Posted on 09/11/2024 6:21:54 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Last week’s online controversy was the interview with Darryl Cooper, whom host Tucker Carlson called “(maybe) the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.” In the interview, Cooper not only claimed that Winston Churchill was a psychopath but also that he was “the real villain” of World War II. Though Cooper admitted Hitler was evil, he also argued that history’s most notorious villain was, in fact, backed into a corner by Churchill, who was bent on war from the beginning. Thus, it is Churchill and not Hitler, Cooper claimed, who should bear most of the blame for the war and the Holocaust. Cooper, during the interview and afterward, chalked up opposition to his telling of the story to core elements of American identity since the war that are too deeply engrained to be questioned.
Typically, claims like these would be unworthy of a response, other than perhaps an eyeroll and quick dismissal. However, this interview has been viewed by millions and was conducted by the most popular news personality in the United States. Also, Cooper has since doubled down on his claims on X.
In his misrepresentation of the two most important figures of World War II, Cooper obscured several basic facts. First, in a claim that reveals his “extensive research” failed to consider basic history texts, he posited that historians never talk about why Hitler rose to power in Weimar Germany. In fact, many have and still do.
Cooper also argued that Hitler’s anger was the fault of England and France because they declared war on Germany after his invasion of Poland. Had they not, he claimed, the war would have been over before it really began. However, this claim ignores Hitler’s repeated goal of building “living space” for Germany in Eastern Europe, how he broke his word before the war by taking all of Czechoslovakia rather than just the German-speaking areas, and the treaty obligations England and France had to Poland.
It’s also important to note that Hitler invaded France through neutral Belgium the day Churchill became Prime Minister, so he can hardly be blamed for the escalation of the war. Cooper also argued that the war could have ended when France was conquered, and Hitler offered peace to England and promised it could keep its Empire. Churchill, he said, should have accepted Hitler’s terms.
However, to do so would have meant abandoning England’s allies, not to mention the rest of Europe, to Nazi domination. Bizarrely, Cooper assumes that Hitler could have been trusted to keep his word that he only really wanted peace. Because Churchill insisted on fighting, Cooper suggested, he is the real villain of the war. Churchill, he said, wanted war to make up for his part in the disaster at Gallipoli in World War I. Though nothing in Churchill’s writings suggests this, Hitler clearly articulated his intentions and, despite what Cooper claimed, it was not to pursue peace.
In fact, Churchill opposed Hitler before the war began. Thus, the simpler explanation is that Churchill understood the danger to the world posed by the Nazis and acted accordingly.
Cooper also claimed Hitler thought the U.S., rather than the Soviets, were his main threat, but decided to invade Russia anyway. And he justified the incredible death toll in Russia, which was far greater than anywhere else in the war, by claiming that Hitler didn’t plan for the massive number of prisoners of war and civilians that would be captured. Cooper also justified German death camps in this way, appealing to a letter written by a German officer suggesting that to kill the prisoners quickly would be more humane than allowing them to slowly starve to death. He failed to mention that the vast majority of those killed in the camps were civilians, not prisoners of war.
In general, both the quality of Cooper’s historical research and his moral compass is exposed by a statement he made in another context:
No god in any religious tradition is as consistently brutal and bloodthirsty as Yahweh in the Old Testament. That includes the various war gods, and deities of peoples like the Aztecs.
In other words, as always, flawed historical revisionism of this sort is always motivated by flawed beliefs about God, the human condition, and the world.
Of course, Churchill was a flawed individual and should not be considered above criticism. Still, it is safe to say that in the context of World War II, he was the good guy, and Hitler was the bad guy.
Cooper’s approach to history is essentially the same as Critical Theory, except from the right rather than from the left. Assuming accepted history to be not only wrong but corrupted by an agenda, historical narratives must be deconstructed and turned upside down. It’s no accident that they end up in the same place: the Jews and Churchill are evil, Hamas is good, and Hitler needs to be rehabilitated.
Christians shouldn’t fall for this, no matter where it comes from.
