>be a journalist
>actually be there right in Germany and witness Hitler's rule first-hand
>write what is regarded as the best book on Nazi Germany ever written
>historians get so buttblasted about this that they refuse to recognize your book as a history book just because you don't have the academic credentials
So, do you regard this as a history book or not?
Yeah. It's a history book.
Yes
Interestingly same criticism is directed at The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire
Did Shirer ever get over his homophobia?
>>6392931
>write what is regarded as the best book on Nazi Germany ever written
>historians get so buttblasted about this
So who decided it was the best book on Nazi Germany then?
>>6392981
Readers
>>6392990
That are not historians. Who would you trust?
>>6392990
Why are they qualified to say it's the best?
>>6392990
How did they decide that? Was there some kind of poll, because I wasn't contacted.
>>6393014
Thats not really an answer. What qualifies the masses of hobbyist historians to deem it a must read/the best?
le david irving face xD
>>6393018
There is no subjective way to qualify this.
Socrates' daimon must shitpost here or something
Sometimes, /lit/ has this weird persecution delusion in regards to academia, so many posts on "academics hate this book!111!!! but it's so good!!!1!!1!" without any sources for either position.
What is up with that?
(Examples: This thread, that overlong thread on Guns, Germs and Steel)
>>6392931
Its like another gamergate.
>>6393031
It's not /lit/, it's /pol/, and it's just garden variety paranoia.
>>6393031
Historians don't hate Rise and Fall, they just don't consider it a history book because it was written by a journalist.
>be me
>be actual historian
>anonymous troll on Taiwanese cartoon board speaks of what he does not know
>mfw
>>6393055
So would it be more appropriate to classify it as a historical document (i.e. a source) rather than an actual history book?
A history book written by someone who was there is better regarded as reportage. If the author lacks a suitable distance from his subject their objectivity should be called into question. The lack of distance usually means they don't have access to opposing views so they will unmeaningly give a one sided depiction of history. No matter what the book's value as history it really can't be regarded as the best book on that period because of the inherent biases.
>>6393064
>implying there's a difference
What does Academia regard as the seminal study on Nazi Germany, then?
>>6393067
being this critical of journalism
>>6393069
probably some textbook about germany in the 20th century
>>6393073
Or being uncritical of anything you read?
>>6393077
>implying it's possible to write objective history
>>6393078
Please don't imply that.
>>6393069
Seminal doesn't mean best or most accurate, it means first or most influential. Which OP's book does have a certain amount of claim to be.
>>6393064
It's journalism, probably
So does this book include holocaust propaganda or is this a legitimate book about what was actually happening?
>>6393150
Why don't you read it and find out rather than just looking for books to confirm what you already believe.
what are some good books about nazis and hitler that aren't jewish propaganda? i've been wanting to study the subject but don't know how to avoid the, er, public relations.
>>6393391
Hitler table talk
Mein Kampf
Hitlers second book
>>6393395
>>6393067
>A history book written by someone who was there is better regarded as reportage.
All history is reportage m8.
If historians don't consider this journalist as a legit source, why do they consider anecdotal evidence by Jewish survivors of the Holocaust as authoritative?
Seems weird then.
My main beef was that Shirer seemed to believe that Hitler did something wrong.
Hitler sucked 88 dicks in his day.
>>6393444
>If historians don't consider this journalist as a legit source
They never said it wasn't a legit "source", just not good as a history book. The main criticism leveled against it were a crude understanding of German history, a lack of balance, leaving important gaps, no understanding of a modern totalitarian regime, and ignorance of current scholarship of the Nazi period.
>>6393391
Something by Maurice Cowling, maybe?
Hitler sucked dick he ruined everything and then he blew his brains out. Some people liked it, because they benefited from it, whilst a great many others did not. Hitler was a dumb bastard and he got his nation in a war when he was supposedly trying to help them economically. He could have stopped early, but he decided it was a good idea to keep pushing forward with expansion and in the end that cost him his ass.
There's really nothing much to Hitler, there is more to study with Facism and National Socialism and how shit they are.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1Gn6I_z9MU
has anyone seen this? adolf hitler's wicked mind.
apparently adolf was an edgelord who liked to get pissed on.
i guess it depends on your view of freudian psychoanalysis.
>>6393483
>They never said it wasn't a legit "source", just not good as a history book. The main criticism leveled against it were a crude understanding of German history, a lack of balance, leaving important gaps, no understanding of a modern totalitarian regime, and ignorance of current scholarship of the Nazi period.
>just not good as a history book
All these criticisms seems to imply that they don't even think it's a good book at all.
