On jargon:
These [socialist] writers were obviously counting on the proverbial humility of a certain section of our people, who believe that a person who is incomprehensible must be profoundly wise.
On new Prime Ministers:
The Press succeeded in the magical art of producing names from nowhere within the course of a few weeks. They made it appear that the great hopes of the masses were bound up with those names. And so they made those names more popular than any man of real ability could ever hope to be in a long lifetime. All this was done, despite the fact that such names were utterly unknown and indeed had never been heard of even up to a month before the Press publicly emblazoned them. At the same time old and tried figures in the political and other spheres of life quickly faded from the public memory and were forgotten as if they were dead, though still healthy and in the enjoyment of their full viguour. Or sometimes such men were so vilely abused that it looked as if their names would soon stand as permanent symbols of the worst kind of baseness.
On art:
The more vile and miserable are the men and products of an epoch, the more they will hate and denigrate the ideal achievements of former generations.
On cancel culture:
The tactics of Social Democracy consisted in opening, at a given signal, a veritable drum−fire of lies and calumnies against the man whom they believed to be the most redoubtable of their adversaries, until the nerves of the latter gave way and they sacrificed the man who was attacked, simply in the hope of being allowed to live in peace. But the hope proved always to be a foolish one, for they were never left in peace.
On the middle class:
Those among whom I passed my young days belonged to the small bourgeois class. Therefore it was a world that had very little contact with the world of genuine manual labourers. For, though at first this may appear astonishing, the ditch which separates that class, which is by no means economically well−off; from the manual labouring class is often deeper than people think. The reason for this division, which we may almost call enmity, lies in the fear that dominates a social group which has only just risen above the level of the manual labourer – a fear lest it may fall back into its old condition or at least be classed with the labourers. Moreover, there is something repulsive in remembering the cultural indigence of that lower class and their rough manners with one another; so that people who are only on the first rung of the social ladder find it unbearable to be forced to have any contact with the cultural level and standard of living out of which they have passed.
On education:
There is no reason why millions of people should learn two or three languages during the school years, when only a very small fraction will have the opportunity to use these languages in later life and when most of them will therefore forget those languages completely.
Have you got it yet? I bet you have. The language used and the way I’ve framed the question suggests a well-known historical figure and someone we’re not supposed to agree with.
But it’s interesting, isn’t it? Whatever he was, he was not a numpty. Well… he was a numpty. But he was clearly capable of recognising patterns and coming up with theories to explain them. Some of which were correct.
Which makes me wonder. Getting hold of a copy of Mein Kampf is not the easiest thing in the world to do. For instance, there were no second-hand copies on eBay last time I looked. I can’t imagine they are that scarce. So I assume eBay and others have been leant on by the authorities.
So, what are they so worried about? We are told that Hitler was a raving loony. That is the narrative. But it is not true. Read Mein Kampf for more than a few minutes and you realise that there’s more to the guy. But the government can’t stand that idea. Apparently. It fears the idea that rather than being a raving loony, Hitler was a raving loony with an ability to reason. Crazy not stupid, so to speak. But why would that idea so threatening to the government?
P.S. I’ve just read the Jewish stuff. Oh Boy.
P.P.S FWIW, I am reading the Murphy translation. I understand there are quite a few translations out there. Or were.
https://x.com/Never_Again2020/status/2087949138486767685?s=20
No problem finding a copy if you speak Arabic.
Forcing people to buy new puts more money into the pockets of the fascists who tend to publish books like Mein Kampf. Why people would lean on others to create that result is a mystery to me.
I inherited a March 1939 edition from my paternal grandfather. Published by Hurst & Blackett.
Never read it. Was taught at school that it was famously dull, but have long suspected that was intended to put people off reading it.
A friend at university had to read the original in the original german for his course. He told me the original german is mind-cheesingly turgid, most of the english translations put it in hugely more readable language.
“Was taught at school that it was famously dull, but have long suspected that was intended to put people off reading it.”
It’s long-winded, repetitive and the language flowery, for sure. But it wasn’t until I read it that I understood the nature of his hatred of the Jews – race not religion – or its centrality to national socialism. He also thinks that propaganda can trump military reality.
P.S. I’ve just read the Jewish stuff. Oh Boy.
Jordan Peterson has said a few times that he’d read the Hitler Tischreden, the collected “table talk”. He was struck by how much of it talked about Jews in terms usually used of disease – pollution, infection, decay, cleansing, and such like.
