Mein Kampf, your kampf, everybody’s kampf
Is this a case of taking the sweetness out of forbidden
fruit, or will this mean an endorsement of sorts, and easier access for
nazi-sympahisers? Should the government
have banned it in the first place? How
dangerous can a book be?
I guess books can be as dangerous as is the person who reads them. Even if the Bavarian government banned the publication of the book, if somebody wanted to read it, it would not be a problem. Not only there are a few editions published outside of Bavaria(or even Germany), but I am sure you could find one online. That is why I do not think publishing new version would affect people that are going to meetings of neo-Nazis, since they would prefer the old version. However, this can be good for the general public that just wants to read the book. After all it is a very famous book.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what mr. Soder said in the article that publishing a version for schools would be beneficial, as young people tend to be less interested in books that are taught in school. It would definitely make the book more normal and boring in the eyes of a children. We had to read a part of the book in our History lesson and I did not feel very excited reading the book, I think that it would be much more thrilling if I were to look for the book and then read it at home.Plus the notes in the new edition of the book should contain background about the way it affected people and history, which I think is very important to know if you want to have a complete picture.
I really like the idea of printing the annotated version, because the original one might be dangerous. I am not going to argue whether Nazi philosophy is bad, I will acknowledge it as a fact. If so, anything that promotes Nazis must be destroyed or, at least, modified. I like the modification way more, because I have great respect for books, and it would be unthinkable for me to discard any. The modification way though... it can be used for positive goals.
ReplyDeleteOne of them is showing children how Nazi propaganda worked, which I think would DECREASE the number of people joining Neo-Nazis. This would also mean that people might be less susceptible to propaganda in general, whih I think would help democratic ways. I might enjoy the commented book, but I heared that original is very boring, so I doubt I will ever lay my hands on it. In the end, I think that if the government were about to ban the book, the annoted version should be released for scholaring purposes.
How dangerous can a book be? I will now raise a undeniable point: Look at the Bible and see what it has done - not by itself, but by its misuse. End of argument.
I think I will agree with Milan's opinion as well as with opinion's of Janka and Rasto.
DeleteIt is undeniable that the book may be a very influential tool, that is, it is a weapon in the wrong hands. I think they raised a valid issue that the book should not be banned, but rather better explained. There is surely a "forbidden fruit tastes best" effect which may be harmful. Even though Mein Kampf is not a great book, however it can cause a significant harm. Therefore, as for everything else, I believe that without the "secrecy and mysteriousness" around, it would no longer be "the" book, but only "a" book.
The annotations were my idea as well. Reading the book, I would very much enjoy the comparison between the Hitler's version, and historically accurate facts. I can imagine it would be called "Mein Kampf: Revealing Hitler's secrets" However, I doubt there is much to reveal, as the whole book is more or less about the same, the purity of the race, and how the Jews are inferior.
Therefore Jimy's propositions, I think, were correct. The book would attract lower attention, people would realize all the fallacies behind Nazi's reasoning and eventually, even Neo-nacis would finally have a clue what they are really worshiping.
On this issue, I can’t disagree that an annotated version is better than the original, but I do disagree with several points of what Milan had to say about it.
DeleteFirstly, as a person who studies this historical period, I can say that the Nazi philosophy is only worse than many of today’s policies because it includes a lot of racism despite that that wasn’t what the National Socialist party was all about and it was only Hitler that transformed it into what it ended up being. Also, there were a lot of similar conflicts with serious racial discrimination in the past hundred years that were at about the same level as WW2 Germany, but weren’t so commonly talked about.
A thought that anything that you consider evil or unfitting should be destroyed is downright censorship (which also happened to be what allowed Nazism to gain power) and is something that is utterly unacceptable in today’s society. Also, since Mein Kampf was not a book Hitler used for propaganda but rather as an expression of his personal dreams concerning Germany, I believe that your ideas of using it to discourage Neo-Nazis from following their political ideology or educating about propaganda can be discarded. As Janka said, the original Mein Kampf really isn’t very entertaining for any of us that aren’t followers of Hitler, but it also can’t be compared to the Bible, which was meant for good purposes unlike Hitler’s book that is only evil if used correctly.
To sum up, I basically agree with Michal and think that the annotation will simply process the raw material that the book now is into something that would be quality educational material.
Alright, I have something to add to basically all the comments here. People say that publishing the annotated version is good because, without the secrecy around the book, people would be less interested in and they also mention arguments as the “forbidden fruit phenomenon”. Whether a person that would want to read the book can be classified as a dangerous person is I think not always true. I would personally like to read the book someday, but not because I am a Nazi sympathizer. Simply because I would like to see what it was. What was the way of thinking of one of the most evil people in the world. Isn’t that by the way the purpose of history? To study the events and their causes to make sure we do not make the same mistake twice? Warning people, showing them how propaganda worked, showing them how the Nazi leader thought is I think a very important part of that. How can we expect people not to make the same mistake twice if we hide the facts from them?
DeleteI definitely do not think the original should simply be sold in bookstores, but I also do not think the annotated versions are sold for the right reason. I do not think the annotated version should be published only to hold people away from the original or to basically lift the secrecy off the book and lower the people’s interest in it. That I think is ridiculous. I think the annotated version should be published to seriously teach the people about one of the mistakes the world did in the past. Otherwise the whole purpose of history is gone. Why should we even care about what happened, if we cannot learn from it? I think the Second World War was the greatest mistake humanity ever made. They already repeated the mistake of the First World War and still they do not want to use everything they have from it to prevent yet another one. You never know whether the Third World War will not include Nazism and only because people were not informed about all there is around it.
On the other hand, if it will, then there is no way of knowing whether that is because the book was published or because it was not published. So we are stuck in an absurd situation. So I would rather stay side-less when it comes to this choice. I am just saying that if they want to publish the book, they should do it for this reason, not the one they state.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete