ADOLF HITLER AN ANALYSIS OF MEIN KAMPF

SRINJOY MAJUMDAR

Old No. 38, New No. 6 McNichols Road, Chetpet Chennai - 600 031 First Published by Notion Press 2019 Copyright © SRINJOY MAJUMDAR 2019 All Rights Reserved. ISBN 978-1-64661-528-5 This book has been published with all efforts taken to make the material error-free after the consent of the author. However, the author and the publisher do not assume and hereby disclaim any liability to any party for any loss, damage, or disruption caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident, or any other cause. While every effort has been made to avoid any mistake or omission, this publication is being sold on the condition and understanding that neither the author nor the publishers or printers would be liable in any manner to any person by reason of any mistake or omission in this publication or for any action taken or omitted to be taken or advice rendered or accepted on the basis of this work. For any defect in printing or binding the publishers will be liable only to replace the defective copy by another copy of this work then available.

To the 6 million Jews who were murdered in Concentration Camps during the holocaust. May their souls rest in peace.

Contents Part 1 Introduction 1. Writing Style

5

2. Basic Argument

6

3. Doctrine Of Brutality

8

4. The Jewish Problem

10

5. Cult Of Personality

13

6. Social Conscience

15

7. Conclusions

17

Part 2 Introduction 8. The Jewish Conspiracy Explained

23

9. Racial Purity

25

10. The First World War

27

11. Conclusions

31

v

Part 1

Introduction Hitler’s autobiographical book Mein Kampf, the official doctrine of the NAZI regime during WWII, is not a book that many would consider to read. Modern society is generally very well acquainted with Hitler and the ultimate outcome of his philosophical stances and will automatically denounce such notions based on a purely humanitarian and moral standpoint. The book remains illegal in many parts of the world (particularly Europe) and it is rightfully considered one of the most powerful, destructive and divisive doctrines in modern history. While the book is often confronting in its content it is still to my opinion an essential read because contained therein are the techniques of a master manipulator. It shows clearly that the doctrine of genocide-inducing hatred is not always - or even generally - a chaotic ramble of spiteful extremist verses but rather a considered and deliberate propagandist argument, one which at many points seems benign and even agreeable and always poses a compelling emotional narrative. There are many places in the book where Hitler seems caring, honest, intelligent, moderate and even inclined towards liberty; such is the art of his manipulation. There are also many other places where such outrageous and baseless ideas are expressed that one would come to question his overall mental sanity. This part deals with an analysis of the first part of his book, chapters one and two, where he deals with the fundamental development of his notions through his experiences as a young man.

The aim of my book is to expose the falsehood of Hitler’s argument from a purely logical standpoint, since the negative ethical implications of the book are already clear to most civilized people. I have discussed the style and mechanism of his doctrine and expose the underlying deceptions that pertain to his arguments.

CHAPTER I

WRITING STYLE Hitler is no doubt a very intelligent man. The style of his writing implies a high skill with vocabulary and argumentation styles as well as a high degree of ability to convey a concept in a way that is ostensibly convincing. Reading Hitler’s work, from a purely literary sense, was quite pleasant and intellectually stimulating. The main criticism about Hitler’s writing style (being completely isolated from the dubious argument he tries to make) is that it is prone to a great deal of waffle and repetition. He takes three pages to detail a concept that could have been expressed in a single paragraph and throughout the book he is continually re-enforcing his ideas by repeating the fundamental concepts of the book.

5

CHAPTER II

BASIC ARGUMENT Hitler had two basic arguments in his book. The first was an argument that places Nationalism, national pride and national identity at the top of all human ideologies. Hitler argues that national pride and identity are the only things that will advance the interests of human beings and that all the observable shortcomings of society and individuals themselves are a symptom of the lack of national identity as a driving force in the society in which he lived. He viewed the two greatest perils facing humanity as Marxism and Judaism mainly because both doctrines take an internationalist view of humanity and in some ways side-lines nationalism as an underlying concept. However while the Marxists believed in global socialism and a worldwide brotherhood of proletariat (working class) solidarity, the Jews represented a people who were dispersed throughout the world and thus did not have a singular national identity. Hitler considered any political, religious or social movements that operated on the international scale as being essentially corrupt because it undermined the national powers that he held so dear. His paranoid arguments of a global Jewish conspiracy demonstrated exactly why his hatred of the Jews and his hatred of global Marxism were very much linked in his psyche. In many places, he derided democracy as being essentially flawed, even on a national level, because it appealed to the views of the majority that he considered that to be an argument for the lowest common denominator 6

SRINJOY MAJUMDAR

and prevented people of real intellectual superiority and ability from taking positions of power. Hitler considered himself very much among the class of elite intellectual thinkers and evidence of his megalomania can be seen dotted everywhere around the book. The doctrine of superiority by its very nature causes a person to assume that anything detrimental in society, culture or circumstance can only be attributed to the collective ignorance, evil or laziness of those he considered inferior. It is unclear if in reality Hitler was a religious person of if he believed in God. If you take the book at face value he makes frequent references to God in his arguments and considers faith and the Church as part of the establishments that he holds most sacred. In later parts of the book he even expresses the idea that the Church is even more important than the State. Simultaneously though, he references Nature (with capitalization as an entity) and Darwinian notions of evolution are one of his primary evidences of the superiority of Aryans and the subsequent inferiority of all other races.

7

CHAPTER III

DOCTRINE OF BRUTALITY One of the most telling examples of a logical fallacy is the abandoning of primary premise Hitler makes with regard to the rise of political movements and their subsequent maintenance. In attacking Marxism, Socialism and Trade Unions he makes various points that show that Marxist or Communism ideology tends towards brutality and the suppression of individual liberty. He details how in his younger days of employment he had conflicts with the Trade Unions whereby he would argue against their doctrine at the workplace and would subsequently be dismissed from his job as a result of his disagreement with the philosophy of Trade Unions. He showed that the Trade Unions limit the intellectual freedoms of the individual by only prescribing that communist publications be purchased, communist meetings be attended and communist concepts be supported. Using this suppression of liberty as a fundamental point into the evils of Communism, he then postulates that any movement that is based on truth, integrity and righteousness needs to be “equally or if not more-so as brutal” as the competing doctrines in order to be successful. The abstract idea of righteousness here is the sanctity of nationalism which he takes as an axiom, something that is self-evident and does not even need to be argued. He points out the problem (brutality) in the rival doctrine as evil but instead of providing an alternative that eliminates the brutality he then reverses his premise to say that brutality is a good thing (or at least a necessary thing.) 8

SRINJOY MAJUMDAR

““They feel very little shame at being terrorized intellectually and they are scarcely conscious of the fact that their freedom as human being is impudently abused; and thus they have not the slightest suspicion ofthe intrinsic fallacy of the whole doctrine. They see only the ruthless force and brutality of its determined utterances, to which they always submit. If Social Democracy should be opposed by a more truthful teaching, then even, though the struggle be of the bitterest kind, this truthful teaching will finally prevail provided it be enforced with equal ruthlessness.”

”

- Adolf Hitler.

This “totalitarianism for the sake of individualism” is one of the fundamental contradictions in NAZI thinking.

9