>>6392931
The most important thing, OP, is that you realize Berlin Diary is better.
Shirer under emphasized the Jewish communists trying to take over Germany and completely excluded evidence that the Jews murdered Hitler at the end of the war. So it's really poor history and nothing more than propaganda for the Jewish cabal.
>>6393508
"... this was quite shattering for him, because don't forget this messianic self-concept was the compensatory overlay for the profound void within."
why does this remind me of how the jewish orthodoxy rejected the chist-nature of jesus?
>>6393574
Please don't compare Hitler to Christ
>>6393094
I guess I meant "definitive". The single book that will confer the greatest amount of understanding.
>>6393512
Journalism and history are different disciplines. You can read TRAFOTTR and appreciate his research and personal experience but you should probably take some of his sweeping conclusions about German culture and why homosexuals made such sadistic evil nazis who smelled bad.
>>6393574
christ*
History book or a journalist's observations, doubtless people refer to this as authoritative source.
So who the fuck cares?
"Good essay there, Jimmy, but I see you cited Shirer, and he's not really a historian, you know. Last semester you cited Reed on the Bolsheviks! What's wrong with you, Jimmy? Wanna get flunked?"
>>6393583
*with a grain of salt
I think it's a book of history.
/pol/ here.
Every 'popular' and 'credible' books that are acclaimed by academia on the Third Reich, is Jewish propaganda, I don't know how you don't realize this. It's part of a Jewish plot to subvert Western civilization.
Hitler literally did nothing wrong.
>>6393627
But Western Civ already subverts Western Civ.
>>6393631
Only because of degeneracy
>>6392931
>Shirer
>jew
>best book on the Third Reich
You're fucking with me...right?
>>6393639
No, because of the cracks within its own foundations.
>>6393025
>damage control maximum power
>>6393658
If by 'crack within its own foundations' you mean Jews and degenerates, then yes. They need to go
>>6393667
Nope. If anything you are reflecting exactly the kind of cracks I'm speaking of.
>>6393577
Yeah, Hitler was actually real and did shit.
It's like comparing random hippie exhibit A with the most influential human being to ever exist.
>>6393671
>degenerate detected
Marxist swine, pls go
>>6393658
>hurr durr
fuck off. god himself sets the foundations
>>6393698
Sounds like it's time for you to take the red pill of objective non-ideological absolute Truth.
>>6393702
Then God is deceiving you.
>>6393703
Humans aren't objective viewers. We discovered that long ago.
>>6393567
This actually
>>6393710
prove it, fagcuck
>>6393718
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivity_%28science%29
In its most general consumable form, here you go!
>>6393698
>Western civilization isn't really worth saving bud.
Can you just stop posting you parisitic fucking kike
>>6393721
fuck off, postmodern swinecuck
>book has a part in it where a top nazi official calls hitler out for doing the exact same things he's accusing jews of doing
>book gets criticized by academics for having a journalistic tone rather than academic, which I agree is bullshit
>/pol/smokers use this criticism of a book they never read as proof of a widespread jewish conspiracy in academia
>>6393739
Wait, are you denying that there's a global Jewish plot to subvert Western civilization and enslave all non-Jews?
back 2 tumblr
>>6393747
Go back to /pol/
>>6393752
>muh feels
Liberals everyone
>>6393747
/pol/ is two clicks away
>>6393758
It's my duty to redpill all you brainwashed cultural marxist sheeple
>>6393747
Whether or not there is is beside the point. /pol/dancers cannot claim moral superiority over such a supposed conspiracy if the only problem they'd have with it is that they're not the ones doing the subversion and enslavement.
>>6393766
I've never actually posted on reddit before. Tumblr, sure. But Idk how anyone could post on reddit, the UI is absolute bullshit.
>>6393772
We can, because white people created Western civilization.
Jews aren't white. And Jews don't have Christian values
>>6393757
>using "liberal" to describe members of the left
You can't just redefine words on a whim to better suit your precious feelings. Go back to tumblr.
>>6393778
A Century of Social Science
BLOWN
THE
FUCK
OUT
>>6393785
Jews clearly want to enslave us all and destroy all of western culture and civilization.
White Christian males with property want to keep Western civilization.
>>6393801
>Jews clearly want to enslave us all and destroy all of western culture and civilization.
Damn good on the Jews.
>>6393578
I wish people wouldn't ask this fucking question. Why the hell would there be a best book on anything, or a definitive book to read for fuck sake. Especially on a subject that has been written about so fucking much.