I read 200 pages He is completely lunatic over Jews and STD, chiefly syphilis
Hitler was crazy? I wonder what Jordan Peterson thinks of that?
I would think most assessments are that Hitler was evil but smart. Not smart enough in the end, but smart. Bad combination. But crazy?
You’ve got me wanting to read Mein Kampf, if only I can get hold of a copy without anyone knowing! I’m sure Amazon keeps my purchasing history private.
p.s., no copy at Project Gutenberg! I thought for sure they’d have it.
Related: have you ever heard of a University course that has the students read and analyze the book we’re discussing? Which we are apparently more reluctant to say the name of than we are Voldemort! Probably best since the scraping bots will be stopping by any time now.
I’d name that course “Dangerous Books”. In a proper University, that should at least prompt some questions. Honest questions!
Try archive.org
Phillipe, it amazing how much time he spends talking about health and fitness. And he was dead against smoking. He would fit right in with our modern-day public health administrators.
@Patrick Crozier
And he was dead against smoking.
Yeah, because breathing bad stuff can really kill you.
I wonder if the Meine Kampf access problem is maybe a British thing? I checked ebay and there were lots of (very expensive) copies, and you can buy it on Amazon for $15.
I also did a quick google search and found a bunch of them in public. So it seems pretty accessible to me. Though in the Tyrannical State of the United Kingdom, who knows.
As to Hitler himself, you can pick out a few quotes from any writer and make him look smart. I’m sure if you combed the archive of Samizdata and picked a few of the best sentences I ever wrote, quoted them in isolation, I’d look like a genius too.
As to Hitler himself, I don’t think he was particularly smart, certainly militarily his constant interference lead to Germany’s dreadful performance post initial successes. What he was good at is propaganda, and he was a man for his time in the ruins of post war and post depression Germany he was the right man to lead the worst instincts of human kind. I think in part because he was willing to say the most horrible things, and also there is a certain amount of luck involved in these things. No doubt there were many petty little Bohemian corporals (to use Hindenberg’s description of Hitler), many of them, but most were probably killed, arrested or faded into oblivion.
It is worth noting that the fascism of Germany is very telling in an economic sense. If you consume all the wealth of a country under the control of a fascist central state you really can look like you are doing an amazing job. However, once you have spent all the savings you find yourself in a pretty bad state. Which is certainly the case with Germany both economically and in their war efforts.
A few sharp comments doth not a genius make, and no doubt he was not above plagiarism. Although I have not read the whole thing and certainly not in German, I do think that the reported excesses of flowery language is often an indication in writing of an attempt to impress, in fact to do the very thing he accuses socialists of “a person who is incomprehensible must be profoundly wise.”
Correction: you CAN buy it on Amazon. Kindle edition is $15.
p.s….sorry Fraser, I missed that you already found the Amazon version!
My late mother was in her teens during World War II. During the war, she went out to a bookshop and bought a copy of Mein Kampf on the principle of “know your enemy”. I don’t remember her mentioning having any difficulty in obtaining a copy, nor any objection from her parents – who were the sort of people who would not tolerate “defeatist talk” at the dinner table.
Adolf Hitler was a socialist – very much in the tradition of “War Socialism” which went back long before General Ludendorff – although the name of Ludendorff is associated with it and his War Socialism FAILED – as Ludwig Von Mises showed in “Nation, State and Economy” the War Socialism of Germany and Austro-Hungary was less efficient, even in wartime, that the less statist approach to production that France followed in the First World War.
The tradition of socialism that Mr Hitler followed was also older than Karl Marx (the form of socialism that inspired Mussolini – who had been the leading Marxist in Italy), it went back to earlier 19th century German thinkers who did NOT think the state would “wither away” (as Engels put it) into some ideal state of pure Communism – they believed that the state domination was the ideal state, that it was not some transitional stage to some other state-of-affairs. Fichte is an obvious example of such an early 19th century thinker.
For the practice of this form of socialism under the rule of Adolf Hitler see “The Road to Serfdom” by F.A. Hayek and, more detailed, “Omnipotent Government” by Ludwig Von Mises.
For his social radicalism (and Hitler and the other National Socialists were very much social radicals) see the work of Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn – showing how the Nazis hated such things as the traditional family and traditional Christianity – which had been the core of German identity for well over a thousand years. Himmler (head of the S.S.) was particularly fanatical in his radicalism – turning against the Roman Catholic faith of his youth.
In his youth Himmler showed little sign of the hatred of Jews that later defined him – indeed the Captain of his fencing team at university was Jewish, and the two young men were friends.
When Himmler lost his Christian faith he seemed to undergo a profound mental crises – and it was then he grabbed hold of Racial Socialism, something that Hitler offered him – although (see above) Hitler did NOT invent Racial Socialism – it was there in Fichte and others a century before him.
The hated of Jews was very articulate in Germany (in spite of Jews being so assimilated in Germany – the violent Jews of say London or New York were almost unknown among the cultured German Jews) – more so than in Britain, where it was more of a mob thing.
Like so many Germans (the best educated people in the world – Germans in Germany and Austrian Germans) Mr Hitler was well read – and had no problem in reciting, for example, the well written (although utterly savage) writings of Martin Luther against Jewish people.
Was Mr Hitler correct in holding that children should not be taught other languages?
I do not believe so – indeed one of the regrets of my life is that I did not learn other languages in my youth.
My father (who left school at 14) could read several languages.
As for Mr Hitler’s mental state – his youth, where he had been without a real job or home, had an effect on him – as did the terrible stress of the First World War (my own grandfather, Julius Marks, went to war a decent man – and came back a vile man, but, on the other hand, my other grandfather, James Power, appears to have been the same happy-go-lucky Irish-Londoner before and after the First World War).
The drugs Mr Hitler was given by his quack doctor also had a bad effect on him – but, no, at least for most of his time in office he was not insane.
As far as I know, Mr Hitler never visited an extermination camp – he wanted the Jews removed from the world, but he had no desire to see the process. Even Mr Himmler is supposed to have only visited an extermination camp once – and is said to have found the process very unpleasant, and did not come back.
Mr Himmler also wanted a combat command – but when finally given one, the stress was too much for him, he had to go to a rest-home for a period of time.
Reinhard Heydrich appears to have been the person who made the final decision to turn a theoretical desire to get rid of Jews, into a practical plan for extermination.
Reinhard Heydrich was highly intelligent, well educated, quite sane (no sign of any mental illness), and was brave in combat.
He was targeted for death by the British NOT because of some British love of Jews – but rather because Reinhard Heydrich was the National Socialist that the British feared most, it was feared that he might, one day, become Leader – and that this would be bad news for Britain and other opponents of Germany.
Reinhard Heydrich was rather like a combination of two of Conan Doyle’s characters – Professor Moriarty (see, for example, how he and his “SD” intelligence service out witted MI6) and Colonel Moran – in his combat skill.
Fraser Orr is correct – “My Struggle” is out of copyright – so if there is problem with getting it here, that is very much a “British thing”.
As Natalie points out – Britain did NOT use to be like this, but we are now.
For example, more people are arrested for peacefully expressing their opinions in Britain than in Russia – in spite of Russia having a larger population than Britain, and Mr Putin being a brutal ruler (and he is a brutal ruler).
The British establishment are actually proud of how much they crush dissent – they think it is “Progressive” to do so, and they are correct – it is “Progressive”. And NO we are not talking about Nazis being arrested in Britain.
There is a copy of Mein Kampf on Archive.org:
https://ia803107.us.archive.org/32/items/AdolfHitlerMeinKampfENGLISH/Adolf%20Hitler%20-%20Mein%20Kampf%20ENGLISH.pdf
It might be an idea to download it from there and NOT have a paper/money trail linked to you.
Another interesting (for a given value of interesting) is The Vampire Economy (Doing Business Under Fascism) by Gunter Reimann which was published in the USA in September 1939. Long story short, the economy under the Nazis was totally orientated towards war production and fully under the control of the state from the word go.
Ha, i thought it was Karl Marx.
Phil B – correct, as F.A. Hayek showed in “The Road to Serfdom” and Ludwig Von Mises showed (rather better) in “Omnipotent Government” – National Socialism was socialism.
Specifically “German Socialism” or “War Socialism” – with business “owners” reduced to “shop managers” doing the bidding of the state.
In the same way every large enterprise in the People’s Republic of China has representatives of the Communist Party in it (all-of-the-large-enterprises) – the large enterprises are all directed for the purpose of increasing Chinese power and undermining the West.
