[–] the_sovereign ago
It was a very, very tamed and ordinary book
Just because you keep saying that doesn't make it true. It wasn't a silly book like some Marvel comic book. It was a book about Hitler's political ideologies and philosophies as well as his future plans for Germany.
There is no cause and effect link here
Again just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true. Hitler wrote "the nationalization of our masses will succeed only when, aside from all the positive struggle for the soul of our people, their international poisoners are exterminated" And then when Hitler rose to power, he did just that. Is that enough cause and effect for you?
I didn't know that to rise to power is so easy.
Well it is, and it's a reason why people make so many references to the Nazis in politics as tiresome as it may be.
To "contribute to" and to "cause" are two very different things.
This appears to be the crux of your argument, but you are also trying to defend the book as being very tamed and ordinary when it's the exact opposite of that. It is only harmless now because we know what evil it spawned in people. Hitler's ideology is the true cause of the Holocaust. His book was just another medium to spread his evil ideology. If this is the aspect that you are hung up on then fine, but you cannot deny that this book clearly influenced millions of Germans to Nazism.
[–] MasivGam3 ago (edited ago)
That is irrelevant. The burden of proof is on you. Please prove that there is a direct cause-and-effect link as you claimed. The fact is - you can't.
You are getting annoying. You reminded me of those stereotypical Jews Hitler portrayed in Mein Kampf where they, when defeated by a sound argument, will turn around the other day and begin repeating their already debunked lies as if nothing ever happened. I already told you that you are operating with an incorrect English translation. The German original does not speak about an "extermination", it says "uprooted" when speaking about political adversaries, which carries a very different meaning. Don't you get that? Why the fuck are you repeating it?
Oh, my! Look! We have the recipe for world domination right here! Let's just write a boring, chaotic and amateurish book about our "political ideologies and philosophies as well as our future plans" and the world is ours! ... What a fucking nonsense!
It is. Because you are mixing up two very different things and are constantly trying to bend facts into conforming with your ideological claims.
Because that's what it was.
It isn't. Quote from Wiki for you: "...Benito Mussolini was also critical of the book, saying that it was "a boring tome that I have never been able to read" and remarked that Hitler's beliefs, as expressed in the book, were "little more than commonplace clichés"." Exactly. The book for the most part is boring and it does not contain anything that at that time in Europe wasn't not only a commonplace among laymen, but was published in hundreds of other books and hundreds of newspapers every fucking day. Every other person in Europe at that time thought the same.
[–] the_sovereign ago
I don't think Benito Mussolini's endorsement of "boring tome" is a glowing endorsement for your argument. I don't know what else to tell you. You say I mistranslated it, but then you also say I didn't and that I took it out of context for WW1. Clearly the author of the book and the majority of people who read it were inspired enough to become Nazis and execute the Holocaust - a pretty clear cause and effect. If you're trying to argue that people are ultimately responsible for their actions, I won't disagree with you, but to deny the influence the book had on the rise of Nazi German is pure lunacy. I'm afraid the burden of proof is on you my friend for every major historian and most people would highly disagree with you.