Counter-Currents
The Worst Week Yet: September 1-7, 2024
Blaming Churchill
Jim Goad
2,155 words
It’s often been alleged that ever since World War II ended, Holocaustianity emerged from its ashes as the West’s official state religion.
To dare suggest that human history’s bloodiest war didn’t happen exactly the way we have been commanded to think that it happened is to face the sort of social death that stared down European heretics who questioned the resurrection of Christ 1,000 years ago.
Like most Manichaean belief systems, Holocaustianity draws a stark and unbroachable line between good and evil, one that permits no nuance. Hitler was Satan, and Jews were six million rubber-stamped versions of Christ, shedding their innocent blood to forever redeem humanity from its wretchedness.
And yet it didn’t work out so neatly. For one, the Jews didn’t ascend to heaven, and they are eternally condemned to tremble in fear at existential threats at the hands of humanity’s clearly irredeemable dregs.
Audio version: To listen in a player, use the one below or click here. To download the mp3, right-click here and choose “save link/target as.”
In this state religion, the distribution of guilt is clearly inequitable: The only person who bears ANY blame for World War II, at least while it was happening, was Adolf Hitler. And then after World War II, the guilt must be shouldered by everyone of European ancestry, no matter their forefathers’ role in World War II—they must suffer. Forever.
It’s truly that ridiculous, and meekly attempting to bring facts and reason into the discussion is to be barked at by a pack of rabid bitches in estrus.
Last Monday, Tucker Carlson hosted Darryl Cooper, whom he referred to as “the most important popular historian working in the United States today,” on his podcast. The two-hour-plus sit-down was titled “Darryl Cooper: The True History of the Jonestown Cult, WWII, and How Winston Churchill Ruined Europe.”
I skipped over the Jonestown segments, but what’s remarkable about the rest of their discussion is how calm and non-“hateful” it was. Then again, unless you’re dealing with brutally bitter anonymous meme-tarded trolls online, this has been my consistent experience for the past three decades, ever since I started paying attention to what most accused “hatemongers” actually have to say. Almost without fail, the people who are accusing them of “hate” are palpably more bitter, unhinged, and malevolent than the “haters” are.
Neither Carlson nor his guest say the word “Holocaust” once, although they both agree on the premise that the official World War II narrative has achieved religious status because, as with Christ’s crucifixion, it involved blood sacrifice. Neither one of them has a positive word to say about Adolf Hitler, either. Nor do they have a negative word to say about Jews.
In Darryl Cooper’s framing, World War II would never have reached the colossal scale that it did—involving the American empire, the Soviet empire, and even Imperial Japan—without Winston Churchill:
COOPER: I thought Churchill was the chief villain of the Second World War. Now, he didn’t kill the most people, he didn’t commit the most atrocities, but I believe, and I don’t really think, I think when you really get into it and tell the story right and don’t leave anything out, you see that he was primarily responsible for that war becoming what it did, becoming something other than an invasion of Poland .…
CARLSON: Why don’t you make the case for that? Okay so you’ve made your statement, a lot of people are thinking, “Well, wait a second, you said Churchill, my childhood hero, the guy with the cigar.” Yeah, well, in the next thought that comes into their head is that, “Oh, you’re saying Churchill was the chief villain, therefore his enemies, you know, Adolf Hitler and so forth, were the protagonists, right? They’re the good guys ….
COOPER: That’s not what I’m saying. You know, Germany, look, they put themselves into a position, and Adolf Hitler is chiefly responsible for this, but his whole regime is responsible for it, that when they went into the East in 1941, they launched a war where they were completely unprepared to deal with the millions and millions of prisoners of war, of local political prisoners and so forth that they were going to have to handle. They went in with no plan for that. And they just threw these people into camps, and millions of people ended up dead there.
“No plan…camps…millions of people ended up dead there.”
Uttering those words, Cooper committed the unpardonable sin, the modern version of blaspheming the Holy Ghost.
Cooper alleges repeatedly that Germany did not want a war with Western Europe and that Hitler sent a string of peace proposals to both Neville Chamberlain and Winston Churchill. Despite what has now become an item of canonical faith—that Hitler wanted to “take over the world”—Cooper says that Hitler’s proposals stressed that Germany would allow England to keep all its overseas colonies and that the main international threat that both countries faced was Russian Bolshevism.
Cooper calls Churchill a “psychopath”—another grave transgression when that word is only reserved for Hitler—and portrays him as a bellicose imperialist who kept the war going and bided his time while he corralled other imperial forces into joining the effort:
COOPER: The reason I resent Churchill so much for it is that he kept this war going, when he had no way, he had no way to go back and fight this war. All he had were bombers. He was literally by 1940 sending firebomb fleets, sending bomber fleets to go firebomb the Black Forest just to burn down sections of the Black Forest, just rank terrorism, you know, going through and starting to, you know, what eventually became just a carpet bombing, saturation bombing of civilian neighborhoods, you know, to kill, the purpose of which was to kill as many civilians as possible. And all the men were out in the field, all the fighting henchmen were out in the field…. And so this is old people, it’s women and children. And they knew that. And they were wiping these places out. It was gigantic, scaled terrorist attacks, the greatest, you know, scale of terrorist attacks you’ve ever seen in world history.
CARLSON: Why would he do that?
COOPER: Because it was the only means that they had to continue fighting at the time. You know, they didn’t have the ability to re-invade Europe. And so, he needed to keep this war going until he accomplished what he hoped to accomplish. … “We need either the Soviet Union or the United States to do it for us.” And that was the plan and kept the war going long enough for that plan to come to fruition. And to me, that’s just it’s a craven, ugly way to fight a war.
CARLSON: And what was the motive?…
COOPER: There’s all those things but then you get into you know why was why was Winston Churchill such a dedicated booster of Zionism from early on in his life, right? And there’s ideological reasons. In 1920, he wrote a kind of infamous now article called “ZIONISM versus BOLSHEVISM.” …And this is 1920. So, this is shortly after the Bolshevik Revolution. Basically, the point of his paper is he says these people who are over there, they’re all going one direction or the other. They’re going to be Bolsheviks. They’re going to be Zionists. We want them to be Zionists, you know, and so we need to support this. And so that was early on. There’s an ideological component of it. But then as time goes on, you know, you read stories about Churchill going bankrupt and needing money, getting bailed out by people who shared his interests, you know, in terms of Zionism….
