Europe Latest News

Italy: Mein Kampf “Top 10” School Book

A national poll in Italy among 138,000 secondary schools and 3.5 million students has found that Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf is one of their top ten favorite reading materials.

The finding shocked the liberal establishment in Italy, particularly in light of the fact that Hitler’s book came out tops among some 10,000 different titles nominated.

According to a report in RAI news, a survey launched by Italy’s Ministry for Education to promote reading and discover which books are “most beloved” by schoolchildren, showed that several secondary schools included Mein Kampf in their top ten lists.

Alessandro Fusacchia, from the Italian Ministry for Education, referred to the choice as a “particularly nasty case”, adding that the book was ineligible for the vote in any case as secondary school pupils had been asked to select books by Italian authors published after 2000.

He said: “We are looking into it, but we are convinced that it was not a bad interpretation of the request, but rather a free choice.”

The choice wasn’t confined to one region, with classes in Palermo, Catanzaro (Calabria), Potenza (Basilicata), Tivoli and Gaeta in Lazio, Trieste, Udine (Fruili-Venezia Giulia), and Piacenza (Emilia Romagna) all selecting Hitler’s book as one of their favorite reads.

There are several English version translations of Mein Kampf, with the most famous editions being by James Murphy (published in 1939) and by Ralph Mannheim (published in 1943).

Both these editions were unauthorized, although Murphy’s work is often mistakenly believed to be have been “official.”

This is because Murphy was originally commissioned by the Nazi Party to translate the book into English. The poor standard of his translation caused him to be fired less than halfway through the work, and he left Germany for England, where he completed it in his own style.

READ  Indian Colonizers in Britain Bring Third World Corruption and Fraud to UK Elections

Murphy’s pirate version was then published by Hurst and Blackett, and is well-known for its numerous errors and additions—including the use of racial pejoratives for blacks which Hitler never used in the original.

The Mannheim translation likewise was unauthorized, and although supposedly “better” than the Murphy translation, also contained many errors and was equally poorly translated into English.

There was, however, one officially authorized translation issued by the Nazi Party, although it was printed in such small numbers that it never gained much publicity. The translator of this officially authorized version was clearly neither Murphy nor Mannheim, as its style and simplicity of reading showed, yet his or her name has been lost.

Most of the copies of this officially approved English translation were printed during the Second World War and distributed in the prisoner-of-war camp libraries for Allied prisoners to read. As a result, they became known as the Stalag editions—Stalag being a contraction of the German word Stammlager, or POW camp.

HTML Editor - Full Version


  1. In Italian it;s translated as “My battle”. Why the title of this book is it translated into English as “My struggle”? “My fight” or “My battle” sounds closer to the meaning of the word “Kamph”. “My struggle” sounds diminishing, like a person was struggling for something instead of fighting/battling for something. Just compare the expression “Are you struggling? ” with “Are you fighting?”

  2. I’ve read it, and to be honest it was the most awful, disjoined, painful read I think I’ve ever read. But felt being a student of history I had to endure it. It’s not the big bad call for Nazism that the MSM would lead you to believe, it’s mostly jibberish….

  3. Maybe because, like here in the UK, there comes a time where you look around and think, were we actually the victors in that war? What did we actually fight for? Why have the western allied nations seem to be losers as well in the end? Why do all the countries who ‘fought the nazis’, have to celebrate their own cultural and ethnic cleansing via replacement migration, embrace moral and spiritual bankruptcy, sexual degeneracy and economic poverty in the name of ‘progress’, and modernity’, and any who object to this are then ‘the nazis’? Makes you ask: Just WHO were the ‘nazis’ then? So you investigate. You find that the more you learn, the more you have been lied to. You find it was’nt ‘Nationalism’, that started either world wars, but rather globalism, whose front ideaology is Communism and Marxism and then finally you realise that Hitler was right.

  4. As interesting as this info might look, one should avoid excessive optimism.

    One should exert extreme caution when basing any analysis on polls, the general ‘quality’ of which nowadays is tantamount to hear-say reliability level (see the US 45th President’s election and how it was carefully not correctly, nor honestly, forecast). One should, as a matter of principle, try and figure out what are the impact and effects intended with such releases of ‘sensasional’, heavily emotionally-loaded information; and who stands to benefit from it – I hint at the strange coïncidence of Britain’s first “gag-law” (Please note: a GAG; not a MUZZLE – the latter equalling to a reversal of charges as one muzzles a rabid dog to protect others from it, but one gags an honest man to prevent him from shouting for help) and the prosecution of hopefully indomittable and certainly admirable Alyson Chabloz.
    Usually one must take into account the abysmal ignorance of our youth(s) as a result of their steady cretinisation at school and through the mostly audio-visual ‘media’ gang. Should one try and find out just what the upcoming generations know of, and about Hitler; one must expect to be heavily disappointed by the results. When the war generation marched out of the butchery mesmerised and heavily formatted with pavlovian reflexes; the next ones’ general knowledge on the matter were heavily simplified down to the basics of “History one-o-one”… and maintained with care at that level.
    As for the power of concentration of the quite perfectly “iloticised” offshoot of nowadays; I suggest the following test:
    Try giving off-hand to your dominant teenager a text printed black on white (no colours; no pictures or images) on the obverse of an A4 page on any subject likely to generate his interest, to read quietly in your presence – he will probably give you first a good demonstration of his talent at speed-reading – and once that he is through with his reading, ask him what he has gathered from the content. You might be in for a few surprises.
    Allowing for a reasonable measure of “effet de mode” and for the possible ‘coolness’ of the topic will help one to resituate an exciting news to its’ correct level of impact.
    As far as the present information release goes it can be perceived as an incitement for us to communicate, teach and inform as much as possible. No small task; but if we endeavour to do precisely that; then this specific news will have borne in it some measure of utility.


Post Comment