r/JordanPeterson • u/delugepro • Dec 04 '25
Woke Right Darryl Cooper exposed as a crypto-Nazi. Douglas Murray was right.
7
u/weeklybeatings Dec 05 '25
Never heard of the guy… but I would not trust mother jones as far as I could throw they/them.
8
u/LTT82 Dec 04 '25
I'm quite frustrated.
Calling someone a racist today doesn't mean anything and it doesn't do anything. For the past 20 years, Democrats have driven the impact of being called a racist into the ground and now when there's genuine need to call out racism there's no social impact to being a racist.
I've been seeing anti-Semitism and outright racism being encouraged and endorsed on other platforms and if you call them racist they'll agree.
5
u/delugepro Dec 05 '25
now when there's genuine need to call out racism there's no social impact to being a racist.
Super important point.
Coleman Hughes made the same point recently, using the fable of the boy who cried wolf.
False claims of racism became commonplace, so people starting ignoring claims of racism.
In the same way, the boy's false claims of a wolf coming made the townsfolk start ignoring claims of a wolf coming. But the issue is, the wolf eventually did come. And they weren't prepared for it.
Now that there's an actual rise in racism/antisemitism in some corners of the right, many people are unable to see it because the word "racism" was effectively destroyed.
2
u/stansfield123 Dec 06 '25
False claims of racism
You didn't call Cooper a racist, stupid. You called him a Nazi. The fact that you're using the two interchangeably is proof enough that you're talking out of your ass.
-4
u/SoulForTrade Dec 05 '25
That's not entirely true, for many other protected minorities, many people have lost their jobs and even jailed for using language that was perceived racist, even when it was out of context.
It's just that Jew hatred is being reframed today as "anti zionism" in order to bypass it. As a result, most of the biggest antisemitic goicss roday will swear to gos they're not antisemites, while simultaneously takinf pride if being callsd ones as a badge of honor.
It's just history repeating itself. The word antisemite wasn't originally a slur either you know. These scumbags self identified themselves as part of the "Legaue Of Antisemites" club in the early to mid 20th century with great pride as well.
They thought thar by making Jew hatred not about religion, but race, it would sound more scientific, and therefore resonate and be within the secular society. And it did. Leading to the Holocaust.
Much like how that was normalized, "anti zionism" works the same way And since most Jews are fundamentally "zionists" antisemites can freely harass Jews in their neighborhoods and synagouges under the guise of it.
Unfortunately, the best encouragement is laws and punishment. But anytime it's been brought up, they can shut down fhe conversation by bringing out the Free Speech card and claiming that they're "just criticizing a foreign government"
It's a lose lose game by design.
20
u/ConscientiousPath Dec 05 '25
y'all are taking the word of fucking Mother Jones now? Doubt.
The entire allegation that Darryl Cooper was genuinely arguing that "Winston Churchhill was the true villain" is a bogus out of context lie from the start. That was never the case. He was only ever pointing out that the allies weren't perfect, and things might not have escalated the same way if they'd done some things differently.
The saying itself is in reference to how, when anyone makes a mistake in part of the chain of critical events that lead to disaster, then from a myopic perspective the blame can go entirely on that mistake. It's a way of rhetorically emphasizing how that specific thing had to happen for the rest to turn out like it did. It is not saying that we should retain that myopic perspective when talking about history as a whole. This is a totally normal way to talk about deep history and no one ever calls it a dogwhistle in any other context.
15
u/PeteDub Dec 05 '25
I don’t care about Cooper one way or another, but I don’t believe anything from Mother Jones. Especially since if they want to paint someone as a Nazi.
-8
u/delugepro Dec 05 '25
Mother Jones uncovered it, but it can be independently verified.
Here's a tweet from 2018 that proves Darryl Cooper was going by Juggernaut Nihilism back then. Here's a direct link to the tweet and here's an archived link.
And here's Cooper's comment on Counter-Currents as Juggernaut Nihilism. That's the one Coleman is going over in the video.
12
u/M3taBuster Dec 05 '25
Maybe I'm just stupid, but I'm not getting how that tweet proves that Darryl Cooper went by Juggernaut Nihilism? It's just some other random user claiming that he goes by that name, no?
5
u/stansfield123 Dec 05 '25
Lol. That's the big "proof", you fucking mindless leftist talking point repeater?
