Thoughts on Darryl Cooper's “Enemy: The Germans‘ War”

Why is history so full of worst-possible-outcomes?

Darryl Cooper

aka MartyrMade released the first part of his long-awaited podcast series about WWII from the German perspective. As usual, it’s excellent and provides much food for thought, whether you agree with all of his takes or not. Listening to it, I kept coming back to the old question: why does history produce horror after horror, seemingly no matter what people do?

Right off the bat, Darryl does what he does best: letting you time travel, giving you a glimpse into what it must have been like to live through a historic episode — in this case, the unspeakable horror of the Great War: an entirely new form of armed conflict that not only killed young men by the millions, but ended the very idea of the noble war along with the age of aristocracy. Out of the industry-powered mass slaughter, the sheer inhumanity of it all in every sense, emerged a New World Order, and via WWII, our own present collective mind, locked into a set of confused yet powerful pseudo-religious presuppositions.¹

The Woke Right and Its Discontents

For the Germans, the horror show of WWI that they shared with the other belligerents was made worse by the British food blockade during and after the war, which literally starved the country to death and ultimately broke the political system, while forcing it into the brutal Versailles treaty. While every front soldier lived through the unimaginable nightmare of the war, in addition to that, Germany got deliberately rekt economically, territorially, politically, socially. All of that planted a ticking time bomb at the heart of Europe.

It is easy to see in WWI and its aftermath the beginning of the downfall of Western civilization, or, cue Alex Jones voice, the takeover by the Globalists. It’s also easy to see a grand design at play here, geared towards using shock-and-awe to implement further centralization, divide-and-conquer, and the further molding of the collective mind towards erasure of everything that’s noble and good, and the embrace of everything low and debased. But even if we accept there is such a conspiracy, it can only work with natural lines of force, for it too is part of the cosmic order. In other words, when we contemplate why on earth everything seems to constantly go from bad to worse, whether we think in terms of conspiracy, teleology, destiny, or “nuts-and-bolts” about history, we need to be conscious of how these dynamics play out that lead to these outcomes.

Consider the sheer disgust with it all that people felt after WWI, and how much the promise to stop something like this from ever happening again must have resonated. A lot of today’s hostility by “the left” toward anything patriotic has its historical blueprint there, and for good reason: the blind hooray patriotism, the nationalistic mass hysteria preceding and accompanying the war,² the mass slaughter based on shaky visions of grandeur mixed with hidden geopolitical calculations nobody really cared about — all of that led to a massive pendulum swing against nationalism and the very concept of collective honour, and with it for revolutionary ideas, for the utopia of a “world government” securing peace for all. It’s easy in hindsight, for instance, to blame those advocating for the establishment of the League to Enforce Peace (from which grew the League of Nations and then the UN) for being naive at best, globalist handmaidens at worst. But at the time, given the intense trauma (listen to Darryl’s podcast), we can perhaps see why people thought this was a good idea. (Which makes you wonder about some of the things we, at the present moment, might consider good ideas, and how future generations may beg to differ.)

The Human Condition: An Unsolvable Equation

While support for an internationalist “peace project” was widespread after WWI, whether in its communist or liberal-democratic form, in Germany, a parallel development materialized: many Germans, especially veterans, were well-positioned to perceive the malevolence of this proto-globalist idea. After all, Germany had just been torn apart by what appeared to be this very internationalist project — again both in its liberal and communist forms. To those Germans, the lesson of the Great War wasn’t “never war again, no matter the cost,” but “never defeat by revolutionary globalism and foreign interference again, at all cost.” It wasn’t just Hitler and the Nazis who thought like that; a broad movement formed around this core message with many nuances and different flavors, ranging from restoration to communism-minus-internationalism to various forms of nationalism and reactionary or more progressive Volk-mysticism.

