/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17878341]

Nazi propaganda?

[Anonymous No.17878348]

>>17878341
https://voca.ro/1eZjtYnWzsBl

[Anonymous No.17878352]

>>17878341
Any relevant excerpts?

[Anonymous No.17878560]

>>17878348
>Vo-ka-ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHH

[Anonymous No.17878592]

it's just poorly written and uninteresting

[Anonymous No.17878593]

>>17878352

[Anonymous No.17878598]

>>17878341
>nazi propaganda
No anon, it's a science textbook

[Anonymous No.17878601]

>>17878341
This is actually good despite its poor editing, but the Dalton translation is the best English version hands down.

[Anonymous No.17878731]

>>17878341
Fascinating book, well written. would read again A+++

[Anonymous No.17878735]

>>17878341
Nazi is short for Ashkenazi

[Anonymous No.17878744]

He has some great ideas about what education should be and how to treat people. THis is not nazi propaganda you dense faggot. Read more nazi books

[Anonymous No.17879246]

>>17878744
Yeah I just read the section on education and I couldn't agree more. In America we do the exact opposite which why everyone's basically fucked with useless degrees and some significant fraction of a million dollars in debt.

[Anonymous No.17879685]

>7.3 Vacillating Tactics of the Marxists
>In those years, it was indeed a delight to follow the vacillating tactics of our perplexed and helpless adversaries. First they appealed to their followers to ignore us and keep away from our meetings.
>Generally speaking, they heeded this appeal.
>But as time went on, more and more of their followers gradually found their way to us and accepted our doctrine. Then the leaders became nervous and uneasy; they clung to their belief that such a development shouldn't be ignored forever, and that it must be ended through terror.
>Appeals were then made to the 'class-conscious proletariat' to attend our meetings in masses, and to strike at the representatives of a 'monarchist and reactionary agitation' with the clenched fist of the proletarian.
>Our meetings suddenly became packed with workers, fully three-quarters of an hour in advance. These resembled a powder keg ready to explode at any moment, with a burning fuse at hand. But it always turned out differently. People came as enemies and, when they left, if not ready to join us, were at least in a reflective mood and thinking critically about the correctness of their own doctrine.

The Commie Jew fears the power of NS propaganda.

[Anonymous No.17879721]

>>17878348
i never click these. its funny that retards spend time making them

[Anonymous No.17879776]

>>17879721
you did though.

[Anonymous No.17879800]

>>17878341
Are you asking whether Mein Kampf is nazi propaganda?

[Anonymous No.17879814]

>Nazi propaganda?
yeah, kinda

[Anonymous No.17879848]

it was explicitly written for supporters rather than the general public, he later disavowed the book, if he won the war i doubt he'd have kept it in print.

[Anonymous No.17879860]

>>17878341
Mein Cope.

[Anonymous No.17879883]

the book was not written, Hitler dictated it to his assistant while in prison.

[Anonymous No.17879951]

which translation is the best and most accurate?
I have pdfs of the Ford, Hurst & Blackett, Stalag translations.

[Anonymous No.17880029]

>>17879951
Dalton

>>17879883
>>17879848
This
The Second Book is actually much more important

[Anonymous No.17880081]

>>17880029
what's that version like with censorship?

[Anonymous No.17880204]

God I'd love to see the Wordsworth cover for this one.

[Anonymous No.17880583]

>>17879721
its just farting noise

[Anonymous No.17880594]

>>17878744
>>17879246
What does Gottfried say about education?

[Anonymous No.17881110]

>>17880029
What's the second book?

[Anonymous No.17881135]

>>17878341
>translation

[Anonymous No.17881202]

>>17878601
I can't seem to find any version on sale. I don't live in the US so that's a bummer. I checked ebay and other sites but only ones that sell is Barnes and nobles.

[Anonymous No.17881239]

>>17878341
It is just really boring

[Anonymous No.17881505]

>>17880594
I meant Hitler. He talks about how public education is too broad, forces students to memorize far too many irrelevant details, and doesn't teach them practical skills and knowledge for their eventual professions. Also about the neglect of physical fitness and discipline in primary curricula.

