Reading it was a big wake up call for me too. At first I thought "Well if they're vilifying Trump so much, I'm sure that happened a lot in the past too" and tried reading it with an open mind. I found myself nodding a lot when he was decrying how awful journalists are. A lot of the specific German politics at the time lost me though.
For anybody interested in more I would suggest watching The Greatest Story Never Told. Still take it as propaganda of course, but the other side of the media and hollywood entertainment.
I would suggest watching The Greatest Story Never Told.
Right . . . Hitler's image needs some rehabilitation.
FFS, of course he was a human being. We are all capable of great evil, and attempts to rehabilitate his image come from the fear of realizing that yes, junior, you too are capable of the most unspeakably violent crimes if conditions are right and you have layers of sycophant bureaucrats to carry out your commands and a press to give them positive spin or bury their consequences. The more compartments, the more layers, the more PR flak-catchers, the more plausible the denials.
Have you considered the fact that Hitler wrote Mein Kampf as a PR piece?
My point is that Hitler's actions as Fuhrer outweigh those of his well-intended youth, and that his purpose in writing his autobiography was to present an image to the public that they would find favorable--the same with most if not all autobiographies of politicians.
What does Trump or my opinion of him have to do with any of this?
and that his purpose in writing his autobiography was to present an image to the public that they would find favorable
But does that make anything he said wrong? Were any of the problems he was decrying complete falsehoods conjured from literal nothing? If so, were all of the Germans who came to follow him also just that stupid they believed outright lies based on nothing?
Or do you think journalists actually are people deserving of human rights? Because that's a bold position to take.
What does Trump or my opinion of him have to do with any of this?
Because your inability to see people saying "he said some stuff that I kinda get" without going screaming about how evil he is is the exact same as a TDS screaming about DRUMPH BAD. The kind of people who'd say Haiti isn't a shithole because he said it was, just because ORANGE BAD.
And because the guy you replied to outright said people's response to Trump is what made him reconsider Hitler, due to the similarities in the narratives surrounding them and people's emotional crying about them.
Because Trump has been painted as the second Hitler and everything about him is maligned. His policies, his tweets, his haircut, how he eats his steak, his businesses, his kids, etc. He is probably the most maligned person in history behind Hitler and Jesus. So it's an apt case study comparison.
Reading it was a big wake up call for me too. At first I thought "Well if they're vilifying Trump so much, I'm sure that happened a lot in the past too" and tried reading it with an open mind. I found myself nodding a lot when he was decrying how awful journalists are. A lot of the specific German politics at the time lost me though.
For anybody interested in more I would suggest watching The Greatest Story Never Told. Still take it as propaganda of course, but the other side of the media and hollywood entertainment.
Right . . . Hitler's image needs some rehabilitation.
FFS, of course he was a human being. We are all capable of great evil, and attempts to rehabilitate his image come from the fear of realizing that yes, junior, you too are capable of the most unspeakably violent crimes if conditions are right and you have layers of sycophant bureaucrats to carry out your commands and a press to give them positive spin or bury their consequences. The more compartments, the more layers, the more PR flak-catchers, the more plausible the denials.
Have you considered the fact that Hitler wrote Mein Kampf as a PR piece?
And does that make what he is saying wrong? Do truthful statements become false because a No-no person says them?
Because it sounds like you'd argue the sky is green if Trump said it was blue.
My point is that Hitler's actions as Fuhrer outweigh those of his well-intended youth, and that his purpose in writing his autobiography was to present an image to the public that they would find favorable--the same with most if not all autobiographies of politicians.
What does Trump or my opinion of him have to do with any of this?
But does that make anything he said wrong? Were any of the problems he was decrying complete falsehoods conjured from literal nothing? If so, were all of the Germans who came to follow him also just that stupid they believed outright lies based on nothing?
Or do you think journalists actually are people deserving of human rights? Because that's a bold position to take.
Because your inability to see people saying "he said some stuff that I kinda get" without going screaming about how evil he is is the exact same as a TDS screaming about DRUMPH BAD. The kind of people who'd say Haiti isn't a shithole because he said it was, just because ORANGE BAD.
And because the guy you replied to outright said people's response to Trump is what made him reconsider Hitler, due to the similarities in the narratives surrounding them and people's emotional crying about them.
Because Trump has been painted as the second Hitler and everything about him is maligned. His policies, his tweets, his haircut, how he eats his steak, his businesses, his kids, etc. He is probably the most maligned person in history behind Hitler and Jesus. So it's an apt case study comparison.