - 1947).
    The Morgenthau Plan, partially realized in the Joint Chiefs of Staff directive 1067, crippled the remaining economy, reduced food available to the population (down to starvation levels - 1000kcal/day and less), which resulted in a significant increase of civilian deaths. It may be hard to believe but the situation in the Soviet occupied zone was initially slightly better for the civilian population...
    Fortunately wiser heads prevailed (probably also due to the rising "communist threat" - General Lucius Clay "There is no choice between being a communist on 1,500 calories a day and a believer in democracy on a thousand.") and after 1947 things got much better.

  43. Re:Pity some communist books weren't banned too by khipu · · Score: 2

    Marx came up with a theory of human nature and economics, and communist states tried to put that into practice. Because Marx's theory was wrong, those states failed, consistently and repeatedly. The fault is with Marx's theory.

    When scientific theories are correct, their application usually leads to positive results. The theory of vaccination leads to vaccination programs and that leads to more health. The theory of the effect of air pollution on lungs leads to clean air laws and improvements in public health.

  44. Anti-zionism != Anti-semitism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Semitic people include Arabs. The kosher propaganda has going far too long.

    1. Re:Anti-zionism != Anti-semitism by Hognoxious · · Score: 0

      Semitic people include Arabs.

      So what?

      Take your amateur saloon-bar linguistics and shove it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:Anti-zionism != Anti-semitism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, use Judeophobic if you prefer. I actually prefer 'modern-day Nazis'. Not all Muslims are Semites - not even most of them, but the Judeophobia is global amongst the Muslims for the simple reason that the quran itself has the vilest of things to say about the Jews. Far worse than what Dainsanefh writes above - it's not just anti-zionism, but anti-Judaism as well.

      My point remains. If White supremacists say it, they're rightly condemned as being racist. However, if either Muslims, or Black NOI members say it, it's suddenly cool. It's worth pointing out that Hitler was a great admirer of Muslims, and befriended the grand mufti of Jerusalem and through him arranged an SS battalion of Bosniaks to do his bidding.

  45. Laughter didn't work in 1939 by Viol8 · · Score: 1

    "or that's precisely the response they hope for."

    And sometimes its precisely the response you have to give or become a victim yourself. If all the sociopaths and psychopaths in the world could be defeated just by pointing and laughing then the world would be a lot more peaceful place. But they can't.

  46. No, count on someone on Slashdot... by Uberbah · · Score: 2

    ...shooting his mouth off without bothering to read the summary:

    "The book is not banned by law in Germany, but Bavaria has used ownership of the copyright to prevent publication of German editions since 1945. Copyright restrictions stop at the end of 2015, 70 years after Hitler's death."

  47. Make it freely available by Anon8---) · · Score: 1

    No need to make money off something so abhorrent. Shame on anybody, who tries to.

  48. German approach by hipp5 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have to be honest, I'm not a huge fan of the German approach to presenting the horrors of WWII. Last Christmas I visited the Dachau concentration camp outside of Munich. All the material presented there went extremely over the top to paint the Nazis as inhuman monsters that were far distanced from any sane person. But what this totally missed is that the horror of the Holocaust was that it was completely human. The vast majority of the Nazis were everyday people like you an me, and that's what makes it mindbogglingly terrible.

    In contrast you have the Holocaust exhibit at the British Imperial War Museum. The whole first section is very clearly focused on the on the economic and political conditions that led to the rise of the Nazis. Through the propoganda and information presented in that exhibit you come to understand how otherwise normal people came to participate in, sanction, or at least turn a blind eye to, one of the worst attrocities in modern history. I believe that only by dissecting this information and understanding this "flaw" of human nature can we really prevent such terrible things from happening again. Mein Kampf should have been repuplished years ago for exactly this reason.

    1. Re:German approach by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The German approach is very sadistic agreed. Their can't be any discussions of the motives, whether some things were right in Nazi politics etc. No it's become a religion to blame themselves for the war to the point of pissing away billions of euros to help out other EU countries that run themselves like idiots because Germany can't be seen as being aggressive or just say "not my problem" about anything now can they?

    2. Re:German approach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what this totally missed is that the horror of the Holocaust was that it was completely human. The vast majority of the Nazis were everyday people like you an me, and that's what makes it mindbogglingly terrible.

      That's one thing I liked about Inglourious Basterds. Ludger Pistor and those Soldiers celebrating in the cellar don't appear to be bad people.

