The Forgotten Green Brown Alliance

gotten through it. If not, I don't blame you. It can take a while to get through almost six and a half hours of material, I suppose, But yeah, I figured I would give you guys yet another special episode.

This one's serving as a sort of addendum to what we talked about in the previous episode in the episode known as the Hanshar about the so called Muslim Nazis, and this one is a lot more modern in its history and gets into something that I think is pretty obviously a growing problem, particularly on the political right, at least in the United States, on its fringes. I know that fringes don't necessarily matter all that much when it comes to kitchen table issues. But you know, this isn't

a political podcast. This is a historical podcast that gets into political topics, and in this particular case, I think it fits for me to be talking about this growing trend and where it arguably comes from, or at least in part comes from, and it matches really well with what we just covered in the Muslim Nazi series so far. Again, we still have one more full episode of that series coming hopefully sooner rather than later, but I've learned not to make promises about that before we get into the

episode today. I want to thank everyone as always for supporting this show, supporting me, supporting what I'm doing here, especially those of you have been doing it for so long, like my supporters John Andre Saither and Mike Maylebin who've been supporting the show, you know, at the incredibly generous executive producer level for years now. I really appreciate them, and I appreciate all of you who are able to throw a couple bucks my way every month, every year,

whatever it might be, whatever works for you. If you want to show some love that way. If you haven't already, head over to Patreon dot com, slash History Impossible or History Impossible dot substack dot com, though I think that's actually changing over. I have to wait to see how that looks. But soon Historyimpossible dot Com will just take you directly to the substack, a one all encompassing home.

So yes, please consider supporting the show, becoming a member, paid subscriber, whatever you want to call it, and I will be forever grateful. Was a good time too, because I am entering my last proper semester of graduate school, so I'm going to need all the help I can get to pay off those student loans that I decided to bring upon myself. So thank you again for listening, and let's get into some impossible history.

healthy values for the guidance of mankind. The leadership of mankind by any Western man is now on the decline. Not because Western culture has become poor materially or because its economic and military power has become weak. The period of the Western system has come to an end primarily because it is deprived of those life giving values which enabled it to be the leader of mankind. Sayid Kutub, you are dying. I see in you all the characteristic

stigma of decay. I can prove to you that your great wealth and your great poverty, your capitalism and your socialism, your wars and your revolutions, your atheism and your pessimism, and your cynicism, your immorality, your broken down marriages, your birth control that is bleeding you from the bottom and killing you off at the top. In your brains, I can prove to you that those were the characteristic marks of the dying ages of ancient states Alexandria and Greece,

and neurotic Rome. Oswald Spengler, Dear Hitler, I welcome you back with all my heart. You have been defeated, but in fact one should regard you as the real victor. There will be no place in the world until Germany again takes first place. Your principal mistake was opening too many fronts. But everything is forgiven, for you are a shining example of belief in one's fatherland and people. You are eternal, and we shall not be surprised if we

see you again. On Marl Sadat on the eve of his controversial election as mayor of New York City, Zornmumdani had his fair share of critics. It is safe to say,

and he still does having been inaugurated. While some criticisms had more to do with his inability to sufficiently distance himself from his more inflammatory and just plain dumb previous comments and performances, as well as his supposedly planned policies, there was a common thread with some conservative and right wing commentators and critics of his namely that Mamdani was not just a socialist but a closet Islamist or a Jihati.

Even figures as prominent as Aonhirsi Ali, herself a strident and longtime critic of Islamism and even Islam itself, were more than willing to claim that Mamdani was quote an Islamist clad in socialist garb unquote, as Ali stated on

her ex page. Figures like Sequoia partner Sean MacGuire what even further earlier on in twenty twenty five, claiming that quote Mamdani comes from a culture that lies about everything unquote, because quote it's literally a virtue to lie if it advances his Islamists agenda unquote, echoing what I would consider at least simplistic claims of Takaya that are often quoted

by drive by critics of Islam. This kind of commentary prompted a lot of criticism, including from opponents of Mamdani, mostly because it was largely seen as missing the point to essentially use the words of the New York Post editorial board when they stated on July second, twenty twenty five, not to quote unquote, go down the Islamist rabbit hole.

Socialism is what makes Mamdani toxic unquote. And this is to say nothing of a lot of these claims being completely inaccurate factually speaking, and arguably even Islamophobic at least

in the case of Maguire's commentary rather than Ali's. Now however, ultimately untethered from reality, this fear of a leftist Islamist blob monster was it was actually pretty understandable, especially from figures like Ayon heir Cili who have been on the proverbial Islamism be for so long and having literally survived

its assaults. As Satanan Dume at The Wall Street Journal pointed out in response to these claims of Mundani's plan to quote establish a caliphate on the Hudson unquote, there is a troubling synergy that has been seen and that I've even talked about with Islamists and far left activists, particularly when it comes to the issue of Israel, and often Jews in general, though usually with the Zionist filter

lane over everything. Now this has become very well covered territory, especially in the wake of the campus and street protests against alleged genocide preemptively launched while the bodies from the October seventh, twenty twenty three program were still warm. It's even reignited a fair bit given events in Iran in which we're either looking at another Tianum and Square situation or possibly a second Iranian revolution as of this recording.

It's very hard to say, but it definitely has revealed the ideological confluences and inconsistencies one could say, between Islamists and leftists, but the willingness to make common cause, however incoherent.

Now this alliance, if we want to call it that, has even gotten serious academic and think tank treatment, with report from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism being published in the journal Terrorism and Political Violence as far back as twenty thirteen that covers this phenomenon, and like I mentioned earlier, even I as many of you listening, no doubt remember, have taken a stab at explaining elements of the I guess we'll

call it the newest incarnation of this alliance via the soft imperialist strategy employed by Islamist groups calling it their velvet gie Hod, as well as if you remember discussing

the concept with Spikes Brendan O'Neil. However, I will defer to the renowned British Israeli historian Robert Wistrich in summarizing both of the contradictions, the shared values and ultimately the overall obsessions in what he calls the red Green Axis in his massive Tone, a lethal obsession anti Semitism from antiquity to the global Gihad, where he writes the following quote.

Islamists may sharply disagree with their far left allies about feminism, homosexuality, religion, secularism, and the validity of socialist ideals, but they share a common anti Western, anti globalist, and anti Zionist agenda. Radical Islamists are not, of course interested in the traditional class struggle of the proletariat, but like the far left, they hate America, revel in the myth of a Jewish world

conspiracy and are determined to eliminate Israel. Palestine is the issue where their cooperation with the left is most harmonious. In Britain, as in France, the anti globalist left and the Islamic fundamentalists also share a common rejection of liberal

modernity and the entire Enlightenment project. Yet ironically both want to globalize the Middle East conflict, demanding humanitarian intervention by the wicked Western imperialists if only to stop Israel, while at the same time threatening it with UN and EU sanctions. Nowhere is the morbid emotionalism and self indulgence of a victim centered culture more palpable than in the pro Palestinian

partisanship of the International Solidarity movement. To simplify that into the parlance of our times, we could say it is without question that even now, despite all the complications arising from the current potential second revolution in Iran, the Palestine issue has become the omni cause for what passes as the left in the West in recent years, with the only globebization they seem to support seeming to be the

so called decolonialization struggle. Even Zora Mamdani himself made this clear when back in twenty twenty three, while speaking on a panel called Socialist Internationalism the Solution to the Crisis of Capitalism, he claimed the following quote. For anyone to care about these issues, we have to make them hyper low.

And I think that what an opportunity we have is that we are in a country where those connections abound. Is actually in New York City, you have so many opportunities to make clear the ways in whish fast trumble over there is tied to capitalism.

which is what Mamdani was referencing. When you're doing that, you're basically just inflating the importance of your own personal cause by marrying that cause to more global events and associations, hence an omni cause. And given what active opposition to Israel has largely become in the last two years, it is clear that this cause has constituted an unholy marriage of values on to the Western left. To go back to the scholar Robert Wistrich, he further explains as follows quote.

