I really enjoyed this conversation, thanks. I haven’t heard much from Darryl but it was cool you sort of pinned down/asked for direct answers on hot button topics and he was totally fine with that. I wish more people did that.
David Irving was condemned for "Hitler's War" for inaccuracy, which is why people thought he was anti-Semitic. An investigation showed the book had poor methodology and analysis: the thesis that three million Jews died (historians believe the minimum was four million and the number killed is now believed to be over 7 million), Hitler did not intend to destroy the Jews but it was done by his subordinates due to bureaucracy and Himmler being the power behind the throne (in reality, Hitler was a one-man dictator who was suspicious of Himmler due to Himmler being a neopagan crank: the idea Hitler was Himmler's puppet comes from the fact that Himmler undermined Hitler due to the fact the S.S was a state-within-the-state, but no one says Reagan was Bush Senior's puppet), and Hitler tried to improve conditions in the camps (in fact, the food supply was for guards, servants, and kapos, with many "untermenschen" being given the chance to become either).
Irving was seen as a conspiracy theorist since at least the late 1980s, before "Hitler's War" was published in 1989. In 1987, Irving claimed the Polish president-in-exile (an anti-Semitic feudalist who was sympathetic to Hitler before the 1939 invasion), who was killed in an aeroplane crash, was murdered on the anti-Judaic (and anti-Israeli), Stalin's orders, allowing him to rig the Polish elections.
In reality historians believe the crash was an accident (despite Germans, Austrians, eastern Europeans, watering-holes like the "Reader's Digest," and popular history, believing otherwise), and I say the reason the Poles did not welcome the government-in-exile with open arms was because whilst the Poles hated the Soviets whom they fought in order to gain independence, they hated the feudalists as well, since feudalism led to the Partitions of Poland.
In late 2021 it had been determined that Irving's entire historical work, previously believed excellent aside from the anti-Semitism and conspiracy theory involving the death of the Polish president, was riddled with not only inaccuracies but bad formatting, poor analysis, bad evaluation, unreliable sources, and worst of all, actual fraud: in other words, he made things up, although much of his work was simply incompetence rather than lying.
It is true he is not a Hitlerite and no longer denies the Holocaust, despite how the media still describes him as a Holocaust denier. He was further condemned, along with the white moderate BBC, for "The Conspiracy Files" in which he claimed 7/7 was an inside job, false flag conspiracies by definition being anti-Semitic.
A mother of one of the killed victims of 7/7 said "I can't believe the BBC is doing this. He is helping terrorists and they're letting him broadcast it." However, the terrorists take responsibility for their actions, despite alt-lite cranks like Irving depriving them of responsibility.
Irving is clearly a recipient of tokenism, the old boys' club, and affirmative action for the white male working class, given the fact that Irving is from the former Danelaw, which has been poor in the case of northern England and having increased levels of poverty in the case of the North Midlands (like Shropshire and East Anglia), since the Harrying of the North: beforehand it was the richest part of England thanks to ties with the Kingdom of the Danes.
He is also obviously the beneficiary of grade inflation (which has negatively affected Western education since at least the late 19th century, and I would think earlier), and the fact that teachers and professors know that giving good grades to those who are easily exploited (i.e. the poor or middle class people from the Danelaw), will allow them to be exploited in the capitalist system for less pay.
I would think Irving supports unions, guilds, small businesses, fossil fuels, steel, the fishing industry, manufacturing, welfare, healthcare, education, and individual rights, and opposes wars, surveillance, corporate rights, free trade, and immigration.
All of those things are associated with northern England and the North Midlands: thus he can be considered a centrist extremist like the National Bolshevik Vladimir Putin (as opposed to the radical centrists the late H. Ross Perot or Jesse Ventura, since northern England and the North Midlands are more leftist).
Thus, I think he has an ideological bias, but it is not National Socialist per se (although National Bolshevism is similar to the Strasserism of the White Rose and the rest of the German Resistance, Strasserism being the original National Socialism).
Niall Ferguson still seething? Guess he realizes his whole career depends on a narrative that is losing credibility. Mr. Free Speech and Open Inquiry himself trying to Shut It Down.
To be fair, Darryl didn't properly explain himself. He should have typed out his thoughts beforehand: Churchill and I believe Roosevelt memorized their speeches.
Churchill didn't write, nor even perform many of his speeches himself, it's well known that he had a voice double for radio broadcasts. Even the "we shall fight on the beaches / we shall never surrendah" speech was performed by this double. Not exactly a paragon of oratory.
I doubt that he would go to the trouble of memorising speeches he didn't intend to give.
Anyway, I won't argue against the virtues of memorising texts. But Churchill, one of the least, if not *the* least, virtuous head(s) of state of the 20th century, is hardly the shining example even when it comes to speechgiving, and I don't know of a reason to assume he was a good memoriser, for his time anyway. He was almost certainly better at it than most people today, of course. Including myself. "Learning by rote" was big in British education back in the day.
I really enjoyed this conversation, thanks. I haven’t heard much from Darryl but it was cool you sort of pinned down/asked for direct answers on hot button topics and he was totally fine with that. I wish more people did that.
