I am noticing a rise in Holocaust denial with the rising anti-Zionism coming out of the Israel-Palestine conflict. Many of these YouTubers, tiktokers, and podcasters point to the writings of David Irving as proof. I know he is a holocaust denier and an idiot, but I would like to read it so I could point out the exact flaws in Irving’s “evidence” and stop getting the comment “You haven’t even read it!”. I also don’t want to send a penny to this author, but also don’t want to break the law in getting access to it.

How would you go about this situation?

    • Mariemarion@lemm.ee
      0·
      8 days ago

      Dunno how it works where you are, but I (author) get money from library books. Much less than when a reader buys it (duh), but it pays for nice Christmas presents.

      • Apepollo11@lemmy.world
        0·
        9 days ago

        In the UK, certainly. It’s not the library’s job to censor what the borrowers want to read, even if it’s David Icke.

        • Zealousideal_Fox_900@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          0·
          8 days ago

          In Australia too. I was in Gatton, Queensland, at their Library, and they had signs up warning people to basically go pound sand, the library is not a censorship authority, and that they will not remove books based on “religious morals”, in the LGBT pride section, and a similar sign, lacking the morals bit in some of their conspiracy theory books. And Gold Coast Libraries stocks some of the weirdest conspiracy theory mags in the planet.

    • dhork@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      Furthermore, since it’s very likely that this author is not going to make really complex points, you could just go to the library, skim through it for an hour or two, and take notes on the two or three points worth quoting. (Or go all old-school and make photocopies of a few pages…). This way there is no record of your use of this book anywhere

  • voracitude@lemmy.world
    0·
    9 days ago

    Ugh, of course those people would point to any source that supports their current claim, without vetting the source itself. They’ll even tell you that of course they don’t support antisemitism, while spouting that antisemitic Irving shit all day, and that’s okay because they pick and choose only what they agree with out of the rhetoric. As though they couldn’t find sources that support their point without the concomitant antisemitism.

    First and foremost, then, I’d go about this by not denying the genocide in Gaza and not saying stuff such as “I bet you love Palestine” like it’s a pejorative, spacecadet.

    My second point would be to recognise that there is no moral or ethical reason not to pirate Irving’s works. If you were able to find it at a library, it would be there because someone paid a publisher for the copy and likely some kind of library license. Some of that goes to Irving. There is no way to deny him profit and acquire his work legally. So, pirate it. Fuck that guy.

    • spacecadet@lemm.eeOP
      0·
      9 days ago

      For some reason I don’t like Nazis, second most popular book in Gaza is Mein Kampf

      • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
        0·
        9 days ago

        Take this quiz and see if you can tell the difference between Nazism and Zionism. I bet you can’t.

      • voracitude@lemmy.world
        0·
        9 days ago

        This is about the shittiest argument you could make. Good luck in your search, maybe you’ll find some self-awareness along the way.

      • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
        0·
        8 days ago

        I know you are a Zionist from our previous chats, but I absolutely support going through any of these books with a critical lens. Do your best to try to find inaccuracies or prove what they say wrong, don’t forget to look into the sources they reference throughout the books.

        Use Anna’s Archive to find them all for free, some I have already found full editions available online

  • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
    0·
    9 days ago

    Download a book? Illegally? Online? Through a popular torrent website?

    I would never do such an illegal and terrible thing!!

      • cecilkorik@lemmy.caEnglish
        0·
        9 days ago

        Yeah that would be bad. I think we can agree that if there’s one thing that’s even more important than the ideology of an author, it’s definitely capitalism, which is conveniently not an ideology at all, just one of the fundamental laws of the universe. That’s why it’s important to not pirate things for ideological reasons.

  • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    9 days ago

    Do you have to agree with everyone you give your money to? What sort of economy would that be?

    Buy the book on the premise that you want access to the content he spent energy and time to produce. Just like you’d pay to get access to any kind of content that you want to consume because it is the fair thing to do.

    Or get it at the library like everyone else said.

    Pirating it is not ethical of course, but furthermore it becomes hypocritical and intellectually dishonest if you would criticize some else for pirating content produced by any other author.

    • cecilkorik@lemmy.caEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      Do you have to agree with everyone you give your money to? What sort of economy would that be?

      Probably a pretty nice one, actually.

          • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            0·
            9 days ago

            You are not obligated to read the book.

            You should feel obligated to nothing except to remunerate people fairly for their work if you want it.

            • bitcrafter@programming.dev
              0·
              9 days ago

              Sure, I am obviously not obligated to read the book, but what I was specifically responding to was the following remark:

              Yeah isolating yourself from everyone you disagree with is awesome, truly nothing bad ever comes out of it.

              which in turn was a response to the following:

              Do you have to agree with everyone you give your money to? What sort of economy would that be?

              Probably a pretty nice one, actually.

    • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      I do try. I actively boycott shitty companies (for 30 years and counting) and my list is long and swollen.

      If more people took action on their principles our systems would be a lot less shitty.

      Just because you can’t boycott everything doesn’t mean you should do nothing.

    • Skua@kbin.earth
      0·
      9 days ago

      I don’t think people expect that you have to agree with everyone you give money to, but it doesn’t seem unreasonable to try to avoid sending money to a Holocaust denier specifically for his Holocaust denial

      • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        0·
        9 days ago

        But the OP wants access to that content. It doesn’t matter what the content is, what matters is someone wrote it and they are entitled to payment from those who want to consume it.

        Alternatively they could just not read it or ask the people they are debating to send them a copy if they possess one.

        • Skua@kbin.earth
          0·
          9 days ago

          I think the question includes a discussion of whether or not that access is worth sending money to the author, right? Like, even if OP completely agrees with your position about the author deserving money for access and also wants access, they may want to both avoid sending money to the author and to avoid stealing it more. Of course you mentioned the possibility of finding it in a library and someone else in the thread suggested finding it second hand, which are probably both preferable solutions here if they are practical

          • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            0·
            9 days ago

            I just don’t think there’s any room for debate. You can get it on loan, rent it, buy it secondhand or buy it new. Anything else would be unethical.

            • Skua@kbin.earth
              0·
              9 days ago

              That’s fine, that just means the ethical question is now “is accessing it in one of those ways worth the consequences of doing so?” You might well say yes or, as others in these comments have, argue that the consequences are negligible. You might say no. It’s still a relevant debate in the topic OP is asking about even if we completely accept your position about which ways of getting access are ethical

  • Apepollo11@lemmy.world
    0·
    9 days ago

    You could just buy the book second-hand. Authors don’t get any of that money, and you’ll be able to get it for much cheaper than new.

  • leds@feddit.dk
    0·
    9 days ago

    Threw out Gaiman’s books , needs to be purged from history ( except Good Omens of course, because of Pratchett)

  • theneverfox@pawb.socialEnglish
    0·
    9 days ago

    There is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Just live your life

    Anyone with enough money to influence society already has enough money to influence society. Given them another $3 doesn’t make you complicit

    If they have problematic views but aren’t pushing them on society… Well, no one is perfect.

    Ultimately, voting with your wallet is a lie. Best sellers aren’t the best books, they’re the ones boosted by publishers and public figures. Just like the record industry - there’s people who are literally choosing the winners and losers

    What’s the ultimate ethical implication of using ketchup at McDonald’s vs buying a dipping sauce? There certainly is one, tiny as it might be. Use that energy to do good things, you’ll make a far greater difference calling a senator than buying a lifetime of books

    Or just sidestep it all and pirate it or check it out at a library

      • theneverfox@pawb.socialEnglish
        0·
        9 days ago

        Cool? That sounded like it was meant as a rebuttal, but that’s my whole argument.

        You can’t live a truly moral life under capitalism, but you can fight to change the system while living in the system. There’s no hypocracy in that, suggesting otherwise is just a mid-wit talking point

        Now, if we got together and organized a boycott against Amazon and you broke it, that would be a different story

      • theneverfox@pawb.socialEnglish
        0·
        9 days ago

        That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying live your life and save your energy for where it would actually make a difference

        Collective action works, voting with your wallet is a way to make people think they don’t need to organize

    • capybara@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      People who spread disinformation and conspiracy theories should profit as little as possible from it

    • scintilla@lemm.ee
      0·
      8 days ago

      If you’re looking for a color e-reader the unfortunate truth is that they are just not there yet. The best on available is not really that much better than the Libra color since most are using the same technology as it.

      There are a few RLCD devices that are available but from my understanding they aren’t very well reviewed and basically habe to be outside to be used without a backlight.