In the pro Palestinian narrative of liberals and Marxists, remarkably little attention is paid to the crazed ideology, the poison culture of martyrdom, or the violently anti Semitic hatred emanating from much of contemporary Islamism. Instead, terrorism and Islamist suicide attacks are explained away as a product of social conditions

and the general misery induced by Israel's policies. However, this marriage of values, that of functionally supporting a theocratic terrorist government and social progressivism, is built upon moral contradictions that have also been well covered territory, including again by yours

truly over the pages of Quillette in Queer Majority. In other words, there really is no need for me to further litigate the self evident absurdity of Queers or Palestine, or any of the self it and absurdities of people who consider themselves leftist activists marching in the streets in

support of the Ayatola Homini. In the end, there is plenty of well written history covering the rise of the PLO and the leftist activists and terrorists who allied themselves with them during the height of the radical era of

the late nineteen sixties and early nineteen seventies. It's well covered territory, in other words, thanks largely to the resurgence of this strange red green alliance in the wake of October seventh, this has perhaps understandably overshadowed the story of the other alliance that Islamism has formed and with whom they found a home in the margins of Western political society. In fact, as undeniable as it has become that there have been plenty of Western leftists willing to make common

cause with Islamists. There is a sturdy history of the far right making common cause with Islamists. In two thousand and two, less than one year into the United States Global War on Terror, the geopolitics professor Alexandra d Vallier real name Mark Donna, coined a provocative term, the Red, Green,

Brown Alliance. Del Vallier had been controversial in his assessments before, going so far as to claim that the United States was using no joke Islamist organizations to destroy Europe in his first book, Islamism in the United States, An Alliance against Europe, originally published in nineteen ninety seven at Landish has This claim was and likely informed by del Vallier's extreme hostility toward the Clinton and Reagan administrations, in particular

for all sorts of reasons that aren't really worth getting into right now. Del Vialler's later assessment that of an ideological alliance, however unofficial, between the far right, the far left, and Islamism, ultimately gained some legs thanks to its relative soundness based on the evidence that was available at least now. Far from claiming that there were some shadowy backroom deals being forged between representatives of the American Nazi Party, the

Communist Party USA, and his Abutarir. Del Valler was more interested and characterizing this phenomenon as, in his words, a convergence of totalitarianisms, or also, in his words from a later article that he wrote on the subject quote, a coalition of longtime losers and a syndicative universal hatred unquote.

In other words, del Vallier was taking note where there are usually divergent values overlapped, similar to Robert Wistrich's read green axis, but with a greater ideological and intellectual scope.

As del Valler writes, quote, it is evident that is Islamism, the third totalitarianism after Nazism and Communism, echoes to a definite extent the aspirations of its two predecessors, seizing the struggle of civilizations and religions, then declaring war on the Judaeo Christian world in the name of the dispossessed of

the rest of the planet. Islamism seduces as much those nostalgic for the pagan Third Reich resolve to eradicate Judaism in Christianity, as it does to those partisans of the Hammer and Sickle determined to come to blows with the bourgeois and capitalist West, and continuing later, Davalla writes the following quote from the outset, One asks oneself, what could be able to unify movements as ideologically antagonistic as the Reds atheist and materialists, the Greens, theocrats and Islamists, and

the Browns believers in the War of the races. To believe that such an alliance would be philosophically impossible and strategically improbable, and therefore from the get go doomed to checkmate would be to forget that Islamism is not only the third totalitarianism to come about, but is also equally in a number of points, the inherited unifier of the

two predecessors. In so far as Islamism is not only simply a religious fundamentalism, but also and above all, a subversive revolutionary totalitarianism, an ideology of mass destruction comparable to Nazism, Maoism,

or Stalinism. This green fascism prolongs the anterior totalitarianisms. What distinguishes the Green version essentially is that it brings to the historical totalitarian hatreds, a theological justification and a divine Benediction, whether it concerns the Lebanese Hezbalah, Palestinian Hamas, the Alcatic combatants, or the Iraqian Palestinian resistors, it must be recognized that in the marketplace of globe revolution, the Islamists and the

Arab Muslim Moujacchedeen in general are the most effective and ferocious adversaries of quote unquote Israeli American imperialism. They are the ones who are inflicting the most damage on the colonialist and capitalist powers, whom the Reds and the Browns detest above all. Being the third moment of totalitarianism, an avenging Islamism leading the assault on the capitalist democracies and

the Judeo crusader forces. Knows now such an ascension throughout all corners of the globe, and in particular in europe An ascension facilitated by the planetary and unprecedented mediatization which it has enjoyed since the shock of September eleventh, two thousand and one, that it has been attracting like a magnet the attentions of those nostalgic for the Communist and Nazi totalitarianisms, drawing at the same time from the vulgate of the extreme right and from an Islamically correct template

that is pro Arab and third worldist. This new revolutionary, very implanetary hatred henceforth seduces the latest anti Jewish and

anti American militants of the extreme radical right. Daviller has more to say about the formation of this alleged unholy alliance, but in short, when one examines the contours of the radical ideologies that inflame so much of modern political discourse, one begins to realize that the supposed contradictions within these radical ideologies matter far less than their shared broader visions of the world. More with one another can come later.

In the meantime, they all have the same enemy, and just as radical leftists and revolutionary Marxist Leninists can leave aside their supposedly progressive social values and supposedly secular worldview to make common cause with theocratic Islamists, their many radical right and self styled neo fascist dissidents who have just as little difficulty doing the same, all in the name

of defeating their shared enemies. Though there is almost always a single shared enemy at the center of this radical nexus, the question of this shared enemy is not a mystery because it has been the shared enemy of ideological radicals for well over a century, and arguably far longer if

one looks at theological developments across time. To name this shared hatred has become unfortunately a bit of a cliche at this point, and one destined to fall on deaf ears, but for clarity's sake, it does need to be stated. It is a hatred, or perhaps more commonly, chronic distrust

of Jews. It could be said that the skeleton key for radicals and radicalism is the Jew, the eternal Jew, as Joseph Gerbels might have put it, thanks to his rejection of Christ or the prophet Mohammed, thanks to his murder of Gentile children, thanks to his stateless cosmopolitanism, and now thanks to his state sanctioned genocide, all of the things that you've probably heard various figures on the far left and the far right say over the last couple

of years. The Jew has always been framed as the outsider, and outsiders are often the greatest threat to a utopian project, a utopian project that is Christian, Muslim, nationalist, communist, or a truly globalist one. Outsiders are the enemy that is always how it's framed, and that's why the Jew has often been targeted. This is why it is a mistake, in my opinion at least, to place anti Semitism in the same category as rank racism or general bigotry, and

more in the same category as conspiracy. They The journalist David Reeaboy recently wrote about this in Tablet magazine while discussing what is appearing to be this newest incarnation of the strange radical Alliance ideological alliance, I should say that we're about to discuss explaining the following quote. What unites these audiences isn't ideology so much as a way of seeing. In this world of theirs, nothing happens by accident. Every war, election,

or scandal confirms the existence of an unseen hand. The more elaborate the theory, the more convincing it feels. The current peddlers of this theory didn't invent this pattern. They inherited and updated it into a modern vernacular of globalist plots, unipolar elites, and foreign lobbies. The content changes, but the structure never does. This is a cognitive map built entirely on lies. Yet most people, including many Jews, still describe

antisemitism as anti Jewish racism. That mistake is fatal. Racism begins with emotion. Anti Semitism begins with explanation, its logic as counterfeit, but it poses as reason all the same. This confusion has deep roots. After the Civil Rights era, hate became the moral grammar through which all prejudice was understood. Jewish institutions eager to speak that language adopted at wholesale. Once anti Semitism was redefined as an emotional or linguistic offense,

its conspiracy core was buried under tropes. In that bucket, the falsehoods that launched pograms and genocides, blood libel, world Jewish control were lumped together with trivial stereotypes. The result was a flattening of meaning. Even the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance as official definition adopted by governments and many Jewish groups,

reflects this collapse. It's warning against mendacious, dehumanizing or demonizing allegations about Jews treats antisemitism as a moral failure rather than an epistemic one. Indeed, the more I have learned about antisemitism throughout history, the less it has appeared to me to be some strained social construct akin to racism, and more like something of a tradition. This is a tradition of conspiracy theory, and conspiracy theories are the bedrock

of radicalism. Whether we're describing religious or secular radicalism, left or right doesn't matter. Anti Semitism is the bigotry that comes in with grand post talk justifications, rather than a bigotry that forms them on the fly. There is, in other words, a relatively robust internal logic to anti Semitism, creating a vastly more powerful permission structure than your traditional colorist racism that we still occasionally see in the West.

