It's really ironic that you used Main Kampf to justify your position. Mein Kampf hasn't taken over our society (though there are still plenty of people who read it), but it was an important part of the way that the Nazi's took over Germany in the 1930s.

And continues to inspire and radicalize people. It's only that the world has come through the other end of that insanity and the body count is high enough, that Mein Kampf stands, to most people, as a tombstone monument to complete insanity.

Do we need to let every kind of complete insanity run its course and generate a body count?

As I remember the book didn't start to sell very well until the Nazis took over in 1933, at which point it was a little too late to stop them.

The book did (as I recall) describe Hitlers plans in some detail, so had more people read it, maybe they would have done something.

I'm going to reply the exact same way I did to another comment: Mein Kampf sold 240,000 copies before he became chancellor, so it seems like it was already an important part of the conversation. I'm not advocating for censorship, but obviously the argument that Mein Kampf is available therefore we should stop trying to limit violent speech is not a good one.

Without context, sellling a 1/4 million books to a population of some 62 million is not impressive. I couldn't find out how many books were sold in the late 20s in Germany, but it is hardly a bestseller if less than 1/2 of a percent have read the book.

Anyway my argument was sorta the opposite: the book did manifestly not sell well enough that it became how most people got converted to Nazism, and if more people had read the book they might have realized that Hitler was doing exactly what he wrote in his book and stopped him at an earlier point.

The New York Times Bestseller list covers a population much larger than that. Yet:

"""To make the list, it is estimated that novels sell from 1,000 to 10,000 copies per week, depending on competition. Median sales fluctuate between 4,000 and 8,000 in fiction, and 2,000–6,000 in nonfiction. The majority of New York Times bestselling books sell from 10,000 to 100,000 copies in their first year.""" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times_Best_Seller...

The Nazi's didn't need a book to take over Germany in the 1930s. Their use of radio, and controlling all theater was much more important to their campaign.

They controlled who was allowed to express themselves and how. They limited everything to their message, even suppressing branches of science that didn't support their views.

That we as a liberal society can tolerate illiberal views is important. You should read things like Mein Kampf and the Unabombers manifesto - not because they are good but because you should know your enemy and how they think.

Mein Kampf sold 240,000 copies before he became chancellor, so it seems like it was already an important part of the conversation. I'm not advocating for censorship, but obviously the argument that Mein Kampf is available therefore we should stop trying to limit violent speech is not a good one.

"Fire & Fury" sold 2.3 million copies. Did it play a role in Trump not being re-elected?

Strawmanning an argument is poor form.

Mein Kampf has existed and been available, and hasn't actually really caused any harm. That doesn't make it a better book but the hallmark of liberal society is that we can tolerate dissent while an authoritarian one can not.