This book is packed with details around Hitler and the growth of his ideology, it's expansion through Germany and then the actions he and his followers took to using the machine of war to spread it to countries who weren't captured by his oral zest before ending his life in depressed misery when his dreams did not manifest as reality. In short, it doesn't do much that any other biography on Hitler hasn't already done before.
However, where this book does stand out is its bravery to challenge the accepted consensus (pioneered by the likes of Glantz, McDonough, Evans and Kershaw) that Nazism's greatest enemy was Bolshevism, specifically the "Judeo-Bolshevik menace" that had nested and sprouted within Stalin's Soviet Russia.
Instead, Simms dares to say it was actually America (yes, America!) whom Hitler and his followers wished to see fall. Now, on the surface, there is some merit to this claim. Yes, Hitler was certainly against America and their alliance with Britain during the war and did spout that they had been manipulated by the "Judeo menace", not least in Roosevelt and his actions to convince the American people war with Germany was a necessary as was fighting Hirohito and Imperial Japan.
However, to say America was Hitler's main enemy from the beginning does stretch the truth in a way that evidence simply can't support. While there is a case that Hitler was inspired by America and their success in conquering the Native Americans and converting an entire landmass into an imperial superpower over the course of 150 years, inspiration is not the same as forthright hatred. The evidence disproportionately demonstrates that Hitler deemed Stalin and his brand of Bolshevism as the ultimate enemy, both ideologically, racially and geographically.
There is a mountain of evidence proving this but the most critical one is this: Hitler was stuck in a war against Britain after the Fall of France in 1940 and Churchill's insistence to keep fighting after ousting the appeasers in Chamberlain and Halifax. Yet, Hitler and his generals pushed to ignore Britain by 1941 and open up an entirely new and unnecessary front against Stalin and Russia, even though they didn't have to because of the Molotov-Ribbentrop non-aggression pact.
Why? Why in any sense of the word would they dare attack Russia when the logical thing to do was to focus on defeating Britain or at least convincing them to settle for peace? The answer is simple: because fighting Britain and, by extension, America through economic aid, was the wrong war in Hitler's eyes. He did not want to fight Anglo-America, the ones whom he privately admired and placed at the top of the pedestal in his racial hierarchy alongside the idealised Aryan Germans. No. The ones Hitler and his ardent followers despised and craved war with was the "Judeo-Bolshevik menace" that lay within Soviet Russia. The Soviets were, in Hitler's warped view, everything he despised: racially inferior, hoarding rich resources they didn't deserve, adhering to Marxist-Leninism, and living in the land Hitler greatly wanted to achieve his 'lebensraum' dream.
Yes, Hitler did fight against Britain and America during WW2. No, they were not his desired No.1 enemy. Soviet Russia was, so much so that he risked everything on one of the greatest gambles in military history in launching Operation Barbarossa against them. Simms even admits this in his book, contradicting some 300 pages where he crafted a narrative framing America as Hitler's No.1 enemy.
To summarise, this book could have been an amazing biography on Germany's darkest shadow, but it instead becomes a mouth piece spouting something that historiography simply doesn't agree with because it isn't true. Take out the author's opinions regarding Hitler and America and this book is well researched, clear and, for the most part, a good read about Hitler's life. However, with the other stuff thrown in, it becomes a frustrating read for anyone who knows better.
Richard Evans summarised it best: "In the end, Simms hasn’t written a biography in any meaningful sense of the word; he has written a tract that instrumentalises the past for present-day political purposes. As such, his book can be safely ignored by serious students of the Nazi era."