David Irving - Hitler----s War-la Guerra De Hitler -castellano-.pdf ★ (FRESH)
The reaction from the academic historical community to Hitler's War was swift and overwhelmingly negative. Historians across the political spectrum condemned the book for its distortions and tendentious reasoning. Writer Gitta Sereny described Irving's work as being "closer to theology or mythology" than to history, while historian Martin Broszat labeled Irving a "Hitler partisan". In an early review, The New York Times quoted historian Robert G. L. Waite, who stated definitively that "the historical record" shows Hitler would kill the Jews of Europe, contrary to Irving's assertions.
Irving's work relies heavily on primary sources, including diaries, letters, and interviews with former Nazi officials. However, his critics argue that he selectively presents and interprets these sources to support his revisionist thesis.
Methodologically, Irving commits several cardinal sins of historiography. He engages in confirmation bias —cherry-picking evidence that supports his thesis while ignoring contradictory documents. He also relies heavily on argument from silence , inferring Hitler’s ignorance from the absence of written “extermination orders” that, as functionalist historians argue, were never necessary because the Nazi regime operated through euphemism and verbal communication. Moreover, Irving dismisses survivor testimonies and postwar confessions as unreliable unless corroborated by contemporaneous German documents—a standard he does not apply to exculpatory evidence.
Your public links are automatically deleted after 13 months. If you delete a link, you'll still have access to the thread in your AI Mode history. Learn more Delete all public links? The reaction from the academic historical community to
A 5th edition was published in 2018 in Colombia, indicating that the book continues to be reprinted and distributed in the region.
Irving utilized thousands of pages of primary documents, including unpublished diaries and private correspondence of high-ranking Nazi officials (such as Goebbels and Himmler), to reconstruct a day-by-day account of Hitler's decision-making.
Quizás el punto más polémico es la afirmación de Irving de que no existe evidencia documental que pruebe que Hitler ordenó o conocía el exterminio sistemático de los judíos hasta finales de 1943, atribuyendo la responsabilidad a subordinados como Himmler o Goebbels. Controversia Legal y Académica Hitler's War: Amazon.co.uk: David Irving: 9798991972475 In an early review, The New York Times
Existen ediciones en español de este libro, publicadas bajo títulos como La guerra de Hitler o La verdad de Hitler y de su guerra vistas desde dentro . Encontrar la versión ".pdf" en la red puede llevar a sitios que infringen derechos de autor, por lo que se recomienda buscar las ediciones físicas publicadas por editoriales como Planeta en la década de los 80 según registros de la BNE . Enfoque Metodológico
"Hitler's War" (La Guerra de Hitler) by David Irving is a highly controversial work that argues Adolf Hitler was unaware of the Holocaust, a thesis rejected by mainstream historians who classify the book as revisionist, pseudo-history [1]. The work has been discredited by historical evidence, and legal proceedings have concluded that Irving manipulated evidence to downplay Hitler's role in the genocide [1].
The Spanish edition, La guerra de Hitler , was published in Spain by Editorial Planeta in 1980. The translation was performed by Andrés Bosch. The Spanish version is a faithful translation of Irving's original English text, including its controversial footnotes and conclusions. Irving's work relies heavily on primary sources, including
"La Guerra de Hitler" de David Irving es un ejemplo paradigmático de cómo la historia puede ser interpretada de maneras muy diferentes dependiendo de la perspectiva del historiador. Mientras que Irving presenta su obra como un intento de ofrecer una visión más matizada y humana de Hitler y su guerra, muchos historiadores ven en ella un intento de revisionismo que blanquea o minimiza los crímenes del régimen nazi.
La tesis más controvertida del libro es la presentación de Hitler no como el principal instigador de cada detalle de la guerra, sino como un líder a menudo desconectado o, en ciertos aspectos, moderado, cuyas órdenes eran malinterpretadas o ejecutadas por subordinados como Himmler o Göring.
In "Hitler's War", Irving presents a narrative that deviates from the widely accepted historical account of World War II. He argues that Hitler was not directly involved in the planning and execution of the Holocaust, and that the atrocities committed during the war were the result of actions by lower-ranking officials and the SS. Irving also claims that Hitler was not aware of the full extent of the atrocities being committed.
David Irving's "Hitler's War" is widely discredited by historians for manipulating evidence to argue that Hitler was unaware of the Holocaust. The work is considered ideological propaganda, characterized by systemic historical distortion, rather than objective analysis. For a detailed overview of the trial, visit Wikipedia .