When I peeked at Churchill’s 1920 essay “ZIONISM versus BOLSHEVISM,” I was blindsided at how Winston Churchill, perhaps history’s most celebrated philo-Semite, trotted out the idea that Russian Bolshevism was primarily a Jewish phenomenon, something that would get him tarred as an “anti-Semite” today:
International Jews
In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort [i.e., Jews who are nationalists in the nations they reside in] rise the schemes of the international Jews.
There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews.
Writing for the Mises Institute, Ralph Raico dredges up a Churchill quote from 1937 where Winnie reportedly said that if forced to choose between Nazism and Communism, he’d go with Hitler:
Three or four years ago I was myself a loud alarmist…. In spite of the risks which wait on prophecy, I declare my belief that a major war is not imminent, and I still believe that there is a good chance of no major war taking place in our lifetime…. I will not pretend that, if I had to choose between Communism and Nazism, I would choose Communism.
But then, when Nazi troops lurked on Moscow’s fringes ready to bring down Communism, Churchill sided with Stalin. And when the war was over, Churchill lamented that an “iron curtain has descended over Europe,” seemingly unconcerned that he’d stolen the phrase from Joseph Goebbels.
A strong case could be made that Churchill was a man whose only motivation was the raw acquisition of power regardless of how much blood was spilled. Otherwise, he seemed to have no principles or guiding ideology.
Toward the end of their discussion, Carlson and Cooper marvel at how, rather than saving the West, World War II destroyed it:
CARLSON: So, Germany is this totally self-hating place. It’s depressing as hell, though also wonderful in a way, but it’s going away. But they lost, at least you could say they lost two World Wars in a row. Britain won two World Wars in a row, and if anything, it’s more degraded than Germany. So, like, just to take it back to the first thing I said, and I’ll shut up and let you answer, but if Churchill is a hero, how come there are British girls begging for drugs on the street of London? And the place is, you know, it’s just there. London is not majority English now. Like, what?
COOPER: Well, the people who formulated the version of history that considers Churchill a hero, they like London the way it is now, you know….
CARLSON: But that’s not victory, that’s like the worst kind of defeat, is it not?
COOPER: That is something that ends your existence as a people….
CARLSON: I just can’t get over the fact that the West wins and is completely destroyed in less than a century.
COOPER: Well, the West was conquered. The West was conquered by the United States and the Soviet Union.
CARLSON: Okay, but I’m including the United States in the West. Right. Somehow, the United States and Western Europe won. That’s the conventional understanding. And both have now looked like they lost a World War.
Cooper isn’t the first to allege that Churchill played a pivotal role in escalating WWII beyond a petty squabble over Poland between Russians and Germans. Pat Buchanan said as much in his 2008 book Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World.
Cooper described the vituperations, recriminations, and hyperbole that ensued in the wake of his quietly reasonable discussion with Carlson as “emotional incontinence” and said it is “is proof of my point about the sacred nature of the World War 2 mythos.”
Even the White House got involved. On Thursday, in perhaps the most emotionally incontinent outburst of them all, Senior Press Secretary Andrew Bates fumed at Carlson:
…[G]iving a microphone to a Holocaust denier who spreads Nazi propaganda is a disgusting and sadistic insult to all Americans, to the memory of the over 6 million Jews who were genocidally murdered by Adolf Hitler, to the service of the millions of Americans who fought to defeat Nazism, and to every subsequent victim of antisemitism…. Hitler was one of the most evil figures in human history and the ‘chief villain’ of World War II, full stop…. The Biden-Harris administration believes that trafficking in this moral rot is unacceptable at any time, let alone less than one year after the deadliest massacre perpetrated against the Jewish people since the Holocaust and at a time when the cancer of antisemitism is growing all over the world.
In response, Carlson texted CNN:
The fact that these lunatics have used the Churchill myth to bring our country closer to nuclear war than at any moment in history disgusts me and should terrify every American. They’re warmonger freaks. They don’t get the moral high ground.
Color me impressed. That’s like stoically enduring the Battle of Britain in your pajamas, then blithely throwing open your bedroom shutters, stretching, wincing in the daylight, and yawning. We need more hatemongers of this caliber.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
56 comments
Uncertain if you received this the first try as there was a glitch. Here it is again if you did not receive it.
—————————————————————
After much WWII research I no longer feel empathy for the Brits. I realize that Brits were lied to massively, however, if I can do the research to get closer to the truth about WWII so can the Brits. Here’s a tiny example:
In a European court David Irving said “if the soldiers who stormed the beaches in Normandy in June 1944 could see England as it is today they wouldn’t have gone 40 yards up that beach”.
https://ugetube.com/embed/wtSfrET8JmNFstv
6:08.
I have sympathy for the British in World War II. The proper context for their actions includes the slaughter of the chums regiments in World War One, the British royal family being German, the receptiveness of the British aristocracy to poetic voices from World War One, the memorialization of the dead of World War One, the lack of eagerness of the English to gloat over the recently concluded slaughter of their Teutonic cousins on the continent and on the contrary their hopeful and happy attitude to German revival, and the intense anger and bitterness of Neville Chamberlain and others whose feelings he well represented when these hopes of a brotherly and peaceful reconciliation with a revived and powerful Germany were dashed by war.
If Hitler had been wiser, there were a lot of British people who were willing and eager to be friends of the Germans.
Ultimately these people did not decide how things were going to go. Hitler did.
“If Hitler had been wiser,”
By this do you mean if Hitler had doubted the honesty and integrity of the British and French diplomats who were entrusted with submitting the proposals to the Poles?
Since Hitler trusted them, and they betrayed Hitler and Poland, Hitler’s offer to resolve the situation was not submitted to Poland, and viola, invasion and German/Polish war. Then the British government, that betrayed Hitler, declared war on Germany, and Winnie peed his pants with joy.
