by Peter Töpfer

Arktos Journal

Nov 30, 2023

Peter Töpfer examines the complex interplay of social forces and individual motives in shaping historical events and current geopolitical situations, highlighting the often contradictory and chaotic nature of these dynamics.

Speech at the Chisinau Forum: UN Agenda 21 and the Great Reset – The Fall from Liberalism to Technocracy and Transhumanism, September 9, 2023.

Watch the speech here.

1

Historical events can be the result of effects emanating from fairly unified forces. Then peoples or large social groups stand relatively united behind an action: the interests are relatively clear and motivate the individuals to work together towards a goal.

But that’s actually not the rule. Even in a dictatorship that is tightly run from above and uses a great deal of force, different forces can be in competition with each other that the dictator does not really have under control. With regard to the Third Reich, for example, one speaks of an ‘anarchy of offices’. But even below the offices, groups there worked against each other as well as with each other upwards against the regime. Hitler certainly did not have all this under control. And even if the competition of subordinate leaders may have been in his interest as supreme commander — the so-called playing off of actors against each other and the balancing of their interests — that did not have to be the case at all. Forces that were clearly working covertly against him need not even be mentioned here, although they were very relevant or even decisive.

As another example of a contradictory and even chaotic situation of forces, I would like to cite the situation in Iran around the so-called Holocaust Conference, which took place in Tehran in December 2006 and which I attended1 (by the way with a speech entitled ‘Save the West!’ whose call remained unheeded. Back then I was dismissed as a ‘Nazi’, but nowadays all opponents are ‘Nazis’ and the West probably can’t be saved anymore). Even in the immediate run-up to this conference, it was not clear whether it would actually take place at all, although it had been announced. The Iranian embassy in Berlin was suspicious and not helpful. Finally arriving in Tehran, one saw how different forces were working against each other even within the Iranian leadership. That the conference would take place was still on the razor’s edge until shortly before it began; we were informed of this by forces campaigning for the conference. In the end, the group around President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad prevailed over those who did not want to jeopardise a certain relationship with the West. Again, not to mention pro-Western actors and agents, who certainly acted covertly against the holding of the conference and who may have contributed to the chaos.

2

Different, actually mutually contradictory interests do not only exist on a social level, they can also go right through individual personalities. In psychology, one speaks of so-called personality parts — a very useful concept. An actor may be torn between different positions and group affiliations.

We also are currently facing a chaotic situation of forces, both with regard to the general development towards a technocracy and the prevention of such a development, as well as with regard to the entire geopolitics and a section of it: the war in Ukraine.

Edward Slavsquat, in a recent article, pointed out how in Russia there is a debate about a certain chaotic situation and about who is actually responsible for the strategic planning of the military operation, and thus who is on which side anyway.

The unclear situation in which forces that supposedly belong to one camp but are in fact not acting for this camp implies that the war in the Ukraine will probably, as Edward Slavsquat writes in another article, ‘drag on for a long time’.

This stalemate is at the expense of the Russian and Ukrainian peoples, both of whom, with their tens of thousands of dead and all the destruction, are the ones who suffer. But it is also at the expense of all other European peoples. The beneficiaries of the ongoing war are forces from outside the European area. But the beneficiaries also include Europeans, Russians and Ukrainians, who have common and at least partly overlapping interests with the non-European beneficiaries or are even in cahoots with them.

For the vast majority of these European beneficiaries, the situation is clear: they have virtually no patriotic and libertarian personality parts related to Europe.

In the individual personalities that are considered patriotic, various interests can, in the chaotic situation of forces, pass right through them, even those in the very highest ranks. Then they are not 100 per cent behind the interests of the people, but also act to the detriment and damage of the people.

Nevertheless, there may also be authentically patriotic parts within such a leader; only he is no longer fully aligned with the interests of the popular masses who are most affected by war and geostrategic manoeuvres. In these personalities, other parts oppose the patriotic parts.

READ MORE