It's connection, that is, anti Semitism's connection to social and religious tradition that goes back far further than Berlin in nineteen thirty three, reveals its durability across time and ideology, and thus helps explain its frequent role and unifying seemingly desperate ideologies in creating this red green, brown alliance described by del Vallier. Much can and has been said about the horseshoe theory of Western politics, the idea of a

red brown alliance, which many socialists angrily dispute. I've noticed, perhaps doth protesting too much, and as stated before, much more can be and has been said about the Red Green Alliance of late. However, the brown prong of what del Valler called the convergence of totalitarianisms has gotten, in my opinion and at least far less play, far too

little play as far as critical commentary goes. There are many possible reasons for this, but it likely lies at the core of why there are so many people who might still be scoffing at the idea of a red Green alliance. It just seems too outlandish to assume that the Western radical right could ever possibly see eye to eye with Islamists on anything. And yet, as we will see, there is a robust history that shows precisely the opposite.

if they haven't already been released. But I want to provide a little bit of context, and I think the best way to do that is to let Hudson Institute senior fellow Michael Dorin's lengthy explanation that he published in Tablets suffice for that, where he wrote his follows quote For commentators like Mark Twain, it was clear that Jewish

brains were an American national asset. Today's would be oracle profess themselves to be less sure, seeing unequal results as proof that the Jews are up to their old tricks European style. Tucker Carlson, in his growing circle of populous broadcasters, have learned that resentment towards the Jews sells. Many Americans rightly suspect that unaccountable concentrations of power, bureaucracies, corporations, elite networks have distorted public life and hollowed out institutions meant

to answer to the people. Carlson takes that legitimate suspicion and fixes it on a single explanatory target. He does not indict elites in general. He indicts the Jews. Carlson's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case is a revealing example of his method, taking a wider critique of elites and redirecting it towards the Jews. While letting his own kind off the hook. For many Americans, Epstein has come to symbolize a depraved elite that evades accountability while enforcing more

standards on others. His network spanned business, politics, academia, media, and royalty figures such as Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and senior academics at institutions like Harvard University. It was a world of power that operated by its own rules outside the bounds of decency. Israelis were present in that world as well, including one of their former prime ministers, a hud Barak. In Carlson's telling, the Israelis are not

one group among many. They sit at the center as the prime movers who direct these scandals toward their own nefarious particular list ends with other, mainly Christian participants as their dupes. During continues later in the essay, as follows, placing Masad in the frame does more than allege foreign involvement. It reorganizes responsibility. If Epstein ran a blackmail operation for Israeli intelligence, then presidents, billion, academics, royalty and media figures

did not act independently. They answered to someone above them. What begins as a story of elite corruption and depravity then becomes the discovery of a hidden hand. Jews cease to appear as participants in a decadent system and reappear as its managers. Carlson updates the protocols of the Learned

Elders of Zion for the digital age. Dorin later lays out Tucker Carlson's strategy and those shared by other online jew obsessives like Candice Owans, that I think is also worth putting a pin in to help illustrate how this usually goes. As Dorin writes, quote, online populism thrives on the claim that shadowy forces control public life and that only a few brave figures dare to confront them. Jews are prominent across media, law, finance, and culture. They are

easy to see. They are obviously successful as individuals, but also voluble in their opposition to anti Semitic attack. When attacked, they answer that combination visibility, professional leadership, and public responsiveness creates the illusion that populist broadcasters crave of a vast

network that appears unified, powerful and threatening. Anti Semitic broadcasters allege that a vast, shadowy Jewish network manipulates American politics from behind the scenes, coordinating media, finance, and government to enforce conformity. Jewish individuals and institutions respond, often rightly, naming the charge as anti Semitic. The attacker then points to that response as proof that the network actually exists. But contrary to their public theatrics, the dangers of such activity

are minimal, at least to them. Jews are too few, too politically divided, and too decentralized to exercise the kind of coordinated power that these accusations imagine. There is no zion as common turn to punish or murder dissenters outside a narrow set of professional precincts, or anti Semitism still carries severe cost, there is no real danger of losing work. Yet the absence of real retaliation does not weaken the story,

it strengthens it. The broadcaster confronts a supposedly vast and dangerous adversary, bears his breast upon the barricades, and descends unharmed in full view of the public. The appearance of courage is produced without the burden of risk. With all of that said, it was therefore unsurprising that Tucker Carlson would host the internet's most famous jew hater and Hitler apparently also Stalin fan Nick Fuentes on his wildly popular program in late October of twenty twenty five, some months back.

As of this recording, and this created what appears, as of early twenty twenty six is still be something of an ongoing fracture point within the American conservative movement. However unified one might want to believe it actually is, and that's interesting in and of itself and will warrant future examination for sure, especially as it continues to swallow up

other very popular right leaning figures like Megan Kelly. However, Carlson and by extension, Nick Fuentes, as seen in a lot of their content, both provide an interesting window into what this potential new Green Brown alliance may start to look like if we are indeed witnessing its early days and not just some kind of branding exercise or redirection strategy, which are both possible explanations, but the pattern does exist, and if we go back, for example, to an episode

of his program from May of twenty twenty five, Tucker Carlson almost certainly trying to be provocative as a way to criticize the American healthcare systems handling of the ongoing opioid crisis. Claim that quote unquote, if you really want to be red pilled, one should learn about the Taliban's quote unquote faith based approach to drug rehabilitation.

are if you're listening. Some of them are big political donors. You get rich on drug treatment programs. Disgusting. It doesn't work. It works for some small percentage, but it doesn't work for most, that's for sure, and a lot of them die and they never lead productive, joyful lives. And the Taliban have a faith based I know I'm probably get pulled off YouTube for saying this, but it's true. I'm

saying this is a Christian on a Muslim. They have a faith based, no nonsense, zero intoxicant policy in their rehab and it works in ours doesn't.

cessant jew beater and traditional anti semi respectively. But if one takes a more broad look at the wider paleoconservative slash paleo libertarian commentator class that was essentially getting alluded to by Dora in that piece I quoted earlier, one can start to see a common thread.

by you know, every pastor under the sun. And then you've got this religion which crops up, which shows affirmative action, absolute strength. You know, these are the tenants which appeal to young men, particularly in Europe and of course in the Middle East, but you know, predominantly in Europe. And so this is the key, you know, driving force is the fact that theology, like Christianity in Europe, has been stripped of its actual truth. It's an eternal truth.

has been weak? And obviously startling upsetting to hear, but he is echoing I think what you are what you are speaking to, which is that there does need to be a.

its religion and culture. People are happy, they're welcoming of others, they're tolerant of diversity. There's none of that here. But you go to a country like the Emirates or Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and you see that when people are self confident, when they're really pleased with what they're doing, and they believe that their system is the right system, that self confidence results in a welcoming attitude. You'll say I'm really kind of pro Jesus, like I'm a Christian. They're like, oh,

that's so great. Well, they mean it. It's a country governed by Sharia law where they're into things that I'm not into, like polygamy or Islam. No one's forcing this on me. I'm not mad at you. I can go to a place like that, and I don't feel like I need to judge everybody on their local customs. But in the process of doing that, you get perspective on

your own society. Let's treat the people who run the banks that people who are getting rich from usury like the criminals they are, and make them suffer, because that's totally fair. If you exploit and destroy people, you're not a good person. And I think we should start by getting collective actions. No, it's that the real danger is Shia law. Sharia law, and you can tell when you go to a place like Abu Dhabi or Riyad, like

oh Man. I hope we don't ever wind up with a society like this with a rape rate of zero, where you leave your keys in your Lamborghini and don't ever worry about it being stolen. And you know, if people want to get wasted, they do it at home, you know what I mean. Yeah, boy, I hope we don't wind up with that. Mm hmm, yeah, I think. I mean, Sharia law is obviously just a punchline. I don't know that too many people actually believe in the

reality of that. And I mean sure, like I said, you know, I'm a lawyer I actually studied legal philosophy. Sharia is not that different from other legal codes.