>>6393508
>Freudian psychoanalysis from across the ocean based on a jewish doctors second hand account
you don't even need to be pol to raise an eyebrow
I've never seen a /pol/fag talk about a book they've read, not even one that would confirm their worldview. That's how illiterate they are.
>>6393805
shill cuck
>>6393818
I've read both Evola and Mein Kampf. So fuck off with your straw man
>>6393014
>universally except for the people who study history
Fixed that for you
>>6393824
Oh and Kevin Macdonald
>>6393819
I don't believe in the nuclear family.
>>6393846
You're obviously a degenerate then.
>>6393875
>>6393879
How is the nuclear family not the best structure?
>>6393888
It's a paranoid remnant of an older time. It's an ideal exacerbater of emotions. The nuclear family isn't going anywehre anytime soon, though, don't worry.
>>6393904
lol you want some brave new world type shit, cuck
>>6393908
Have you ever read a book?
>>6393067
>If the author lacks a suitable distance from his subject their objectivity should be called into question.
>any history
>objective
ayyy
>>6393921
I've read Brave New World. And it's degenerate
>>6393904
>paranoid
Please explain why in more detail.
>ideal exacerbater of emotions
Firstly, exacerbater isn't a word. Secondly, the nuclear family exacerbates emotions because humans have evolved to feel emotional bonds between parents and child. Thirdly, nothing you've said actually explains why the nuclear family is worse than any other societal structure of rearing.
>>6393653
in his defense he makes no mention of the holocaust in it...
nazis were absolute monsters during ww2, the more i read the less doubt i have...
whether the figure was 6 million is a matter of debate but not all jews are jewy
>>6393950
The actual figure is more like 2500 Jews being killed.
>>6393936
Capitalism affects the power of emotional groupings such as the family, which in turn help consolidate the capitalist system. It could be argued that the Nuclear Family grew parallel with the rise of private property, restricting emotion to aspects of the financial.
All social relations are produced by power, with groups or classes in power creating themselves by constituting other groups as Other. Sexuality is a primary technology of power. Sex plays the role for the bourgeoisie that blood played for the aristocracy; that is, as a means of defining the body. The bourgeoisie define the body as an object to be known, controlled, and in general made use of in order to maximise life. The family, serves to locate sexuality and to confine it and to intensify it.
>>6393969
so what u want lil nigga? sum brave new world type shit everyone just use each other as instruments to their own immediate sexual self-gratification, cuck? No love, jsut masturbation with various partners with whom nothing is shared except the mechanical act of 'satisfying' your libidinal drive with various indifferent masturbatory props?
ABSOLUTE FUCKING CUCK
>>6393985
You are an idiot.
>>6393987
>resorting to name-calling when your utopian nightmare is revealed to you
lel, liberals
>>6394002
But you're the liberal here. Stop stretching the definitions of words.
Nuclear family is literally perfect. Extended families are good too, but they don't fit too well in bourgeois civilization (best civilization, cry moar french faggots).
Everything else is degeneracy that talks about "freedom" but quickly degenerates into harems. It's like you don't even know left-libertarian student unions.
>>6394010
i would like to smell all those buttholes
>>6394010
are you citing left libertarian student unions as reflective of all society when you don't associate with left libertarian student unions and know others that don't
>>6393969
No, the nuclear family did not grow parallel to the rise of private property. Are you serious? Have you read anything on this subject?
The second part you appear to parrot words or learned phrases without considering their meaning. For example "all social relations are produced by power." Is this really the case? Is friendship, for example, "produced by power?" Think about it. Are you impelled to befriend people based on power, or based on having a good time with them?
"Sexuality is a primary technology of power." This unfortunately is related to sex rather than the nuclear family, as is the rest of the paragraph. I'm not asking about sex, the body, the other, or anything else. I'm asking very plainly if you can suggest why the nuclear family is bad, and if there is another system that would be better than it.
If you could reply in your own words, and not in learned phrases, you may make a better case.
>>6394022
I used to, actually, but got disgusted and quit after I saw the leaders and professors creating harems out of the girls I liked.
>know others that don't
My point is that people like you want to transform the entire world in a left-libertarian student union.
>>6394043
where is that pic of the naked girls from?
>>6394026
>Is this really the case?
Yes
>Is friendship, for example, "produced by power?
Yes.
>. Are you impelled to befriend people based on power, or based on having a good time with them?
No.
>This unfortunately is related to sex rather than the nuclear family
Sex is related to the nuclear family.
>I'm asking very plainly if you can suggest why the nuclear family is bad
The nuclear family is presented as the superior family structure for the rearing of children, and the single-mother family becomes the focus of the social work gaze through which specific types of social work "intervention" and "assessment" come to be prescribed and justified, through confession or otherwise.