      In contrast you have the Holocaust exhibit at the British Imperial War Museum. The whole first section is very clearly focused on the on the economic and political conditions that led to the rise of the Nazis. Through the propoganda and information presented in that exhibit you come to understand how otherwise normal people came to participate in, sanction, or at least turn a blind eye to, one of the worst attrocities in modern history. I believe that only by dissecting this information and understanding this "flaw" of human nature can we really prevent such terrible things from happening again. Mein Kampf should have been repuplished years ago for exactly this reason.

      Don't worry. German pupils have lots of time to learn it that way.
      We had to read Friedrich in 6th grade, Andorra in 10th grade and The Reader in 12th grade. And IIRC history in 9th and 10th grade exclusively covered Germany from WWI to WWII. We also visited a concentration camp where videos were shown that were filmed by british soldiers when they got there in 1945, heaps of corpses included.

  49. Mein Kraft? by queBurro · · Score: 1

    Mein Kraft? brilliant!

    --
    sag
  50. They should bowlderize it by heptapod · · Score: 1

    Replace every instance of Jew with Oompaloompa

  51. Republished in German is nice, but... by lourd_baltimore · · Score: 2

    ...you really haven't experienced Hitler until you have read him in the original Klingon.

  52. Das Kapital by Baldrson · · Score: 1

    Was Marx's "Das Kapital" ever banned anywhere?

    1. Re:Das Kapital by techybod · · Score: 1

      yes- Nazi Germany......

      --
      "Friends help you move, Real Friends help you move bodies"
  53. Re:Demystification - The Banality of Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A bit off topic to your post, but hopefully apropos.

    Your point re: debate it is interesting to me because I think that the many German's probably have a more nuanced view about the Nazi's than many countries. From travel there I gather the book the Banality of Evil (subtitle Eichman in Jerusalem) by Hannah Arendt is quite ubiquitous. I What I think the rest of the western (and largely whole world) forgets is that facism is always an ever present threat. Consider the stanford prison experiment and Milgram's experiments.

    More generally, if Arrendt is to be believed, while there were a couple of your evil mastermind type people (no doubt still present in our societies), much of the rise and evil of Nazism was possible through mindless careerism and bureaucracy not whole departments of people with devil horns and serpent tails. Also mindlessness in the population vis a vis accepting what their government tells them. It should also not be forgotten the degree to which Canada, the US and the UK also had (and continue to have) Nazi like parties.

    I do my best not to be an alarmist (or run afoul of Godwin's law ;-) ), but IMHO these tendencies(authoritarian generally) are ever present in society and it is arrogant of us to suggest that it could never happen (especially given the recent ominous proliferation of western democracies trying to introduce secret evidence and wide surveillance rules). The only (hopeful) guarantee to avoid this is actual vigilance through citizen participation and action in the face of oppressive and unfair behavior on the part of governments and other power actors (like large business).

    That's my rant for the day... :0)

  54. Are there any actual truths in it though? by DG · · Score: 1

    I have had an essay peculating away in my brain for a while whose subject is the selective reading and quotation of various holy books.

    The bible, for example, is full of all sorts of horrible things, but there are passages that contain "just", "lawful", "good", or "moral" stories and instructions - for simplicities' sake, let's call them the "bad" parts and the "good" parts.

    Those who hold up any particular religious philosophy as the paragon of human virtue quote the "good" parts and ignore the "bad" parts.

    Well, Nazism has this wonderful rhetorical value as being one of the few philosophies that is universally regarded as being wholly "bad". Aside from a few nutcases - who most of the world recognize as abhorrent - nobody has anything good to say about Nazis. They are the go-to bad guys.

    Mein Kampf is the Nazi bible, or at the very least a work of Nazi scripture. The common view of the book is that it must be evil through and through. I posit, however, that there exist passages in Mein Kampf - much like the bible - that are, if not ethically and morally good, at the very least neutral. If so, this would make it possible to - again, much like the bible - to selectively quote Mein Kampf and use it as an anchor for a moral philosophy.

    Not that I'm in any way interested in rehabilitating National Socialism! The point here being that if you can find good in Mein Kampf, well, what does that say about the practice of selective quoting in the bible?

    I think you can see where I'm headed with this.

    Anyway, I have never read the book, so the postulation that it contains good/neutral passages remains (to me) unproven. Are they in there?

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
    1. Re:Are there any actual truths in it though? by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      Fucked if I know. I got twenty pages in and gave up 'cos it was juuuuust shiiiiit.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    2. Re:Are there any actual truths in it though? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Huh, and I'd heard the first chapter or two was the only part worth reading (before the Jew-hate starts).