well as get attention from those on the outgroup. But the thing is that does nothing to actually diminish the significance of the very strange incarnations of ideological alliances that pop up among Western radicals on the left and right, and their strange connections to Islamism. Now, this common thread is not surprising, because again, it is never really about

the actual cause believed in by one's allies. That's why you get this weird sort of dissonance when you look at these different ideologies, despite the fact that we can see them in a lot of ways, in a lot of times defending one another because what really is binding all of these people together at various times and in

various ways, is simply one shared enemies. While the radical Western left believes in a vague notion of decolonization, the radical right believes in this vague notion of being anti war, and the Islamist groups like Kizibier or Hamas believe in a restoration of a caliphate or Islamic dominance over the Holy Land, all very disparate standpoints, yet all three of these groups essentially share the same enemies Israel and or the Jews, which are rapidly becoming functionally synonymous as far

as I'm concerned, and almost always by extension, the United States and the Western world in general, at least as they currently exist. It is therefore not all that outlandish to call the radicals on the western left and right functional allies of Islamists, and just as the functional allyship of various leftist groups has existed with Islamists for some time, namely since the Iranian Revolution of nineteen seventy nine, though the connection does go back a bit further than that

in some ways. But just as that has existed for so long, so too has the allyship between radical right wing groups and individuals and Islamist groups and individuals. Similar to the radical Western left, the radical Western right does not, at first glance, seem to be a good fit for making common cause with Islamists. There's always a preternatural paranoia about border security and even immigrants in general, to say nothing of what often veers into Western chauvinism and outright racism.

And it discussed with all things foreign, with the people of Islamic countries, often, though of course not exclusively, being used as examples of who not to allow within Western borders. And Yet, in his two thousand and six book The Enemy of My Enemy, The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right, the political science scholar George Michael explains that despite these tendencies of the Western radical right and the tendencies of Islamists quote, they actually share some

strikingly similar characteristics. In continuing, Michael writes the following quote, both movements evince a high degree of exclusivity as they endeavor to create their own utopian versions of homogeneous societies. Moreover, increasingly there is a meeting of the minds on several important political issues. Oddly enough, one example is the cause

of Palestinian independence. The two also offer similar critiques of American foreign policy in the Middle East, the American media, modernity, secularism, and globalization. Finally, both movements see the United States government as hopelessly under the control of Jews or Zionists, pursuing policies that are at cross purposes with their own group interests. The key, Michael argues for a meeting of the minds between the far right and Islamists is finding potential vectors

for cooperation, particularly where perceived enemies overlap. In fact, according to Michael, quote, perhaps the greatest potential unquote has to

do with that of my profession, that of history. More specifically, the greatest potential for cooperation between the far right and Islamists can be found within the phenomenon of historical revisionism, particularly when it comes to events like World War Two and the Holocaust, whose narratives figures like Tucker Carlson always seem so keen to try and upend for whatever reason.

As Michael explains, quote, there are several reasons why the prospect of cooperation between the historical revisionist segment of the extreme right and militant Islam is strong. First, the racialism in this segment tends to be muted and much less strident. Rarely does one read claims about the racial superiority of European derived peoples or the racial inferiority of other races. Furthermore, non Europeans, such as Afro Caribbean scholar Tony Martin have

on occasion given lectures at revisionist conferences. Finally, there is a great congruence of interest in this field of intellectual endeavor because both militant Islam and revisionists are highly critical

of Zionism. While one can likely imagine several examples of this convergence of interests, especially to the longer one spends in right wing corners of X and other platforms like that, one of the most infamous examples of far right anti Zionism comes from a particularly notorious Swiss Holocaust denier named

Jugen Graf. Groff's first and most infamous book was The Holocaust on Trial Eyewitness Accounts Versus Natural Laws, published in the early nineteen nineties and co authored with fellow Holocaust denier Carlo Montonio. Thanks to this work and many others

echoing similar themes. Groff was dismissed from his teaching position, giving him further credibility as a persecuted person in the eyes of the revisionist crowd, where he continued to thrive until his death, actually just last year in twenty twenty five.

According to George Michael, who interviewed him for the Enemy of My Enemy, Graf quote saw great potential for an alliance with the Palestinians and their supporters, especially because any effort to discredit accepted views of the Holocaust would undercut the legitimacy of the State of Israel and, by extension,

the larger international community of Jews. Graf was indeed an unrepentant anti Semite and a true Holocaust denier, not quote unquote just a revisionist, though that is largely a distinction without a difference in this particular context, of course, with Groff claiming to Michael that quote, the quote unquote Holocaust lie is but a rotten corpse unquote, just waiting to be disproved, despite quote the fact that those who profit from these myths control the education system plus the media

of the West unquote. While completely ostracized by mainstream historians, review and claims like these. Understandably, Groff was able to help organize a conference called Revisionism and Zionism slated to occur in Beirut Lebanon in the summer of two thousand and one. The event ended up being canceled at the last minute, but it was spearheaded by the Institute for Historical Review or IHR, probably the most infamous historical revisionism outfit,

thanks which frequent laundering of Holocaust denial. The IHR was not content to simply distribute supposedly respectable pieces of Holocaust denial skepticism, though they sought to form foreign alliances and not just with fellow traveling European white supremacists. As Michael explains in his book Quote, the IHR had interfaced with Muslims in the past. Its director, Mark Webber, has been interviewed numerous times on Iranian state Radio Islamic Republic of

Iran Broadcasting or IRIB. According to some accounts, Arabs were among the first financial supporters of the IHR, just prior to the founding of the IHR. It is believed that the government of Saudi Arabia funded the Holocaust denier William N. Grimstad, the author of the six Million Reconsidered, and on some occasions Muslims have addressed IHR conferences, including Isa Nachle of

the World Muslim Congress quote. The IHR has long since lost any luster it might have once had, and its circulation of paid supporters was already in the four digit range as of Michael's writing two decades ago. Nevertheless, the revisionism link between elements of the far right and Islamism

continues to persist and has a rich tradition. Even the very infamous German Canadian Holocaust denier Ernst Zundo, who was appropriately helped in court by David Irving in the late nineteen eighties, once commented that quote the poor Palestinians are the most abused victims of this holocaust in quotes there

propaganda tool q quote. In modern times, however, the link between the two worldviews goes beyond mere shared interests in denying or downplaying the Holocaust and even becomes more specifically wedded to current events. This became especially clear following the Pogram of October seventh, twenty twenty three, as reported by Catherine Kanely and Zoe Mansei in their paper Hate United

Neo Nazi accelerationist support for Hamas. There were a number of far right accelerationists, that is, people who wish to speed along the destruction of modern societies so a newer,

supposedly better utopia can be born from the ashes. These far right accelerationists were on telegram and they quote believe they share commonalities with Hamas and consider the Israel Hamas conflict to be an opportunity to radicalize, recruit, and inspire violence against the Jewish community unquote, going so far as to share what they believe are Israel's critical infrastructure details for Hamas's consumption on telegram. This is not actually that outlandish.

