Mein Kampf

March 4th, 2015 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Old copies of the offending tome are kept in a secure “poison cabinet,” a literary danger zone in the dark recesses of the vast Bavarian State Library. A team of experts vets every request to see one, keeping the toxic text away from the prying eyes of the idly curious or those who might seek to exalt it.

“This book is too dangerous for the general public,” library historian Florian Sepp warned as he carefully laid a first edition of Mein Kampf – Adolf Hitler’s autobiographical manifesto of hate – on a table in a restricted reading room.

I presume people in Bavaria have the Internet. It is on Project Gutenberg.

I know the parliamentary library has a copy also, as once when I worked there I was sent to check out which MPs had borrowed it!

The prohibition on reissue for years was upheld by the state of Bavaria, which owns the German copyright and legally blocked attempts to duplicate it. But those rights expire in December, and the first new print run here since Hitler’s death is due out early next year.

I didn’t realise it was still under copyright. Hitler died in 1945 so I would have thought copyright expired in 1995.

The book’s reissue, to the chagrin of critics, is effectively being financed by German taxpayers, who fund the historical society that is producing and publishing the new edition. Rather than a how-to guidebook for the aspiring fascist, the new reprint, the group said this month, will instead be a vital academic tool, a 2000-page volume packed with more criticisms and analysis than the original text.

Sounds like a good way to do it.

Regardless of the academic context provided by the new volume, critics say the new German edition will ultimately allow Hitler’s voice to rise from beyond the grave.

“I am absolutely against the publication of Mein Kampf, even with annotations. Can you annotate the devil? Can you annotate a person like Hitler?” said Levi Salomon, spokesman for the Berlin-based Jewish Forum for Democracy and Against Anti-Semitism. “This book is outside of human logic.”

Yes it is an awful book, that represents great evil. But it was the Nazis who banned and burnt books. Trying to ban Mein Kamph would just make it more desirable – and never succeed.

Dotcom and Mein Kampf

March 27th, 2014 at 7:39 am by David Farrar

3 News reports:

Internet millionaire and alleged cyber-pirate Kim Dotcom has admitted owning one of the rarest pieces of Nazi memorabilia in existence.

On the eve of the launch of his Internet Party, Dotcom has confirmed he purchased one of the first copies of Adolf Hitler’s book, Mein Kampf, signed by the man who went on to establish the Third Reich.

It is one thing to read Mein Kampf. It is widely available. But to buy a rare first edition personally signed by Hitler is incredibly suspect, and very bad taste when done by someone of German nationality. To do a comparison, could you imagine a Cambodian buying an signed copy of the memoirs of Pol Pot?

“Let me make absolutely clear – I’m not buying into the Nazi ideology,” says Dotcom. “I’m totally against what the Nazis did. I did buy a cigar holder off Churchill and a pen off Stalin.”

There’s a big difference between a pen and the book which was used at motivation for genocide of around six million Jews.

Whale Oil has more details:

On May 21 2011 Alex Mardikian sat down for breakfast with Kim Dotcom in Spain. …

Dotcom asked what Mardikian thought about the fact he now owned a book written by “the greatest German who has ever lived”.

This is an on the record statement from Mr Mardikian. I am sure it is denied, but then you have to judge the motives of the two parties. What reason would Mardikian have to invent such a quote? Not hard to think of the reason you would deny it.

But there is more:

Further investigations by WOBH have revealed that not only does Kim Dotcom own a signed and autographed copy of Mein Kampf, one of the rarest copies on the market, but he also possesses other Nazi memorabilia.

One item is a Nazi flag, that until recently was displayed in the cellar of his mansion at Coatesville.

This presumably can be substantiated also. It either was or was displayed.

The flag was given to him on his birthday in 2011 by one of his guests at his birthday party.

At the time of the birthday and the gift Kim Dotcom exclaimed to all in attendance that this was “the best present he had ever been given”.

He profusely thanked the guest repeating over and over how happy he was to have received the flag. Again his closest confidantes remonstrated with Dotcom over the flag and he shrugged off the criticism by claiming it was all a big joke.

There were lots of guests at that party I assume, so again should be easy to verify if this is correct or not.

WOBH can confirm that the flag is still in the possession of Dotcom because in the days after the raids two staff were tidying up ahead of the arrival of John Campbell and his cameras. They were going to tour the mansion for a soft piece on the aftermath of the raid.

