can you learn something from this book? whats the summary of it
Can you learn something from this book? whats the summary of it
Adam Morales
Brody Brown
"fuck those people who grifted my minecraft server and fuck businessmen for making chips and coke so expensive"
Ethan Hill
I honestly have never read it. Adolf Hitler was after all, a politician, not a philosopher.
This book is a taboo for its antisemitism, but there are anti-semitic books which have a very non-political and even a prophetic quality to them such as the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion"
Julius Evola has a great article called The Secret Causes of History & The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion from his book "Men Among the Ruins"
When you disregard the antisemitic narrative of the book, as a rather simplification to hide perhaps the true occult intentions of the document: it can serve as a very interesting book that is not only some sort of political justification, but rather a blueprint for world dominance in all sectors of human existence
Tyler Peterson
>juliusevola.net
very interesting stuff, but he didnt really come out and say what exactly he means. I guess it is necessarily obscure by nature?
Benjamin Harris
>but he didnt really come out and say what exactly he means. I guess it is necessarily obscure by nature?
I think Evola, by talking about the "occult" forces behind such organizations, or individuals, pushing such agenda, is the same occult forces which Guénon identified as the counter-tradition.
The problem is that the forces of dissolution probably are not intelligent in a sense that they are clearly organized and driven by some group of 70 elders or such other fantasy.
>Guenon writes that counter-tradition is identical to the traditional notion designated by the ‘reign of the Antichrist’, whichever way this latter symbol is understood, either as an individual or a collectivity. In a certain sense it could be both, as there will be a collectivity that will appear as the ‘exteriorization’ of the ‘counter-initiatic’ organization itself when it finally appears in the light of day, “and there must also be a person who will be at the head of the collectivity, and as such be the most complete expression and even the
>very ‘incarnation’ of what it will represent, if only in the capacity of ‘support’ to all the malefic influences that he will first concentrate in himself and then project onto the world”.
Even if Judaism, Masonry, Communists or groups such as Bavarian Illuminati may have contributed to the advent of it: the dissolution may achieve such a point that the destructive trend is too much for even them to master or direct and the tide may turn against them like Evola observes:
>Third Estate, will eventually usher in the last collectivist phase, to which it has inadvertently opened the way. It is therefore logical that the role of a central guiding force of global subversion in this last period will no longer be played by Judaism or Masonry and that the main current may turn against both of these groups, as if they were residues to be liquidated once and for all; after all, this can be seen in countries in which regimes controlled by the Fourth Estate (i.e., Marxist regimes) are beginning to be consolidated, even though Jews and Masons contributed to their advent.
Austin Bennett
so it's an abstract force of history, yet he also repeatedly makes mention of 'secret hidden influences', are these meant to be metaphorical?
Carter Gutierrez
The Young Hitler I Knew by Kubizek was enjoyable. Reminds me of myself desu.
Christian Perry
Desu I think it's absolutely fucking hilarious that a passionate artist turned into the most infamous man in the western world. Artists truly are superior to all other men.
Zachary Perry
>'secret hidden influences', are these meant to be metaphorical?
What do you mean? Do you think Bavarian Illuminati is some invention of Dan Brown and such societies never existed?
Adam Weishaupt himself became a Freemason in 1777, the year after he founded the Illuminati, being received into a Munich lodge. Count Mirabeau, the later revolutionary leader in France, was privy both to Weishaupt's intention to join and to the secret reason for it, for his Memoirs included a paper, dated 1776, which set out a programme identical with that of the Illuminati, and in his History of the Prussian Monarchy he refers to Weishaupt and to the Illuminati by name and says: “The Lodge Theodore de Bon Conseil at Munich, where there were a few men with brains and hearts, was tired of being tossed about by the vain promises and quarrels of Masonry. The heads resolved to graft on to their branch another secret association to which they gave the name of the Order of the Illuminés. They modelled it on the Society of Jesus, whilst proposing to themselves views diametrically opposed.”
This is the exact intention and method described by Weishaupt in his own correspondence, and this is the proof that Mirabeau, the later revolutionary leader, knew of it at the time, that is in 1776. Moreover, his words suggest that the secret society of the Illuminati was founded with the express intention of gaining control of Freemasonry and of instigating and directing revolution through it.