This is more or less the case in America today, but far worse. Not only do students have to memorize vast quantities of irrelevant detail, most of it isn't even real, or just ideological programming. The large majority come out of uni knowing basically nothing. Despite his remarkable foresight, Hitler hadn't conceived of a system where students owe ten-years' of wages for a worthless credential. If you told him such a system existed he'd know who was behind it immediately, however.

And of course they also come out of school flabby or frail. Just look at any zoomer. It's a crime what's been done to them.

I haven't looked into Feder's views on education but if he wrote any they're likely identical to Adolph's.

>>17881110
Hitler's thoughts on German forigen policy: what went wrong in the past and how the NSDAP will fix it.

>>17881202
https://cosmotheistchurch.org will ship internationally but they can only take crypto or mailed-in payment. This is the only one linked from Dalton's site ( https://www.thomasdaltonphd.com )which will do so. It's on libgen though.

>>17881239
>oy vey goy it's just too dull for you aren't you feeling sleepy how about you play a video game

[Anonymous No.17881650]

>>17881505
Any reason you say Dalton has the best translation? I've found nothing online to attest for his credibility

[Anonymous No.17881682]

>>17880029
From the introduction:

> WHY A NEW TRANSLATION?

> As it happens, every one of the previous translations has major problems and disadvantages, for a modem English reader.

> The two primary versions—Murphy and Manheim—are written in the style of early 20th century British writers. They use a wide array of archaic 'British-isms' and British spellings that make reading awkward. Worse, they attempt to follow too literally Hitler's original style. Like most Germans of the time, Hitler wrote long sentences, fashioned into long, complex paragraphs. Manheim follows this style religiously, to the detriment of the reader; Murphy at least occasionally breaks up long sentences into more readable segments.

> Worst of all, both major translations are simply poor efforts. They do not read well. One repeatedly encounters passages that are awkward, incoherent, or incomprehensible. There is little of the fluidity and lyrical power of the German original. For his part, Murphy takes a considerable amount of 'translator's license,' interjecting unwarranted terminology and wording, or simply leaving things out. Manheim is more literal, but in the end is scarcely more readable. The reader simply needs to scan a sampling of either text to understand the situation.

>This is unfortunate, to say the least. It is almost as if the publishers intended, or at least preferred, that the translations be difficult to read. Certainly this limits the circulation of Hitler's ideas, and makes it easier to dismiss them—a convenient situation, for the book's many critics.
With the exception of Murphy, all of the standard editions betray their intentions with aggressive, hostile, and slanderous comments in their introductions.

[Anonymous No.17881706]

>>17881650
>>17881682
> Consider this selection of remarks:
> Johnson: Hitler is "no artist in literary expression," and "often indifferent to grammar and syntax." The book is "a propagandistic essay by a violent partisan" that "warps historical truth" or "ignores it completely." Hitler's discussions on race can be safely dismissed, because "the greatest anthropologists of the 20th century are agreed that 'race' is a practically meaningless word."

> Lore: "I cannot conceive of any book of which I more positively disapprove." The book has an "atrocious style" and "countless contradictions." In essence, it is "an outpouring of willful perversion, clumsy forgery, vitriolic hatred, and violent denunciation."

> Manheim: Hitler is a "paranoiac" who offers us "disjointed facts" and "largely unintelligible flights of Wagnerian fantasy." He creates "a dreamworld," one "without color and movement."

> Heiden: Mein Kampf was written "in white-hot hatred." It is "ill-founded, undocumented, and badly written." "The book may well be called a kind of satanic Bible."

> Watt: The book is "lengthy, dull, bombastic, repetitious and extremely badly written." "Most of its statements of fact...are demonstrably untrue." It yields "an intolerably prolix German style and a total lack of any intellectual precision." As a work of political philosophy, "it has no claims whatever to be taken seriously." Hitler's racial theory—a "mystical racist mumbo-jumbo of Aryanism"—is a "revolting mixture of pseudo-science and bogus historicism." The work is self-consistent, but this only betrays "the terrible consistency of the insane." In the end, Hitler is nothing more than a "master of the inept, the undigested, the half-baked and the untrue."

