Now coming back to the Mein Kampf, there is this very significant issue that has to be mentioned. It is a book written in German. What I have made a cursory reading of, is only an English translation. It does seem to be a translation done without any mischief. By ‘mischief’, I mean efforts at trying to impute wrong words to deliberately convey unintended meanings, senses and imputation in the sentences. To that extent, the English translation on which I depend upon could be authoritative enough.


However, that is not enough. For, even though no one mentions it is so many words, any translation between languages that do not have similar or same social, familial and hierarchical codes, remains an incomplete translation.


For instance, if a translation is done among languages of the Indian peninsula, most of the social powers, direction of communication, hierarchies, the relative positions of the various people who speak, the relative position of the various persons who are mentioned, the direction of imperative honesty, and also those of callousness etc. remain unchanged in the translated text.


Even then there are certain languages of the Indian peninsula, which have code levels which are not found in other languages of the Indian peninsula. When translations are done among these languages, in certain areas actually a vacuum should exist, where the other exact word is absent. However, no one would notice a vacuum in the translation, because the translator would quite naturally use the next best option to fill up the vacuum. However, the exact social context, the relative social or positional hierarchy is lost in the translation. Moreover, the emotional content and associated paranoia that one language system would create would remain unexplained in the other language.


However, when one does a similar translation between a language of the Indian peninsula and English, there is a huge amount of discrepancy happening. Actually, when a text connected to a native Indian peninsular social life, connected to the local people therein, is translated into English, there is a huge possibility that what appears in English is people with totally different personalities. In the feudal language of the Indian peninsula, people are not standalone entities as seen in English. They are all powerfully connected to each other in word codes, which go on changing depending on who is connecting to whom. The YOU, HE, SHE, HIS, HER, HERS, HIM, YOUR, YOURS, THEY, THEIR, THEM &c. Go on changing.


This very ferocious pulsation, which has a very powerful hold on every emotion in a person living in a language system of the Indian peninsular region, is totally lost in an English transition. In English, the words YOU, HE, SHE, HIS, HER, HERS, HIM, YOUR, YOURS, THEY, THEIR, THEM &c. literally stands immutable in virtual space.


As far as I can judge, German language has some kind of feudal content in it. After reading the text of Mein Kampf, I am more or less sure that the German language is feudal or hierarchical. Actually, in the current-day understanding of this software phenomenon, I define such languages as 3-D virtual arena languages. I can’t go into that theme here.


There have been many online discussions that I had with others, from whom I could get to feel that I am right about this. There was a small interaction with someone from German nativity who claimed to be a native in English also. It was on the subject of the German pilot deliberately crashing his plane on the mountain tops, killing all the passengers therein. I simply suggested that if the German language had this feudal content issue, there can be emotional swings possible unless the exact hierarchies are enforced in sync with the positional hierarchy.


There are other competing hierarchies possible. Age is a very competing hierarchy in most feudal languages. If positional hierarchy is not enforced very severely, in many cases the age-wise seniors would overtake the positional seniors with a very minor word change. The impact it can have on positional senior is of the nth degree. These kinds of information are not there in English. And modern psychology and psychiatry are more or less in the dark about many items that are common knowledge in many feudal language nations.


There is this quote from Mr. Nanoo Pillay’s Manuscript Sketch of the Progress of Travancore. It bespeaks more or less the standard people mentality in any feudal language nation. In the quote, it is about the people of the erstwhile Travancore kingdom in the south-western part of the Indian subcontinent.


QUOTE: The people of the country acted less from principle than from feeling and short-sighted views of interest. Their motives frequently fluctuated, and their enmities and reconciliation were often sudden and apparently unaccountable. END OF QUOTE



Coming back to Mein Kampf. It is a book written in German language. The spirited spur that certain word usages and combination can deliver in German might not be replicate-able in English. There have been attempts to portray the demagogy style of the author of Mein Kampf in various quarters in English, as that of a mad man. In fact, the famous Charlie Chaplin movie The Great Dictator does attempt to do this in a very striking manner. However, a huge understanding is missed in these kinds of portrayals. For instance, if one were to hear an emotional speech in Tamil and try to translate the words into English, there can be a very good chance that the exact emotional triggers are lost in the translation. This same issue is there with regard to most feudal languages.


In fact, English nations do not have the least idea as to how or why the Islamic groups manage to garner supporters and to regiment them. For them, the emotionally rousing speeches seem to rouse up thousands of people just because the people are fools. That is not the exact fact. The fact is more related to the fact that most other languages are not planar like English. In fact, the word codes in feudal languages create a huge 3-D virtual arena in which human beings get linked to each other in powerfully swaying tugs and pulls. It is a theme which a native English speaker cannot contemplate upon.


It is a very complicated world. In this complicated world, people do not exist as equals or as entities having any right to any equality or dignity. Everything is relative. Relative poverty and luxury is a necessary ingredient in this type of social living. Relative heights and lowliness are encrypted into everything possible. People and associated items are relatively gold or dirt. Divine or desecrated.


In Mein Kampf also, this is there. On one side, the author finds most things German as totally debased. On the other, German things are divine. It depends on who the author is speaking of.

MEIN KAMPF by Adolf Hitler - A demystification!

VED from VICTORIA INSTITUTIONS

Commentary - What might be lost in the translation!

VED.jpg