The secret hidden influences you inquire may be as plain as the Secret Chiefs or "Unknown Superiors" of Freemasonry. René Guénon talks about them also in his book "Studies in Freemasonry and the Compagnonnage"
But who exactly are they? Since They are "invisible" and "inaccessible" or "unknown" superiors they are exactly. In terms of Freemasonry and comparing them to some other hierarchy like that of army, they could be likened to Captain A. and Admiral B. of the Naval Intelligence Department or some other Intelligence department. These "Unkown Superiors" keep in the dark and perhaps unknown for precisely the same reasons; and these qualities disappear instantaneously the moment they (personally) want to get hold of you.
So who are they? They are the directing influences that are Unknown, but it does imply certain Secret Influences as Evola points out.
Alexander James
Does anybody have a reading list of the things Hitler has read? I know Kubizek mentions Hitler reading Dante's Divine Comedy, Schopenhaur and some other stuff.
Jack Gonzalez
yeah that makes sense, thanks.
Jason Bailey
Hitler didn't really read ,his favorite thing was watching theater,opera and listening to classical music. So in other words he did what most of us do right now thats why most people that have studied him have liked him or haven't because he was a normal person seeing the wing of change coming and predicting that it won't end well. But I am sure there is a list, but from what I know most of the things he learned and his most important characteristics came from his mother and his best childhood friend.
Jacob Edwards
I hear he did lug Schopenhauer's The World as Will and Representation around with him in the trenches during WWI. Fitting reading for a guy like him really
Jayden Cruz
Well I think he learned more from experience than he did from books or "bombs" for gods sake he lived in the streets for so long after the defeat of his country and he didn't suicide when he had absolutely nothing. His life made him who he was no book would change his ideals
Sebastian James
Bentley Hall
Oh wait he did have his dog yea thats why just buy a dog
Brandon Lewis
>Hitler didn't really read
Why are you pulling shit out of your ass? Hitler was known to be an avid reader.
Leo Evans
I am not pulling it out of my ass, I also didn't say he didn't read but his experiences outweigh any book you will ever read. So if you want to just read the book he studied then just go and find them don't ask Yea Forums, but for the experiences well I am not sure how you can get them
Andrew Davis
The German people were cheated in WWI by the allies but also by their own domestic people i.e. the jewish media conspired against the german people and demoralized the populace.
The German people trade industrial output with the East and in exchange the East sells the Germans food. Once the East industrializes the East will no longer have incentive to trade food with the Germans. This is problematic because Germans need food.
We are animals and should regulate our breeding like we do with already domesticated animals.
Reasonable socialism. We should respect the workers because they are German but the workers are workers so fuck unions and Marxists. Also unite all German people under one nation.
Grayson Parker
>Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion
>prophetic
It's not prophetic at all since it's a plagiarism of some french book shitting on corrupt politicians.
Jacob Collins
He was very interested in Germanic mythology and history as a kid iirc, as a student/dropout he read Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, and presumably Marx since he spends like 1/3 of Mein Kampf responding to Marx.
Yes, Hitler had quite an understanding of consensus-crafting which is actually primarily what the book is about. Some of the race/national theory stuff is interesting to learn (just to know what the movement actually believed), but Hitler was a total retard when it came to geopolitics in this book and irl. Worth the read imo.
Daniel Hughes
It has Motivational™ tier quotes, such as
>Obstacles are placed across our path in life, not to be boggled at, but to be surmounted
[read in successful sportsman's voice]
Michael Allen
I do not know which is the more nefarious—to ignore social distress, as do the majority of those who have been favoured by fortune and those who have risen in the social scale through their own efforts, or the equally supercilious and often tactless, but always genteel, condescension displayed by people who have a craze for being charitable and who plume themselves on ‘sympathising with the people.’
— Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf
Justin Parker
"im hitler blah blah blah i dont like jews"
Robert Edwards
Does anyone have a English translation pdf of mein kampf that isn't edited to distort the message or to include a virtue-signalling preface of "Hitler bad"
Owen King
It's a book about what every white person wants to say but cant.
Aaron Allen
The Protocols 1–19 closely follow the order of Maurice Joly's Dialogues 1–17.
>Protocols reproduce and paraphrase in many parts the ideas found in a short book written by a certain Maurice Joly during the period of Napoleon's Second Empire. Allegedly, mysterious provocateurs of the Czar's secret police were responsible for writing the Protocols. This argument is truly irrelevant: those who decry plagiarism should keep in mind that this is not a matter of a literary work or of copyright. For example, when a general writes a plan, he could employ previous materials and writings as long as they contain ideas fit for his purpose. This would be a case of plagiarism, but it would not affect at all the question of whether or not this plan has really been conceived and carried out.
-Julius Evola
It is truly irrelevant if the whole book was a work of plagiarism compiled from different sources.
Again, read: