I don't think you guys actually read anything

then you must be english and not an amerinigger

>white
Shut the FUCK up, mongrel.

I reread my own shitposts and normiebook every day.

We actually do. It's just that we like to bitch and shitpost about things that we haven't read, in addition to bitching and shitposting about the things that we have read.

This is accurate

I do read, it's just that when I'm posting I pretend I have read a whole lot more or maybe the same amount but specific other books I haven't actually read, depending on the post I'm crafting

I practice my rhetoric by arguing leftypol in Veeky Forums.

Veeky Forums has always been more about collecting books than reading them. That's why we have shelf threads.

That's just natural though

The act of actually reading is the worst part about books
Note that I'm not saying having read a book is in any way bad, on the contrary, it's great, but that's when you are done and not actually reading

Reading as an activity is just fucking dull
You sit, motionless and on your own, stare at the tiny symbols and turn over a piece of paper every now and then.
How lame is that?

Read about what interests You and not what interests the larping saviors of western cannon.

>tfw reading about Hitler and it's fascinating

>You sit, motionless and on your own, stare at the tiny symbols and turn over a piece of paper every now and then.
How lame is that?

why i only read picture books

thats a purty shelf of books

I'd like to read but I just waste all my time browsing Veeky Forums.

Veeky Forums is also extremely pretentious and hates anything that isn't philosophy or classical works.

>Reading as an activity is just fucking dull
You're reading the wrong books, user. Maybe you should stop asking Veeky Forums for suggestions and just pick up books that sound interesting to you.
>You sit, motionless and on your own, stare at the tiny symbols and turn over a piece of paper every now and then.
>How lame is that?
Well considering we're the only species capable of doing that, and the fact that many human societies never invented the written word to begin with, I'd say it's pretty goddamn impressive.

>Monolingual
Did you really try to make an insult out of being able to google translate

"Sound interesting" doesn't make them interesting; it's the same gimmick as advertising. Make a cover that attacks so we can nail 'em with the shit inside

Boy, you really don't like to read, do you?

Are you new?

That's a rhetorical question (might wanna look up what that one means)

Yeah Hitler is my favorite too

Currently I'm reading Jitterbug Perfume. Judge that how you will, I know you cunts like to mock anyone that reads fiction.

maybe you should a new hobby+board

I finished with Irving's writings, currently reading Kershaw's books + Stolfi's write-up.

Eventually I plan to do same sort of reading for all the larger single individuals around WW2 and WW1.

Remember that part where he incorporates Austria into the Reich?

Oh man, classic Hitler
what a guy

I thought you were sincere ;_;

Why do you perceive sincerity as this sort of stoic no-fun-allowed state of mind?

Was Irving any fun?
I've been avoiding him, is he a good writer in terms of prose and whatnot?

I think he managed to make the dry diplomacy and bureaucratic aspects of governing a country very interesting to read, and most of all revealing in the sense that it opens up the inner structures and workings of Nazi high command.

As for his prose, I think he was a fairly good writer, managed to grab my attention closely and the book was nearly 1500 pages (Hitler's War and War Path combined) and I never got bored despite most of the book just being reviews of diaries, documents etc. from Nazi Germany era.

Kershaw has left me wanting. He even shows historical ignorance at parts in the book I'm reading and has a far more.. "pop history" feel to it (is not as thorough and as detailed as Irving's books).

but I recommend both.

Now this Stolfi guy, this guy is a fucking fucknut who drank entire goddamn seaful of kool aid and is pretty much the biggest Hitler cultist I've read so far.

>Now this Stolfi guy
I will freely admit I've never heard of him before

Irving is said to be quite the fanboy himself, isn't he? That's why people discredit him and whatnot, or that's my impression at least
If Stolfi is actually full cool aid mode and even worse, are you getting anything out of reading him? I guess I'm asking if you would ever recommend him

He looks Hitler from the point of view as how Hitler was as a person and understood himself as a person. It's very different, certainly. His book also involves critique of modern Hitler biographies (base of them, which is, to assume Hitler was of pure evil, and everything must point toward it, like backwards ass way of building a biography). One of the first pages go on about how Hitler was messianic in his narrative (over political character). Which sort of makes sense.

I definitely recommend it, if you are looking for a non-standard Hitler biography, but just a disclaimer, it's quite the kool aid journey.

Irving's got shit on Stolfi in terms of fanboyism.
I gave Irving a shot and I was happy I gave it. Good writer, and accurate book.

b

What ARE you reading this week then?

As I said, Kershaw's books and Stolfi.

Easton is good. Also Heritage does quality work. Heritage doesn't publish anymore, not leather bound, but quality HC with sandlots and ornamentation.