Joseph Goebbels thought that the attitude of the British was incomprehensible because they had not attacked an unarmed Germany but when the Germans were as well armed as the British or better the British were saying go no further or we fight.
I have explained the psychology of a large, socially important, and potentially decisive fraction of British people. The reactions that Goebbels found incomprehensible were understandable and nearly inevitable.
Hitler didn’t show that he was any wiser than Goebbels in relation to the English. The moment called for a man who understood such things. Hitler was not that man. That is what I mean by saying, “if Hitler had been wiser …”
Gotcha.
In retrospect Hitler appears to have naively thought that appealing to the Brits as ethno-brothers was going to carry some weight (besides diplomacy, airplanes and leaflets). He didn’t seem to judge or appreciate the nuances of british politics correctly.
WWI and WWII cemented the final transfer of world-level hegemony from White civilization to Western (heavily jewish controlled) civilization. A critical aspect as to the point of view on this take is that ‘civilization’ is a verb, not a noun. This is all about becoming, not being. The jews are obviously not finished with things yet.
“If Hitler had been wiser,” ! Hitler dumped leaflets onto English cities stating that Germany DID NOT want a conflict with England.
It was Britain/France that declared war & attacked Germany. Hitler did not want a conflict with the West; here are 3 minimum proofs:
1-Britain bombed Germany first & multiple times before Germany responded.
2-At Dunkirk Germany could have taken them all as POWs, instead Hitler let the allies go.
3-May 10, 1941 Rudolf Hess solo flight to UK on a mission of peace failed because Churchill refused any peace offers. Churchill imprisoned Hess for the rest of his life, he died in 1987.
Churchill refused all of Hitler’s peace offers. The British people along with the people of the Allies were lied to.
Even Darryl Cooper sighted the Chief Villain for WWII was Churchill. The truth is already out & more people are discovering it.
Oswald Mosley opposed the war & Churchill had his political opponent locked up. If Churchill had cared more about his people instead of himself.
Thank you. David Irving goes into all of that and much more in this 1 hour and 48 minute introduction into his newly released book in 1987 called “Churchill’s War.” It’s a fascinating speech, including the huge bribe offers from wealthy Jews and the Czech government to Churchill encouraging him to attack Germany. Everything Irving cites comes from solid sources.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2-b0LcB4bE
“Ultimately these people [British people] did not decide how things were going to go. Hitler did.” Not so. Actually it was the British leadership that decided turning a Germany/Poland conflict into a World War.
The following quotes are from “Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War” Pat Buchanan, 2008.
The current hatred against us Europeans is undeniable & is connected to WWII & beyond.
Germany never invaded Britain & never intended to. Hitler & the NSDAP wanted good relations with Britain, offering even to come to Britain’s defence including military aid. Hitler could have taken the hundreds of thousands of British soldiers with their backs to the sea at Dunkirk as POWs, yet, he did not. Instead, he issued his Halt Order. Rudolf Hess (deputy Fuhrer who spoke English & knew the Duke of Hamilton) flew a solo mission of peace May 10, 1941 & parachuted into a field in South Lanarkshire, Scotland 12 miles short of the duke’s estate. Churchill had him arrested, rejected his peace proposals, & imprisoned Hess for the rest of his life (Hess died in 1987).
Britain cared nothing for Danzig, or, if it did, sympathized with Germany. It was Poland who continued to rebuff many reasonable offers Germany put forth. The Danzig issue was between Poland & Germany; German’s claim was legitimate & even Britain supported it. Danzig was the most justified of German grievances. Lord Halifax (Viceroy of India 1926-1931 & Britain’s Foreign Secretary 1938-1940) never wearied of suggesting that Danzig should return to German sovereignty.
Poland refused to yield an inch. Ambassador Kennedy (1937-1940) reported Chamberlain’s feelings to Washington: “Frankly he is more worried about getting the Poles to be reasonable than the Germans”.
Then came Britain’s “war guarantee to Poland”, which was viewed by many in Britain as “reckless”, “turned British policy upside down”, “the maddest single action this country has ever taken”, “[n]owhere in British diplomatic history is it possible to discover a more feckless and fateful act”, “a frightful gamble”, “[i]f the British army general staff approved this, said Lloyd George (UK Prime Minister 1916-1922), they ought to be confined to a lunatic asylum”, “foolish”. As for the French, “they thought the British pledge madness”. As for the Italians, the British guarantee to Poland, writes Luigi Villarreal, was “the most disastrous single diplomatic move”. Many others echoed the same sentiments.
It was the Allies led by Britain that caused & are responsible for the unnecessary World War 2, not Germany.
Hitler & his party offered Britain many peace offers & Britain rebuffed all of them. The British now say “THIS ISN’T THE BRITAIN WE FOUGHT FOR”, therefore, what exactly was Britain fighting Germany for?
I remember, that one of the most decent Englishmen of the 20th century, Sir Basil Liddell Hart, was even DURING the war vehement oppositional to the Allied bombings of German cities.
what exactly was Britain fighting Germany for?
For the Churchill’s debts before Jewish bankers.
“The Unknown Warriors” 2012, Nicholas Pringle.
Unhappy With What’s Become of the Country They Fought For.
https://ihr.org/other/unknownwarriorsdevlin
“I have never seen a happier people than the Germans. Hitler is one of the greatest men I have ever met.”
Lloyd George, British Prime Minister (1916-1922) after a visit to Germany in 1936 [Daily Telegraph, 1936/09/22].
“Nothing is ever irreversible, except the death of a people by genocide or miscegenation.” Dominique Venner.
Counter-Currents published a book which is good: Some Thoughts on Hitler & Other Essays, by Irmin Vinson: San Francisco: Counter-Currents, 2012, Foreword by Kevin MacDonald Edited by Greg Johnson.
https://counter-currents.com/product/some-thoughts-on-hitler/
If you’re looking for some further reading, here it is.
