The problem is that in Dugdale's translation of Mein Kampf (the one in Library), lets say as an example, in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 of a chapter, he deleted the 2, 4, 6, and the other paragraphs 1, 3, 5 are let alone and they are exactly the same in other translations, which is not only an absurd but it distort the real context of the paragraphs left.
Lets analyze a quote, from Dugdales translation, in which Hitler supposed praise protestantism (also happens in other translations and in German, but without the real context, we could not see this is an insertion):
Protestantism will always help in furthering all that is German whenever it is a matter of inward purity or increasing national sentiment, or defense of German life, language, nay, even German freedom, since all these are essentially a part of itself; but it is most hostile to any attempt to rescue the nation from the clutches of its most deadly enemy, for its attitude towards Judaism has been laid down more or less as a dogma. Nevertheless it wavers undecidedly around the question and unless that question is solved, all attempts to bring a German revival are without meaning or possibility of success.
It is obviously an insertion, that one can think that xtianity can be something that will help Nationalism issues for superficial appearance (like the neo-nazi organizations), BUT it is totally useless and hostile to real nationalism, so the double standard doesn't makes sense. In Dugdales also there is not the quote below that Hitler says it is useless to try to reform a religion (like making an idiotic aryan-christ) but either totally destroy or adopt it (like adopting Paganism as the official religion, and destroying xtianity, something he actualy BEGUN in Nazi Germany) - For the new people, see Third Reich and Christianity:
http://spiritualwarfare666.webs.com/Third_Reich_666.htm
Here, one truly cannot serve two masters. Make no mistake, I believe the founding or destruction of a religion is a far greater matter than the founding or destruction of a State, let alone of a political party. It is not an argument to the contrary for someone to say that the attacks were only defensive measures against attacks from the other side.
Now why Ford's translation is better than the others (considering the original in German was corrupted too). The below are quotes from the book "Mein Kampf Translation Controversy":
Dugdale Translation 1933
The first legal translation was an abridged(incomplete) edition called the Dugdale translation. It was criticized for selectively omitting sections, however the omissions appear to be random. The quality of the translation was not up to par, that combined with public complaints about an abridged version led to a new translation. The Dugdale version was published by Hurst & Blackett in London and Houghton Mifflin in the US.
Here is a Dugdale example compared to the Ford translation:
Dugdale Translation: I refused to countenance such folly, and after a very short time I ceased to attend the meetings of the committee. I made my propaganda for myself, and that was an end of it; I refused to allow any ignoramus to talk me into any other course.
Ford translation: I refused to submit to such foolishness and after a very short time, I stopped attending the committee sessions. I prepared my propaganda and that was that. I also did not let some good-for-nothing interfere with my work, just as I did not concern myself with their business.
The Dugdale quote appears to say that Hitler was producing propaganda for himself. Although we can figure out it means, this is not what was originally intended or written.
The Dugdale translation not only omitted paragraphs, it omitted important sentences and critical information from within sentences in an effort to abridge the book as much as possible. Dugdale was significant because it was the first legally published copy of Mein Kampf, but it is not commonly read today since unabridged(full) versions are available now. Considering the over-edited nature. Because it is abridged, it will not be used for any further examples or analysis in this text.
Mistranslation in other editions as regards race:
The word Hitler used the most was völkisch which means belonging to a certain race/people.
Its actual meaning can be more positive or more negative based on context. The word itself sounds very nice and innocent which is why the Nazis kept using it instead of the racist sounding rassisch for a race. The best translation for völkisch is one that is somewhat neutral like racialist however it would not be correct to translate it as racist.
Folkish, Populist and Racial are pretty much interchangeable, however no one uses folkish or populist in common speech. These were commonly used in older translations from the 1930s which obscured the true meaning. If you look up populist or folkish in the dictionary, you will find a very nice definition which is not necessarily related to the aceoriented meaning in Mein Kampf.
The word ethnic may be considered too religious of a term in German. The German equivalent, ethnisch, wasnt used in the original German texts of Mein Kampf. Its used differently and not an accurate translation for völkisch.
It would be inappropriate to translate populist as racist. The word racist in English has a negative taint which was not associated with the words populist/folkish. Therefore we must be careful not to blindly substitute racist for populist even though it would be a valid word substitution based strictly on the definition, the meaning is skewed by social perception if we do so.
For these reasons, the words populist and folkish which were used in earlier translations were not used in the new Ford translation. The words simply have no modern meaning to the average person. Ethnic is not accurate either so race/racial was the best choice and is the most accurate translation. Populist was most often replaced with race-aware or racialist (one who uses race to make decisions or studies racial matters, usually informally) in the Ford translation.
Ave Satan
