Plot

Darryl Cooper discusses his controversial views on historical narratives, the power structures they uphold, and his criticism of World War II myths, while emphasizing the need for open, honest discussions about history.

Darryl Cooper joins Tom Woods to discuss his controversial appearance on Tucker Carlson, where his views on Winston Churchill and World War II sparked backlash from the media and government. Cooper argues that mainstream historical narratives, particularly around World War II, are oversimplified to support existing power structures, and questioning them invites fierce resistance. He explains how these narratives, especially the "good versus evil" myth of World War II, justify U.S. military interventions and global dominance. Cooper also delves into parallels between modern Russia and post-World War I Germany, critiquing the West's refusal to de-escalate tensions with adversaries. Throughout, Cooper calls for honest conversations about history, free from censorship, while working on his own historical project, which aims to tell the story of World War II from the perspective of the German people.—J. Spurlin

Tom Woods interviews Darryl Cooper, creator of the "Martyr Made" podcast, to discuss Cooper's controversial views on historical narratives, particularly surrounding World War II. Cooper had recently appeared on Tucker Carlson's show, where his discussion of Winston Churchill and the myths of World War II led to widespread condemnation from major media outlets and even the White House. The conversation with Tom Woods dives deep into the role that historical narratives play in shaping public perception, supporting power structures, and justifying modern conflicts.

The interview begins with Tom introducing Cooper and referencing the backlash he received after his appearance with Tucker Carlson. Cooper explains how the controversy started when Carlson referred to him as a "historian," a title that Cooper disputes. He views himself more as a "storyteller" who relies on the work of historians to bring lesser-known or controversial historical facts to the public. Carlson, however, insisted on calling him a historian, and this, combined with their discussion of "Winston Churchill's legacy," led to harsh criticism. Cooper remarks that many of the points he made were not new; similar arguments had been presented by figures like "Pat Buchanan" and British historians such as "A.J.P. Taylor," but the intensity of the backlash was unprecedented. He attributes this to the fact that "historical myths," particularly those about World War II, are so tightly protected that questioning them invites a fierce, emotional reaction from the establishment.

Cooper and Tom agree that "historical narratives" serve as "load-bearing stories" that uphold certain power structures. For example, questioning the mainstream story of World War II is seen as dangerous because it underpins so much of the modern "U.S. foreign policy" and "global order." The comparison of every modern adversary to "Hitler" - whether it be Saddam Hussein or Vladimir Putin - has been used repeatedly to justify military intervention. According to Cooper, the "myth of World War II" is presented as a "good versus evil" story, where "Winston Churchill" and the "Allies" are seen as the unambiguous heroes who defeated "Nazi Germany." This simplistic narrative, Cooper argues, serves to flatter current regimes and discourages deeper exploration of the causes and consequences of the war.

A significant part of the discussion centers on the "emotional taboos" surrounding certain historical figures and events. Cooper explains how from childhood, people are conditioned to revere figures like "George Washington" and "Winston Churchill" and to see World War II as a sacred story that should not be questioned. This emotional conditioning makes it difficult for people to engage in open discussions about the complexities of history. Cooper criticizes the academic and media establishments for discouraging "dumb questions" that challenge these narratives, even though such questions are essential for a genuine understanding of history. He notes that even respected historians who try to explore these topics in a nuanced way are often dismissed or attacked.

Cooper discusses how "censorship" and "cancel culture" play a significant role in suppressing alternative historical perspectives. While a few decades ago, a small but vocal group of people could destroy someone's career for challenging mainstream views, the "internet" has changed that dynamic. Cooper points out that, despite the backlash he received, his podcast subscriber numbers have reached record highs, and he remains the top history podcast on platforms like "iTunes" and "Spotify." This shows that there is a growing audience for more nuanced and controversial takes on history. However, Cooper also acknowledges that the emotional reactions and "censorship efforts" are intensifying precisely because the "internet" allows more people to question established narratives.

One of the central topics in the interview is Cooper's critique of the "World War II myth" and its impact on "modern geopolitics." He compares "post-World War I Germany" with "modern Russia," suggesting that both nations went through periods of extreme humiliation and degradation after their respective defeats. In Germany's case, the humiliation of the "Treaty of Versailles" and the "Weimar Republic" created fertile ground for the rise of "Adolf Hitler." Cooper argues that "Vladimir Putin's Russia" experienced a similar collapse in the 1990s, with the country being treated as a "playground" for Western powers. In both cases, strongmen like Hitler and Putin rose to power by promising to restore national pride and sovereignty, which led to conflict with the West. Cooper is critical of the West's refusal to understand the "trauma" these nations experienced, which he believes contributed to their aggressive behavior.

Cooper draws attention to "Winston Churchill's role" in escalating World War II, arguing that Churchill's refusal to seek peace with Germany in 1939-1940 pushed Hitler into a paranoid, war-driven state. Cooper notes that "Germany" made several peace offers, which were ignored, leading to the "greatest slaughter in human history." While Cooper acknowledges that Hitler and the "Nazis" were responsible for their actions, he argues that the West had opportunities to avoid the worst outcomes but chose not to take them. This refusal to de-escalate conflicts, Cooper believes, has been repeated in modern times, particularly in the U.S.'s approach to countries like "Iraq" and "Russia."

Cooper also shares his views on "historical revisionism," pointing out that questioning mainstream narratives often leads to accusations of "sympathizing with dictators." For instance, those who critique "Winston Churchill" or "George Bush" for their war policies are often accused of supporting "Hitler" or "Saddam Hussein," which shuts down meaningful conversation. He compares this to a "hostage situation," where the police use a "maximum-pressure approach" that escalates violence, rather than seeking peaceful resolutions. Cooper argues that criticizing Churchill or Bush does not mean supporting Hitler or Saddam; rather, it is about holding Western leaders accountable for their role in escalating conflicts.

Another significant part of the conversation is Cooper's comparison of the "Jonestown massacre" to the "Waco siege." He explains that the U.S. government learned the wrong lessons from "Jonestown," believing that they should have intervened earlier and more aggressively. This mindset influenced the "Waco siege," where the government applied maximum pressure, leading to unnecessary deaths. Cooper sees parallels between these domestic incidents and the way the U.S. handles international conflicts, where "escalation" is often prioritized over "de-escalation."

Toward the end of the interview, Cooper reveals his plans for a "World War II project" titled "Enemy: The Germans' War." The project aims to tell the story of the war from the perspective of "German civilians," humanizing the German people and exploring how they experienced the war. Cooper emphasizes that he tries to empathize with all sides in any historical conflict he covers, which he believes is crucial to understanding history in a meaningful way. He acknowledges that many people find this approach controversial, especially when applied to World War II, but he remains committed to telling a more nuanced version of history.

The show concludes with Tom Woods praising Cooper for his resilience in the face of public backlash. Despite the intense criticism he faced after his appearance with "Tucker Carlson," Cooper has remained firm in his beliefs and continues to challenge "mainstream historical narratives." Tom encourages his listeners to seek out more "forbidden topics" and question established views, particularly those that have been heavily protected by the establishment.

In summary, "Darryl Cooper's interview" on The Tom Woods Show delves into the complexities of "historical narratives," censorship, and the need for more open discussions about history. Cooper critiques the "World War II myth" and its role in justifying U.S. military interventions, while also calling for a deeper understanding of how nations like "Germany" and "Russia" have been shaped by historical trauma. His forthcoming "World War II project" seeks to offer a more nuanced perspective on the war, focusing on the experiences of "German civilians," and Cooper's ability to endure public scrutiny serves as an inspiration for those seeking to challenge "mainstream historical myths."