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    3. Re:Are there any actual truths in it though? by durdur · · Score: 1

      The problem with this book is, anyone who reads it does it through the lens of everything else they know about Hitler and WW II. So it's pretty hard to take anything like an objective look at it. The one thing that is true, is that Germany received a very raw deal at the end of the first World War, and was left with a ruined economy and dismantled army, including a lot of disaffected veterans. And the grievances about this fueled Nazism. But Hitler's view of the world was also colored by a lot of racist gibberish. It is mostly not even original with him but picked up from various sources. And it is gibberish for multiple reasons, one of them being that "race" is a hopelessly fuzzy concept, and also that ancestry doesn't determine character or personality, or other such traits.

    4. Re:Are there any actual truths in it though? by DG · · Score: 1

      Granted - anything Hitler has to say on "race" is going to be completely out to lunch and is pretty much a given to be "bad" stuff.

      But if he says something like "farmers need to get their produce to market and an efficient transportation system is a way to make that happen" - well that's true, even if it did come out of Hitler's mouth.

      I'd love to see a list of quotes from Mein Kampf that follow a similar pattern - stuff that is unquestionably true, even though the source is pretty much the worst possible source ever.

      DG

      --
      Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
    5. Re:Are there any actual truths in it though? by silverspell · · Score: 1

      Mein Kampf is the Nazi bible, or at the very least a work of Nazi scripture.

      I think its importance is somewhat overstated. Albert Speer, who was practically Hitler's second-in-command during much of the war, eventually admitted that he'd never actually read it.

      (Then again, plenty of self-described Christians throughout history have never actually read the Bible, either because they weren't literate in its language or because they only feel the need to internalize those parts of Scripture that reinforce their existing beliefs.)

    6. Re:Are there any actual truths in it though? by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are, all to the glory of the Fuehrer and the Third Reich. Yeah, right.

      Already posted this elsewhere --- Sen. Alan Cranston, on his return to the U.S. from Germany, finding an expurgated version for sale which had some Americans admiring Hitler, translated all the unpleasant parts, and published them:

      http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people/Cranston/cranston-con2.html

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    7. Re:Are there any actual truths in it though? by DG · · Score: 1

      I'm more interested in - man alive, it is repugnant to say this - the "pleasant" parts. The parts that have nothing to do with race or any other key Nazi tropes long proven wrong.

      Assuming they exist. He couldn't have gotten every single word wrong, could he?

      And please let me reiterate - I am in no way an admirer of Hitler or his philosophy. I am not seeking to celebrate the stuff Hitler got right. I am instead seeking to show that you can make any book look good if you choose your quotes carefully.

      DG

      --
      Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
  55. Its essentially the same as a blog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's poorly written and Hitler just draws on and on about hating people for no particular reason other than just because.

  56. Holodomor Movie Too? by Baldrson · · Score: 1

    Beautiful irony in that. I suppose then the answer to the question "Has there ever been a Holodomor movie made anywhere?" would be, "Yes, Nazi Germany..."

  57. Adolph Hitler was a very, very naughty man by crutchy · · Score: 1

    Lieben est verboten, a es scriben uts, ka liederhosen, lieben est verboten god dammit!

  58. Re: "rendering unto Caesar" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I agree with you on how that has been applied to "obey mans governance".
    It's a terrible corruption of its original intent. Caesar represents infrastructure
    needed to live on this Earth - roads, buildings, water, waste removal, etc.
    You can't be effective at the "unto God what is God's" until you accomplish the
    unto "Caesar what is Caesar's". So many miss this point and believe it means
    allegiance unto government...

  59. You know who else read and wrote? Hitler! by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    This also brought to you from the trite department of false equivalencies...

  60. So now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now we must extend copyright to stop the rise of the 2nd Nazi party. At least that's what the RIAA tells me.

  61. Post WWII Army Training Film by Migraineman · · Score: 2

    Funny, I was stumbling through some Private Snafu shorts last night, and watched this gem. I find it very interesting to look back at the films from the WWII era and see how much (or how little) society has changed.

    As for the Bavarians camping on Mein Kampf, you'd think that they would have figured out that most parents have - the more you demonize something (alcohol, MJ, sex et al), the more the teenagers will find it appealing. If they want to destroy the financial incentive associated with the work, release it GPL-style. Make sure derivative works have to be GPL'd as well. Just stuffing the master copy under a mattress is ineffective.

