5 ms·
"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany" by William L. Shirer. It's a classic history book of our century which, despite its title, pri
by old-gregg 10y ago
"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany" by William L. Shirer. It's a classic history book of our century which, despite its title, primarily focuses on Hitler's raise to power in the early 30s and the long, painful and ultimately futile international attempts at avoiding WW2 in the late 30s.
It's a book I wish everyone would read, particularly everyone in a public office and the media. It's a shame that comparing politicians and their actions to Hitler has became a cliche everyone now is quick to ignore. Meanwhile there's plenty of stuff happening in the world straight from the Nazi playbook of the 30s.
- nickbauman 10y agoAlbert Speer's Inside the Third Reich is a good accompaniment, too.
- noinsight 10y agoThere's a new trilogy by Richard J. Evans about the same subject. I have them sitting on my bookshelf but have yet to read them. Apparently Shirer's book has drawn some criticism because he was a journalist and not a historian whereas Evans is a historian. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Reich_Trilogy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Reich_Trilogy
- madao 10y agoThis is true, however I think its safe to say that most of his work was from primary sources, he kept extensive journals during the period and was also lucky enough to talk to several generals of OKW and get access to their journals. Not to mention that he also gained access to the Nuremberg trial records and German records (very well documented) after the war. Well worth the read.
- tvural 10y ago"It's a shame that comparing politicians and their actions to Hitler has became a cliche everyone now is quick to ignore." The trouble is that whenever person Y puts person X and Hitler in the same sentence, there will be news headlines that say, "Y compares X to Hitler". At that point it looks like Y suggested X would do something on the level of the Holocaust. If Y really just meant that X and Hitler provoked distrust of minorities, that nuanced message will get lost. Examples: https://www.google.com/#q=+sam+altman+compares+trump+to+hitler https://www.google.com/#q=+sam+altman+compares+trump+to+hitl... https://www.google.com/#q=meg+whitman+compares+trump+to+hitler https://www.google.com/#q=meg+whitman+compares+trump+to+hitl... https://www.google.com/#q=glenn+beck+compares+trump+to+hitler https://www.google.com/#q=glenn+beck+compares+trump+to+hitle...
- smnplk 10y agoThere is also a good biography about Hitler from a historian called David Irving. He is the guy that studied the history of hitler and ww2 for decades. Although he is perceived as very controversial author, I think his books are the closest thing to the truth.
- coolsunglasses 10y agohttps://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/david-irving https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/indi... How do you separate what is true from what is he biased about?
- smnplk 10y agofair point, thanks for downvotes :) But do lookup the documents where Hitler clearly states that he forbids any violence against the jews. The real monsters were Goebbels, Goring and Himmler.
- syngrog66 10y agowow. thought I'd be the only one to cite that here on HN, and I just did over in my own top-level comment, along with Hackers. and agreed, it's particularly relevant today in helping to think about Trump and whether it's wise for Americans to vote him into power