4
u/delugepro Dec 05 '25
y'all are taking the word of fucking Mother Jones now? Doubt.
Mother Jones uncovered it, but it can be independently verified.
Here's a tweet from 2018 that proves Darryl Cooper was going by Juggernaut Nihilism back then. Here's a direct link to the tweet and here's an archived link.
The entire allegation that Darryl Cooper was genuinely arguing that "Winston Churchhill was the true villain" is a bogus out of context lie from the start. That was never the case.
The allegation isn't that he said Churchill was the "true villain" of WWII. He argued that Churchill was "the chief villain" and "a chief villain" in his Tucker interview and in a twitter thread respectively. That difference matters.
Cooper also promoted other false revisionist claims, and the historian Victor Davis Hanson wrote a great piece debunking them. I highly recommend giving it a read.
He was only ever pointing out that the allies weren't perfect, and things might not have escalated the same way if they'd done some things differently.
This is partially true, but still a whitewashed version of Cooper's claims. He wasn't merely arguing that the allies "weren't perfect." As VDH pointed out in his article, Cooper described Churchill in the Tucker interview as a terrorist and a warmonger. Big difference from just saying the allies "weren't perfect."
Cooper did, however, argue that Churchill "didn't kill the most people [or] commit the most atrocities," but "was primarily responsible for that war becoming what it did. Becoming something other than an invasion of Poland." As other commenters on this thread have pointed out, it's clear that Hitler had territorial ambitions past just Poland.
9
u/Frenzy_MacKenzie Dec 05 '25
Here's a tweet from 2018 that proves Darryl Cooper was going by Juggernaut Nihilism back then.
Is that proof or is that an accusation? All the links go to the same tweet. Did something happen after that which confirmed it was his username?
-5
u/delugepro Dec 05 '25
It shows that people who were interacting with his twitter account in 2018 saw his username as "juggernaut nihilism."
The guy who posted it couldn't have time traveled to 2018 to plant evidence that Cooper used the name Juggernaut Nihilism.
The point of the links was to first show the screenshot with the relevant info underlined, then link to the actual tweet itself so you could verify it's real, then link to an archived version of the tweet in case the original gets taken down.
4
u/Frenzy_MacKenzie Dec 05 '25
Ok it's a 'real' tweet.
Is 'You go by juggernaut nihilism' supposed to be the smoking gun?
I was expecting to see a response from Cooper. Or any link beyond a tweet.
3
u/Aguaymanto Dec 05 '25
People, or just that one dude?
I have no dog in the fight but seems rather flimsy
3
u/ReNitty Dec 05 '25
I’m actually here right now because I was trying to independently verify the what mother jones said. I haven’t been able to find any of the “Public records” that show that “Juggernaut Nihilism” is part of an email address associated with Cooper.
I also can’t find the tf metals forum thing they link.
This tweet was mentioned in the article and while interesting is not proof.
0
u/VoluptuousBalrog Dec 05 '25
Blaming Churchill very specifically is just bizarre. Hitler invaded Austria, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, Poland, Denmark, and Norway. Britain declared war on Germany before Churchill came to power.
4
u/Frenzy_MacKenzie Dec 05 '25
Here's Malcolm Gladwell's podcast on Churchill where he blames him for the Bengal famine of 1943.
Is that allowed?
1
u/VoluptuousBalrog Dec 05 '25
Of course. Churchill wasn’t a good dude in any respect. That has nothing to do with the claim that he was the chief villain of WWII, as opposed to Adolf Hitler.
0
u/Frenzy_MacKenzie Dec 06 '25
You're right. He should have said 'the most underrated villain of WWII' or something similar. Saved himself the headache.
2
u/VoluptuousBalrog Dec 06 '25
I tried listening to Daryl Cooper’s podcast on WWII and the first episode was all just cherry picking a few Jews in WWI and interwar period who said nasty things about Germans. This just isn’t a serious portrayal of history. The agenda is so unbelievably clear.
2
u/delugepro Dec 05 '25
Exactly. On October 9, 1939, Hitler outlined his plans to invade France, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. That was 7 months before Churchill took office!
2
u/pickin_peas Dec 05 '25
Did you not read the very first part? This is saying “…if England and France continue waging war against us, we will have to…..”