> Foxman: Hitler's "theories have long since been discredited." The book is "a work of ugliness and depravity." It is "unreliable as a source of historical data," full of "lies, omissions, and half-truths." The book's "atrocious style, puerile digressions, and narcissistic self-absorption" are obvious. Its theories are "extremist, immoral, and seem to promise war." Hitler's "lunatic plan" is "absurd" and even "comical." All in all, "a ridiculous tract."

> Any translator, editor, or publisher who would include such words can hardly be trusted to do an honest job. The intent to bias the reader is plain. Certainly there is no concern here for the author to obtain a fair and objective reading. In fact, precisely the opposite.

[Anonymous No.17881725]

>>17881650
>>17881706
> The recent Ford translation, while not overtly hostile, has several other major flaws. Ford has no discernible credentials, no publishing record, nor any documented history with such academic works. His 'in text' notes are awkward and distracting. The book includes many amateurish and cartoonish 'photos.' There is no index. And his so-called publishing house, Elite Minds, appears to be some kind of environmental group that focuses on the ecology of sharks, of all things. This is unfortunate; the last thing the public needs is another misleading, ill-conceived, and unqualified version of Mein Kampf.

> The 'Nazi' or 'Stalag' edition of Murphy has its own problems. The version published by Elite Minds claims to be authentic, which means that they retained all the original flaws of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. The result is nearly unreadable. The Ostara edition fixes many of these problems, but still reads poorly. It does break up the long paragraphs, but to an extreme degree; one typically finds single-sentence paragraphs, as in a newspaper. This move destroys all flow and connection of ideas. And neither version has an index or explanatory footnotes.

> BENEFITS OF THE NEW TRANSLATION
> The present work addresses and resolves many of these unfortunate drawbacks.

> Section headings have been added, in text, in bold. The German original employed such headings, but only at the top of each page. The reader thus never knew where a new section actually began. These headings have been translated and inserted at the appropriate points, directly in the text. This simple change greatly improves readability, by clearly organizing the narrative and breaking up long textual passages.

> Much emphasis has been placed here on readability, without sacrificing accuracy. The English text reads smoothly and naturally. Also, numerous contractions have been employed: it's, I'm, isn't, and so on. This again improves readability, and more closely matches the first-person 'dictation' style of the original.

> Finally, the book has helpful and relevant footnotes, a useful index, and a bibliography of relevant secondary source material.

[Anonymous No.17881803]

>>17881682
>>17881706
>>17881725
interesting, anon. thanks for posting

[Anonymous No.17881807]

>>17881202
Oh I was wrong. Blackwell's is UK based and will ship internationally.

https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/9781732353220

Clemens & Blair ships to the US and Canada

https://shop.aer.io/ClemensBlairLLC/p/Mein_Kampf_vol__New_English_Translation_English_Tr/9781732353220-10880

[Anonymous No.17881876]

You can't just discount every other translation because the authors thought Hitler was a crackpot and a bad writer. He was a bad writer - hence all the confusion

>Manheim follows this style religiously, to the detriment of the reader; Murphy at least occasionally breaks up long sentences into more readable segments.

Above is an assumption that Hitler's writing style is more palatable in German. I'm no German, but I'm pretty sure that isn't the case. I've never heard of such pedanticism as this when translations of other German works of the time and before are discussed.

>The recent Ford translation, while not overtly hostile, has several other major flaws. Ford has no discernible credentials, no publishing record, nor any documented history with such academic works. His 'in text' notes are awkward and distracting.

The same applies for Dalton. Just because he has written books about similar things does not give him credibility. He also claims a PhD but as far as I can tell doesn't reveal his identity so might as well have given it to himself.

>The 'Nazi' or 'Stalag' edition of Murphy has its own problems. The version published by Elite Minds claims to be authentic, which means that they retained all the original flaws of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. The result is nearly unreadable

I haven't read the Stalag version but its the one I'm leaning most towards. The opinion here that is less readable is the same garbage opinion that has led to so many stupid bible translations. If you can't read the original then that's on you, and if the original had mistakes then translations should have those same mistakes if nothing other than for the sake of authenticity

>As it happens, every one of the previous translations has major problems and disadvantages, for a modem English reader.
>for a modem English reader.
Made me laugh

Honestly I get that you're probably Dalton himself thus why you keep pushing this edition, but I still see no reason to get this over the Stalag version. I don't want readability, I want a literal interpretation as similar to the source text as possible. Its a historical document, not a piece of prose, why would you want anything else?

