Take a photo of a barcode or cover
2.27 AVERAGE
2.27 AVERAGE
Strength. Unity. Unwavering Loyalty.
No historical non-fiction has been quite as interesting, and I don't think any will.
While obviously more interesting to those with an in-depth understanding of early twentieth century/WWI Germany politics, Hitler's autobiography represents the closest thing to a method that became the most infamous madness.
One thing can be said: You cannot deny the impressive nature of how Hitler is able to paint a landscape for his movement that reinforces his concepts, and how he intends to see it through. Atrocious grammar and long-winded, with unnecessary tangents, the arguments still at times present some interesting thoughts and hard-sought convictions, even if completely wrong. Some are obviously outdated and dependent on anachronistic thinking, some disconcertingly convincing and forceful. While his anti-Semitism and blood purity is dull, his propaganda and party-building is still relevant. So the content of his arguments are synonymous with evil today, but many of the development of his methods, the caricatures of his attacks, and the unquestionable dominance of his views to his own self are intimidating. Whatever one may think of the most infamous tyrant in history, it can't be denied that his views shaped world events in no way perhaps anyone else's have. Maybe that in and of itself makes it something worth investigating.
No historical non-fiction has been quite as interesting, and I don't think any will.
While obviously more interesting to those with an in-depth understanding of early twentieth century/WWI Germany politics, Hitler's autobiography represents the closest thing to a method that became the most infamous madness.
One thing can be said: You cannot deny the impressive nature of how Hitler is able to paint a landscape for his movement that reinforces his concepts, and how he intends to see it through. Atrocious grammar and long-winded, with unnecessary tangents, the arguments still at times present some interesting thoughts and hard-sought convictions, even if completely wrong. Some are obviously outdated and dependent on anachronistic thinking, some disconcertingly convincing and forceful. While his anti-Semitism and blood purity is dull, his propaganda and party-building is still relevant. So the content of his arguments are synonymous with evil today, but many of the development of his methods, the caricatures of his attacks, and the unquestionable dominance of his views to his own self are intimidating. Whatever one may think of the most infamous tyrant in history, it can't be denied that his views shaped world events in no way perhaps anyone else's have. Maybe that in and of itself makes it something worth investigating.
challenging
sad
slow-paced
Eerste helft gaat over het leven van Adolf Hitler en geeft een kijk in wat er in die man zijn hoofd omging. De tweede helft gaat over zijn partij en is zodanig slecht geschreven dat het in feite onleesbaar saai is.
A very interesting, engaging book. I learned bits of german history and perspectives I hadn’t known before. Also great insight into the mans ideology and the quote on quote logic that gets him there. A must read to understand history and modern times. Interesting parallels may be found.
Pre-read review: I want to read this because I want to start studying right wing discourse, to see patterns in it and trends over time, to “study evil” and not only study people I like.
dark
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Even ignoring the horrors this man was responsible for, this is still one of the dumbest philosophy books I've ever read.
The ideology presented is mostly so braindead, I had to stop reading it for long stretches of time, especially after getting to the two parts where 1) he blames his entire entry into a political career on his father hating his art and his instructor telling him he was a bad architect, and 2) he states his hatred of Jewish people started because a Jewish-ran newspaper was making the culture in Vienna too flamboyant (despite the fact he himself agreed with much of what they published) which, in his effort to find a different news source, caused him to "learn more" from what today would be the equivalent of probably Info Wars or Breitbart. From that point on, it spirals into the ramblings of a man with too much confidence and too little knowledge to justify it.
If ever there was brainrot before the internet, it's this book. "My struggle" my ass. Such a weak-willed excuse of a man and it shows in his writing. Without the influence of others, he would've been the nobody he deserved to be.
The ideology presented is mostly so braindead, I had to stop reading it for long stretches of time, especially after getting to the two parts where 1) he blames his entire entry into a political career on his father hating his art and his instructor telling him he was a bad architect, and 2) he states his hatred of Jewish people started because a Jewish-ran newspaper was making the culture in Vienna too flamboyant (despite the fact he himself agreed with much of what they published) which, in his effort to find a different news source, caused him to "learn more" from what today would be the equivalent of probably Info Wars or Breitbart. From that point on, it spirals into the ramblings of a man with too much confidence and too little knowledge to justify it.
If ever there was brainrot before the internet, it's this book. "My struggle" my ass. Such a weak-willed excuse of a man and it shows in his writing. Without the influence of others, he would've been the nobody he deserved to be.
dark
inspiring
reflective
tense
medium-paced
informative
slow-paced
challenging
emotional
mysterious
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Content Warnings
Graphic: Body horror, Confinement, Death, Gun violence, Mental illness, Violence, Car accident
Moderate: Chronic illness, Terminal illness
Nella parte centrale è un ottimo trattato sulla politica, sull'oratoria e sulla crescita di un partito politico.
Nella parte finale compie una buona analisi della storia recente (recente nel 1926, ovviamente) della Germania, e della situazione politica dell'epoca. Anche se è spesso infarcita di richiami all'antisemitismo.
Ma è la prima parte quella che risulta indigesta, e che non mi fece portare avanti la lettura del libro quando lo presi sette o otto anni fa. Una prima parte che parla quasi esclusivamente di razzismo e di antisemitismo.
Se si escludesse la prima parte, e si soprassedesse sul costante additare l'Ebreo come nemico del mondo (nell'ultima parte) sarebbe anche un buon libro, che aiuta a capire come mai un popolo è arrivato a sostenere un governo come quello Nazista, e a sopportare (se non proprio a supportare) tutte le nefandezze compiute.
Ma tali parti non possono essere escluse, e rendono difficile formulare giudizi obiettivi sul testo.
L'unico commento possibile, alla fine, è quello di Indro Montanelli, che nella mia versione è riportato in quarta di copertina:
<>
Nella parte finale compie una buona analisi della storia recente (recente nel 1926, ovviamente) della Germania, e della situazione politica dell'epoca. Anche se è spesso infarcita di richiami all'antisemitismo.
Ma è la prima parte quella che risulta indigesta, e che non mi fece portare avanti la lettura del libro quando lo presi sette o otto anni fa. Una prima parte che parla quasi esclusivamente di razzismo e di antisemitismo.
Se si escludesse la prima parte, e si soprassedesse sul costante additare l'Ebreo come nemico del mondo (nell'ultima parte) sarebbe anche un buon libro, che aiuta a capire come mai un popolo è arrivato a sostenere un governo come quello Nazista, e a sopportare (se non proprio a supportare) tutte le nefandezze compiute.
Ma tali parti non possono essere escluse, e rendono difficile formulare giudizi obiettivi sul testo.
L'unico commento possibile, alla fine, è quello di Indro Montanelli, che nella mia versione è riportato in quarta di copertina:
<