The idea that trade with them (or allowing them to buy land and other property) is Adam Smith style “Free Trade” is false (indeed the idea is demented nonsense) – it is nothing to do with Adam Smith style “Free Trade” and everything to do with economic warfare.
However, basically only President Trump has not been bought by the PRC – most of the Western political and corporate leaders (and the despicable Economist magazine) want “free trade” with a power that is organized like National Socialist Germany, but is about ten times the size. Ten times the population.
They do not care if the West is destroyed – as long as they personally profit, not understanding that their “friends” in the PRC will, in due course, vivisect them.
I found out by searching on the languages quote. The others are interesting, too.
AH was not totally deranged, although he did have an unhealthy obsession with Jews. He was also widely read.
His magnum opus, MK, was, the last time I looked, available for loan on the open shelves of Aylesbury library, where I am typing this on my laptop at this very moment. I am aware of no evidence of this having done anyone any actual harm.
Off topic, but what the hell . . .
https://x.com/sappholives83/status/2088187997640417760
IrishOtter49
Correct – when the evidence is this overwhelming it can not be explained by just incompetence. The establishment, the “experts” and so on, are deliberately destroying the nation – the people.
It is much the same in many other Western nations.
This is an international establishment.
And you are not off-topic – because the establishment brand anyone who opposes their plans “Nazis” even though Winston Churchill and Charles De Gaulle (the leading figures in Britain and France who OPPOSED the Nazis) were totally against the demographic destruction of their nations by mass immigration and “Progressive” policies aimed at reducing the native fertility rate (which they have).
I myself have been called a “Nazi” – for opposing mass, government encouraged, migration (welfare benefits and public services for the migrants – and special laws compelling people to accept them) and for opposing the Progressive social policies (the top-down Social Revolution) that has crushed the native fertility rate in Western nations – just-as-it-intended-to.
The fact that members of my father’s family (the relatives of his mother in the Netherlands) were gassed, is considered not-relevant. After all Jews are the ones guilty of “genocide” according to the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party Sir “Ed” Davey.
The followers of the Crescent Moon are lovely – according to both the late Mr Hitler, and Sir “Ed” Davey.
For those who do not know – the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was an ally of both Mr Hitler and Mr Himmler, and, by his words, Sir “Ed” Davey is very much in the tradition of such “liberals” as the late Mr Hobson (who argued that the British Empire was a Jewish conspiracy) and Mr Burns (the Liberal Party minister who argued that the First World War was a Jewish conspiracy).
He reverses the truth – for, in reality, it is Hamas and the other Islamic (not “Islamist” – Islamic) groups, who seek to commit genocide.
Jeffrey Dahmer was a fairly intelligent and well-read guy.
(USA serial killer who ate parts of his victims after having sex with their dead bodies, in case this is too USA-centric.)
This post suggests a new way of pointing out something obvious – “even Hitler knew that!”. The rhetorical tactic would be to suggest that some observation about politics and society is so glaringly obvious that even a raving lunatic like Hitler could grasp it, so anybody who still doesn’t get it must be mad or stupid.
@Patrick Crozier – Race was absolutely central to Hitler’s thinking and therefore to Nazi ideology. Nazism was Hitler’s personal racial theories implemented through the methods and organisational structures of Italian Fascism. That’s also why the arguments about whether historical National Socialism was “left-wing” or “right-wing” will never be resolved. It’s not just that the association is so toxic that neither political tribe will ever accept it. Rather, it’s that Nazi thinking was based on such fundamentally different assumptions to what we now call “left” and “right” that it is orthogonal to them.
@AndrewZ
That’s also why the arguments about whether historical National Socialism was “left-wing” or “right-wing” will never be resolved.
But left wing and right wing are entirely arbitrary categories anyway. For example, why do people who oppose gun rights generally favor abortion rights? There is no axiomatic foundation that links those two. Instead they are just tribes where some specific thing attracts a person such as a passion for abortion, and to join the tribe you have to swallow all the other baggage — baggage that generally is just an accretion over time. It is a lot like religion. People are attracted to the loving, supportive communities, and as a consequence they have to swallow some of the more ridiculous and horrible ideas of Christianity, because support of what they love about it overwhelms the need to have a logical consistent belief framework.