John Stonestreet serves as president of the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. He’s a sought-after author and speaker on areas of faith and culture, theology, worldview, education and apologetics.
Glenn Sunshine is a professor of history at Central Connecticut State University, a Senior Fellow of the Colson Center for Christian Worldview, and the founder and president of Every Square Inch Ministries. He is a speaker, the author of several books, and co-author with Jerry Trousdale of The Kingdom Unleashed.
Agreed. Seems like some folks have lost the plot.
Flawed he might have been, but he was the man for the times.
There was a lot to disagree with the historian Cooper on, and it was his characterization of Churchill I found offensive and flat wrong.
But historians are offensive and wrong all the time.
My main interest was in two things: This ‘episode’ being used by the Left as a tool to damage someone they hate (Conservatives and Tucker), and secondly, the branding of Tucker and Cooper as anti-semites by saying they denied the Holocaust.
They did nothing of the sort. Cooper was discussing the plight of the Soviet POWs who got treatment even worse than the Jews, to the point there were accounts of concentration camp Jewish inmates who took pity on the Russians.
Cooper may have been completely wrong about the how and why of the treatment of those POWs, but NOTHING in that entire interview had anything to do with the Jewish Holocaust and the mechanics of that on the part of the Nazis.
The only commonality was that the Soviet POWs were often in the same camps as Jewish concentration camps, except that they were always segregated competely. They were kept in different parts of the camp, separated by barbed wire.
1609 comes to mind.
Tucker is so committed in his opposition to war, especially the war in Ukraine which he believes has forced us to the very edge of nuclear destruction, that he falls victim to the human tendency to reshape history to fit and persuade others to his modern view.
The media created Churchill and people obviously fell for it.
This guy is not a historian.
The record of everything Churchill did before and during WW2 is meticulously recorded in his 5 volume book, The Second World War.
It consists of hundreds of his 'minutes' or memos he dictated to various officials during these years. Between them are narratives of what he did, said, and thought.
If one would read just the first two volumes, The Gathering Storm and Their Finest Hour, all the historian's legwork has been done by Churchill and any objective person would have to agree that he almost singlehandedly coordinated the rearming and motivation of England to save itself and the Western World. And just in the nick of time.
Tucker by his ignorance of Churchill's account (or any other contemporary of Churchill's account of which there are many) gave this charlatan a venue to spout his unsubstantiated garbage. Shame on Tucker. He may look all smart and preppy, but he obviously lives in the Kamala realm of feckless ignorance and weak-mindedness.
He should at least have read a Readers Digest Condensed Book about this, or maybe binge watch The Hitler Channel or Smithsonian. WW2 docs run 7/24/365.
I disagree Tucker gave the guy a platform to expose what a fool he is.
Churchill didnt become PM until 1940.
👍
What do you say about Churchill agreeing to the forced repatriation of Russian immigrants, forcing them to return to Russia and to their death?
Daryl Cooper did the Martyrmade Podcast, right? If so, I should consider it a competitor to my podcast.
“Cooper was discussing the plight of the Soviet POWs who got treatment even worse than the Jews, to the point there were accounts of concentration camp Jewish inmates who took pity on the Russians.”
?????? Say what? Jewish babies, children, women, and men filled ditches of overrun towns and the crematoria of death camps. And they were being killed even in the first waves of the Wehrmacht’s advances.
Might review Yalta Conference and then Operation Keelhaul - and the role the US Army played.
Make that 6 (six) volumes.
The 6th is “Triumph and Tragedy” and of note a group of writers (”The Syndicate”) helped on all volumes.
Just like so many lefty libs can't stop themselves from applying their modern notions of standards to historical figures. You're a good example, forever castigated for brutal tactics toward black Union soldiers and starting the Klan (before the Democrats got hold of it).
All that post-war good work for nought, your bust removed from the Tennessee capitol as if it were an object of shame. But that terrible caricature standing by the freeway being removed was good riddance to bad taste.
Pure crap.
Dunno, I [blush] don’t often listen to podcasts. [hides head]
https://search.brave.com/search?q=Martyrmade+Podcast
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.