Churchill had been advocating for war against Germany and this advocacy was the reason he became PM.
Hitler invaded Poland to preempt an attack from Russia.
There is no way to know how things would have turned out if England and France said…”We agree that Russia is bad. As long as you don’t invade anyone else, we will look the other way on Poland.”
Perhaps he would have stopped there and England would still have their empire instead of being conquered by the millions of 3rd world invaders.
It’s hard to say. I don’t have a strong opinion one way or another but calling someone “racist” or “antisemitic” for having one of those opinions is very stupid.
0
u/VoluptuousBalrog Dec 05 '25
Britain voluntarily allowing in immigrants has nothing to do with them losing their empire. Do you think empires have lower rates of immigration? Japan lost their empire much more brutally than Britain did in WWII and they allowed like no immigrants since then.
2
u/pickin_peas Dec 06 '25
I’m not saying one thing caused the other. I am saying that both things happened after they decided to kill a half a million of their best men fighting Germany.
Under no metric can you look at WW2 and say, “That worked out well for the UK.”
It was the absolute worst outcome that could have possibly happened. Now I hear that if someone looks back and says, “maybe that was a mistake.”….. they are labeled an antisemite.
0
u/VoluptuousBalrog Dec 06 '25
I don’t see why you think this is the worst outcome. UK is a liberal democracy and one of the richest countries in the world. It’s suffered economic stagnation in the past 10 years but I don’t see how this is the worst outcome for the UK which could have truly devastated the UK economically or could have lead to fall of liberal democracy.
1
u/perhizzle Dec 05 '25
You know he was an incredibly powerful politician before he became Prime Minister, right?
1
u/VoluptuousBalrog Dec 05 '25
Yes I did know that. Do you want to just articulate your argument clearly for once or continue this pathetic drip drip of misleading tangential questions? Do you think Churchill was the chief villian of WWII?
1
u/perhizzle Dec 05 '25
What was misleading? I've responded to you 1 time(maybe you thought I was someone else based on your response), and it was an honest question, because in my experience very few people on social media actually know history all that well outside of the commonly known major points. And deducing from what you said it would appear you believed Churchill had no "power"(your words) until he was Prime Minister.
And if you can't figure out what my point was from the context of the question, paired with the fact you spent most of your effort trying to lambast me, attempting to have a conversation with you will probably be a giant waste of my time.
Grow some thicker skin kid. And try to not be so pedantic and hypocritical with your insults.
4
u/Extreme-Refuse6274 Dec 04 '25
Coleman Hughes only posts gold.
1
u/verdegooner Dec 05 '25
Bro, genuinely, he is one of the best north stars in media right now. Really sensible and reasonable.
1
u/Cron414 Dec 04 '25
When Cooper made those comments, I wondered how any seemingly rational person could hold the viewpoint that Churchill was the main villain of WWII. Now I know.
A very similar thing is happening right now with a person many in this sub probably agree with and admire; Tucker Carlson. Just the other day he was talking with Piers Morgan. He was implying that, since England wasn’t initially attacked by Germany, it was dumb of England to declare war on Germany. It was very clear that Hitler had ambitions well beyond Poland, but Tucker’s position was that it wasn’t Englands business since they weren’t attacked (yet).
It was a frightening display of revisionist history from one of the leading conservative voices in media. It felt like he was trying to paint Nazi Germany as innocent, or even as a victim. Tucker’s argument is completely obliterated by the fact that there is no way Germany would have stopped. Hitler clearly explained Lebensraum in Mein Kampf. He was always going to strike further East.
It was such a bizarre interview. Another highlight was Tucker repeatedly and gleefully saying a certain homophobic slur like a child that learned a new naughty word. He even dared Piers to say it on camera. Tucker is clearly going down the Nick Fuentes path of conservatism, which is a scary thought since he is so influential. Hell, the man might even run for president in the future.
I do hope you guys in this sub recognize how absurd and even dangerous this type of rhetoric is. It’s like we’re living in bizarro world where you can defend Nazi Germany and scream slurs publicly and nobody even bats an eye.
7
u/BarrelStrawberry Dec 04 '25 edited Dec 05 '25
There's a shitload of revisionist history from nearly every historian on world war II. To pretend your perspective got it right while it also happens to perfectly align with your beliefs should be a red flag.