I suppose that if you need to fight a war but you don’t have the might to do it directly, then it makes sense to try to drag in others to help fight it with you. I can’t fault Churchill for that much. It also would have been dishonorable for England to abandon Poland after giving Poland a guarantee, even if the alternative was worse for everyone. I think the blame ultimately lies with Hitler for starting an unnecessary war on the assumption that the other European powers would let Poland go, and then losing it, in large part through his own mistakes. Germany was provoked into war, but they still started it.
I think the Nazis were far from pure evil and the Allies were far from morally unblemished. But I wish the Nazis had continued with their highly successful domestic programs and strengthening Germany against any attack by internationalist and communist forces, without launching a dangerous and destabilizing war. The war they started may even have been just and honorable in some ways (e.g. protecting Germans being abused in Poland) but the #1 job of the German state is to protect Germans in Germany, and Germans in Poland could have been helped without attacking Poland and risking the destruction of Germany.
dishonorably for England
The words dishonor and England are synonyms. The Poles were just stupid to trust the English. Like Arabs before them, or like Ukrainians now. In the end result the Poles were “liberated” from Germans and went into the Soviet Bolshevik yoke for 44 years. Thanks, Sir Winston.
These national insults are nothing but harmful. We Whites are brothers in a great family and we ought to act like it.
The problem is that most wars in the world history the Whites have fought against the Whites, and now they are doing the same. You can think and say that another races are enemies of the Whites, and maybe that’s correct, but in the historical reality anyway the most wars were and are going within one race, not between different races.
Cain and Abel were brothers too.
“I suppose that if you need to fight a war…”, stop right there – there was no need for Britain to fight Germany over the Danzig issue because Britain agreed with Germany that Danzig belongs to Germany. And, even if Britain disagreed with Germany it was not in Britain’s best interest to sacrifice its people. USSR invaded Poland September 17, 1939, did Britain declare war on USSR? NO. France did not want a conflict with Germany, however, the French caved to the world superpower at that time, Britain.
Read the bottom of page 280 in “Stalin’s War” by Sean McMeekin, 2021.
Read the top of page 12 in “The Forced War” by David L. Hoggan, 1961 (pages 726 to 788 are the notes).
On page 571 the Italian Ambassador Bernardo Attolico was so disgusted at Britain for wanting war that he stated with indignation that warmongers such as Anthony Eden should be hanged.
On page 621 Pope Pius XII blamed Poland being the primary threat to peace for not negotiating with Germany (with Britain using Poland as a pretext for war against Germany) & page 627 has even the Soviet Foreign Commissar Molotov blaming Poland & suggesting invading Poland to save the Polish people from their unwise leaders. (USSR did invade on September 17, 1939.)
It has been said that the first casualty of war is the truth; WWII is an excellent example. In a nutshell, Germany’s highly successful financial system freaked out the International Bankers & they had no choice but to destroy Germany to save their global financial system en route to a One World Control. The International Bankers mainly used British leaders to pull this off.
Albion had zero interest in guaranteeing anything for Poland other than finding a slick and chaste reason to declare war on Germany.
Even today we still have people believing the nonsense that Hitler tried to take over the world. In fact, he was able to redress most of the grievances from the Versailles Dictate without war. That is what he said that he would do, and that is why he came to power in the first place.
Hitler took calculated risks believing that nothing ventured was nothing gained. He did make a severe miscalculation, however, by using military force against Poland in 1939. Hitler simply did not expect the Entente to declare war, let alone to fight, because it was not reasonable nor in their own national interests to do so. The Entente never intended to save Poland nor use it for anything other than as a catspaw against Germany.
Hitler’s peace proposals were reasonable and more than generous ─ when everybody had already agreed that Danzig was German.
Besides, the lofty Wilsonian principles that were somehow so sacred to the salvation of Democracy after the last war, were here at play in that ─ like the Sudetenland earlier ─ the fate of Danzig, Silesia, etc. was according to the “self-determination” of those very peoples themselves.
Danzigers made some of the most fanatical National Socialists because they had the right and desire not to be a Polish satrapy, contrary to any decrees from London and Paris.
The matter could have easily been resolved without war if the Poles and the Entente had simply agreed to Hitler’s proposal to allow a road and rail right-of-way between Danzig, East Prussia, and the Reich. But a rail-line and an Autobahn would have invalidated the Polish blockade that hoped to choke the port of Danzig into submission.
Hitler was also subject to time constraints because he knew that the Judeo-Bolshevists would be gunning for Germany soon enough ─ once the Entente and American inducements came to an offer that the Soviets could not refuse.
This meant that any war in the West had to be concluded soon or a continental fortress against the menace in the East could never be built.
In fact, the Soviets under Stalin had been in an arms race aimed towards continental hegemony since 1928. The Stalinists would postpone the Trotskyite principle of World Revolution and focus instead on “Socialism in One Country,” i.e, supplanting Germany as the likeliest continental hegemon.
Hitler understood that time was not on Germany’s side.
When Molotov made a play for Romanian oil resources in talks from late 1940, and the Romanians had to appeal to Germany for protection, Hitler knew that peace with the Soviets had passed its sell date and time to prepare would be short.
Germany wasn’t anywhere nearly enough prepared and the Soviet buildup was far more dire by 1941 than the most pessimistic German intelligence estimates. Sometimes all the options are bad. Some battles just cannot be won.
As my friend Fritz Berg used to say, we can thank Hitler and the atomic bomb that the Red Army is not now camping on the Rhine.
🙂
Now the Arabs and Africans are camping on the Rhine, and such situation is in all European countries, freed by good Anglo-Saxon liberators. On the other hand, in the Central European states, occupied by evil Stalin’s Bolsheviks the situation is much better, and those states are at least much more White and National.
Honestly, did you have Tucker defending Mr. and Mrs. Oswald Mosley on his 2024 bingo card?
I’ve been following the comments over at Unz Review, running beneath articles by Thomas Dalton & K MacDonald, about the Carlson-Cooper podcast. Several people, in defending the standard narrative, have referred to Goebbel’s diaries and a debate involving David Cole here at Counter-Currents without providing links.
I searched through the C-C archives, but all I found was a Spencer Quinn article on Cole vs Unz that hardly seems to the dispose of the question.