  62. Next step by Jiro · · Score: 1

    Too bad they can't follow up by changing the law about swastikas. This has caused censorship of American media because the companies want to sell them in Germany--there's a reason that the only swastika in the Captain America movie is a one second scene that could be easily cut for foreign distribution.

    1. Re:Next step by Shoe+Puppet · · Score: 1

      there's a reason that the only swastika in the Captain America movie is a one second scene that could be easily cut for foreign distribution.

      Not for Germany. Swastikas can be depicted in movies as they, unlike video games, are considered works of art.

      --
      (+1, Disagree)
  63. Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too late, it's already been demystified http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/9857/362193-mein_chair.jpg

  64. Good by Right1488 · · Score: 0

    This sounds like a good idea to me.

  65. MineKampf? by Dripdry · · Score: 1

    Is MineKampf the next game Notch is making?

    --
    -
  66. Good thing Germans have a govt to think for them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    God knows they couldn't do it themselves, the dumbass morons that they are.

  67. will it still by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

    be illegal to read?

  68. Here's a hint by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    Just publish an annotated version. Explain where he was wrong.

    1. Re:Here's a hint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a good reason they can't do that: he wasn't wrong.

  69. Someone's math is off! by modi123 · · Score: 1

    Copyright restrictions stop at the end of 2015, 70 years after Hitler's death.

    Since when did it become vogue to think Hitler died almost 70 years ago? Oh.. I see - the Bunker-Believers are finally swaying the public opinion that the oh-so pat closure to the war was done with Hitler taking a cyanide pill. Pffsst... yeah that's a little too neat.. too gift wrapped for the historical shelves if you asked me. It is pretty clear he escaped on a u-boat and went to South America where he spent the rest of his live puttering around small villages searching for clues on various modern mysteries: the Fountain of Youth, amassing crystal skulls, and finding the lost outpost of Gorilla City. Come on people - this is common knowledge!

    Assuming he didn't find the fountain of youth he had another good twenty years on him - which means those patents are pushed back that far as well! Problem solved!

  70. It's a camping manual .. right by qqe0312 · · Score: 1

    We do the concentrating, they do the camping.

  71. Re:Pity some communist books weren't banned too by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Marx came up with a theory of human nature and economics, and communist states tried to put that into practice.

    The first state that tried to put it in practice which weren't prevented from doing so by outside factors (i.e. being crushed) was Soviet Russia. And Soviet ideology was not purely Marxist - it was Marxist-Leninist, which is actually a pretty big difference. According to Marx's own theories, a communist revolution should not have been even possible in Russia in 1917, because it was an agrarian country where the majority were peasants, not factory workers.

    From there, all other socialist states in the world directly or indirectly trace their lineage to the USSR, and so their ideologies are also offshoots of Marxism-Leninism. We don't know how well any other Marxist schools of thought would hold up to real life, because Marxism-Leninism (-Stalinism/Maoism/Juche/...) was all that was ever tried.

  72. Freedom is a funny word. by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

    Full-on socialist policies . . . actually free the citizenry from having to worry about the very trials and tribulations that consume the time and energy of a capitalist society

    Indeed. They free them from the ability to do so. They free them to accept whatever they've been given. And they free them from the aspiration to do more. Such a wonderful system.

    1. Re:Freedom is a funny word. by msobkow · · Score: 1

      Ask a Canadian if they feel free.

      Ask a Swede if they feel free.

      Ask a Norweigan if they feel free.

      They'll bitch about the high taxes, but they won't bitch about a lack of health care.

      Where is the freedom in knowing the bank can jack your rates and take not only your home, but everything you've paid into it so far?

      Where is the freedom in knowing that once $1M has been spent on your child's medical treatments, your only option is bankruptcy?

      Where is the freedom in knowing that despite a college degree, your only hope for a job is flipping burgers?

      Socialist systems still use money. You still need a job. You still have options as to where to spend that money.

      You're thinking communism, where the state controls everything from your career to your housing options.

      If you're going to argue politics, you'd best learn what the terms mean before you open your mouth.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  73. Godwin's law? by dzfoo · · Score: 1

    By definition, shouldn't the comment thread been stopped and locked the moment the summary was posted?

