Wednesday August 5, 2020
SNc Channels:



Oct-01-2011 02:06printcomments

Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich

Guido Giancomo Preparata, the author, is a former professor of Political Economy at the University of Washington.

Conjuring Hitler,
Order from: Amazon

(SALT LAKE CITY) - There are two definitively distinct types of history: the history written by those who take official propaganda at face value, and the history written by those who read between the lines, dig into the cracks, and shine a light on the dark corners of purposefully forgotten inconvenient truths.

The second type of history is sometimes referred to as “revisionist.” A more accurate description would be to call it “real” history, with the inverse being true of the former kind.

Conjuring Hitler is one of those rare gems of real history that stands out as a unique treasure amongst the landfill of wasted ink and paper that has been spent on the subject of the “Great Wars”.


Guido Giancomo Preparata, the author, is a former professor of Political Economy at the University of Washington. He currently teaches Criminology at Kwantlen Polytechnic University in Vancouver B.C.

I talked with Mr. Preparata by phone and we had a wide ranging conversation that included topics from Conjuring Hitler, and his most recent book, The Ideology of Tyranny.

Mr. Preparata told me that his approach to researching Conjuring Hitler was similar to that of a detective investigating a murder case. This particular case is only unusual in that it involves the murder of some 60-100 million persons.

If it is true that the culprit in any murder will do anything in their power to erase the traces of their crime, then this can only be more true when the crime is one of such stellar magnitude.

To myself, a not particularly well informed person in the history of this period, a few particular questions stand out about the events that transpired in the course of the two Great Wars.

For instance, why did America and Britain give financial and technological support to both Germany and Russia, their supposed enemies, only to shortly thereafter declare war (in the latter case a propaganda war only) on both?

One of the interesting bits of information that Preparata digs up is that Germany, Britain, and America were all supporting the Bolshevik (communist) revolution in Russia, while they were simultaneously slaughtering their own populations in a brutal war with each other.

According to Preparata, Germany was supporting the communists with gold. Lenin, who was in Zurich, was smuggled into Russia via Germany. Trotsky, who was ensconced in Manhattan, made his way to Russia via Canada, where he was arrested, then freed on British orders.

The German role in this odd confluence of support for “communist radicals” by the most conservative regimes on earth, Preparata chalks up to the role of Alexander Israel Helphand, known as “Parvus,” who Preparata asserts was likely a British agent.

Preparata explains the seemingly inexplicable support of Bolshevism by America and Britain very simply: Britain was pursuing a grand strategy of global domination which necessitated turning Russia and Germany against each other in order to neutralize their vastly superior productive capacity.

Preparata explains the British strategic position as being that of a sea fairing power, which is of course not at all controversial. As a sea fairing power, Britain's economy was based largely on “trade,” which is to say that they were the global middle man, taking a cut of the produce from the land bound nations of the world.

England is a small island, which has been to their advantage for as long as history exists, in that they have a natural protection against foreign invasion not shared by their continental counterparts. This has not stopped England from being overrun at several crucial points in their history, but in general, it has provided them with security and stability unmatched by any continental kingdom.

France, Germany, Russia, and everyone around and in-between have been fighting continual wars on their own soil for centuries.

War is destructive of productivity and capital, and thus a country that can live in relative peace can much more easily outshine its peers who are plagued by war.

Preparata's theory, in my interpretation, is that Britain's status as a global superpower, financed by their control of the seas and pilfering of international trade, was rooted in their advantageous security position in relation to the other European kingdoms. Britain, knowing that its supremacy relied upon the division and warfare between continental powers, consequently did everything in its power to encourage said division and warfare.

The greatest threat to Britain lay in the “European Heartland.” Specifically, peace between Germany and Russia that would allow them to combine Germany mastery of industrial technology with Russia's seemingly limitless natural resources.

To understand the magnitude of this threat, consider the following facts:

  • In World War I Germany fought a two front war against Britain, America, France, and Russia.
  • They lost, and their society was left in shambles.
  • Twenty years later, Germany had increased its industrial capacity far beyond what it was before.
  • Germany fought another two front war against the same parties, and was subsequently totally annihilated.
  • Fifty years later Germany is economically the largest and most prosperous nation in Europe.
  • It has probably the most advanced industrial base in the world.

