I have occasionally linked to Tucker Carlson, so in the interest of balance and accuracy, I link to scathing attacks on him
from CNN and
super-skeptic Michael Shermer.
At issue is that Carlson interviews Darryl Cooper who had some criticisms of Winston Churchill for decisions related to WWII.
Cooper also blames Hitler and Stalin, but Shermer is outraged that Cooper does not credit Churchill's enormous moral superiority.
quote from
19:49
Irving okay this is all yes the
19:54
Allies killed Innocents on the road to
19:56
Victory but the killing stopped the
19:58
moment the Allies
20:00
won the genocide of Jews by Germans
20:03
ended on VE Day and the genocide of
20:06
Chinese by Japanese ended on VJ Day aitz
20:11
and then King were no more the Allies
20:16
killed in order to Stop The Killing by
20:18
the axis and for no other
20:20
reason the axis killed for geography for
20:23
political control for economic power for
20:26
racial purification and for pleasure and
20:30
the killing would have gone on and on
20:33
and on were it not for the
20:36
Allies anyone unable to see the
20:38
difference should have his license to
20:41
practice history
20:43
revoked that's you Mr
20:46
Cooper
Shermer seems to be blaming Cooper for Irving's opinions.
I did not see where either of these videos factually dispute anything Cooper said.
And Carlson just interviewed him, and so does not necessarily agree.
Shermer's ends with his real beef, a racial statement.
even Hitler himself was a physical
24:14
wreck by their own criteria. all of them
24:18
should have been sterilized before
24:20
passing on their defective
24:22
genes. extermination of masses of people
24:25
racially or ethnically different from
24:27
those in power is The Logical outcome of
24:30
the aristocratic romance and the belief
24:33
that there is or can be such a thing as
24:35
pure race and
24:38
ethnicity. there is no such thing, as
24:41
modern genetic Sciences unequivocally
24:45
demonstrated every person on Earth comes
24:47
from a single population of a thousand
24:50
to 10,000 individuals who migrated Out
24:53
of Africa and began to colonize Europe
24:56
and the rest of the world time between
24:59
100,000 and 160,000 years
25:03
ago. black Australian Aborigines for
25:06
example are genetically more closely
25:08
related to Southeast Asians than they
25:11
are to Black Africans because the route
25:14
of migration was from Africa through
25:17
southeast Asia into
25:20
Australia. the similarities between
25:22
Australian Aborigines and Africans and
25:25
the differences they show with Southeast
25:27
Asians are literally Skin
25:30
Deep. the principle holds for All Peoples
25:33
around the world and our racial
25:35
similarities vastly outweigh our racial
25:38
differences. We Are One race, one folk, one
25:45
people. all right thanks for Les thanks
25:47
for listening. it's Michael Shermer here
25:50
another solo commentary of the Michael
25:52
Shermer show.
I do not see how this has anything with Churchill's decisions, or the Carlson interview.
As a factual matter, Hitler did not have any children, and did not pass on his genes.
What Shermer says "modern genetic Sciences unequivocally demonstrated" is not true
as DNA evidence proved about ten years ago that the out-of-Africa population interbred
with European Neanderthals and Asian Denisovans. That is, we did not descend from a single out-of-Africa population, but from several populations that had already scattered around the world.
He says that we are one people right after saying that some racial groups are more similar than others.
Which is it? If there are measurable racial differences, then we not one race, one folk, one people.
There are probably dog-lovers who say that the similarities between humans and dogs outweigh
the differences. So what? Does that mean that Churchill should not be criticized?
I have noticed that some public intellectuals, when presented with a controversial topics, immediately make
statements that are obviously wrong. Why? My guess is that they are signaling that they know some politically
incorrect facts, and do not want to say them. Shermer has already been fired by SciAm magazine,
and may not want to be further canceled.
CNN shows Cooper saying:
0:32
I told him, maybe trying to provoke him
0:34
a little bit, that I thought Churchill
0:35
was the chief villain
0:36
of the Second World War.
0:38
He didn't kill the most people.
0:40
He didn't,
0:41
commit the most atrocities
0:42
and stuff that comes into their head.
0:44
He's saying,
0:44
is that,
0:45
oh, you're saying
0:45
Churchill was the chief villain.
0:47
Therefore his enemies,
0:49
you know, Adolf Hitler
0:50
and so forth, were Stalin
0:52
the protagonists? Right.
0:53
They're the good guys.
0:54
If you think he's a villain,
0:55
that's not the case.
0:55
That's not I'm saying,
So Cooper, in trying to be provocative, said Churchill was the chief villain, but was not excusing Hitler or Stalin.
Shermer acts as if Churchill entered WWII in order to stop the Jewish Holocaust. I do not think that is historically true.
This is weird for a rational skeptic to be so triggered by some criticism of Churchill.
We need healthy criticism of war policies. Shermer acts as if Cooper is a Jewish Holocaust denier.
I didn't see any of that, but it is still weird to go into a rant about African DNA.
Warmongers frequently cite Churchill to justify war. They will say that we need to stand up to Saddam Hussein
and Putin the way Churchill stood up to Hitler.
I am not expressing any opinion about Churchill here, except that I think the defense of him is a little strange.
Update: CNN reports:
The Biden administration is denouncing Tucker Carlson after the far-right personality hosted a guest on his show this week who suggested the Holocaust happened by accident, calling the interview “a disgusting and sadistic insult to all Americans.” ...
The administration’s statement specifically refuted Cooper’s claim to Carlson that Churchill was the “chief villain” of World War II.
“Hitler was one of the most evil figures in human history and the ‘chief villain’ of World War II, full stop,” Bates wrote. “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.”
Reached for comment on Thursday, Carlson sharply criticized the White House.
“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,” he said in a text message to CNN. “They’re warmonger freaks. They don’t get the moral high ground.”
But numerous columnists have pointed out inaccuracies in Cooper’s remarks, including his assertion that the Nazis “went in with no plan” for housing millions of prisoners of war “and just threw these people into camps, and millions of people ended up dead there.”
So I guess the chief technical disagreement is over whether the Nazis had a plan.
Maybe the White House could have provided a link to a historical document with the plan.
Regardless, it appears that Carlson's main interest is in whether Churchill is a good example for starting wars today.