Any idea what these people are talking about?
Somebody about Unz must have read my mind. Here’s a link to David Irving on Goebbel’s diary entry = https://www.unz.com/pub/jhr__revelations-from-goebbels-diary/
Churchill’s 1920 article can be found at https://archive.org/details/WinstonChurchillZionismVsBolshevismStruggleForTheSoulOfTheJewishPeople1920
There’s also a Russian translation, for example, here https://cont.ws/@providenie/2262018
The origins of the current reorientation of the Western world away from nation-states to be replaced by zones of a globalist order with a corresponding decline of civilization precede World War II. A quick survey would include:
American foreign policy elites pushing an international security regime in the aftermath of World War I through the run-up to WWII (see, for example, Stephen Wertheim’s Tomorrow, the World: The Birth of U.S. Global Supremacy – this book is worth a review).
The rise of transnational economies creating continental super-states superseding nations (James Burnham analyzes this point in The Managerial Revolution, 1941).
British Fabians such as Clement Attlee (who in the 1930s wanted to replace British citizenship with world citizenship) and H.G. Wells (possibly originating the term “New World Order” – check out his 1936 movie Things to Come).
The World Federalists of the 1930s and similar movements calling for global government.
President Wilson’s advocacy for the League of Nations.
The chaos of World War I and then the Bolshevik Revolution sinking 19th century historical optimism.
The various socialist-Marxist movements in the 19th and 20th centuries agitating for international revolution.
Enlightenment era philosophies going back to at least the French and American Revolutions, notably the Hegelian and Whig interpretations of history.
The point is, the current Western decline cannot be reduced down to the Danzig Crisis nor blamed on any single individual. Going on the assumption that the decline can be reversed by a re-interpretation of a single event of 1939 is an exercise in futility. The origins of the post-World War II “myth” go much, much deeper.
“Going on the assumption that the decline can be reversed by a re-interpretation of a single event of 1939 is an exercise in futility.” Absolutely correct. Therefore, we need a paradigm shift & here it is: We gave up going to the stars for diversity! How has that worked out!!! We must embark on Our Breakaway Civilization in perpetuity & head back to the stars where we left off in 1972. This can only be achieved by totally 100% segregation separation (has to be explicit, a homeland for Europeans only, no exceptions). We have to see the bigger picture. Our Solar System alone has practically incalculable amounts of resources. One asteroid alone has enough precious metals to be worth more than the global economy at $10 quintillion. As the Faustian European spirit in our DNA fuels ingenuity, inquisitiveness & our unquenchable thirst for knowledge, we can pursue our destiny fore there is an unavoidable universe right above us, it begs to be explored as the explorers we are. We have the greatness of our ancestors coursing through our veins. Leave earth we must, eventually, as our Sun will one day die. Connect with those who have made the paradigm shift, do not waste precious time with those who are not onboard as time is not on our side. Those who have made the leap to the People of the light can catchup.
XIV VERB
“Hitler was one of the most evil figures in human history ….””
One of? ONE OF? You heathen anti-Semite!
Foreign policy is supremely important, perhaps even more important than immigration.
The Groypers are right to demand “No immigration, no wars”.
The second part of that demand is crucial.
Antiwar Democrats like Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. supporting Trump is a positive development.
Warmonger Republicans like Dick Cheney supporting Kamala Harris is another positive development.
Trump’s Republicans are continuing to evolve into the American nationalist party on the two most important issues, and the Democrats are continuing to evolve into the opposite.
This is the beginning of the end of the uniparty, and the beginning of real choice.
No, immigration is more important than foreign policy. Unless we get a handle on demographic change, frankly nothing else matters.
What might be the association between the ‘Holocaust of the Jews’ way back then, and today’s American statistic that about 60% of Americans are in credit card debt?
Who owns the banks?
Goes around, comes around.
Link to David Cole article about the Carlson interview with Cooper:
https://www.takimag.com/article/humane-holocaust-tuckers-all-in/
When he talks about the millions dying in camps, I’m reasonably certain he’s speaking about the Soviet prisoners of war captured in the great encirclements during the first few months of Barbarossa and not about the Jews.
I could be wrong, of course.
The “Roman” Greeks used to blind people rather than killing them, to render them unthreatening. Perhaps the Germans should have blinded these prisoners and sent them back over the lines. Stalin’s commissars would have starved them to death even more quickly.
Perhaps the Germans should check those prisoners, find out who of them would be ready to fight against the Bolshevism, then give them weapons and send to fight against the beloved Comrade Stalin, the Leader of the World Proletariat. Oh, no, that was not possible, because they were Untermenschen, of course, savage Asians, not on the same level with the Great Europeans.
Perhaps you haven’t heard of General Vlassov’s army. Other than them, there were a number of SS units, including entire divisions. Then there were others recruited to perform garrison duty in western regions. When the American army invaded France, they assumed that some of the savage Asians you mentioned were Japanese. Then after the war, all Soviet citizens (whether military or civilian, and whether or not they worked for the Germans) got shipped back home where most were killed – we can thank Eisenhower for that one.
Vlasov’s Army was formed in 1944. Why there was no Russian formation as early as in July 1941?
By the way, Vlasovs Army is not good example at all, Lokot Republik is much better example.
That’s correct. This discusses Soviet PoWs, and David Cole is missing the mark.
The Soviets did not sign the Geneva Convention, so when the German General Staff was preparing Operation Barbarossa, any planning for PoWs was far down in priorities. The Wehrmacht Quartermaster-General was Eduard Wagner, who later shot himself to avoid arrest as a July 1944 bomb plotter in the Junker caste attempt to assassinate Hitler.
The German General Staff assumption for the invasion was that if a preemptive attack against the Soviet Union was to work at all, the campaign would either hit or miss and there would be no long Winter War. When the Germans were reversed at the threshold of Moscow in late 1941, the commanding Generals were ready to surrender ─ but Hitler fired most of them and ordered the front to hold ─ and it did. Leon Degrelle and many others described this in their memoirs.