German Panzer Division - Afrika Korps

If you consider the hypothetical alliance of Germany and Russia, Preparata's interpretation of history comes into sharp focus.

Germany rolled over Poland, Austria, and France, the major continental powers, with minimal difficulties.

Their offensives in Africa were highly successful, and they were on the verge of rolling up Britain's Middle Eastern properties.* [*The Suez Canal was the real prize of the Middle East then and now.]

Then the Germans stopped their bombing of Britain, ended their offensive against British properties in Africa and the Middle East, and launched an invasion of Russia.

According to Preparata's narrative, this German insanity was based on a specifically cultivated false belief of the Nazi leadership that they could form an alliance with their supporters in Britain and America. This belief was instigated in no small part by the King of England. Not the one from the Academy Award Winning The King's Speech. The other one. The avid Nazi. The one who supposedly abdicated the throne in order to marry an American “commoner.”

A sin against noble blood so grievous he simply could not continue to sit on the throne. The King was only one of a number of British and English elites who actively supported the Nazis, or adopted the role of “peace” in the face of Nazi aggression. This is traditionally viewed as a “dark stain” or “minor aberration” in the overall Anglo-American pursuit of truth, justice, and global domination. What Preparata surmises is that this was a carefully crafted strategy of the British to lure their Nazi puppet into the devastating confrontation with their Bolshevik puppet that they had been setting the stage for all along.

In Conjuring Hitler Preparata provides a great deal of support for the thesis that the British and Americans supported the “white” anti-Bolshevik forces in Russia in their propaganda and feigned diplomacy, but that they actively hindered them on the field of battle.

Preparata asserts that the whole business with the King of England supporting the Nazis was a well crafted farce. This assertion bears some merit. After all, the whole point of being King is absolute authority, so if the King wanted to marry anyone, it would hardly be grounds for leaving the throne.

Stranger than fiction Order Now

Given the general depravity and excess of the European monarchy, it is inconceivable that any of them would feel the need to justify any of their actions, let alone voluntarily relinquish the throne in order to satisfy the sensibilities of their constituents. Case in point, the current set of degenerate swine. Murdering your ex-wife, and marrying whoever, is an old story with the British royalty.

The idiocy of a King leaving the throne because it is taboo to marry an American of low blood smells like palace propaganda, with the attenuating lack of credibility that it deserves.

I discussed the question of European royalty with Mr. Preparata. The big question, outside the scope of Conjuring Hitler, is the hidden forces at work in the Great Wars that destroyed the Kingdoms of Europe. Destroyed all of them except Britain that is. The other question, unanswered, is the “family affair” nature of this whole business.

The fact that the royal families of Russia, Germany, and England where all close blood relatives. In talking to Preparata, he mostly took a pass on this question.

The secrets of the royal swine (you don't think Orwell was just talking about communists do you?) are their own, and their dubious power rests on their ability to keep it so. I did agree with Preparata that the “benign monarchy” is a farce as well.

My observation is that as long as any King or Queen sits on a throne, they can exercise the same power of coercion that they ever have.

Look at the idiot press and Hollywood lapping at their boots if you care for an example. Absolute contempt and reprobation for monarchy should be fundamental to any American. Especially vis-a-vis the British clowns.

Why is it that your press treats them like gods and the dubious “elite” of your society falls on their ass to get knighted and swear allegiance to the crown? The other topic that Preparata dwells more upon, but does not fully disclose, is that of the international monetary system, what he calls “the grid.”

I talked to Preparata about the role of banking in war, and he sees it more as one of servitude than of instigation.

From an economic perspective, modern war is impossible without modern banking. You must have “credit” in order to wage war. The important question is from whence doth this “credit” issue. Preparata defines the divide in society as being between those who create money and those who do not.

Another way of looking at this is that those who create money have permanent power, while everyone else is permanently in debt.