Telegram was used by Hamas during the October seventh pogrom. That is where they posted all those ghastly videos that I unfortunately have seen, but I think a lot of other people have too. Kenneli and Manzi also report that quote. One of the analyzed channels shared details on Israel based substations,

including specific location coordinates. One neo Nazi accelerationist channel, now disabled, posted a guide on how to sabotage electrical substations in Israel, which included an open infrared map of electrical substation sites in Israel and read if America can shut down with nine substations as a large scale country, imagine Israel as it is a short scale country unquote. So this isn't

just a relic of the past. These functional alliances still do seem to exist in more meaningful ways, even than contrarian pundits trying to get views and come up with the edgiest way to make their case. In a way, it is unsupp rising that accelerationists sees something to admire in Hamas. Back in two thousand and six, George Michael pointed out accurately that quote. Since the nineteen eighties, the extreme right has evolved from a movement characterized by ultra

patriotism to one increasingly characterized by nihilism. With that in mind, Hamas, it has been accurately stated by many, is a death cult and has described themselves as loving death more than the rest of us love life. That's very well covered territory. So it is not hard to imagine how a hyper privileged and sufferably bitter Western radical yearning for an apocalypse of the modern world could find something admirable and one

of the most barbarically nihilistic organizations on the planet. Indeed, to go back to the commentary from Keneli and Mansy, they make it clear that quote, intergroup support is not rooted in a common religious or cultural ideology, but rather in uniting against a common enemy, the Jews and the corrupt West unquote, and that accelerationists are fans of Hamas's tactics, suggesting quote that their guerrilla style warfare is worthy of

adoption and should be implemented by accelerationists in the United States unquote, despite different ultimate visions of the world they wish to see. The researchers found that, without question, quote, both ideology and methodology are the spotlight as areas of potential convergence unquote for Islamist terror groups like Hamas and far right terror groups and individuals in the West. Again, shared hatred is often all that is needed to forget

diverging visions of the future. However, there have been figures in the far right who have gone even deeper with finding common cause with Islamists, going so far as to exhibit outright islamophilia. The most famous recent example of this phenomenon was actually the streamer Sneako, who converted to Islam in twenty twenty three but has been fashioning himself a

far right provocateurl or for some time. However, a less famous but far more significant figure serves as what George Micah refers to as the Islamic national socialist synthesis of our modern era. That figure's name is David Myatt, and his is a fascinating story.

unquote in their own words. Mayatt is less known outside of the UK, where he is originally from, but over the years he gained a bit of a reputation as the leader of the underground paramilitary group Combat eighteen in nineteen ninety eight, after the original leader was thrown in

prison for murder. This murder had been part of a broader strategy of quote attacking left wing bookshops, gay pubs, and anti apartheid activists in the nineteen nineties, and there is little doubt that Mayat played a part in the terror, or, if one is to be more charitable, was fully aware

of it. However, like a lot of self described seekers, he became disillusioned with the movement, especially after it self destructed from quote Internet, seeing conflicts and government repression unquote in George Michael's words, though he never let go of the Nazi ethos, Mayatt sought new meaning from various avenues, including Daoism, Buddhism, Christian monastic life, and even pagan and Satanic secret societies. But eventually he discovered Islam and was entranced.

This discovery and enchantment did little to tamp down Mayatt's neo Nazism, and in fact, it only accentuated it. His racial ethno nationalism as Michael calls it, or neo racism

as Miyat himself called it. Interestingly, does not apply a hierarchy to the races, but does emphasize the importance of racial particularism in the context of quote cultural identity and self determination quote in which quote the various races of the world have different destinies, different abilities, and different ways of living that should be respected unquote. In George Michael's

words summarizing Mayat's views. And yet the West, that is the new World order in Mayatt's parlance, was not included in this formulation and was in fact the corrupting force that did not allow for different ways of living that should be respected. And of course, given his continuing neo Nazi beliefs, there was a very particular group that helped orchestrate this corruption. Thanks to their supposed influence, you can

probably guess who he was thinking about. Mayatt admitted in interviews to George Michael for George Michael's book The Enemy of My Enemy, that he was slightly opportunistic in his pursuit of Islam because he admired the militancy practiced by Islamist groups against what he saw as the enemy again, the new World War order. Yet again, the idea that he an avowed national socialists and Islamists quote shared common enemies, the capitalist consumer West and international finance unquote, was plenty

enough to entice him. But unlike other far right activists and radicals simply seeing the value of shared enemies, Mayatt took it a step further. He converted taking on the Islamic name Abdullah Ziz. This made perfect sense to him because, as Michael explains, Mayat believed that quote something was terribly missing in the hearts of right wing extremists. Unquote, there was something, as far as Maya was concerned, truly inspiring

about jihad, the truly fanatical commitment of the soul. As Maya himself explained in one of these interviews, quote, I came to understand that what motivated the fighters I and others had discussed previously was an intense faith, a real belief in an after a belief that it was their duty to act in such a way, and that by doing their duty in the way they did, they would be assured of entering paradise. And this faith was not a political belief they had acquired or accepted an adult life.

It was part of their very culture. Indeed, it was their culture, their tradition, and their way of life from birth through death. It was this type of faith, this immersion in one's own culture, which our own people so sadly lacked. We were trying to motivate people in a political way, whereas Muslim fighters did what they did because it was accepted as their duty as their own people

understood this duty and gladly accepted their martyrdom quote. Despite his deterministic and all encompassing diagnosis of Muslim culture, if such a thing even really exists in full, Maya was adamant that racial differences played little role in his thinking.

In fact, he insisted that quote the truth about national socialism has been obscured for over fifty years thanks to the intensive, hateful, worldwide, well financed, and unending propaganda campaign directed against it, characterizing the image of the Nazis we get from the historical record as quote the stereotyped Marxist

capitalist image of a national socialist unquot. Mayat rejected any notion of being a quote rabid so called racist who hated other races unquote, instead proclaiming that he quote loved my own people, valued my own heritage, and wished to see the creation of independent homelands where different races and cultures could live in freedom according to their own customs.

While this certainly contradicts the original national socialist mission of Liebensraum, this type of modern day racial radicalism is common enough among those who would consider themselves racial separatists. Mayat did not believe that the well established history of national socialism, or the history of imperialist militant Islam for that matter, contradicted his worldview, or more importantly, that these worldviews could

conflict with one another. This was of course thanks to his belief that we have gotten the history of the Second World War wrong, as well as our Western understanding of Islam. But it was also because he believed that there was more than enough kinship between the faiths. As may had explained in his interview, quote, there was some common ground since both ways, when correctly understood, produced civilized,

honorable individuals who use reason as a guide unquote. However, he did start to notice contradictions as time went on, and as he attempted to create something akin to, in Michael's words, aryan Islam, in which quote aryan culture and identity could be expressed in the confines of Islam unquote. Now, eventually, Mayat, who was a very intelligent man, it should be noted, with a reported i Q of one hundred and eighty seven,

he needed that, at least for him. There were too many contradictions between Islam itself and his that is, Maya's vision of true national socialism, which he saw as more tied to folk culture, that is, the culture of the voke, and as Hitler believed, a reverence for capital and nature. The main problem, though, was not the issue of racial or even general cultural differences. The problem was that Islam

was too concerned with jana or the next life. Radical action for the reward of the hereafter was ultimately too individualistic of a principle for him, and he left the Faith to continue his political project from the standpoint of folk culture. Nevertheless, Maya continued to express admiration for Islam and even stated that quote I do believe I understand Islam, which is why I know an alliance between Muslims and

national socialists as possible and indeed necessary. Unquote if he an avowed national socialist who supposedly has since renounced all of his radical beliefs, for what it's worth, but if he at the time, as an avowed national socialist devoted to crushing the new world order, if he could see the value in such a friendship, others would have to as well, and perhaps even embrace the faith as he

once did. However, there were others, particularly one man, who had already done just that, and this one man's story is just as fascinating, if not more disturbing, than Mayat's.

a Protestant family in Freiburg, Switzerland. He had converted to Islam in nineteen sixty two, after having spent most of his adult life in the Swiss Socialist Party, which had brought him into greater contact with Islam to the party's support for Algerian independence at the time, as he put it in his interview with George Michael for Michael's book, he was drawn to Islam because quote it was an anti theology, quote in which quote Allah is a declaration

of war against all theology unquote, because quote Allah is always greater and greatest and completely different beyond all human reason unquote. Even better, Hubert realized Islam taught the quote unquote unity of faith and reason, and that quote there was no church, the only authority and message and of the messenger from which the religious, the political, the social

are all one are together unquote. Enchanted by the promises he saw in this new faith, unlike what he saw as stunted Protestantism and milktoast liberalism, he made the decision to convert. It was upon his joining of the faith, reciting his Shahada in Egypt to the Sheikh Mahmud Shaltut on the invitation of the Egyptian Embassy, that Hubert's views on politics started to change, especially the more often he spoke to the more radical Islamists among his new friends.