Gen. Guderian in his excellent but colored postwar memoirs claimed that Hitler botched the Moscow invasion by diverting his Panzers to complete an encirclement of Kiev. But this is nonsense.
The Original Barbarossa plan laid out three objectives ─ ALL of which must be met before the Soviet Union would (wishfully) collapse. These objectives were Kiev, Moscow, and Leningrad.
In the event, only Kiev was captured and Hitler diverting Army Group Center to assist the slogging Army Group South, now becoming a double envelopment, was crucial to that.
Moscow likely would have never been meaningfully taken regardless because the German logistical tether was just too thin, and because Soviet Siberian reinforcements were arriving in force with the Japanese threat in the Soviet Far East having faded away following their Pearl Harbor attack.
Unfortunately, the massive bag of Soviet PoWs that the Germans captured in these colossal encirclements did not fare so well.
Most of the Soviet PoWs who died in German custody in fact died during this period of the 1941-42 Winter, the harshest in some forty years. About the same percentage of German PoWs also died in Soviet custody, albeit over a longer time period from 1941-55.
Germany had an acute and almost insoluble labor shortage during the war. It is permitted under the Geneva Convention to use PoW enlisted men (but not officers) as forced-laborers.
Of course, the Soviets never signed the GC, so the Germans felt no need to reciprocate with them anyway. But if the Soviets had been signatories, PoW accomodations would have been tasked under the General Staff planning, which was the case in the West.
Under the treaty terms PoWs are to receive the same food, housing, and medical care as one’s own forces. But this potential Soviet PoW labor resource was squandered one way or another. The Germans could barely feed and accomodate their own at this time, and the Wehrmacht did not even have any Winter clothing available for their own troops.
SS-Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler had high hopes for the Soviet PoWs as a labor force. But when the Wehrmacht delivered the surviving Soviet PoWs to the SS, they were in sad shape, mostly unfit for work.
It was Soviet PoWs that built the Birkenau PoW barracks camp, aka Auschwitz II. Auschwitz Commandant, Obersturmbannführer Rudolf Höß writes about this and Soviet PoW fitness in his memoirs ─ which were completed in Polish custody just before his 1947 hanging. These are very interesting memoirs, but must be taken with a grain of salt.
Originally, it was claimed that four-million were gassed and cremated at Auschwitz-Birkenau. In the basement of Krema II at Birkenau alone, Holocaust historians like Raul Hilberg claimed that a half-million Jews were killed.
When the surviving Soviet PoWs proved too infirm for work, the Germans decided to conscript Jews as forced-laborers. Himmler, who was in charge of all police forces, had a mandate to provide security and to intern security risks anyway; he therefore had wanted to kill two birds with one stone, and thus put any prisoners or security internments to work.
This became most difficult for the Jews since they were not only interned but now subjected to forced-labor. And the infirm are simply not given top billing for rations and medicine.
David Cole and others fall far short with their Holocaust Lite thesis where the tiny Reinhard(t) Camps (Treblinka, Belzec, and Sobibor) were the primary method used in the Holy Extermination narrative with some kind of Rube Goldberg “murder factory” program using engine exhaust and fumigants like steam and later Zyklon-B. The original Genocide story claimed steam and diesel engine exhaust, both absurd.
There were no homicidal gaschambers, and lethal gas was never used as a form of capital execution in Germany.
In other camps from Dachau in West Germany to Auschwitz (Oswiecim) in Poland, the Germans fumigated with the commercial fumigant Zyklon-B and using commerical fumigation apparatus. This can still be inspected at museums like Dachau and to a lesser extent at Auschwitz, where tourists have taken pictures of steam autoclaves used for the disinfection of clothing and bedding and equipment and calling them homicidal gas-chambers.
The “gas-chamber” pictured below from the USHMM website is actually a steam autoclave used for disinfection at the newly-liberated Struthof-Natzweiler camp in Alsace (France), which David Cole thinks was used for “experimental” gassings. You can find pictures of identical equipment used by the Kaiser’s forces.
https://collections.ushmm.org/iiif-b/assets/765134
Delousing and fumigation of clothing was not done in the basement morgues of the Birkenau crematorias, however ─ as postwar chemical testing of the ruins has proved. This is why the Holocaust narrative is now focusing more on the Reinhard(t) Camps and shootings on the Eastern Front, cf., the work of the late Israeli spook Yitzhak Arad.
David Cole wrote a very interesting autobiography (now banned at Amazon) and I will buy another of his books if he is ever allowed by the Hollyweird Jews to publish again. He likes to discuss the drama of the Jews, and that is fine, but technical problems with the purported Nazi gassings, not so much.
Nazi Gassings Never Happened! Niemand wurde vergast!
🙂
I’m very pleased reading the comments here. It’s always reassuring to see that others know the truths that you are aware of but are lost with the masses. Check out Tyler Kent. He worked in the US Embassy in London and was arrested and held incommunicado throughout the whole war. Ambassador Kennedy waived Kent’s diplomatic immunity in order to let the British MI5 arrest him. He was supplying the British peace faction, Lord Ramsey and others, with secret telegraphs from Roosevelt to Churchill. There was a book written in 1945. when Kent was still imprisoned in Britain titled; “The Case of Tyler Kent” by John Howland Snow. Even better is a BBC interview with Tyler Kent from 1982 or 83. It’s a MUST WATCH! Kent and Lord Ramsey CAME VERY CLOSE to getting Britain out of the war.
If only the Polish leader Pilsudski didn’t die in 1935 Germany and Poland more than likely would have come to an understanding. Pilsudski & Hitler had great respect for each other which showed when the two signed a friendship treaty between the two nations. We may have even seen Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, etc invade the Soviet Union together by 1940 or so.
After Pilsudski died the leadership in Poland became very hostile to Germany and to the ethnic Germans within Poland.