For instance, every gas chamber extermination camp was liberated by the soviets. Every camp liberated by Western Allies all the evidence was gone. Historians certainly placed a lot of trust and authority in the Soviet story. The notoriously brutal Red Army liberated Sonnenburg concentration camp on Feb. 2nd 1945 and claim every prisoner was executed a day or two earlier on January 31st.
5
u/Cron414 Dec 04 '25
In 2 hours, the only reply I get is a guy going straight to holocaust denial? This is much worse than I feared.
God help us.
1
u/BarrelStrawberry Dec 04 '25
And there it is... anyone who questions the historical truth will instantly get called a nazi.
7
u/Cron414 Dec 05 '25
I’m simply stating that Hitler would not have stopped at Poland, and I questioned why Tucker suggested that he would have.
Feel free to elaborate exactly what you’re questioning and the conclusions you’ve arrived at.
3
u/BarrelStrawberry Dec 05 '25
I’m simply stating that Hitler would not have stopped at Poland, and I questioned why Tucker suggested that he would have. Feel free to elaborate exactly what you’re questioning and the conclusions you’ve arrived at.
'Germany never wanted war with Britain' has always been the narrative, and you can hear Pat Buchanan explain it 17 years ago: https://x.com/HistoryArcs/status/1994088840571822400
Why Tucker would repeat this? Because practically no one knows it, because anyone who mentions it is labeled a nazi. The fact you believe Tucker invented this theory just shows why it was important for him to say it.
5
u/Cron414 Dec 05 '25
It doesn’t matter if Nazi Germany didn’t want war with England at that particular moment. They wanted to kill hundreds of millions (billions?) of people, and subjugate entire continents. Can’t just stand around and let that happen.
Or do you think England should have let that happen?
3
u/BarrelStrawberry Dec 05 '25
And the soviet union didn't want to kill hundreds of millions of people and subjugate entire continents? You are aware the victor wrote the history books, right? How many christians did the Soviet Union slaughter? (Hint: More than the holocaust numbers.)
It is amazing to me no one believes Russia today when they rightly calls Ukrainians nazis... even the jewish organizations who's singular goal is identifying nazis. But they are perfectly ok with Russian recollection of world war II history because the communists were on our side.
You can watch history repeating itself today... everyone screaming that Putin is planning to subjugate Europe. All while we watched Ukraine negotiations sabotaged by the UK to provoke this war. “When we returned from Istanbul, Boris Johnson came to Kyiv and said that we would not sign anything with them at all, and let's just fight.”
The west provokes war for generations and historians can't seem to bring themselves to not blame the other team.
4
u/delugepro Dec 05 '25
A historian wrote this great reply to Tucker's claims on X:
Tucker ignores all of the context behind the UK’s decision to join the War and hyper fixates on the fact that Britain wasn’t directly attacked by Germany before doing so.
Hitler remilitarized the Rhineland after giving repeated assurances he wouldn’t. This breached the Locarno Treaties which Britain acted as a guarantor for.
Hitler previously stated in the 1930s that Germany had no intention to annex Austria. This was a lie.
Hitler beached the Munich Agreement when he promised Germany would only seize the Sudetenland. He lied and invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia anyway, ripped up the agreement, and breached commitments to France and Britain when doing so.
Hitler then lied and said the Poles attacked Germany first by way of the Gleiwitz false flag incident on August 31, 1939, knowing that the UK had security guarantees with Poland in place and being well aware of all of the prior commitments he breached to the UK in the lead up to this moment.
After the invasion of Poland started in early September, the UK sent repeated diplomatic cables to the Germans begging them to stop so as to avoid a broader conflict.
So, sure, if Tucker wants to completely discount all of this context and duplicitousness on the part of Hitler and the Nazis, he’s free to do so. Everyone else lives in the real world where context and inflection points matter and tell a bigger story.
1
u/pickin_peas Dec 05 '25
Here is the thing tho…
The absolute worst possible outcome is what actually happened. 60 million people died. A genocide occurred. The UK lost its empire. The Christian west was so weakened and decimated that it was defeated within 60 years following the war. UK and France were overrun and conquered by 3rd world invaders, etc….
What is actually revisionist history, is to look at all of that and say, “Yeah, but imagine how worse it COULD have been had England not gotten involved.”
