Thanks for these interesting posts. You learn something new everyday.^^
Interesting information about the legal situation with regard to the possession and the sale of "Mein Kampf" in Germany and Austria on the one hand, and in anglo-american countries on the other hand:
Unvermeidbar ändert sich die Rechtslage jedoch am 30. April 2015, wenn die 70-jährige Schutzfrist nach dem Tod eines Autors, die auch für Hitler gilt, endet. Ab diesem Moment kollidiert der Nachdruck von "Mein Kampf" nur noch mit den Gesetzen gegen nationalsozialistische Propaganda respektive Wiederbetätigung.
Nach gegenwärtiger Rechtslage darf "Mein Kampf" in Deutschland derzeit ohnedies verkauft werden, wenn es sich um Exemplare handelt, die vor dem 30. April 1945 gedruckt wurden. In Österreich ist der Privatbesitz legal, ebenso ist es erlaubt, dass Bibliotheken "Mein Kampf" zu Studienzwecken verleihen. Auch der Verkauf durch Antiquariate ist gesetzeskonform. Allerdings ist alles verboten, was der Verbreitung nationalsozialistischer Gesinnung dient. De facto müsste der Antiquar also sicherstellen, dass der Käufer "Mein Kampf" nicht zu Propagandazwecken benützt.
Im angloamerikanischen Raum sind die Berührungsängste mit dem Buch längst geschwunden. Selbst ein international agierender Händler wie "amazon.com" bietet "Mein Kampf" an, und zwar sowohl in englischen Übersetzungen als auch im deutschsprachigen Original. Viele der Leserkommentare weisen in die gleiche Richtung wie diese Meinung: "Wenn man verstehen will, weshalb der Holocaust geschah, kann man es nicht vermeiden, die Worte des Mannes zu lesen, der dafür verantwortlich war."
I would say "Mein Kampf" is required reading for any serious student of Hitler and/or 1930s German National Socialism. I don't really see how it's possible to understand these things fully without seeing the literature?
(Having said that, though, I think the copies printed now should be critical editions: i.e. they should contain footnotes to alert the reader to lies and disinformation, etc.)
I would love to read this book in its original German. Any idea where I can get a copy I. Austria Robert? Would I have to find a dealer in some dark alley in a seedy part of Vienna?
ad Colin: Because of our "Verbotsgesetz" (also called "Wiederbetätigungsverbot") it is very difficult to get a copy of that book. Personally, I never felt any more desire to read anything written by Hitler than anything written by any other psychopath. I do understand, however, that other people might be interested in the book for several reasons.
You might be able to get a copy of the book at one of the university libraries. I'm not sure if you'll be allowed to take it home with you, though. Because of our somewhat complex legal situation with regards to "Mein Kampf" most bookstores will be reluctant to even offer the book.
Read it Colin. I hear it's quite a terrible book though. Boring
ad Colin: It might actually be easier to get a copy through amazon.de (I just checked). They actually sell it (as an annotated version; the content is the same).
Just make sure you don't write a "favourable review" on the contents of the book and publish it on any Austrian site - you'll get into trouble for that. (I'm not kidding).
I wouldn't pay for that nonsense anyway Colin.
Google mein kampf german pdf yields lots of results... like
Not sure if it's a "legal" copy. Does Bavaria still own the copyright? Normally I would say buy the book... but hey, it's Hilter, who cares
Thanks for the link. I would only read it for interest. I don't expect it to be a classic piece of literature.
Apparently Bavaria has it, although only until 2015, and it is banned in German Print. http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/bav...
Here's an interesting article. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1310052/...
I think that giving the money to a Jewish charity is a wonder irony. I'd have taken the money.
'' (b) that the dropping of atomic bombs as an act of hostilities was illegal under the rules of positive international law (taking both treaty law and customary law into consideration) then in force ... (c) that the dropping of atomic bombs also constituted a wrongful act on the plane of municipal law, ascribable to the United States and its President, Mr. Harry S. Truman; ... The aerial bombardment with atomic bombs of the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was an illegal act of hostilities according to the rules of international law. It must be regarded as indiscriminate aerial bombardment of undefended cities, even if it were directed at military objectives only, inasmuch as it resulted in damage comparable to that caused by indiscriminate bombardment.'' => http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of...