As if the humiliation of losing the war, what amounts to the OG color revolution, internal pressure from communist and anti-war sentiments as well as guerilla warfare between political factions, starvation-by-Brits, losing territory where masses of ethnic Germans found themselves cut off, the imposition of a chaotic and alien new form of government, almost-communism, bankruptcy-by-reparation, hyper-inflation, screwing over workers and pensioners by foreign loan sharks, and all the rest of the madness unfolding during the Weimar years hadn’t been enough, Germany was also forced through Versailles to accept sole responsibility for the war. This was such an outrage at the time that even the Weimar leadership, including the Social Democrats, hotly debated and contested the Kriegsschuldfrage (war guilt question). The Weimar Foreign Office even established a department to finance and coordinate the ongoing study of the question in an effort to counter the narrative abroad. Official history (of course) tells us that this was all a propaganda enterprise seeking to whitewash German guilt, and fair enough, I suppose. But if it represented “motivated reasoning,” so did the “Germany’s-to-blame-alone” line by the victors, not least since the massive reparations in goods and money depended on it.³

When it comes to the question of who’s to blame for WWI, today’s “official textbook history” is of little help: while it is admitted these days that blaming the Kaiser for it all doesn’t really cut it (although this line still looms large in the Western psyche), nobody gives a good answer. Like with most historical events, at least those in the relatively recent past, we find a hodgepodge of different national myths: the Brits, the French, the Poles, the Russians, the Americans etc. all have their narratives about it all, which are often conflicting, while still sometimes presenting interesting arguments. (This is even more extreme for WWII history, where each nation has their own revisionist or “official” take, conveniently projecting all the blame and wrongdoings on others while presenting itself as the pure victim-hero of the story — again, interestingly, not without each making some good points.)

Besides the various national myths, there are a plethora of conspiratorial takes on WWI, such as blaming the British Empire (crushing the emerging competitor Germany and driving a wedge between her and Russia, conveniently propping up the commies), the ”Globalists” (using WWI to end the anciens régimes, discredit nationalism, push the World Revolution, and ultimately erect a globalist one-world government aka the New World Order), the Jews (furthering Zionism and the eventual creation of Israel while destroying ethnic nationalism via communism and liberalism to make life safe and prosperous for the Jewish diaspora), to name just some of the more popular ones. Again, interestingly, just like the national myths, all of these stories do make interesting cases and can shed light on certain all-too-human aspects of the great mystery of how an earth-shattering historical event like WWI could have come about and played out the way it did.

Of course, conspiracy theories and die-hard national myths are hard to swallow for most current academic or “official” historians, and so, when it comes to who’s to blame for WWI, we are left with the unsatisfactory idea that it was just one of those things. A favorite retreat is to engage in blatant materialism, blaming everything but human agency: resources, economic factors, the math of alliances, game-theoretical calculations, population dynamics, sweeping technological changes… as if any of those abstractions could actually do anything, as opposed to humans taking decisions based on reasons, no matter how narrow their field of options might appear to us.

Since materialist history is rightfully seen as stale and lacking true explanatory power, the latest concept brought to bear on explaining WWI, as a sort of middle ground between materialism and Great Men theory, is that of the powers having “sleepwalked” into it. This idea, presented in various forms, proclaims that the complex entanglement in alliances, external circumstances and ideological pressures left European leaders no choice but to blindly fall into WWI’s horror show.

What at first seems like another cop-out by milquetoast historians unwilling to seriously engage with revisionist and more esoteric takes on history actually has something going for it, if for different (and more esoteric) reasons. “Sleepwalking,” metaphorically speaking, means doing things without awareness, without a sense of the bigger picture of the human condition: actions based on “good reasons” but lacking in knowledge and perception of the deeper currents, of what Darryl Cooper in his podcast calls “sinister influences hostile and imponderable … moving behind the veils.” Conspiracies in different varieties are part of these “hostile sinister influences,” but at the end of the day, they too merely belong to the category of “actions based on good reasons and ignorance.” There is a deeper level still.

Accepting that it’s not “economic pressures” or “evolutionary strategies” or anything like that acting in human history, but humans with their thoughts and reasons (of which such material pressures are certainly part of⁴), leads to the question of how our thoughts actually come about. Where do they originate? Are our thoughts truly our own, and to what degree? Based on what?