This situation is objectively identical to blood nobility (permanent power) and everyone else (permanent subservience) so it is not illogical to view money as a permutation of the monarchical system, with bankers as mere functionaries who carry out the clerical business involved.

One interesting fact that Preparata highlighted was that the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) was created to “settle” the war debt between Germany and its enemies. I asked Preparata if he knew anything further about how the BIS had, over time, morphed into the de facto “central bank of the world.” He did not have any additional insights into this, but it is an interesting footnote on the history of this period, to say the least.

The fallout from World War II is perhaps the most compelling question that challenges the official narrative of the causes of war. How is it that the ally of Britain and the U.S., who they created, suddenly became their mortal enemy? What of the decades of Cold War nonsense that followed? Preparata is already deeply into research on the subject of the Cold War, and he hinted that there may be a book forthcoming on this subject as well.

In our conversation, I noted one interesting anomaly that had caught my eye, which was that if you look at the aircraft of the U.S. and Russia, you will find that they were all designed according to the same blueprints, with minor cosmetic alterations. Since they both stole their initial jet fighter designs from the Germans, the similarity of those aircraft is no surprise.

But go down the line and look at each U.S. Air Force fighter, then look at each Soviet MIG, and you will see that each plane was created from the same schematics. You may say that the Russians stole the plans from the Americans, which may be true, but who facilitated this multi-decade criminal conspiracy that penetrated the core of America's top secret military industry?

Preparata seemed to lean toward the view of the Cold War as a propaganda sham from head to toe, but even he was not sure if this was done with the explicit collusion of the Russians, or merely baiting them dance as a circus bear.

The period of the Cold War, and its successor, the International War on Terrorism, (or International War of Terror depending on your taste for accuracy) gave rise to what Preparata describes in his most recent book, The Ideology of Tyrrany.

The crux of The Ideology of Tyranny is that it is a philosophical, and ultimately political, system of destroying all knowledge, dividing society along endless fault lines of gender, race, religion, and party affiliation, and ending dissent. Preparata traces the rise of this ideology through famous exponents like Foucault, and their less famous, and more radical, progenitors. I have yet to read the book, but I look forward to doing so. The attempt to destroy the Christian religion is certainly one of the more interesting developments of the twentieth century. The concurrent attempt to destroy Islam cannot be viewed as a separate initiative.

There was certainly an immense wave of “progress” in the twentieth century that destroyed the institutional basis of the Christian religion and then proceeded to destroy the ideology of Christianity. That wave broke over the Ottoman empire as well, and has been raining down on every Muslim society with full force.

Making sense of these social developments is no easy task, but a work that coherently fills in a small piece of the puzzle is much appreciated.

In Conjuring Hitler Preparata uncovers a historical narrative of great interest and documented veracity. While every answer may raise further questions, the book was an immensely satisfying read, that shed light on many of my own unanswered questions about the history of the Great Wars. I look forward to additional work by the author, and thank him for writing this excellent book, and taking the time to discuss its contents with me.

__________________________________ Business/Economy Reporter Ersun Warncke is a native Oregonian. He has a degree in Economics from Portland State University and studied Law at University of Oregon. At a young age, his career spans a wide variety of fields, from fast food, to union labor, to computer programming. He has published works concerning economics, business, government, and media on blogs for several years. He currently works as an independent software designer specializing in web based applications, open source software, and peer-to-peer (P2P) applications. Ersun describes his writing as being "in the language of the boardroom from the perspective of the shop floor." He adds that "he has no education in journalism other than reading Hunter S. Thompson." But along with life comes the real experience that indeed creates quality writers. Right now, every detail that can help the general public get ahead in life financially, is of paramount importance. You can write to Ersun at:

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

[Return to Top]
©2020 All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of

Articles for September 30, 2011 | Articles for October 1, 2011 | Articles for October 2, 2011
Your customers are looking: Advertise on!

Tribute to Palestine and to the incredible courage, determination and struggle of the Palestinian People. ~Dom Martin

Special Section: Truth telling news about marijuana related issues and events.

Annual Hemp Festival & Event Calendar

Sean Flynn was a photojournalist in Vietnam, taken captive in 1970 in Cambodia and never seen again.