    --
    Carol vs. Ghost
    ...Can you save Christmas?
  74. Reminds me of China by ElusiveJoe · · Score: 1

    It reminded me of that I've read about how Chinese communist party came to power. In that time (before WW II) there were two parties struggling for power: nationalists and communists. But it's easy to mistake one for another, because both were totalitarian, pro-censorhip and anti-individualist (one party to rule them all), both were hunting down and killing their opponents, both had power-crazy sociopathic leaders with enormous egos.

    And it continued to be like this in other countries throughout the XXth century. Some countries had nationalist dictators supported by US, other countries had communist dictators supported by USSR, sometimes there was coup d'etat, but one dictator was simply followed by another, and people were fucked once again.

  75. False equivalency? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US WWII Concentration camps (a historicaly misleading, but technically accurate term) were on a completely different scale and axis compared to the Nazi Death/Concentration camps.

    That said, US does have plenty of shameful episodes, past and present.

    Tuskegee Experiments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment

    Gitmo

    Trail of Tears

    Atrocities during Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. In fact during all wars.

    Effective extermination of many Native American peoples.

    Except for possibly the last, these are still in no way comparable to the scale, depth, and focus of events such as the Nazi holocaust, Armenian genocide, Soviet gulags and planned starvations, Chinese prison/work system.

  76. That was covered in "Band of Brothers" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many everyday Germans, to say nothing of soldiers, knew what was going on (and many approved and even benefited), even if they did not actively enslave, torture or kill.

    Every American should be required to see that miniseries, as well as "The Pacific"

    And really THINK about what war drives even seemingly normal "good" people to do, to say nothing of those who are psychopaths.

    1. Re:That was covered in "Band of Brothers" by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      Are you talking about the episode, "Why We Fight", when they first discovered the concentration camp?

      I suppose that covers it, but I personally feel that as graphic as it is, it is too sanitized. It's not that I want to see all the gory details. It's just that it is hard to know exactly how bad it was.

  77. Re:Pity some communist books weren't banned too by khipu · · Score: 1

    Well, that's nice. Nevertheless, the fact remains that there is no empirical support for the implicit social, psychological or economic theories that underlie Marx's work, and every attempt to put them into practice has failed.

    The burden of proof that Marxism is anything other than pompous pseudo-scientific claptrap is still on the proponents of his system. Of course, the Neo-Marxists (Habermas and the like) are even further removed from science and reason than Marx was.

  78. Why don't Germans just give the death penalty to N by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1
    I know they're a no death penalty country, but in this case, why not make an exception? Just arrest try and execute anyone found guilty of belonging to or supporting a neo-Nazi party no matter if it's actual Nazis or it's some offshoot created to get around the German ban on Nazis. Mp You could say the same thing for more than half the Nazis high command during WWII also- they got sucked into something they didn't really understand yadda yadda yadda.

    Why play games with these people? What does it take for humanity to learn a lesson. Just kill them. No , really. Just kill them. In the US too. just kill them. Fuck your civil liberties and free speech rights . Nazis et. al. don't get civil liberties and free speech rights.

  79. Copyrights expire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is this nonsense you speak of?

  80. Re:Why don't Germans just give the death penalty t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny - I feel the same way about liberals....

  81. Re:Why don't Germans just give the death penalty t by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

    And liberals feel the same way about you. The thing is, if conservatives continue to succeed in getting the US to do nothing about global warming , liberals are going to get to do something about it. Conservatives will be desperately trying to hide the fact that they ever watched FoxNews or read RedState or took their science from Rush Limbaugh or were ever one of those "crazy asshole conservatives...."

    From abolition to women's suffrage, from food safety to product safety from evolution denialism and the Scopes Trial (haven't learned much since then, have you, Tennesee conservatards) from segregation and intermarriage laws to laws against homosexuality conservatives never pass up a chance to line up on the losing side of history in this country.

    But with global warming, it's taken to a whole new level. Now you're literally a clear and present danger to national security of the United States, which is just how the CIA et. al . see you BTW.

    But it's not just the national security of the US it's also every nation on earth adn THEIR intelligence agencies.

    . Hey, how do you think that's going to work out for ya?

    It's like a political suicide pact.... that's one good thing that will come out of all this.. the country will be unified in its wholesale and irreversible rejection of "conservatism" and will come to see it the same way everyone now sees Bull Conners and the Klan.

    Thanks for being the suicide bombers of your own "movement" and ensuring that when people watch old FoxNews clips it will be just like watching the Nazis goosestepping under the Arc D'Triumph.

    Hey,we could have done it without you, but it wouldn't have been so decisive.. and...spectacular...

    Just do us all a favor and keep denying reality.