There is an interesting controversy brewing between academics and Jewish groups in Germany as the deadline approaches for the end of the copyright over Hitler’s “Mein Kampf”, the book that laid the foundation for the Nazi takeover and ultimately the genocidal crimes of World War II. For seven decades, the copyright has rested with with Bravarian officials who have prevented the publication of the work. Now, academics are arguing that the book should be reprinted due to its obvious historical significance. However, Jewish and other groups are demanding a continuation of the ban on reprints.
The 800-page book, “My Struggle,” will become part the public domain on January 1st.
But as “Mein Kampf” — whose title means “My Struggle” — falls into the public domain on January 1, differences have emerged over how it should be treated in future. The historians at the Institute of Contemporary History of Munich (IFZ) will produce an annotated version of the two-volume tome that will be offered in January for 59 euros ($65).
The historians view this as a compromise since the work will be heavily annotated. However, Charlotte Knobloch, President of the Jewish community in Munich and Upper Bavaria, objects that even an annotated version “contains the original text” which “should itself not be printed”. She insists that it will be “in the interest of right wing militants and Islamists to spread these ideas.”
I certainly understand the concern but I believe that work should be reprinted with or without annotations. It is a historically important work in understanding the crimes and ideology of the Nazis. Like most free speech advocates, I have always been critical on the effort of Germany to criminalize references or symbols of the Nazi period. These laws have been easily circumvented by developing closely related symbols and salutes for Neo-Nazis. More importantly, it remains a fundamental tenet of free speech that the solution to bad speech is good speech — not censorship. The scourge of white supremacy and Nazi values has continued despite these laws, which allow extremists to assume the claim of victims and accuse the West of hypocrisy (or fear of exposure to these ideas). There remains plenty of sources of this information, particularly given the Internet. Historians however believe that the work should be available in new additions to be studied in history, political science and other departments. Perhaps not too surprising given the free speech and academic interests, I favor reprinting the work and leaving the debate over its content to the market of free ideas and exchange.
What do you think?
Source: Yahoo
Olly: “Provide the cite where I stated I “fear” government.”
It’s all right there on the Albuquerque thread, three or four statements of fearing the government and conflating it with criminals, complete with date and times.
Boo-yah:
“I understand you already feel defenseless against our government; that is perfectly reasonable considering how they have become unconstrained by the rule of law.” Oct 22 @12:16pm
“Let’s go with no civilian owns a gun. This leaves ONLY government and criminals to possess guns, right?
What is the law-abiding citizen to do for self-defense against the criminal?
What is the law-abiding citizen to do to defend their rights from a government who will not be constrained by a disarmed citizenry?” Oct 22 @11:47am
“So because you personally have never been harmed by a criminal or your government, then everyone else should be denied their 2nd amendment rights? Using that logic, if the government has never stolen your personal property then no one else should have their 4th amendment protections.” Oct 22 @ 12:43pm
You lump the government and criminals together in the same category; the government steals from you and harms you just like the criminals you fear; You feel defenseless against the government, therefore you need firearms; how else are you protect yourself against the government.
Inga – I thought the fish fry was on Fridays.
T. Hall,
Provide the cite where I stated I “fear” government.
Inga – you should know better. Rick is fairly new and is getting the benefit of the doubt.
Annie
1, October 29, 2015 at 6:31 pm
Rick, I was being criticized for using Wiki, while your use of Wiki was ignored, get it?
Since you support double standards I’m a little surprised you think that worth noting. But since it’s another double standard I guess I shouldn’t be.
LOL! Speaking of 6th graders.
Very successful, smart, attorneys, CEO’s, large corporations, hire me. I’ve had some clients for 25 years and more.
Annie
1, October 29, 2015 at 6:22 pm
Rick shame on you for using Wiki.
You mean like you did in your 5:55?
You’d better slow down, now you can’t even follow your own assertions.
Spinelli, those people were duped and wasted their money.
People pay me big bucks to gather facts. It’s my profession. Et vous?
LOL!!! It’s all in the archives.
Rick
1, October 29, 2015 at 5:25 pm
From wiki:
Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and control of the means of production[1][2][3][4][5] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.[6] “Social ownership” may refer to public ownership, cooperative ownership, common ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[7]
****************
Rick shame on you for using Wiki.
“…when they’ve been bested in a debate”
So you think this is a debate?
I was on the debate team in high school.
This is not a debate.
Last night’s anti-GOP commercial on MSNBC was not a debate.
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
.
Randyjet showed how horribly IGNORANT you were about WW2, post WW2, and even simple European geography. THAT is what I was referencing. I don’t play games, I don’t dance, I don’t make false allegations, I don’t shoot from the hip. I am a person of truth. I don’t dissemble.
I read it. I bought it in the mall decades ago. They used to have an edition translated by Ralph Mannheim if I recall he also translated a lot of ole Fred N. Anyhow, parts of “My Struggle” are an interesting read, parts of it are not well written. Certainly it should not be repressed.
I realize that notion will enrage some of the bedwetting book banners out there. Tough. Move to Bavaria if you want censorship they’ll accommodate you now just as much as they would have in 35
… a 50/50 chance of being wrong”
Exactly.
Sometimes 100% wrong, especially if the SJWs have taken an interest in the topic.
“the use of SJW is proof of immaturity”
Calling people immature is proof of immaturity.
In contrast, Truth is its own justification.
You and Annie are Social Justice Warriors.
Admit it, own up to it, say it loud and proud.
Plus, vote Democrat because it’s got electrolytes!
I NEVER said such thing. Although, dissembling is one of your tools of the trade.
“I favor a tent.”
TMI, buddy.
Of course you’re a Nazi expert.
You’re a Democrat.
That’s the best experience for it around.