Those two staff thought, rightly, that the flag wouldn’t look good on television and so folded it up and put it away for safe keeping in some boxes also stored in the cellar.

One former staff member spoken to by WOBH (who wishes to remain anonymous due to ongoing threats from Dotcom) in our ongoing investigations of the REAL secret life of Kim Dotcom has told us that regularly, at dinner, Nazi salutes would be made and Nazi chants like “Heil Hitler”  and “Sieg Heil” were made, especially if the guests were mainly German.

The former staff member is unnamed, and again it is he said vs he said but what is the chance that both Mr Mardikian and the former staff member are both making it up, especially when combined with the fact that Dotcom did buy a signed copy of Mein Kampf and did keep and display a Nazi flag given to him?

Will this be enough to scare Hone Hawarira off the Dotcom Party? I don’t think so. The only demand Mana have made of Dotcom is that he agree to vote to get rid of National if they get MPs in Parliament. Of course the aim of the party is to get rid of National, as they want a sycophantic Government to replace them that will decline Dotcom’s extradition if the  courts find the extradition order is valid. So I am sure the Dotcom Party will in turn soon declare they are committed to getting rid of National, and then we’ll see how much control Hone has over Mana and can he get them to agree to an effective merger.

UPDATE: Tim Fookes at Newstalk ZB writes:

There’s nothing wrong with wanting to own war memorabilia , nothing at all, a lot of people would have war medals and the likes.

But in my opinion, there’s something quite despicable about wanting to own items belonging to the enemy, and in this case one of the most revolting excuses for a human being ever to walk on this earth, Adolf Hitler.

There’s something abhorrent about having a desire to own something as offensive to so many people, as Mein Kampf, and not only own it, but get a signed copy.

It speaks volumes about Kim Dotcom, or let’s quit calling him that, let’s call him by his real name Kim Schmitz.

Because he is German and appears in stark contrast to most Germans I’ve ever met who are ashamed beyond words about the behaviour of Hitler and his supporter. …

It may not just be that, there are reports circulating that he owns a Nazi flag and other memorabilia too, which poses the prospect that he could be a Nazi sympathiser.

With the launch today of the Internet Party, I’d hope New Zealanders will turn their back on Kim Dotcom in our droves and tell him ‘we don’t want you here, you are offensive’.

I hope that will happen, sadly though, I think he’ll get naive supporters who thinks what he’s doing is shaking the system, sticking the finger to the government, there will be that fringe element of support he’ll get.

You may say I’m overreacting, but I cannot believe he has the nerve to sit there smirking away as he admits he owns that book.

The apologists for Dotcom on this one will end up embarrassed, as more comes out.

What sort of person buys a signed copy of Mein Kampf?

March 1st, 2014 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

Whale Oil blogs:

Two rare early editions of Mein Kampf, signed by Adolf Hitler could sell for more than US$20,000 (NZ$24k) at an online auction, officials say.

Whale comments:

Check the back of the couch and see if you have a spare $24k.

But seriously what sort of sicko wants to own a book by Adolf Hitler. Only a nazi sympathiser could possibly want such a thing.

I think you have to be either genuinely unaware of what happened to millions of people during WWII under the rule of Nazi Germany, or you have to have a very specific personality fault to think that stuff is cool.

I agree. It is one thing to want to read Mein Kampf. It gives an insight into the mentality of the Nazis. But to want a copy personally signed by Hitler – that is rather sick.

Labour on Dunne and Nazis

June 27th, 2012 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

A Labour MP drew parallels between the National Party and Adolf Hitler as controversial legislation allowing partial asset sales passed by a single vote.

The Opposition benches cried “Shame!” yesterday as National’s junior whip Louise Upston cast the decisive proxy vote of UnitedFuture MP Peter Dunne, which saw the legislation pass by 61 votes to 60.

Mr Dunne was not at Parliament for the vote because he was attending the funeral of his son’s girlfriend’s mother.

In a statement, he said he had intended to speak in favour of the bill at its final reading, which was in the “best long-term interests of the country”.

Opposition MPs continued to insist Mr Dunne had misled voters over his views on the partial asset sales plan.

Labour’s state-owned enterprises spokesman Clayton Cosgrove said Mr Dunne’s vote was “a travesty of democracy” because he had said he was against the sale of water resources before last year’s election.

