Lord Londonderry: A Secret History Revealed
- erry's apparently bizarre "comfort level" with Fascism.
- In short, we could not conclude that Londonderry was an ideological Nazi.
- Londonderry praised leading Nazis like Hermann Göring, Rudolf Hess and Hitler himself.
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…