One of those friends was Gamal Abdul Nasser, the pan Arabis radical and president of Egypt. As Hubert later recalled, quote Nasar explained to me some things about the Third Reich, and about the Second World War, and about Adolph Hitler and some things that I have never known. It was for me a complete culture shock. And then I went back to Switzerland. I was invited to the embassy again, and there I met a young girl. She was a secretary, and we later married in the private officers club of

abdel Nasser. There we got married in August of nineteen sixty three, and from then on I've been a Muslim unquote. Continuing to describe his journey into the faith, Huber recounted that while he began as an Arab nationalist, quote, the Islamic revolution in Iran made something new out of me. This deepened his ties to political Islam, and through those ties he actually eventually met the infamous Ayatola Komeni, and he that is Huber even spoke in front of the

Iranian parliament. Despite practicing in the Sunni tradition. As George Michael points out, Huber quote became very much touched by Shia Islam unquote, and he began to add advocate for the Islamic Republic. He was basically an early version of the people marching around with the sign saying hands off Iran.

and American far right extremists over the following decades. This relationship culminated in a little bit of a rabbit hole, but one that I think is worth delving into at least a little bit to understand the scope of this

Green Brown alliance phenomenon we're examining. This involves something called Altakva later renamed Nada Management in late two thousand and one, which was a financial firm that, according to George Michael, quote allegedly funded al Qaeda and allegedly provided assistance to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood unquote, And as Michael later explains, quote, the last known chairman of Altakva is reported to have

been Yusuf Nada unquote. Hence the name change. This man matters to our story because, as Michael writes, Nada had connections to the Western far right that quote extended back decades unquote, beginning with its involvement with the Muslim Brotherhood during World War II and acting as a liaison between the abver or the Third Reich intelligence and the Muslim Brotherhood, a connection that we have explored in history impossible, particularly

when talking about the activities of the Third Reich engaging in propaganda over in the Arab world. Now, Ahmed Huber fits into this equation in nineteen eighty eight as one of the founders of Altakva, which registered as an import export company, but was, according to Swiss authorities, more akin to a terrorist money laundering operation, with resources moving through the company to nefarious figures like Carlos the Jackal and

Osama bin Laden. About two weeks after nine to eleven, the Bush administration put out Executive Order one three two two four, which designated over two dozen international entities as supporters of terrorism. A significant number of these entities, including Altakva, were registered to Yusef Nada, the Nazi Muslim brotherhood liaison.

It was through the investigations that followed EO one three two two four that Ahmed Hubert's name came up, and it was revealed that he had sat on the board of Altakva since its founding in nineteen eighty eight.

The same article references the Swiss newspaper Blick's own reporting that Huber acted as quote a go between for Islamic extremists and neo Nazis unquote, and that he believed that quote the greatest leaders of the twentieth century were Hitler and Iran's late Ayatola Komeni, made evident by the two

men's portraits hanging prominently in his office. When asked about his attendance to a rally for Germany's neo Nazi National Democratic Party, which it should be noted, takes issue with Germany's newer populas driving party alternative Fier Deutschland or a f Day for essentially stealing their thunder just a little fun fact there, as well as his contacts with this party, Huber simply replied, quote the National Democratic Party are brave

people who understand that the Holocaust is a big lie unquote. When George Michael sat down for his interview with Huber in two thousand and three, the Swiss Muslim convert made his positions even clearer, about as clear as one could, and it is thus worth reading at length. Quote I judge as a Muslim, I judge Adolph Hitler and the Reich and his movement in a different way than the Zionists or the Marxists or the Anglo Americans do, because

I know very very much. I have been studying the sources of what was the Third Reich, and I met a lot of people who knew Hitler personally. I have met his secretaries fraugertrud Junga, who recently died, and Christa Schroeder. I have met Anton AxMan, the last Hitler youth leader, who brought the corpses of Hitler and Ava Brown to the Reich Chancellery and burnt them. I met a lot of waffen s S generals from the Liebstandharta who personally

knew Hitler. We Muslims are fascinated by the Third Reich in the nineteen thirties because Hitler had some ideas at the political level and the economic level and the cultural field which were very close to the political, economic, and cultural Shariah. For instance, the economic concept of an interest free, non capitalist economy is very close to the Islamic concept of the economy. Hitler's idea that art should represent God and not be degenerate and make a cult of ugliness,

of lies, and of evil. This corresponds to the cultural Shariah and so on. So this man and his movement were fascinating to many Muslim intellectuals all during the nineteen thirties, and since nineteen forty five, Muslims have been studying all of these things. And we judge him Hitler in a different way. Even if now, of course, when the Muslims protest against America they say Bush equals Hitler, or Israeli

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon equals Hitler. They say that not for themselves, but because they know that it has an impact on Western public opinion. You see, Hitler himself had quite a positive attitude towards Islam. He said several times the only religion I respect is Islam. The only prophet I admire is the prophet Muhammad. He said several times in his table talks that after the Final War, the Swastika will rule over all of Europe and will represent

a new Europe. We will help the Muslims in North Africa and the Middle East to reestablish the caliphate. That means there would be an Islamic civilization. And Hitler said in the Far East there will be the rising Sun Japan. Of course, he didn't see China. Huber pause to laugh here. He had no thought for China. He only saw Japan, with whom he had an alliance. He spoke of a new stability in the world. The swastika, the crescent and the rising Sun would be a new stability.

the New Right. Sometimes we hold meetings together Muslims and people from the New Right to speak about these things and show what we have in common. I also spoke about this at the University of Tehran. I spoke at a seminar and workshops about these problems, explaining what was the Third Reich, what it was all about. In London,

we had conferences. We had Islamic conferences in the United States between nineteen eighty eight and nineteen ninety eight, the last time in nineteen ninety eight in the United States. When you talk about this to young Muslims and young right wing people in general, they say, there is common ground. The link is a criticism of the so called modernity of the modern world, which in many ways has gone far away from God. It is against creation, It is

against nature. Look for instance, at the cult of homosexuality. This is incredible. This is against common sense, against reason, against nature. It is ridiculous. If you look at modern art, it is an insult to reason and an insult of the sense of beauty which is in every human being. If this lengthy diatribe started to sound familiar to anyone keyed into the rhetoric of the current new right, especially online,

the reason why should be appearing increasingly obvious. Anti modern radical is anti modern radicalism, whether it comes in brown or green. A more interesting and yet crucial thing for us to highlight here, though, is that, unlike David Mayatt and a number of other far right figures who have become converts to the Islamic faith, like traditionalist renee Ganols turn towards Sufism, Ahmed Huber came to his far right radicalism from his conversion to Islam. Remember when he started

out right. Before he converted, he was a member of the Swiss Socialist Party. Now this is fascinating in and of itself, but it is also indicative of how malleable belief systems can be when made radical, how easy it is for one radical ideology to inform and influence the

formation of or joining of another, no matter which way around. However, Huber's particular experience also allows us to see the real historical origin of this green brown alliance, and it is a very familiar ordayn, especially to those who listened to History Impossible. Hubert recounted a story directly to Michael during the course of his interview with him for the enemy of my Enemy, and one that really helps bring the

bizarre phenomenon of this green Brown alliance full circle. In the nineteen sixties, as he was becoming more and more invested in his newfound musclim identity, Hubert had traveled to Beirut, where he met with an aging titan of Islamism and, in my opinion at least, the godfather of the Islamist in far right relationship. This Titan not only impressed Hubert with his status and prestige, but also with a story

too wild to be true. As Hubert recounted, quote the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajamin al Husseini, who I met in nineteen sixty five in Beirut. We had a long talk. He told me many, many interesting things. Because he had an almost friendship, definitely a relationship with Adolf Hitler. He

told me a fantastic story. On one night in December nineteen forty one, after the big victories of Germany over the Soviet Union, he had a long talk with Hitler about architecture, culture, the music of Richard Wagner and so on. Hitler started talking about race theory and anti Semitism, and the Grand Mufti asked Hitler, did you ever think, mister Chancellor, that your race theory comes out of Judaism? It comes out of the Old Testament. And Hitler was very astonished

by that. The Grand Muffty knew the Bible very well. He said, all of your ideas, the doctrine of the Nazi Party are in the Old Testament. The chosen people of God are not the chosen people, but the chosen race, and that blood carries the soul, and this chosen race must keep its blood pure. It must not mix its blood with non Jews. The foreigners, the sub human beasts called the goyam, are inferior to the Jewish master race.