Labour are trying to rewrite history. Not a single voter in Ohariu thought a vote for Peter Dunne was a vote to stop asset sales. Dunne’s reference to water resources was about water supply companies, not about power companies that use water.

Check  this thread out from May, where you have quotes from leftie activists before the election about how they need to stop Dunne as he is a vote for asset sales, plus this explicit quote from Peter Dunne:

in the event National puts up its mixed ownership model for the electricity companies and Air New Zealand we would be prepared to support that, provided the maximum was 49%, with a cap of 15% on any indivudual’s holdings

So Labour is clearly lying when they say Dunne misled voters. In fact that is exactly what they are doing, and are masters of.

Some believe the Government has no mandate for the sales because several polls have shown a majority of voters are against the policy.

Labour’s Wigram MP, Megan Woods, said yesterday: “Hitler had a pretty clear manifesto that he campaigned and won on … does this make what he did OK?”

Oh dear, where do we start with Dr Godwin.

Let’s even put aside the implicit comparison of partial asset sales (a policy scores of left wing governments around the world has also implemented) to the Nazis, Hitler and the Holocaust. Frankly if Dr Woods want to make such stupid comparisons, I urge her to carry on doing so. They reflect far more on her and Labour, than anyone else.

But what really annoys me is her woeful knowledge of history. Only those with a superficial scraping of history repeat the line that Hitler was democratically elected, as if he won a majority of seats. He was and did not.

In July 1932 the Nazis got 37.3% of the vote and just 230 out of 608 seats. In November 1932 the Nazis got fewer votes at 33.1% and 196 seats only. They made up only three of the 12 Cabinet members. He then seized power through various ways.

Also the assertion that Hitler had a clear manifesto he implemented is also woefully ignorant of history. Hitler and the National Socialist German Workers’ Party campaigned as an anti-big business and anti-capitalist party, with a later focus on anti-semitism and anti-marxism. Their 25 point plan did say Jews can not be citizens, and would be foreign guests who could be expelled. But that is a long way from saying “Oh yeah, we will exterminate them also”. People may be interested in some of their other policies:

  • We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
  • We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
  • We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.
  • We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.

UPDATE: Dr Woods has apologised.

Brown endorses Williams?

March 31st, 2010 at 1:08 pm by David Farrar

NewstalkZB at 8 am reported Len Brown saying supportive things about Andrew William’s bid to be on the new Auckland Council. The item said:

Len Brown is showing his support for Andrew Williams intention to stand for election onto the new Council.  …

Manukau City Mayor Len Brown says he has worked well with Mr Williams in the past through the Mayoral Forum, and knows he has his community’s concerns at heart.

They also reported John Banks refused to comment – a much wiser strategy.

So far then, Len Brown has endorsed or said supportive things about both Sue Bradford and Andrew Williams being on Council.Is there anyone he won’t endorse?

I mean this is just after Williams puts up on his Facebook page a photo of Rodney Hide as Hitler (H/T: Whale).

Yes this image really is on the Mayor of North Shore City’s Facebook page – placed there by him.

Do I really need to even mention how offensive this is to actual survivors of the Holocaust. You might expect this behaviour from an anonymous troll on the Internet, but not from the Mayor of a major city.

And this is who Len Brown is supporting for Council – because he didn’t want to risk having Williams attack him, if he refused to say nice things about him.

This is one of the criticisms I hear about Brown. From all accounts he is a very nice guy, and quite personable. Someone you would find hard to dislike. Many people I know, from both National and Labour, say Len is a really nice guy.

But the criticism is whether he is tough enough to handle the job of being the inaugural Mayor of the Auckland Super City. You have to be able to sometimes call a spade a spade.

The job will involved both standing for 1.3 million Aucklanders to the national Government, but also being able to run a Council focused on regional issues and not be captured by the parochialism of the past.

And this is why Andrew Williams is unsuitable, in my opinion, for the Auckland Council. Even if you put aside his abusive and ranting style, he is also unsuitable because he seems only concerned with his local area – not Auckland as a whole. Of course you want ward Councillors to represent their communities, but you most of all want them focused on decisions that are good for Auckland as a whole.

It is almost impossible to see how anyone can think Williams would be a constructive member of the Auckland Council, and it does call into question Len Brown’s judgement, that he is effectively endorsing Andrew Williams.