[Anonymous No.17882051]

>>17881876
I read the Stalag (Murphy) translation, and while I liked it and found it comprehensible, Dalton's is objectively better. A choice between the two isn't the worst you could present yourself with.

>modem
Yeah I found that funny too. The editing of the ebook I have replaced "modern" with "modem" in most instances.
In the end "modem readers" works just as well in context.

>I get that you're probably Dalton himself thus why you keep pushing this edition
I'm pretty sure Dalton is an older boomer who has no idea what /lit/ is.
I'm just an internet NatSoc who agrees with the popular opinion his translation is the best. I haven't even read one of the academically hostile translations, and only would if I was getting paid to write an inter-textual comparison.

>Above is an assumption that Hitler's writing style is more palatable in German. I'm no German, but I'm pretty sure that isn't the case.
It was palatable to readers of the time. My Struggle was one of the most popular books in print, even before Hitler was elected, so you can't say it's because the NSDAP forced Germans to buy the book. Or that citizens were trying to signal loyalty to a regime which didn't exist yet.

From what I understand about German editions today: there's only one version that can be legally sold in Germany. It has so much commentary it doubles the size of the book. Germans are also only allowed to purchase one copy.

[Anonymous No.17882081]

can someone post excerpts from the different translations available to compare?

[Anonymous No.17882680]

>>17882081
That would be an interesting project you should do.

[Anonymous No.17882951]

>>17881807
Blackwells has a lot of version of the book, which is the best? I heard the Stalag edition is best because it was released to war prisoners. But i'd like to hear from someone who's read it. (If you did)

[Anonymous No.17882983]

>>17881807
>>17882951
And I'd rather order the full book and not a single volume if possible. (If Vol 1 means half the book)

[Anonymous No.17883017]

>>17882951
Like I said here >>17882051 I found the Murphy (Stalag) translation more comprehensible than most people say, but the editing is in fact atrocious by most reader's standards. I'm used to slogging through amateur translations of rare books so I my opinion may not be a good measure for you. You'll just have to read it if you want to find out.

I happen to be reading the Dalton translation right now and it IS objectively better.

The canonical version IMO is now the two-volume Dalton translation. He has an "essential" edition as well, which I'm sure is good if you don't mind reading abridged editions.

>>17882983
That's just how it comes. You can get the Essential Edition if you want it pared down to a single volume.

[Anonymous No.17883045]

>>17883017
It's rather hard to find the version in Blackwells because they don't include a picture or the version. If it's not much to ask can you link me the essential one or both volumes separately. And they're rather cheap too compared to the Murphy translation I saw on ebay on Christmas.

[Anonymous No.17883137]

>>17883045
>>17883017
Never mind, I've found all 3 books. I think I'll order the Essential one because vol 1+2 are out of my budget. Thanks a lot mate. Finally going to be able to read this. Been wanting to read this since last Nov but couldn't find where to order.

[Anonymous No.17883151]

>>17883137
Where did you find that would ship all 3 internationally?

[Anonymous No.17883181]

>>17881505
Definitely right about education.

[Anonymous No.17883212]

>>17878341
anyone read this?

>Birken challenges the conventional wisdom that Hitlerism was a revolt against Western values. Utilizing Adolph Hitler's major writings, speeches, and recorded conversations, this path-breaking study in intellectual history delineates the relationship of Nazism to other European ideologies, both past and present. National Socialism, Birken maintains, was nothing less than an attempt to create a metaphysical foundation for the German nation-state after both the Frankfurt Assembly and the Bismarckian pseudo-Reich had failed to do so. In this context, Hitler can be seen as the last great exponent of the Enlightenment tradition that glorified fraternity. However, by grounding German nationalism in race, Hitler sent his country on a path toward destruction in the Second World War. Birken closes with the warning that our current failure to provide a post-modern substitute for nationalism invites the reassertion of the Enlightenment obsessions of nation and race. Speculative and far-reaching, this book will stimulate the current debate over nationalism and will be of interest to students of politics and the social sciences as well as German history buffs.