But if you are Kamala and you look at a Venn diagram of the beliefs of the left and the right, then place Nazism on top of that the overlap of beliefs of Nazism is far larger on the left than the right — ideas of the state as your mamma, ideas of gun control and some degree of eugenics for example. Perhaps the only overlap of the beliefs of the right is the strong nationalism and patriotism components that are embraced by the right an eschewed by the left. And really, in truth, that is the reason Nazism is categorized as “far right”, despite “socialism” being right there in the name, and the fact that their is a larger overlap with the left.
To be clear, there are lots of beliefs in Nazism that any decent leftie would find horrific. Though it is hard to remove from your memory the mob celebration and virulent antisemitism of some of the extreme left wing after the October 7th attack in Israel, even before Israel’s response, which I think there is a reasonable argument went way too far.
National Socialism was socialism – as Hayek made clear in “The Road to Serfdom” and Mises made clear (indeed in greater detail) in “Omnipotent Government”. I have explained the specific type of socialism above.
It was also socially radical – as Erik Von Kuehndelt-Leddihn pointed out – National Socialism (particularly the SS) National Socialism rejected traditional Christianity and the other cultural pillars that had dominated German and general European life for many centuries.
Whether you want to call economic socialism and social radicalism “left wing” is a different matter – personally I do, but I would not force anyone else to call it left wing.
As long as the basic facts are understood – that the National Socialists were economic socialists, and social radicals.
This is the 1st and almost certainly the last time that i must give partial credit to Herr Hitler over Mr Marks.
But my reasoning is actually flattering to the latter: given Paul’s IQ and intellectual curiosity, learning one or more other languages would probably be a benefit.
But … the vast majority of native English speakers would probably not benefit.
The situation is different for non-native English speakers, however. I would not know what is going on without Instapundit and Samizdata, for one thing. One just cannot rely on national media: without reading alternative media from the US and Britain, one cannot be sure of what is going on.
And then there are textbooks that might not have been translated into your native language.
And then there is the increased ability of traveling around the world. (As a non-native speaker, i have the advantage of not feeling guilty when speaking English.)
Snorri – I can not even speak or read Dutch, a language related to English. So I have no way of knowing for sure if all the media in the Netherlands is biased and gives a one sided view of the world – although I am told that it is (and I believe that to be the case).
My father could read Dutch – and Yiddish and German, and Hebrew (and, of course, English). And he left school at 14.
I have to believe what you say about the terrible state of the non English speaking media – because I am too ignorant of other languages to check for myself. And the English language version of the media of other nations (such as France 24 – but even Japanese English language television) does seem to just a copy the left media in English speaking countries – never the right media (if I may use the terms “left” and “right” in the modern sense – I agree with you that these are loose terms that have been used in contradictory ways).
Even the Islamic powers English language television stations (such as that pushed by Turkey and Qatar) are like the BBC and the New York Times in their coverage – they just follow the line of the Western left (although I would guess that their output in their native languages is rather different on social policy – concerning women, homosexuals and-so-on).
Word of warning on the book the “Vampire Economy” – it was written by a Communist (“but he was a rich businessman” – contrary to Karl Marx, political opinions are NOT determined by “class interest”), the words “doing business under Fascism” are an indication of that – Communists refused to call National Socialism, Socialism – they used the word “Fascism” instead (they still do – witness the language choices of Marxist groups such as “Antifa” and “Black Lives Matter”).
“The Road to Serfdom” by F.A. Hayek and (better) “Omnipotent Government” by Ludwig Von Mises, are more reliable guides to National Socialist Germany – although, yes, “Vampire Economy” does make some good points.
Paul:
Actually, i did not mean to say that. What i meant is that we cannot trust “professional” journalists anymore; at least, not when reporting on the US, the Anglosphere, and foreign affairs in general. The last item, especially wrt Middle-East affairs.
Instapundit and Samizdata are not run by people who went to journalism schools; that is why they can generally be trusted — but not uncritically; eg the claim that lockdowns “don’t work” contradicts empirical evidence*, and therefore i do not believe Instapundit or Samizdata on this point.
* for the most obvious interpretation of “not working”.
Of course, one could make up a definition of “not working” for which lockdowns “don’t work”.
For a similar reaction, one can search out a copy of the only known non-official recording of Hitler, the secret one made during his meeting with the Finnish general Marshal Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim in 1942.
Listening to the man talk in perfectly sane, polite, even jocular tones about the progress of the war is deeply unsettling, or at least I found it so. It’s easier to think of someone as a madman if you never hear them sounding like a reasonable person.