If we leave behind the arrogant and naïve idea that everything we think is a result of truly independent reasoning, we must first acknowledge that we are part of a deeper matrix of thought forms. Partly they are just habits formed in childhood in our relationship with our parents, who in turn got them from theirs, modulated and informed by society at large. In that sense, our thoughts are connected to the depth of time, are themselves “historical.” German historian Rolf Peter Sieferle talked about a “symbolic field” underwriting history, from whence ideas can bubble up into human consciousness even before they lead to any historical manifestation.⁵ In his view, such ideas don’t cause later developments as much as they are sort of a premonition of future historical forms. This captures the twilight world where a higher order, a higher sphere of creation with its own patterns, intersects with the collective thoughtscape of a given period, transcending the strict linearity of time we have come to believe in, a belief that is itself not timeless but historical. Truly, our thoughts are not purely our own.

If thoughts drive history, and thoughts are not just made up on the spot in our brains but exist within and interact with a wider field of symbolic reality, we can gain a fruitful perspective on the more conspiratorial takes on our existence, past and present.

When writing about history, the best “conspiracy theorists” always come to a point where they have to wrestle with the dilemma that while there absolutely seem to be discernible patterns of “grand designs” in history, bringing about certain definite (and mostly evil) ends, the involved shadowy world of advisors, men behind thrones, and semi-secret “movers and shakers” at the same time seem to react to events as much as they shape them. Honest students of conspiracies will find facts and utterances by historical actors that confirm, and others that contradict the conspiracy in question. Oftentimes the same “villain” that is blamed for it all shows conflicting actions and proclamations, while still playing an important part in the story. It seems that many a statesman and many a group of shadowy figures behind the scenes are mixed bags in that regard, while in the end still bringing about the unlikely course of history that seems too good to be true from the perspective of an evil scheme, or rather too bad to be true from the perspective of decent men. Indeed, it often seems to be “just one of those things,” and there’s far too many of these in the historical record.

The “agents of chaos,” in their psychopathic, self-absorbed and ultimately (or merely) ignorant way, unleash their destructive force, but instead of the randomness and entropy one would expect, somehow manifest an evil order; their actions seem to naturally fall into plots against which we all seem utterly powerless. The terror of history is real.

The more we try, the worse we seem to make it, in this diabolical play I have called the “unholy dialectic.” Again, think about the mentioned anti-war sentiment following WWI and the dream of a higher body making such madness impossible: I’m sure many proponents of all this meant well, their motives being understandable, and yet all they’ve accomplished is giving the rotten part of the “symbolic field” more centralized power, while the madness of pointless and dishonorable war rages on unimpressed. Or take the other side, the German nationalists of the 1920s and 30s: the very act of trying to rid themselves of internationalism, foreign meddling and globalist revolutionaries has made them susceptible to precisely such foreign meddling, turning them into dupes who ultimately brought about the final act of destruction of the budding superpower known as Germany. Worse yet, their most cherished program, the bolstering of the existing German-Romantic blood-and-soil Volk identity with a spiritual connection to German culture and ancestry has ultimately led to its eradication, to the complete castration of the nation and its identity. The attentive student of history will come to the depressing conclusion that it seems pointless to rage against the currents, while still being condemned to perceive their apparent intelligent-malevolent nature. All that raging against the currents will do, it appears, is entangle us further in the next stage of the unholy dialectic (or evil scheme manifesting).

It has become more acceptable lately to look for the deeper layer driving the dialectical darkness of our existence, as opposed to blaming naiveté, sleepwalking or this or that leader or conspirator. The obvious answer in a Christian culture is to refer to “demonic” or “spiritual” forces, as Tucker Carlson has been fond of doing, even using precisely the outbreak of WWI as an example of otherwise inexplicable machinations. It’s one way of putting it, and I applaud it since it dares acknowledge not only the existence of bad actors in the spiritual world, but more importantly, the highly organized and intelligent nature of the phenomenon. We are not dealing with some rogue demons torturing random souls for the lolz (although that’s a thing too), but with a vast intelligence scheming and plotting to milk the fallen race for all it’s worth.