[Anonymous No.17883218]

>>17883151
see >>17881807

[Anonymous No.17883286]

>>17883212
I would agree with the first part of that and disagree with the second. Race was absolutely necessary for his metaphysical foundation of the German Reich, and exactly why previous iterations of pan-germanism failed.

Literally no one is allowed to admit this without becoming an outcast. Birken was jewish so he had a double motive to blame all failures on racial ideology.

Funny enough, looking at the guy his face confirms everything Hitler might say about the physiognomy of jews.

[Anonymous No.17883408]

>>17878341
>everything I dont like is nazi propaganda

[Anonymous No.17885110]

>>17883408

[Anonymous No.17886229]

>>17881706
>those reviews

[Anonymous No.17886263]

>>17878341
It's a comfy read, would definitely recommend. It's a brutally honest autobiography of Adolf's life and the struggles he went through up until he was imprisoned. Very well written, although of course left-wing midwits tend to describe it as 'dry' as a cope because they can't concede that a National Socialist could be so insightful in his writings.

[Anonymous No.17886989]

>>17886263
>of course left-wing midwits tend to describe it as 'dry' as a cope
They describe it as everything from "dry" to "raving" because none have ever read it.

[Anonymous No.17887037]

>>17879685
leftist's love of and reliance on censorship, especially using violence to achieve it, is certainly nothing new

its nutty to read about how OG antifa went around accusing virtually everyone of being fascists and attacking them which drove moderate conservatives right into the hands of national socialism

shit dont change, man

[Anonymous No.17887043]

>>17881505
>If you told him such a system existed he'd know who was behind it immediately, however.

[Anonymous No.17887072]

>>17887043
He'd also know which side won the war.

[Anonymous No.17887091]

>>17878601
>>17880029
>>17881682


Stop lying. The Stalag edition is the only English translation of Mein Kampf approved by the NSDAP

[Anonymous No.17887101]

>>17881725
>The 'Nazi' or 'Stalag' edition of Murphy has its own problems. The version published by Elite Minds claims to be authentic, which means that they retained all the original flaws of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. The result is nearly unreadable.

Where did you get that from, www.gasthekikes.com? fucking idiot

[Anonymous No.17887292]

>>17887091
They also didn't commission it. Murphy volunteered himself out of sympathy with their cause. NSDAP authorization was an acknowledgement of his initiative, not a fulfillment of their need.

Germans didn't lack for educated English speakers who could have translated it. They didn't require a translation. MK was a book for Germans and Hitler didn't much care if anyone else read it or not.

Scholars on all sides have remarked on the clumsiness of the Stalag edition. There is nothing special about Murphy as a translator beyond his zeal to do the best job he could.

[Anonymous No.17887322]

>>17887292
>word sophistry

[Anonymous No.17887331]

>>17887292
Commissioned or not, it was still intended to be read by English POWs in the camp libraries. Prove that Murphy wrote the Stalag edition. Stop equivocating, braindead internet wignat.

[Anonymous No.17887383]

>>17887322
>>17887331
Look. If you REALLY REALLY like Murphy's first translation good for you. He's one of the only two sympathetic translators. If you're firm in your faith it's better than Dalton's, fine.

[Anonymous No.17887576]

>>17882680
Here's a selection of translations of one of the book's most famous segments:

#1. Mannheim:
The more I argued with them, the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid. If all this didn’t help, they pretended not to understand, or, if challenged, they changed the subject in a hurry, quoted platitudes which, if you accepted them, they immediately related to entirely different matters, and then, if again attacked, gave ground and pretended not to know exactly what you were talking about. Whenever you tried to attack one of these apostles, your hand closed on a jelly-like slime which divided up and poured through your fingers, but in the next moment collected again. But if you really struck one of these fellows so telling a blow that, observed by the audience, he couldn’t help but agree, and if you believed that this had taken you at least one step forward, your amazement was great the next day. The Jew had not the slightest recollection of the day before, he rattled off his same old nonsense as though nothing at all had happened, and, if indignantly challenged, affected amazement; he couldn’t remember a thing, except that he had proved the correctness of his assertions the previous day.

Sometimes I stood there thunderstruck.

I didn’t know what to be more amazed at: the agility of their tongues or their virtuosity at lying. Gradually I began to hate them.