I’m fast forwarding alot here to April 1943 when the Germans discovered the 10,000-15,000 Polish officers, lawyers, judges, intellectuals, etc that were brutally murdered by the Soviet NKVD in the Katyn Forest in the Spring of 1940. The Germans invited neutral press, the International Committee of the Red Cross, press allied with Germany, Allied offices that were POW’s in Germany and others to take part in and witness the exhumation of some of the bodies. It was obvious that Germany did not commit this atrocity even though the Germans were blamed for it at Nuremberg in 1946. The leader of the Polish military in exile, General Sikorski, had been asking Stalin where his friends were and could he please release them since the Polish government in exile and the Soviet Union were technically allies at this period in the war. Sikorski learned from his Home Army, and the Polish officer POW’s that the Germans had brought to Katyn to witness the exhumations, that the men Sikorski had been asking Stalin to release and many others were all dead at the hands of the NKVD. Stalin just kept blaming the Germans and then he quit answering Sikorski altogether. Now just a couple months later, when it was rumoured Sikorski may have been thinking of making a deal with Hitler for a smaller independent Poland, Sikorski, his daughter and his entire general staff of his most trusted officers, all died in a mysterious “plane crash” off the coast of British Gibraltar, in which only the “Czech” pilot survived, and her survived UNSCATHED. It’s pretty obvious Churchill and/or Stalin ordered the Sikorski murder to prevent Poland’s government in exile from dropping out of the Allied cause since the whole false basis of the Allied crusade was to “save Poland from the evil Nazis”.
So the Western Allies KNEW FOR A FACT that Stalin ordered his NKVD to systematically murder the elite of the Polish nation yet they STILL HAD NO QUALMS turning over Poland to those that butchered the very soul of the Polish nation.
The Poles were betrayed and sold to the Soviets, just like the whole Central Europe (which then became Eastern Europe), thanks to FDR and his Democrats. But we should admit, that Churchill was against that. But the Democrats are Democrats, later they betrayed the Chinese (thanks, Harry) and given them to Mao Zedong, then they betrayed the Cubans (thanks, Holy John), Iranians and Nicaraguans (thanks, Jimmy), Ukrainians (thanks, Barack and Joe), and so on.
I clicked the Wiki link provided above to “Pat Buchanan said as much in his 2008 book” and encountered – “This [Wikipedia] article has multiple issues.”
The four issues cited:
“…may be too long or excessively detailed.”
“…promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information.”
“…relies excessively on references to primary sources.”
“…is written like a review.”
Glad to see Wiki hasn’t lost its sense of humor. And, glad to see the apoplectic Press Secretary’s comment and heartened by Carlson’s upright rejoinder!
Hitler’s proposal to England was truly generous – England will let Hitler pretty much take over the entire continental Europe – plus support him in attacking the Soviet Union – and England in return will be permitted by Hitler to keep what they already have. And those mendacious English wouldn’t have it! Even after they gave Hitler carte blanche to occupy Bohemia and Austria, two most heavily-industrialized regions of Europe! The British truly knew no boundaries with their schemes.
I am guessing this is an attempt at sarcasm.
Germany built the Siegfried Line (between 1938-1940) which is defensive, in other words if Germany intended to invade West this protection Line would not have been built. Then Britain & France declare war against Germany September 3, 1939.
Germany received its iron-ore from Sweden via Norway. Britain sent its fleet to Norway in order to prevent Germany acquiring its iron-ore. Germany beat Britain to Norway, thus, securing its iron-ore.
The evidence is overwhelming that Germany did not want a conflict with the West. It was Britain that was wanting & instigating a war with Germany.
Seriously, everybody needs to do their own research into what really happened, it is in our best interest to know the TRUTH.
Contrary to popular belief, Hitler wasn’t invasion-happy on the Continent. Why would the Entente try to prevent ethnic-Germans from the remains of the old Hapsburg empire like Austria and Bohemia from joining a contiguous Reich?
Well, so much for the Wilsonian principle of “the self-determination of peoples,” because the Versailles Treaty expressly forbade just that in order to contain Germany if not to exploit her as an economic colony.
Hitler said that he would overthrow the Versailles Treaty and he did just that, trying to increase his military-diplomatic bargaining leverage with conscription and a rearmament program ─ and bending over backwards lest such brinksmanship actually resume the World War.
Germany also had to leave the League of Nations because all countries were equals ─ but in the League, some countries were “more equal than others,” as Orwell would have put it.
Notably, the U.S. Senate before the 17th Amendment (1913) had turned them into a Globalist imperial thinktank, did NOT ratify either the wicked Versailles Treaty or the League of Nations.
So Hitler is a baddie because he supported Bohemian Germans, Austrians, and Danzigers, etc. becoming part of One Reich/One Volk with German citizenship.
Hitler owed Mussolini because, although the Anschluß was overwhelmingly popular with the Austrians, Benito could have easily prevented it. Hitler also had to let the Italians keep the South Tyrol. Politics is all about compromises that you can live with.
Any time that German borders were put to a plebiscite, as in the Saarland, it seems (rather embarassingly for the Entente) that the ethnic Germans wanted nothing more than to be Germans again.
It is notable that Hitler wanted friendship with the French and was not making the status of Alsace–Lorraine into an issue. It would have been interesting to hold a plebiscite on the matter ─ the sacred self-determination of peoples, and all. Not until France had declared war on Germany over Danzig and then gotten defeated, was Elsaß-Lothringen incorporated into the Reich.
Even then, Hitler only claimed military access to Paris and the French Atlantic coast where bombproof submarine bases were built ─ when he could have taken all of France and probably its naval fleet. The British response to being thrown off the continent and the French defeat was to attack the Vichy fleet, killing over a thousand French sailors.
Because neutral Sweden was selling high-quality iron ore to Germany, shipped out of neutral Norwegian ports, the British Navy mined Norwegian waters and prepared to install Allied bases. But Hitler anticipated their intentions and launched an invasion of Norway via Denmark.
The German invasion of Norway was narrowly successful but the small German Navy never recovered and could not support any invasion of England ─ which everybody knew. Churchill certainly knew this since he had access to the best Signals intelligence and decodes.
The Allies organized a coup in Yugoslavia which forced a German invasion, and in the Balkans in general sufficient to vouchsafe German trade with Romania (which exported oil) and neutral Turkey (which exported chromium). The Axis was never fully able to overcome an Allied-Soviet insurgency in the region.
