/lit/ - Literature

>>12192198
I read the posts top to bottom and no one is addressing OP. Regarding that specific book - the author takes a very anti-German, or at least a very anti-NSDAP, slant. Some things still leak in the text though. When he reports that 68 people die at a rally, he does not neglect to mention that 38 were NSDAP and 30 were Communists. This contrasts with what I was taught in school: that 68 gud bois who dindu nuffin were murdered at the rally by ebil nodzees. Still, being honest with the numbers, he puts the blame squarely on the NSDAP. There is a lot more but I do not have the time to condense all of it. If you read this text then you will have a solid compendium of information from which to draw if your objective eye can isolate the bias. I forgot and checked my notes. Shirer does a breddi gud job of illustrating the details of how the forces in power were condensing authority in an attempt to isolate Hitler from it. This all backfired when they failed at a crucial moment, allowing Hitler to seize the whole ball of wax. No single text will get you on a firm footing but this one is a good step - though I would not necessarily like it as a first step. I do not like that he Americanizes the spellings of names either. Pic related will help when you attempt to spell the names correctly.
tl;dr: heavy bias with solid facts

>>11135642
>It amazes me how many of you are just now getting Homer.
I read Homer 30 years ago. That is probably higher than the average age of this board. You have to allow for new blood to come up to speed. Not everyone is on your timeline.

>>11120451
>The English language, ladies and gentlemen.
Willst du "hat gehabt" ein Bißchen besser?