#2. Paternoster Library 1936
The more I contended with them the more I learned too know their dialectical methods. They began by relying on the stupidity of their opponents, and if that was unsuccessful they themselves would pretend stupidity. If that was no good, they would refuse to take in what was said or promptly leap to another subject; and they came out with truisms, which, when agreed to, they made to refer to something quite different ; then, once again on their own ground, they would weaken and pretend to have no precise knowledge. Wherever one attacked such apostes, one's hand met foul slime. If one smote one of them so crushingly that, with the bystanders looking on, he had no course but to agree, and if one thought one had gained at least one step, he merely showed great astonishment the next day. The Jew entirely forgot what had been said the day before and repeated his shameful old story as if nothing had happened, pretended anger and amazement and forgetfulness of everything except that the debate had proved the truth of his assertions.

I was often left staring. One did not know which to admire most—their glibness or their artfulness in lying. I gradually began to hate them.

[Anonymous No.17887587]

>>17887576
#3. Murphy 1939
The more I debated with them the more familiar I became with their argumentative tactics. At the outset they counted upon the stupidity of their opponents, but when they got so entangled that they could not find a way out they played the trick of acting as innocent simpletons. Should they fail, in spite of their tricks of logic, they acted as if they could not understand the counter arguments and bolted away to another field of discussion. They would lay down truisms and platitudes; and, if you accepted these, then they were applied to other problems and matters of an essentially different nature from the original theme. If you faced them with this point they would escape again, and you could not bring them to make any precise statement. Whenever one tried to get a firm grip on any of these apostles one's hand grasped only jelly and slime which slipped through the fingers and combined again into a solid mass a moment afterwards. If your adversary felt forced to give in to your argument, on account of the observers present, and if you then thought that at last you had gained ground, a surprise was in store for you on the following day. The Jew would be utterly oblivious to what had happened the day before, and he would start once again by repeating his former absurdities, as if nothing had happened. Should you become indignant and remind him of yesterday's defeat, he pretended astonishment and could not remember anything, except that on the previous day he had proved that his statements were correct. Sometimes I was dumbfounded. I do not know what amazed me the more - the abundance of their verbiage or the artful way in which they dressed up their falsehoods. I gradually came to hate them.

[Anonymous No.17887595]

>>17887587
#4. Reynal & Hitchcock 1941

The more I argued with them, the more I got to know their dialectics. First they counted on the ignorance of their adversary; then, when there was no way out, they themselves pretended stupidity. If all this was of no avail, they refused to understand or they changed the subject when driven into a corner; they brought up truisms, but they immediately transferred their acceptance to quite different subjects, and, if attacked again, they gave way and pretended to know nothing exactly. Wherever one attacked one of these prophets, one's hands seized slimy jelly; it slipped through one's fingers only to collect again in the next moment. If one smote one of them so thoroughly that, with the bystanders watching, he could but agree, and if one thus thought he had advanced at least one step, one was greatly astonished the following day. The Jew did not in the least remember the day before, he continued to talk in the same old strain as if nothing had happened, and if indignantly confronted, he pretended to be astonished and could not remember anything except that his assertions had already been proved true the day before.

Often I was stunned.

One did not know what to admire more: their glibness of tongue or their skill in lying. I gradually began to hate them.

#5 Dalton:
The more I debated with them, the more familiar I became with their argumentative tactics. At the outset they counted upon the stupidity of their opponents; but when they got so tied up that they couldn't find a way out, they played the trick of acting as innocent simpletons. Should that fail, in spite of their tricks of logic, they acted as if they couldn't understand the counter arguments, and jumped away to another topic of discussion. They stated truisms and platitudes; and if you accepted these, they applied them to other matters of an essentially different nature. If you pointed this out, they escaped again and avoided any precise statement. Whenever one tried to get a firm grip on one of these apostles, one 's hand grasped only a jelly-like slime-that slipped through the fingers, and then recombined into a solid mass a moment later.

But if you really struck a blow on one of these adversaries and, due to the audience present, he had to concede the point, a surprise was in store for you the following day. The Jew would be utterly oblivious to what had happened the day before. He would start once again by repeating his former absurdities, as if nothing had happened. If you became indignant and reminded him of yesterday's defeat, he feigned astonishment, and couldn't remember a thing-except that on the day before, he was proven correct. Sometimes I was simply dumbfounded.