The nuclear family is involved in sex through subtext. Sex is a broader set of results from sex as we relate to it. Sexuality for him must be considered in terms of concepts of knowledge and power
>>6394043
There's other forms of family that exist without being "open". But they do involve the accumulation of social capital. For example, you are all but ignoring Single Fathers and Single Mothers.
>>6394046
From a meeting of the Socialist Youth Union in Brazil.
>"degeneracy" meme word
>>6394096
>"spook" meme word
>>6393026
Hegel Socrates or Kierkegaard Socrates?
>>6393818
>William Blake on a pic that contains "traditionalism conservatism reactionary" in the header
Stop liking what I like
>>6394064
>provides no justification for any claim except spew and obfuscation
>probably thinks he's pretty clever irl
worst tripfag, kill yourself
>>6394119
It's only obfuscation if you're illiterate it in how societies in the Idealized West work within themselves
>>6394100
"Spook" is useful for pointing out when people are enslaved to subjective concepts
"Degeneracy" just means anything the speaker doesn't like
>>6394125
>Capitalised idealized
>Sentence doesn't make grammatical sense
>even if it did it would still be nonsense
>regurgitates this stuff in every single thread ever made
Truly, it must be awful to be you. I'm actually sorry for you.
>>6392931
I have three copies of that book. I really should read one of them...
>>6393758
do you post about anything but /pol/?
>>6393969
>GCSE sociology student rears his stupid head yet again
>>6394179
You're totally not not right, i.e. Wrong.
Truth is intrinsically used in the service of capitalism, says Bataille; however, according to Hamburger, it is not so much truth that is intrinsically used in the service of capitalism, but rather the collapse, and subsequent stasis, of truth. It could be said that Foucault promotes the use of pretextual theory to deconstruct sexism. The subject is contextualised into a textual theory that includes reality as a whole.
Society is part of the rubicon of truth, says Sartre, however, according to Parry, it is not so much society that is part of the rubicon of truth, but rather the fatal flaw of society. It could be said that substructuralist dematerialism states that consciousness, somewhat paradoxically, has objective value, given that Marx’s model of capitalist discourse is valid. The subject is contextualised into a textual theory that includes culture as a paradox.
>>6394179
The West is a geographical place and therefore should be capitalised.
>starting a sentence with and
Christ.
>>6394223
At what point can you stop trying to find meaning from the links between the concepts themselves and not the material conditions that present themselves, the actually relevant conditions of life in the present under Capitalism, and the possibilities of further hazard within the future.
>>6394230
>The West is a geographical place and therefore should be capitalised.
I capitalized Idealized West because it's everyone's love to idealize the west, and not critique it.
>starting a sentence with and
And cry.
>>6392931
I'm thinking of reading this book, is it jew propaganda or fair and accurate?
>>6394277
Hitler was a big bitch
I'm going to read Ian Kershaw's "Hitler". Should I go with the abridgement or the original two volume work?
>>6394289
Takes one to know one.
>>6394291
Then take it from me.
>>6393963
lol, considering the nazis killed millions of polish, russian and other types of civilians during the war, and considering that anti-semitism was at the core of its ideology, how could you say that only 2500 jews died under nazi rule ayyy lmao
>>6393627
Kill yourself.
>Relevant
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/284ms6/why_is_william_shirers_the_rise_and_fall_of_the/
>inb4 reddit
The Third Reich trilogy by Richard J. Evans is also very good.
>>6392931
>People think that reading one book on an event will give them any kind of knowledge
You read at least 10 books and then come to a conclusion.
>>6392931
>gain a comprehensive knowledge of nazi germany using this 1 weird book
>historians HATE it
>>6395324
well memed my friend
>>6393078
le ebin postmodernist
>>6393391
This:
http://www.amazon.com/Hitler-R-H-S-Stolfi/dp/1616144742
>>6395333
Objective history does not exist.
>>6393969
People, especially americans have a hard time swallowing this like the butthurt newfag from cuck /po/ 2.0. here >>6393985 , but this essentially true, without private property and the division of labour the family would have never existed. Even the modern nuclear form of the family today evolved out of very speciffic forms of capitalist growth. In the past the clan or the tribe was more important.
There is nothing that points to the effectiveness of the family system apart from training and educating you to function within the Capitalist framework of caste like worker management, other than that it's all muh feels.
>>6393395
Hitler's tabletalk was completely made up by that guy and has no historical basis or gravity.