You said that you are not patriotic so how come do you agree with the genocide made by your government all these years ago ?
Saying that it was only retribution for Pearl Harbor won't cut it .It's like heating a child with a sledge hammer in the head for spilling some ice cream on your new shoes .
It wasnt genocide, it ended the war. I guess you think a ground assualt and continual aerial bombings would have been the way to go? Idiotic
Sent from my ipad with spelling and grammar mistakes - i know know much that concerns u madara
There isn't a reason in the world that allows anyone to massacre civilians . When the World Trade Center collapsed a whole religion was deemed as ''terrorist'' but if the US army kills over 200.000 people it's just a way of ending a war ?
Of course that I find those who killed those people who were in the twin towers scum also .
You never answered my question. How was the war going to end? Whatever. We already pointed out over 100,000 people died in the Tokyo bombings... and we gave the Japanese a whole week before to surrender... and we waited 3 more days before nuking Nagasaki. The hell with you and your limited logic, I'm going to bed.
One way or another, a bunch of Japanese were going to die. Carpet bombing, ground assault... nuking. Besides, we COULD have nuked Tokyo. 230,000 dead? I'd say they were lucky it wasn't more (I feel the need to stress the point here that I'm not a Japanese hater... for all you sickos out there that think I'm glad we killed 230,000 civilians)
The one with the limited logic is non other then you. It was a genocide no discussion so quit blabbering nonsense .
''The hell with you...'' you don't believe in hell so I guess this is the second weird thing you said.
If 230.000 Americans would've died how would you react ?
the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.
With emphasis on the "deliberate and systematic" part of it, I'm with Spatterson on this one.
From Wikipedia -
...on 24 July President Harry S. Truman approved the use of atomic bombs against Japan, and the next day Spaatz received written orders to this effect. These orders specified that the first attack should be made after 3 August, and named Hiroshima, Kokura, Niigata and Nagasaki as targets. Kyoto, Japan's former imperial capital, had been included in an earlier version of the target list but Nagasaki was substituted on the direction of US Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson owing to Kyoto's cultural value...
230000 dead americans... And we were the agressors? Hmm maybe "wow maybe we shouldnt have started a war we couldnt win"
Still ignoring my question. Nuking appears to be the nash equilibrium.
Srroy bcak to ym iapd. Ingroe all seplilng msitkaes
MADARA, it's pretty easy to say using the Atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a terrible event in human history. It was most assuredly just that. To call it genocide is something completely different. To me, that seems to imply that there was some other clearly better choice that could have been made. If genocide was the goal, wouldn't Tokyo or Osaka be the targets?
To add to what David mentioned about Kyoto - I'm pretty sure Kyoto was left off the firebombing list for the same reason.
Well i guess we could have just surrendered to Japan. Thats one outcome. But... Then maybe Nintendo would have never been invented...thus changing the lives of a generation of mario worshipers
I cant bare the thought of losing my childhood NES
It's not funny anymore if you spell wrong intentionally.Oh and you said that you were going to bed , have I troubled you with my correct reasoning ?
@cgreen0038: Even if it was a war , civilians mustn't be put in danger . I admit that there are things that I don't know but I don't think the Japanese killed any American civilian.
I mean even in my religion even if there is a war about , those who are not participating in the actual battles mustn't be harmed in any way .
Nor would all this stuff have happened
"I don't know but I don't think the Japanese killed any American civilian."
68 American civilians were killed at Pearl Harbor. http://history1900s.about.com/od/Pearl-Harbor/a...
@David: Sorry I didn't know that(may they rest in peace ) . But even that can't explain the death of so many. It's like justifying
the death of 1.5 million Iraqis for the 3000 at World Trade Center .