>>94643
>So essentially, Hitler's viewpoints evolved through the years even past that book's contents which were already incomplete to begin with.

Yes and either scrapped or revised in final decisions
Simmilar example like in second books case was also with goebbels novel michael he disagreed to publish even when he was presented that it was for propaganda reasons as he wasnt the same in nsdap as he was before hr joined

>Is the book perhaps still of interest, as it'd be an accurate view of Hitler's direction for Germany if it was not drawn into a world war?
Interest it would make however only as a showcase of how his ideas evolved, got refined or revised over time in the end during final application
Like for example the ost politik being the main aim of concern against ussr and west politik ignored as that wasnt a germanys sphere anyway(and how in the end revised by real politik later) or how he made 180 on british empire and its hypocritical foregin politics

>Something that concerns me is that the historian attached to the book is a jew besides its publication being well after the war which is almost always a guarantee of fabrication or intentional mistranslation
Thats always a dead give away to filter out poison ttough archival findings like people can do with trevors hitler table talks to filter often 70% of contents