I don't know what amazed me more: the agility of their speech or their art of lying. I gradually came to hate them.

[Anonymous No.17887602]

>>17887595
#6. Wewelsburg Edition
The more disputes I had with them, the better acquainted I became with their arguing techniques. First, they would count on the stupidity of their adversaries, and then, if there was no way out, they pretended to be stupid themselves. If all else failed, they claimed they did not understand, or, being challenged, they would instantly jump to another subject and talk about obvious truths. If these were agreed on, they immediately applied them to entirely different matters. When they were caught off guard, they would avoid the conversation and claim they had no knowledge or understanding of the issue. No matter where you seized one of these apostles, your hand grasped slimy ooze, which spurted through your fingers, only to unite again the next moment. If your argument really gave a man a shattering defeat in front of others, he could do nothing but agree. You might suppose that this was one step forward, but how surprised you would be the following day! The next morning you will find that Jew has not even the slightest memory of yesterday and continues to repeat his old mischievous nonsense as if nothing at all had happened. When pressed about the previous conversation, he would pretend astonishment and could remember nothing at all except the truth of his statements, which he felt had been proven the day before. Frequently I was simply paralyzed. It was hard to know what to admire the most: their fluency or their artistry in lying. Gradually, I began to hate them.

[Anonymous No.17887614]

>>17887602
#7. Stalag*
The more I debated with them the more familiar I became with their tactics in debate. At the outset they counted upon the stupidity of their opponents; but when they got so entangled that they could not find a way out, they played the trick of acting the innocent simpleton.

Should they fail, in spite of their tricks of logic, they acted as if they could not understand the counter-arguments and feeling themselves cornered, hastily transferred the discussion to another field. They uttered truisms and platitudes; and, if you accepted these, took this acceptance as applying to other problems and matters differing essentially from the original theme.

If you cornered them on this point they would escape again, and you could not force them to make any precise statement.

Whenever one tried, to get a firm grip on any of these apostles, one’s hand grasped only a slimy jelly which slipped through the fingers, but coagulated again a moment afterwards.

If your arguments were so telling that your adversary felt forced to give in on account of those listening and if you then thought that at last you had gained ground, a surprise was in store for you on the following day.

The Jew would be utterly oblivious to what had happened the day before, and he would start once again by repeating his former absurdities, and if nothing had happened.

Should you become indignant and remind him of yesterday’s defeat, he pretended astonishment and could not remember anything, except that on the previous day he had proved that his statements were correct.

Sometimes I was dumbfounded. I do not know what amazed me the more —their quickness in repartee or the artful way in which they dressed up their falsehoods. I gradually came to hate them.

*is this the same as Murphy with minor edits?
also, anon above was right about the sentence long paragraphs lol

[Anonymous No.17887682]

my own takes, albeit with no reference to the German which i haven't seen and can't read, so i'm merely judging these as English texts rather than critiquing their accuracy as translations:

Mannheim *****
Paternoster * (fucks up the jelly line and "stood staring" is no match for thunderstruck)
Murphy **** (dumbfounded is good, but i don't like the duplication of "truisms and platitudes" "jelly and slime")
Reynal & Hitchcock **** (handles the jelly line well)
Dalton **** (little different from the older translations, no worse either, though i like "agility of their tongues" in Mannheim more than Dalton's "agility of their speech)
Wewelsberg * (not fond of "arguing techniques", "obvious truths", "spurted through your fingers", "paralyzed", "fluency")
Stalag ** (Murphy's score minus points for terrible formatting)

but ultimately like most translation differences that people are fanatically partisan about on /lit/ the differences are very trivial to the general reader

[Anonymous No.17888239]

>>17883212
>In this context, Hitler can be seen as the last great exponent of the Enlightenment tradition that glorified fraternity.
Isn't this common knowledge?

[Anonymous No.17888353]

>>17878341
hitler wasn't a nazi, retard

[Anonymous No.17889499]

>>17887682
>>17887614
>>17887602
>>17887595
>>17887587
>>17887576
Thanks Anon. Very interesting effortpost.