The genocide order of God is in the fifth Book of Moses, and in the Book of Joshua, the race laws of Ezra and Ishmael. All of these things are in the Old Testament. Hitler was absolutely astonished, and the mufty told him further, you have not high esteem for the Africans, for black people. And also this comes from the Old Testament and the First Book of Moses. The black race is doomed, considered by God to eternal slavery. It's the famous curse by God on Ham, one of

the three sons of the prophet Noah. So when the mufty told Hitler another story, he said, you, mister Chancellor, hate the Roman Catholic Church, to which Hitler responded, really. The mufty replied, yes, it's true, but you, mister Hitler, you never left the church. You are still formerly a member of the Roman Catholic Church. Then the mufty added, mister Chancellor, you have organized your party like the Roman Catholic church. You are the pope. Your Gaulights and reichs

Liters are the cardinals and archbishops. Your party congresses are like high masses religious ceremonies, which you celebrate as the high priest. Hitler then became furious and walked out, and for three weeks the Muffy could not come back in. After three weeks, the Muffy had to go to the Reich's chancellory in Berlin, and he told me there I

thought Hitler would arrest me and shout at me. Hitler came and smiled at the Muffy, put his hands around his arms and said, your eminence, I want to apologize to you. I behave like an uneducated little boy. He said, I have read the Bible and thought about what you said. And now that final victory is close, Moscow will fall in a few weeks and the Soviet Union will be gone, and then final victory will come. We must talk about all these things and try to make some changes in

our ideology. And of course final victory never came. But Hitler dictated a text to Christa Schroeder and Frau Junga, his secretaries, which is called the Hitler Bormann Documents, or the Testament to Adolf Hitler. In this text, Hitler makes a criticism of his policies. Now, there is literally no way to know whether this secondhand story from Ahmed Huber but Hajja Means encounter with the Furor in December of

nineteen forty one has any amount of truth to it. Now, it would certainly be significant, very significant of the historiography if proven, since the only confirmed face to face encounter between Hajja I Mean and Hitler was their late November nineteen forty one meeting, which is to say nothing of their language barrier, which would require at least one interpreter

to be in the room at all times. However, despite the fact that Ahmed Huber was not the most trustworthy individual given his laughable denials of having any financial associations with al Qaeda, despite all evidence pointing to him having those associations, I am inclined to believe that Huber indeed met Haja Mean and aging Mufty did tell this story to Huber in order to impress him, because clearly it did impress him and resonant enough for him to regale

it to a political science scholar interviewing him nearly five decades later, significantly earlier than Haja Mean's historical profile began to expand in the early twenty tens. In other words, in my opinion, it's just my opinion, guys, I'm at Huber had little reason to lie to Michael about having heard this story. Nevertheless, I do not believe that we should take Huber's story at face value as the unvarnished truth about Haja Mien and Hitler's relationship, especially since it

makes Haja Mien in his own eyes look good. After all, being the person who caused Adolf Hitler to apologize and say I acted like an uneducated little boy is probably one of the biggest quasi humble brags that someone like Haja Mien could make. And Hajja Mien was, as we

have covered before, in history, impossible, never exactly forthcoming. When it came to telling the truth about his relationship with the Third Reich, especially after the fact, and especially depending on who was talking to him, it behooved him to downplay that relationship to anyone but fellow travelers, And when fellow travelers showed up to his door, it behooved him

then to play it up. Most importantly, however, is that it is also highly unlikely that Hitler would even consider making some changes to our ideology, in his supposed words, his ideology where he's at the center of it, because he read the Bible for a couple of weeks after getting shaken up by a meeting with a Middle Eastern clerical leader he had, based on Huber's telling, only met twice.

That's what we're supposed to believe here. And finally, the document that Hubert cites, the so called Testament of Adolf Hitler or the Hitler Bormann documents, has, despite receiving citations from respectable historians like Joachim Fest and Alan Bullock, has largely been debunked thanks to the work done by historian

Mikhayle Nilssen in twenty eighteen. Hitler's only eleventh hour change to his ideaology, and I do not really think this was much of a change from Nazism's nihilistic core, was his open willingness to let Germans die for failing to

meet his vision. The accuracy or inaccuracy of all this interesting, though it is, at least to me, is less relevant for our purposes than what it reveals that the green Brown alliance phenomenon goes back exactly to where one at this point might well expect the attempted ideological marriage of Islamism and national socialism. Now, this attempt is obviously very well covered territory on history impossible, and it does not

make this any less significant for our story. In fact, it illuminates yet another historical through line, starting with some bizarre, seemingly new trends in our contemporary era and ending with an equally bizarre story from the Second World War that until recently acted as a bit of a strange footnote that bucked every possible assumption about Nazi ideological priorities, and that bizarre story has, for better or worse, taken on far greater significance, especially in the wake of the growing

radicalism of the early twenty first century. This can be seen in a letter written by the Nazi Johann von Leers, who changed his name to Omar Amen von Leers after his postwar conversion, an escape to I believe it was Egypt. In this letter, written to his friend, the American Nazi agent and fascist H. Keith Thompson, von Leers saw which way the wind was blowing for anyone who considered themselves

an enemy of the New World order. When he wrote the following, the Islamic block today is the only spiritual power in the world fighting for a real religion and human values and freedom. I think sometimes if my nation, Nazi Germany, had got Islam instead of Christianity, we should not have had all the traders that we had in World War II two million women, and would not have been burnt as witches by the Christian churches. There would have been no Thirty Years War which destroyed Germany and

killed more than half of our nation. One thing is clear, more and more patriotic Germans joined the Great Arab Revolution against beastly imperialism. To hell with Christianity, for in Christianity's name, Germany has been sold to our pressers. Our place is an oppressed nation under the execrable Western colonialist bond government. Must be on the side of the Arab nationalist revolt

against the West I Hammed ul Allah. Indeed, for our nation there is only one hope to get rid of Western imperialism by joining the Arab led anti imperialist group.

That is, leftist intellectuals, socialist ideologues, and Islamist agitators found common cause in toppling a regime that they each believed to be beyond saving thanks to corruption and servility to what the Islamists came to call the Great Satan i e. The United States, many forget thanks to what the triumphant regime would come to resemble that in those early days, banners flourished that bore the iconography of Marx and Lenin as readily as the Iyatola Kamane, promising a new dawn

for the country's disaffected and dispossessed. Revolutionaries of all types crowded into clandestine apartment and meeting halls, and they created a fragile unity, convinced that the supposed tyrant that was the Shaw's demise would surely herald a government as diverse and plural as those who rose against it. But history, ever favoring the cynic, has very little patience for such sentimentalism.

When the Shaw's throne was finally toppled, the Mullahs proved far less inclined to share their power than to consolidate it. The Islami's boot came down, and it came down hard on their former comrades. Censorship, suppression of publications, and banning of leftist organizations soon gave way to mass purges and executions, usually accompanied by, perhaps ironically the most socialist of all mockeries of a liberal justice system, i e. The Show Trial.