On the eve of war with Russia, Hitler reluctantly had to send forces to Greece to repair the damage caused by Il Duce’s maladroit military ambitions. German academicians followed hobnailed Teutonic jackboots into the cavernous bowels of Greek Orthodox keeps where only holy monks ever saw the art stored there for centuries. The infidels cataloged the icons and relics and then returned the goodies back to them.
The idea that Hitler was bent to conquer Europe is nonsense. In 1938, when Chamberlain “appeased” Hitler and waved a piece of paper for the crowds ─ green at the gills from his turbulent airplane ride from Munich ─ he knew that the Volksdeutsche peoples of the Sudetenland and Silesia and many others had long been abused by the governments and brigands of Prague and Warsaw. We would simply call this ethnic-cleansing today.
Even non-German Slovakia appealled to Hitler for protection and otherwise would have become a tasty Soviet morsel outside the German spheres of interest along with the Baltic states and Bessarabia (Moldavia).
Handing Poland a blank check against Germany in 1939 when it had already been agreed that the old Hanseatic city of Danzig was German, was the epitome of cynicism.
Germany is a superpower on the Continent today. That was inevitable after the fall of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany. So many lives lost to prevent this …
🙂
If forced to choose which one of Hitler’s political achievements is my favourite of them all, then publishing your entire geo-political strategy in two broadly-distributed books – including which states you plan to eliminate – and then going ahead with that plan point by point without deviation in spite of the obviousness of your plans must be my favourite of them all. The modest second place goes to declaring war on United States at the time when you have reached a stalemate in a war on two fronts.
The ultimate goal of a One-World-Central-Control.
Books:
-“Hitler’s War” David Irving 1977,
-“Churchill’s War, Vol. I: The Struggle for Power” David Irving 1987,
-“Churchill’s War, Vol 2: Triumph in Adversity” David Irving 1997,
(Vol. 3 will be available soon. Notice there are 3 volumes of Churchill’s War),
-“Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War” Pat Buchanan 2008,
-“The Origins of the Second World War” A.J.P. Taylor 1961,
-“Stalin’s War” Sean McMeekin 2021,
-“The Forced War” David L. Hoggan 1961 in Germany Der Erzwungene Krieg (The Forced War), the first English edition of “The Forced War” appeared in 1989.
-“Benjamin Freeman’s 1961 speech at Willard Hotel”.
https://youtu.be/-dRd3Ajiu4Q
In retrospect, we know that Soviet forces were at least an order of magnitude greater than German military intelligence had feared, which was why the only odds with any chance of success was a preemptive attack. The Germans had already been victorious in the West even though they had fewer tanks and aircraft at their disposal than the Entente.
Because England had remained in the war, there was already an undeclared naval war with the United States ever since the Lend-Lease program began in early 1941 to arm Germany’s enemies ─ including the Communists ─ who would only gain in strength.
American warships had orders to shoot German ships on sight, while Germans could not fire unless fired upon. Hitler wished to avoid war with the Americans.
Also, Japan was an unknown quantity at the time of Pearl Harbor and it was (incorrectly) believed that they would absorb American belligerency. I agree that the German declaration of war was not helpful, but nobody would have known that. Japan herself had naïvely thought that the Pearl Harbor sneak attack would effectively take the American Pacific fleet out of the war.
As a precaution against espionage and sabotage, the Americans incarcerated all of the ethnic Japanese living on the American West Coast into concentration camps.
In reality, at best the Americans only devoted 20 percent of their resources to fight Japan ─ and the only hardships that their Home Front ever experienced was rationed sugar and gasoline, and actual shortages of rubber automobile tires.
And even at war with millions in uniform, the Americans had plenty of underutilized labor resources and natural resources to draw upon.
🙂
So many lives lost to prevent this …
Yes, the British Empire twice fought against Germans with Russian cannon fodder and American money and weapons, and even 1989-1990 the Britisch put pressure on Gorbachov, Thatcher wanted that he opposed German reunification. But Gorbachov allowed that and this was one of the cause of his ouster a year later. At least he staid alive and lived a long life, which is very different to another Russian politicians, rulers and influencers, who tried to oppose Britain. They all were killed, Tsar Pavel I, Rasputin, Marshall Tukhachevski, Marshall Beria (Berial also wanted to reunite Germany as a neutral and not Communist land, just like Austria).
When was the last time the English were ever actually “free”?
1065?
It seems to me they’ve been abused by their rulers for a thousand years and then were used by them to abuse others abroad for about another five hundred while the abuse continued at home.
Then their rulers lost the empire and battened on to GAE. Now that’s collapsing and so their rulers have decided to replace them with the descendants of the same peoples they used their forefathers to conquer, while at the same time trying to get the Americans to bleed for them in Ukraine.
That all the while their rulers’ propaganda led the Britannians to become the most arrogant slaves in history is comic irony. The sooner the Windsor’s and the Lords go the way of the Romanovs, the better it is going to be for all involved.
Endless wrangling about The War does little to unite white Europeans. Nowadays all sides feel for both the state of Germany and England. Japan, Hungary and Italy command respect for maintaining their identity. Nowadays Churchill is already under attack from modern Bolsheviks as a ‘racist’ and ‘imperialist’ (when one considers his earlier pre war campaigns). After the UK victory Churchill was immediately voted out of office, one of history’s great lessons that wartime leaders have no guarantee in staying in their post.
Plenty of whites have strong feelings on both sides of this. Some of the must brutal fighting in world history… from the beaches at Normandy to Stalingrad were whites vs. whites. Endlessly rehashing the war of the 1940s just encourages whites to pick sides. Better to pick sides about more contemporary angst and band together.
John Cleese has admirably not catered to woke pressures. The Germans episode of Fawlty Towers has some comic relief and maybe a lesson or two.
Is anybody seriously refighting the war? Historians hash things. That’s what they do. The more open-ended the Revision the better it’s done.
🙂
Ref. “white Europeans”, it is redundant to combine both words as Europeans aka White. Also, it implies that non-Europeans can be European & they cannot.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.