Reason No 187,265 why me working for Hitler would have been a bad idea

October 31st, 2009 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

I tend to crack jokes a lot, even at fairly inappropriate times. Luckily I’ve never been sacked for it. Unlike Fritz Darges. He has just died aged 96, and was one of Hitler’s closest aides. But look at what got him sacked:

But Darges misjudged the “warm-hearted” Führer deeply during one conference at Rastenburg on July 18 1944 – two days before a bomb plot nearly succeeded in killing him.

During a strategy conference a fly began buzzing around the room, landing on Hitler’s shoulder and on the surface of a map several times.

Irritated, Hitler ordered Darges to “dispatch the nuisance”. Darges suggested whimsically that, as it was an “airborne pest” the job should go to the Luftwaffe adjutant, Nicolaus von Below.

Enraged, Hitler dismissed Darges on the spot. “You’re for the eastern front!” he yelled. And so he was sent into combat.

I thought the retort was very good. But what sort of grump was Adolf to not just sack him, but send him to the Eastern Front for whimsical retort!

Sadly Darges still worshipped him:

Darges died on Saturday still believing in the man who engineered the Jewish Holocaust as “the greatest who ever lived.” His memoirs will be published now in accordance with his will.

There will be a lot of interest in his memoirs.

Minto compares Bush to Hitler and Amin

October 22nd, 2009 at 4:05 pm by David Farrar

It’s great to be reminded how fruit loopy the far left are. John Minto blogs:

It was dispiriting to see a group of secondary schoolboys hounded by media as they entered the Auckland War Memorial Museum to apologise for their behaviour at a school outing earlier this year when they paid mock homage to the swastika. …

They weren’t intending disrespect to the Jews, gypsies, communists and homosexuals who all faced Nazi extermination efforts. Surely we need to lighten up a bit here.

The same applies to the Lincoln University students who dressed up as Nazis and Nazi victims for a fancy dress party a few weeks back. There were howls of rage and profuse apologies all round and disciplinary action followed.

Was the same action taken against those who dressed up as Osama bin Laden, Idi Amin or George Bush? All of these figures could rightly be condemned for war crimes and genocide.

Yes of course dressing up as George Bush is the same as dressing up as Nazis. I mean, after all, they are all guilty of genocide.

I just love it that there really are people who equate Bush with Hitler. Even after Bush retired from office in accordance with the constitution. They spent years darkly warning of how Bush would become a military dictator supported by the industrial-military complex. Yet somehow we now have Obama as President and a Democratic House and Senate.

Labour and Hitler

July 9th, 2009 at 3:04 pm by David Farrar

No this post is not going to see Godwin’s Law cited. It is about a fascinating article in the Manawatu Standard:

Though it has been commonly assumed that New Zealand vocally opposed the Nazi expansion and urged Britain to confront Hitler’s regime, two historians are arguing this is not true.

New Zealand continued to push for negotiations with Hitler even as Britain declared war, while still honouring a trade agreement made with Germany in 1937, they say.

We were still trading with Hitler? We signed a trade agreement with him in 1937?

Massey University head of history, philosophy and classics James Watson said he and New Zealand Defence Force historian John Crawford began their research after discovering discrepancies in the history books.

They stumbled across correspondence between key New Zealand ministers in 1939, pushing for continued negotiations. …

New Zealand was behind Britain initially, when British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain went to negotiate with Hitler and signed the Munich peace agreement in 1938.

But after Hitler dishonoured the agreement and invaded Poland, Britain was talking war while New Zealand continued to push for peace negotiations.

Finally, in 1940, New Zealand and Australia sent telegrams to Britain saying they would follow her “to the end”, in whatever decision was made.

So even after Hitler invaded Poland, the Labour Government thought negotiations were the way to go – despite Hitler having broken every previous agreement?

Meanwhile, New Zealand was continuing trade with Germany under a special agreement they had signed in 1937, Dr Watson said.

“I often wondered whether any New Zealander who encountered a German soldier in Greece ever reflected that the uniforms worn by Germans were made from New Zealand wool.”

I wonder when trading stopped?

When Peter Fraser became Prime Minister in 1940, he took a staunch anti-Hitler position.

Dr Watson thinks this might be why the period beforehand has been glossed over by historians.

An historical bias towards Labour could also be the reason, he said.

The research will be published in the British Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History later this year.

I look forward to reading the full research. Thank God for historians.