Thousands of socialists, communists, and other non Islamist revolutionaries were imprisoned or killed between nineteen seventy nine and the early nineteen eighties, with some scholars determining it to be upwards of thirty thousand. In essence, Chromene's disciples, having transformed proletarian fury into a clerical dictatorship, offered their supposed comrades not the spoils of revolution, but the gallows, or, in the

case of the regime, cranes. The story of the Iranian Revolution of nineteen seventy nine turned from one about solidarity to one really about betrayal, as the revolution devoured its own children with zeal that would likely have looked very familiar to someone like Maximilian Robespierre. Now I tell this story not just because Iran is in the news and could quite possibly be facing a true second revolution very soon in twenty twenty six. I don't tell the story

because of that. I tell it to illustrate the core reason why despite this interesting tales implications that it is good to feel skepticism about the life long term prospects of a supposed green brown alliance, or a red green alliance for that matter, As can be seen from the story of Iran, when the dust settles and the radicals realize it's now time to fight one another over what is left, this often leads to the self destruction of

that coalition. There may be a darkly amusing irony to that, but in the end that shared hatred has still been eradicated, and untold amounts of collateral damage has likely resulted and will continue to result from the beginning. Running the risk of stating it too bluntly, this seems to be the law of physics that undergirds the principle of the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Thus it is fair to be skeptical of such alliance as bearing any meaningful

long term fruit. The potential for such a coalition in mainstream politics remains unlikely, especially in Europe. Too many far right and generally right wing governments and political parties like I've done in Germany who I mentioned earlier, or PVV in the Netherlands, or National Rally in France or FIDEZ in Hungary, to name just a few, have made stemming the tide of immigrants from Muscle majority countries a major

plank of their platform. The same has largely been a case here in the United States with the Republican Party, though with a broader animist toward immigration seeming to characterize things, especially during this second Trump administration. So there is a barrier to entry, and it's a pretty big one. And this barrier for entry for such an alliance was actually

bemoaned by the far right Islamist figures profiled earlier. Jurgen Graff, or praising Islam, referred to it as to quote fundamentally alien to European culture and thought unquote to be accepted by right wing parties who he believed needed to understand the tactical alliance. More radical Muslims could provide against globalists and Jewish interests, and David Mayat the guy who became Abdullah Ziz and then went back to being David Mayat.

He claimed that right wing politicians like the Lipennz in France, making a quote unquote political capital out of taking quote an anti Muslim pose was contrary to honor and reason unquote, and Ahmed Huber more charitably called it a quote misunderstanding on both sides unquote, and even seems to agree with the idea that many immigrations skeptics in Europe have expressed that quote many Muslims who come did not really integrate

into Western society for a simple reason unquote. But he sees this as the obvious failure of Western society on a deeper moral level, not to integrate these newcomers or even accommodate them, but rather to submit to the new moral structure of Islam and bring them closer to the vision Hitler had for the European continent. Other far right activists and writers like Kevin MacDonald, Sam Francis, and Michael Collins Piper also expressed skepticism, much of it regretful that

such an alliance could be meaningfully formed and maintained. This is at least partly why it does not really matter how dangerous a green brown alliance actually is, or for that matter, how dangerous the often observed red green alliance actually is. Clearly, there is more respectability to be found in what has become a functional red green alliance thanks to the ideological makeup and nature of cultural institutions like academia, as well as a long standing leftist tradition of supporting

the Palestinian cause. While most historically far right ideologies remain relatively discredited regardless of the alliances they made, However, the Western left's long standing tradition of taking the so called anti Zionist position provided enough credibility to fast and loose criticisms of Israel and Israelis, while also delegitimizing criticism of radical Islam that it clearly helped move the Overton window in such a way that the so called vexatious Jewish

quest could start to actually gain traction from far right figures in the modern day like Nick Fuentes and Tucker Carlson. Nevertheless, neither alliance is in any meaningful sense dangerous, at least not yet at the end of the day, speech is speech, and speech is free, at least in the United States. The purpose in noting and dissecting the Green Brown Alliance in this special episode is not to highlight that it

is the true danger. It is to highlight intellectual heritage in order to better understand the nature of radicalism itself. When it comes down to it, radicalism purports to be about a greater cause, a larger end goal, a utopia. Those causes and goals of utopia certainly exist and are sincere. But the thing is that a utopia has never existed.

It has no analog. The behavioral history and intellectual heritage of radicals does exist, however, and it is always animated by the same impulse to form contradictory alliances based solely on shared hatred and a desire to eradicate that hatred. In the case of these alliances, that enemy is indeed the Jews, whether as a people or as a nation. Though there are larger, more abstract forces and symbols that

they all oppose capitalism, globalism, the West. These three forces and symbols represent the antithesis to all three totalitarianism's ideas of utopia, and that matters far more than the fundamental differences between their respective utopias. It is the powerful critiques of these forces that attracts people to totalitarian ideology, whether it's red, brown, or green. But seeing this unity of purpose between contradictory ideological projects reveals that the appeals only

really work in ideological isolation. When it is made obvious what the shared DNA or political psychological impulse is with all these ideologies, it might start to seem less appealing, at least to the more thoughtful among us. Thus, understanding the common ground that these ideologies can forge despite their fundamental differences is what helps discredit them, at least for anyone who appreciates what remains of liberal values in our

world today. Unfortunately, many people, particularly those drawn toward contrarianism and an unwillingness to modify or even let go of their beliefs that they hold dear, will be more likely to see something compelling in these disparate ideologies sharing their hatreds. If they can all agree on what the problem is despite hating each other, this hypothetical person reasons, then they

must be onto something. This is attempting because it is a compelling story, Especially in the heat of the moment, it can feel good to see opposing signs of one argument come together in unity over another. We're drawn towards that kind of thing because it makes us believe that we can be friends with anybody, and that feels good

to think about now. Because of that, maybe it will continue to be attempting fiction, especially in our age of novelty seeking, which I think is a bit higher these days too, both in ourselves and in the content we consume. Because even further to the point, contradiction, esthetic, ideological or otherwise is indeed novel, and humans do not appear to

be in any hurry to get over that tendency. And yet behind the novelty lies a very familiar tale, and that story has been told many many times throughout history, and it rarely, if ever, looks appealing after the fact. This is why another more particular story from seventeen ninety four, and in France of all places, comes to mind. Despite the time and place, and despite how our culture has tended to regard this time and place, it is not

a romantic story. In fact, it carries with it the same stark nastiness as most stories involving revolution or civil war, other things for which our contemporary radicals appear to constantly yearn Much had happened to lead to this story, and much followed, But I have always believed this particular moment in France's famous or infamous late eighteenth century revolution serves as a great object lesson, perhaps a reality check for those among us that believe the way of the radical

contradictory alliances based on shared hatreds and all is the only way forward. When he was placed upon the execution platform about to have his head removed from his body, the radical French revolutionary Maximilian Robespierre did not deliver a moving speech or utter any famous last words of defiance against those he might have once considered friends and comrades. In fact, he did not say any words at all.

Robespierre had tried to shoot himself to escape justice, but only managed to shatter and mangle his jaw in the process. His face had been wrapped in bandages to keep his jaw in place after a military doctor removed a few of his teeth in pieces of the job over posterity. When he arrived at the guillotine, the executioner removed the bandage and no words left the revolutionary. Instead, all that the gathered crowd heard was a primal scream of pain.

support this show. Again, if you really like what I'm doing and want to show me some love, head over to Patreon dot com slash History Impossible, or just head over to History impossible dot com and become a paid subscriber today. This episode was a nice bonus to add

on to the end. I guess we could say of the last episode, the handshar episode, that I hope you have gotten around to listening to, but don't blame you if you haven't, because again, it is, you know, almost six and a half hours long, so I'm always looking to beat my record, I guess. But anyway, this one, though, was a big surprise for me to learn about this subject as much as I did, and it all kind

of made sense for me. And if you have any thoughts on that or thought I missed anything, please do not hesitate to reach out to me History Impossible at gmail dot com, any of the social media platforms, and I will respond as quickly as possible. So with all that said, I don't think there's really much else to notify here for all of you. We have more stuff coming very soon, and I'm hoping to get some more

good interviews coming. I know we have at least one that is going to follow this episode, but please stay tuned and thank you again for listening and all of your support