In that vein, it is worth noting that quite a few whistleblowers have come forward lately talking about the alien phenomenon, its malevolent nature and its connection to what has traditionally been called the demonic or supernatural evil. One idea in particular, articulated by Dylan Borland, stands out: the suggested ability of the “aliens” to influence our very thought. This would explain why, for example, various leaders and decision-makers historically have developed an obsession with (or blind spot for) certain ideas or programs, or took decisions at key junctures against their better judgment. In other words, manipulation of our reality can be achieved by different means than powerful cabals, means that involve subtle nudges and subtle manipulation of the thoughtscape.

How does such “thought projection” by spiritual evil, aliens or otherwise, work? I suspect that, like other paranormal phenomena, direct “thought manipulation” may be understood as an extreme form of an otherwise more natural process, having to do with our interaction with the “symbolic field.” Normally, we move and navigate within the symbolic field based on our knowledge, our character traits, emotional drives, desires and fears, and the like. By doing so, we align ourselves with parts of reality, parts of the symbolic world, which we then instantiate and empower. The better and the more finely tuned our perception of ourselves and the patterns unfolding around us, the better we can navigate reality and align with potentially higher and nobler parts of the “symbolic field.” Lack of awareness and knowledge makes us susceptible to aligning with less-than-desirable forces, otherwise known as spiritual evil. In a nuts-and-bolts way, this could manifest for example simply in being emotionally triggered by an event and then being manipulated into reacting a certain way. This can be explained with ordinary psychology, although we must consider how we are embedded in this wide symbolic field of which our childhood experiences, acquired or inherited traits, likes and dislikes etc. are part of, which may itself be subject to subtle manipulation by forces above our pay grade. But there might also be a more direct manipulation going on at key inflection points, making sure history unfolds a certain way: a sudden taste for a certain idea, a sense of urgency to do something, an inexplicably strong emotional reaction towards a person, a group or an event… All unconscious, and all “feeling ordinary” like the natural mode of being, yet implanted by malevolent forces through the cracks of self-knowledge and self-awareness.

Grand plans concocted by humans based on half-truths and ignorance make them part of wider plots and patterns emanating from below the surface; they turn us, the fallen species, into pawns bringing about our own spiritual misery. Whatever entity or entities are behind all this, they enter through the gaps of our awareness. Only knowledge of a higher sort can protect us, and lead us to a different kind of influx: the light shining through the cracks of our ordinary rigid mental-material thought complex holding us captive, keeping us away from truth and deeper realizations. The path of least resistance parades us, including our leaders, through the streets by the noose, to the laughter and spite of our captors, even while we delude ourselves into thinking we are the stars of a grand show.

Have I mentioned that history can be very depressing?

But as MartyrMade once again shows in his latest podcast, depression and insight are profoundly related. Not all is lost.

Sorry for sucking you into a piece about alien conspiracies under the guise of a MartyrMade review. But maybe you enjoy what I’m doing here, and if so, consider supporting me with a paid subscription – niche authors really need it. Thanks to all of you guys.

Related:

1. Here’s a link to a good primer by

Chad Crowley

on how central the Second World War is in our collective psyche.

2. Sebastian Haffner provides a good description in his memoirs about the situation at the beginning and during the war at the home front, which amounts to authoritarian mass hysteria. It actually reminded me a bit of the Covid hysteria.

3. To understand the outrage about the “war guilt question” in Germany, keep in mind that since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, guilt of war hadn’t been part of any peace treaty; legal punishment of the vanquished party was excluded — a sort of “tabula rasa” amnesty after wars.

4. Such reasons can be unconscious, but unconsciousness too presupposes and is part of consciousness.

5. Rolf Peter Sieferle, Finis Germania, Landtverlag, 2023, p. 44