Home » World » Lord Londonderry: A Secret History Revealed

Lord Londonderry: A Secret History Revealed

by Ahmed Hassan - World News Editor

Ireland was politically divided in May 1921 afterward becoming a⁢ republic and a separate entity, northern Ireland. Both territories have had⁤ fleeting ‍experiences of indigenous fascism since the 1920s. My previous ‌piece on archaeologist Adolph Mahr demonstrated how the Irish state (apparently unwittingly) promoted Mahr to the directorship ⁢of ⁤its National museum in 1934.⁤ He was ​a man who was by any definition, “a Nazi living in plain sight.” This article ​demonstrates ​that⁢ bizarrely, an anchor⁣ of the British state in Northern Ireland, Lord ‌Londonderry,was at ​the least,grossly misled by Hitler and his cronies. LondonderryS connections with the Nazi regime were⁣ subsequently ‍ignored by ⁢historians. ⁢Tho,at the time,his⁢ apparent collusion with Fascism did not go unnoticed on ⁤his Mountstuart estate,where he contributed⁤ to ambiguity in popular attitudes to Germany. Londonderry’s crude interventions⁢ about Nazism alarmed Belfast’s Jewish community.

It ‍should be noted, from the outset, that fascism in Northern Ireland had a ‌notable inter-war presence, with groups like Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists (BUF). They spawned the ⁣ Ulster Fascists, attracting loyalists ​with antisemitism ​and anti-independence messages. The​ Ulster Fascists were an autonomous⁤ wing of ‍mosley’s⁤ BUF who actually opposed partition. later, the National Front gained  loyalist sympathy, also exploiting territorial flags.meanwhile,in southern‍ ireland,in the 1930s and 1940s,the Blueshirts (Army Comrades Association) and⁣ Ailtirí na hAiséirghe (Architects of Resurrection) emerged.

erry’s apparently bizarre ⁤”comfort level” with‍ Fascism. The bulk of Londonderry’s papers are divided between the public records agency PRONI and archives in Derry,Durham,and Ireland. ⁤Examining them, Londonderry appears to⁣ understood and did not have an antipathy towards fascism. ⁤Alternatively, he may ⁢have believed Hitler was ⁤so invincible the only possibility was appeasement and that gentlemanly dialog might rescue Britain.

In short, we could not ⁢conclude that Londonderry ​was an ideological‍ Nazi. He was known to display the infamous Dachau military ​porcelain, but he was far from being a Swastika-bearing ideologue.  It is probably rather than during⁤ a crucial time in ‍world history he saw no ⁣realistic ​Plan B.  Like statemen of the time, ⁤he believed⁢ “big politics” involved dialogue with ⁤dictators. londonderry enthusiastically cultivated friendships with high-ranking Nazis like Joachim von Ribbentrop. ⁤In ‌1936 he visited Germany, had a ⁢two-hour meeting‌ with Hitler ‌ and praised ‌the Nazi⁤ regime, inviting Ribbentrop to‌ his estate.⁣ He backed the notorious Anglo-German Fellowship, promoting dialogue and understanding with Nazi Germany among British elites.He failed to grasp the violent,expansionist nature of Hitler’s true aims,viewing Germany as a wronged nation. His efforts ‍made it hard for parliamentarians to gain enough⁤ traction to refuse “appeasement” and inadvertently aided Nazi propaganda. Ironically, Winston Churchill,⁢ was a cousin of Londonderry.

Londonderry praised leading Nazis like Hermann Göring, ‌Rudolf ​Hess and Hitler himself.  Indeed,‌ after his initial visit to Germany in early 1936, Londonderry made himself one of the most prominent advocates ​of ‌appeasement. Owing to‌ his unique rapport wit

Lord Londonderry⁣ actively‌ sought to mitigate tensions‍ with Nazi Germany in the lead-up to World War II. He appealed to figures like ‌Franz von Papen and⁢ the German ambassador to London, attempting to quell‌ negative ​press regarding Nazi brutality. His efforts,‍ including ⁢a⁣ letter to The Times ‌ on June 22, 1939, advocating for a peace settlement, were driven ⁢by ​a fundamental misjudgment of the Nazi regime’s ​intentions. While these interventions ⁢may have inadvertently delayed war, they also hindered Europe’s preparation for conflict.

Londonderry’s papers reveal a difficulty in distinguishing between the Nazi party and Germany itself, suggesting a lack of understanding of⁤ international relations ‍and a belief that no viable opposition existed within Germany. ​He collaborated with individuals like Philip ‍Conwell-Evans, a former appeaser, and Colonel Schwerin ‌of the‍ German general staff, pursuing what he termed a​ “gentlemanly-peace.”

His personal correspondence demonstrates a sincere, though​ misguided, ⁤conviction that he represented the spirit of…

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.