dw.com
Mein Kampf" Sales and the Resurgence of Far-Right Extremism
Despite Hitler's death in 1945, his book "Mein Kampf" continues to be sold internationally, reflecting the persistence of his hateful ideology and prompting concerns about rising far-right extremism and violence, particularly among youth.
- What is the global impact of the continued availability and propagation of Hitler's "Mein Kampf"?
- Mein Kampf", Hitler's manifesto, continues to be sold globally, decades after his death, ranging from \$600 online to lower prices in Egypt and India. This demonstrates the enduring, albeit controversial, influence of his ideology.
- What are the long-term societal consequences of the ongoing normalization of far-right ideologies and the increased violence associated with them?
- The normalization of Hitler's ideology on social media signifies a dangerous erosion of societal taboos. This trend, coupled with increased violence among far-right youth groups, necessitates proactive measures to combat extremism, including stricter online moderation and enhanced protection for anti-extremism organizations.
- How do the varying prices of "Mein Kampf" across different regions reflect the differing levels of engagement with or awareness of its hateful ideology?
- The continued sale and online presence of "Mein Kampf" highlights the persistence of Hitler's hateful ideology, including antisemitism and racism, across various platforms and regions. This underscores the need for ongoing education and counter-speech.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the resurgence of Hitler's ideology as a significant and alarming threat, emphasizing the accessibility of his works and the persistence of extremist views. The use of terms like "ideological poisons" and descriptions of the widespread availability of Mein Kampf contribute to this framing, potentially influencing the reader to perceive the situation as more dire than it might otherwise appear. The headline, if there were one, would likely reflect this dramatic framing.
Language Bias
The article uses strong language such as "ideological poisons," "brutal antisemitism," and "mass murderer" when referring to Hitler and his ideology. While accurate reflections of historical events and the nature of the ideology, this language is emotionally charged and lacks neutrality. More neutral alternatives could be used, like "extremist views," "antisemitic beliefs," and "perpetrator of mass violence." The repetition of words like "otrovni" (poisonous) reinforces the negative framing.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the resurgence of Hitler's ideology and its dissemination online, but it omits discussion of counter-movements or efforts to combat the spread of extremist views. It also doesn't explore the motivations of those who spread this ideology beyond a general statement of antisemitism and racism. While acknowledging practical constraints on length, the lack of this context limits the reader's understanding of the complexities of the issue.
False Dichotomy
The article doesn't explicitly present false dichotomies, but it implicitly frames the issue as a simple struggle between those who oppose and those who support Hitler's ideology, overlooking the nuances of individual motivations and the range of beliefs within extremist groups. The complexity of the issue and the motivations of those involved are not fully explored.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the resurgence of Hitler's ideology and hate speech online, indicating a failure to effectively combat hate speech and extremism, undermining peace and justice. The rise of violent extremism, as noted by Nicholas Lele, further threatens these institutions.