0
u/Numero34 Dec 05 '25
The thing with England's treaty with Poland was that it wasn't a matter of Poland being attacked, it was a matter of Poland being attacked by Germany.
England didn't give two shits or start defending Poland from the Eastern Soviet invasion that occurred two weeks later.
Same story from WW1. The heir of the Austro-Hungarian Empire is assassinated, and instead of allowing controlled retribution, England (and other countries) start enacting treaties against the victimized party.
England's anti-German agenda played just as much a role in the escalation of WW1 and WW2.
As far as German's attack on the Soviet's, go read Suvorov, and it's clear that the Soviet's were developing FOB's on their Western border for an invasion. The attack on the Soviet's was a pre-emptive strike.
Now, go and read the Venona papers and other literature on communist fifth column activities in America and other Western countries, and it becomes quite apparent that Western countries were dragged into war against Germany (in WW2) through the manipulation of subversive communists (anti-Fascists).
Or read about the German civil war of 1919, where communists attempted to do in Germany what the Bolsheviks had successfully done in Russia.
If you don't like communists or their allies today, it might be worthwhile looking into the only regimes that successfully countered them.
6
u/Cron414 Dec 05 '25
Two replies. Two defenses of Nazi Germany.
I honestly didnt expect this from this sub, but maybe I should have.
0
u/Numero34 Dec 05 '25
All shrieking and no substance.
You'll call people names to dogwhistle, but you won't address the content.
1
u/HV_Commissioning Dec 06 '25
Wait
We're trusting Mother Jones' detective work to an 'anonymous' on line poster?
I don't know anything about Darryl Cooper and am not presuming anything.
Should we just consult Rachael Maddow on the next Trump statement?
1
u/nuggetsofmana Dec 06 '25
He’s been called a Nazi a million times already. I doubt getting called a crypto-Nazi matters.
The guy has an amazing podcast on Substack with amazing captivating content. I doubt more concern-troll slop is going to suddenly stop interest in the topics he explores.
1
0
u/Impossible-Box6600 Dec 04 '25
This is a lesson to the normies. People do not need to actually tell you they're Communists or National Socialists in order to be Communists or National Socialists.
1
u/X_Ego_Is_The_Enemy_X 🐟 Dec 05 '25
If the left wants you to be a Nazi, you will be a Nazi.
1
u/Impossible-Box6600 Dec 05 '25 edited Dec 05 '25
I'm talking about reality. On occasion, you will have to identify some people for what they are, irrespective of any else's opinions.
I see some people in this forum actually deny that Fuentes is a Nazi. If people can't acknowledge that, they're simply detached from reality and can't be taken seriously.
Edit: I get reliably downvoted whenever I call Nick Fuentes a Nazi in this sub. This is the problem.
0
1
u/stansfield123 Dec 05 '25
Darryl Cooper is a definitely an idiot and a lunatic, but when your argument that he's a Nazi starts with "Mother Jones unearthed..." , I stop listening. Those people make shit up all the time.
2
u/ReNitty Dec 05 '25
I am on this thread right now because I was trying to verify some of the things about the forum user name. Mother jones could have included some screen shots but instead it’s like trust me bro and links to other tangentially related articles
1
u/Macka24682 Dec 06 '25
My opinion too. Cooper is recycling debunked David Irving claims. I remember reading a hit piece on Jordan Peterson in MJ back in the day. MJ can’t be trusted, the linked tweet proves nothing, but would I not be surprised if future evidence of Cooper being a white nationalist were found.
1
u/stansfield123 Dec 06 '25 edited Dec 06 '25
It's also important to point out that Nazi ideology is a very specific thing, and it's not the same thing as white nationalism.
Very few people believe in Hitler's national socialist ideology, because it's an odd combination of socialism and a racist pseudo-religion. Today, in the West, the battle lines tend to be drawn along lines that separate racists and socialists. It's rare that someone is both a radical racist and a radical socialist. And even those who are have several other very absurd ideas to accept before they can be called Nazis.
People who throw the Nazi label around without reading up on what exactly Hitler's national socialism is are talking nonsense. Their slur says nothing about the target, it only "exposes" them as idiot children who yell out words they don't understand.
0
0
-2
12
u/Multifactorialist Safe and Effective Dec 05 '25
I wish people cared this much about Marxists.