Mein Kampf was ghost written by Rudolf Hess
and the second book is a continuation of his mad power fantasies from Mein Kampf
how can u be a jew if u dont practice judaism
>>6395316
You're on 4chan you fucking twat
>>6396407
You're missing the point. And that's objective history never existed.
>there are retards who actually choose to read Rise and Fall of the Third Reich over Albert Speer's Inside the Third Reich
Rise and Fall of the Third Reich is pleb tier schlock written by a muck raker.
>>6392981
Semi-literate plebs
>>6394230
> he thinks you can't start a sentence with "and"
I learned that that wasn't true in high school.
am I a jew pleb if I think Shirers book is a decent source of historical data?
>>6392957
Fag
>>6396442
Does that make you mad? Are you mad?
>>6396326
u can't know nuffin, ids just shadows n vases mayn
>>6392931
>So, do you regard this as a history book or not?
_No._
>>6396377
Citation needed on table talk
I've never heard historians complain about this book. What are the major reasons for their skepticism towards Rise and Fall?
>write what is regarded as the best book on Nazi Germany ever written
Typically I don't trust the masses to say whether or not something is historically accurate. Bill O'Reily continues to write best sellers and half the country probably believes that his books are historically perfect and honest. However any trained historian could point out how shitty his books really are, but they are popular nonetheless.
Rise and Fall has been on my history list for awhile now, I might pick it up just to see what all the fuss is about.
>>6397330
Here is what historian, Evans, had to say about it
>Shirer’s book has probably sold millions of copies in the four decades or more since its appearance. It has never gone out of print and remains the first port of call for many people who want a readable general history of Nazi Germany. There are good reasons for the book’s success. Shirer was an American journalist who reported from Nazi Germany until the United States entered the war in December, 1941, and he had a journalist’s eye for the telling detail and the illuminating incident. His book is full of human interest, with many arresting quotations from the actors in the drama, and it is written with all the flair and style of a seasoned reporter’s despatches from the front. Yet it was universally panned by professional historians. The emigré German scholar Klaus Epstein spoke for many when he pointed out that Shirer’s book presented an ‘unbelievably crude’ account of German history, making it all seem to lead up inevitably to the Nazi seizure of power. It had ’glaring gaps’ in its coverage. It concentrated far too much on high politics, foreign policy and military events, and even in 1960 it was ‘in no way abreast of current scholarship dealing with the Nazi period’. Getting on for half a century later, this comment is even more justified than it was in Epstein’s day. For all its virtues, therefore, Shirer’s book cannot really deliver a history of Nazi Germany that meets the demands of the early twenty-first-century reader
>>6397440
Interesting. It's probably still important to read in terms of viewing the period from a journalists point of view. However there are probably much better books on why Nazi Germany actually happened. Still think I'll give this a read, just finished a Concise History of Germany so this is will probably compliment it.
Thanks for the info anon
>>6397492
Well yes, i mean by now the book is quite dated, and serves better as a source material. It is still a useful source of information, Evan's does use him in his own work, but it's not something you read to give you a definitive knowledge of Nazi Germany.
Here's an interesting article from 1946, when nobody on /lit/ could give me an answer as to the legality of the Nuremberg proceedings.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1946/04/nuremberg-a-fair-trial-a-dangerous-precedent/306492/?single_page=true#disqus_thread
tl;dr Executive power dressed as judicial
>people find this period of history interesting
Third Reich is top pleb history.
In my entire life, I have almost never heard the nazi area brought up not to be bait/strawman. This period is plagued by non criticized judgments of value.
Example : you are for eugenism, literal Hitler, when eugenism has always been a flop in Germany, the nazis almost immediately dropped it, and England was the eugenism center of the world.
There is a reason why the Godwin point became a thing. Discussion involving nazis are almost immediately intothetrash.jpg
If anything I'd consider the Weimar Republic more interesting.
>>6397580
>1918-45 is bad because of popularity and modern politics
It gets tiring pointing out bullshit on 4chumps
>>6396377
Hitler's Table Talk was not made up. There was a "sequel" of sorts that purported to be Hitler conversations from 1945 and that is made up. "Hitler Speaks" also known as "The Voice of Destruction" is another fabrication (actually war-time propaganda). But Hitler's Table Talks is not made up.
>>6396380
The same way Jews who don't practice Judaism can get Tay-Sachs disease.
>>6397580
>when eugenism has always been a flop in Germany, the nazis almost immediately dropped it
sooooo outlawed interracial marriages, forced sterilization and murder of disabled, and the holocaust, that wasn't eugenics? what then?
>>6392931
>why won't historians recognise muh eyewitness account
stfu, history goes well beyond that and you know it
>>6398246
good house keeping