Thanks. I wanted to ask him more but we didn’t have unlimited time unfortunately
David Irving was condemned for "Hitler's War" for inaccuracy, which is why people thought he was anti-Semitic. An investigation showed the book had poor methodology and analysis: the thesis that three million Jews died (historians believe the minimum was four million and the number killed is now believed to be over 7 million), Hitler did not intend to destroy the Jews but it was done by his subordinates due to bureaucracy and Himmler being the power behind the throne (in reality, Hitler was a one-man dictator who was suspicious of Himmler due to Himmler being a neopagan crank: the idea Hitler was Himmler's puppet comes from the fact that Himmler undermined Hitler due to the fact the S.S was a state-within-the-state, but no one says Reagan was Bush Senior's puppet), and Hitler tried to improve conditions in the camps (in fact, the food supply was for guards, servants, and kapos, with many "untermenschen" being given the chance to become either).
Irving was seen as a conspiracy theorist since at least the late 1980s, before "Hitler's War" was published in 1989. In 1987, Irving claimed the Polish president-in-exile (an anti-Semitic feudalist who was sympathetic to Hitler before the 1939 invasion), who was killed in an aeroplane crash, was murdered on the anti-Judaic (and anti-Israeli), Stalin's orders, allowing him to rig the Polish elections.
In reality historians believe the crash was an accident (despite Germans, Austrians, eastern Europeans, watering-holes like the "Reader's Digest," and popular history, believing otherwise), and I say the reason the Poles did not welcome the government-in-exile with open arms was because whilst the Poles hated the Soviets whom they fought in order to gain independence, they hated the feudalists as well, since feudalism led to the Partitions of Poland.
In late 2021 it had been determined that Irving's entire historical work, previously believed excellent aside from the anti-Semitism and conspiracy theory involving the death of the Polish president, was riddled with not only inaccuracies but bad formatting, poor analysis, bad evaluation, unreliable sources, and worst of all, actual fraud: in other words, he made things up, although much of his work was simply incompetence rather than lying.
It is true he is not a Hitlerite and no longer denies the Holocaust, despite how the media still describes him as a Holocaust denier. He was further condemned, along with the white moderate BBC, for "The Conspiracy Files" in which he claimed 7/7 was an inside job, false flag conspiracies by definition being anti-Semitic.
A mother of one of the killed victims of 7/7 said "I can't believe the BBC is doing this. He is helping terrorists and they're letting him broadcast it." However, the terrorists take responsibility for their actions, despite alt-lite cranks like Irving depriving them of responsibility.
Irving is clearly a recipient of tokenism, the old boys' club, and affirmative action for the white male working class, given the fact that Irving is from the former Danelaw, which has been poor in the case of northern England and having increased levels of poverty in the case of the North Midlands (like Shropshire and East Anglia), since the Harrying of the North: beforehand it was the richest part of England thanks to ties with the Kingdom of the Danes.
He is also obviously the beneficiary of grade inflation (which has negatively affected Western education since at least the late 19th century, and I would think earlier), and the fact that teachers and professors know that giving good grades to those who are easily exploited (i.e. the poor or middle class people from the Danelaw), will allow them to be exploited in the capitalist system for less pay.
I would think Irving supports unions, guilds, small businesses, fossil fuels, steel, the fishing industry, manufacturing, welfare, healthcare, education, and individual rights, and opposes wars, surveillance, corporate rights, free trade, and immigration.
All of those things are associated with northern England and the North Midlands: thus he can be considered a centrist extremist like the National Bolshevik Vladimir Putin (as opposed to the radical centrists the late H. Ross Perot or Jesse Ventura, since northern England and the North Midlands are more leftist).
Thus, I think he has an ideological bias, but it is not National Socialist per se (although National Bolshevism is similar to the Strasserism of the White Rose and the rest of the German Resistance, Strasserism being the original National Socialism).
I need to get Darryl to come eat at my restaurant in Spokane…hmmm
What's it called?
Any night but Tuesday or Wednesday.
Belated welcome to the inland PNW by the way.
The Gilded Unicorn. Basement of Montvale Hotel downtown.
This was excellent
What is this jam at the end?
Marvel ‘83, golden dawn
Niall Ferguson still seething? Guess he realizes his whole career depends on a narrative that is losing credibility. Mr. Free Speech and Open Inquiry himself trying to Shut It Down.
What did he do?
Complained about Darryl’s appearance on Tucker
To be fair, Darryl didn't properly explain himself. He should have typed out his thoughts beforehand: Churchill and I believe Roosevelt memorized their speeches.
Churchill didn't write, nor even perform many of his speeches himself, it's well known that he had a voice double for radio broadcasts. Even the "we shall fight on the beaches / we shall never surrendah" speech was performed by this double. Not exactly a paragon of oratory.
The point is, he memorized the speeches, even if he didn't say them.
I doubt that he would go to the trouble of memorising speeches he didn't intend to give.
Anyway, I won't argue against the virtues of memorising texts. But Churchill, one of the least, if not *the* least, virtuous head(s) of state of the 20th century, is hardly the shining example even when it comes to speechgiving, and I don't know of a reason to assume he was a good memoriser, for his time anyway. He was almost certainly better at it than most people today, of course. Including myself. "Learning by rote" was big in British education back in the day.
Would you accept venmo $ for the second half of the conversation?
No but you can subscribe for 5$ a month, download the episode and then cancel.
I live 20 minutes from Idaho border in northern Idaho. Sick. I’m close to Darryl.