Is a Sequel to Denial in the Works?

Francisco Albanese

In his lecture Re-learning and Revising History, Hans-Hermann Hoppe reconstructs his intellectual development by revisiting the historical and political interpretations he encountered during his upbringing in postwar Germany. The libertarian economist and philosopher presents this journey as an intellectual autobiography shaped by the decisive influence of Murray Rothbard and his gradual departure from the dominant narratives of the Western world.

Born in 1949, Hoppe grew up in a family directly affected by the consequences of World War II. His maternal relatives were expropriated and expelled from their properties by Soviet authorities, while his father was held prisoner in one of the camps administered by the Americans. These experiences, rarely discussed within the family, contrasted with the education he received in the Federal Republic of Germany, where American liberal democracy was presented as a political and moral model, accompanied by an interpretation of history centered on German guilt.

His encounter with Rothbard radically transformed this perspective. Hoppe came to understand the state as an institution that monopolizes the ultimate resolution of conflicts, including those in which it is directly involved. This privileged position allows it to impose taxes, legislate for its own benefit, and continuously expand its powers. Democracy, far from correcting these incentives, introduces a competition for power that favors individuals interested in ruling over others. At the same time, the growth of the state attracts major businessmen and financiers, who seek to influence political decisions in order to obtain privileges, contracts, and protection from their competitors. Building on this institutional critique, Hoppe develops an interpretation of war and imperialism. States can shift the costs of their conflicts onto taxpayers and conscripted soldiers, while central banks facilitate their financing. Paradoxically, economically more prosperous societies would possess greater capabilities to pursue expansionist foreign policies.

The United States occupies a central place in this interpretation. Hoppe argues that its intervention in both world wars decisively altered the European balance of power, contributed to the disappearance of traditional monarchies, and enabled the establishment of a military hegemony that continues through NATO. His revision of both conflicts includes controversial historical claims and a minimization of the Nazi regime’s responsibility for the outbreak of World War II. NATO’s expansion following the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the war in Ukraine appear as contemporary manifestations of this same imperial impulse.

In the final part, Hoppe addresses what he considers his most controversial conclusion: the influence of the pro-Israel lobby on American politics. His argument combines criticism of the relationship between Washington and Israel with claims concerning Jewish control over American institutions. He also questions aspects of the historical documentation of the Holocaust and denounces Israeli military operations in Gaza.

In the closing section of his lecture, Hoppe presents what he considers his most controversial discovery: the influence of the Jewish lobby in the United States. According to him, Jewish individuals are disproportionately represented among major American businessmen, financiers, academics, and government officials. He also mentions the presence of individuals holding dual American-Israeli citizenship and the mechanisms of political and financial pressure that he attributes to organizations linked to Israel. Drawing on Murray Rothbard’s positions, he describes the founding of Israel as the conquest of a territory inhabited by another population, whose displacement would have turned the new state into a permanent source of regional conflict. Hoppe attributes a decisive role to Israeli influence in the American intervention against Iran and maintains that Netanyahu is making it difficult for Trump to withdraw from the conflict. He also denounces Israeli military operations in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran.

His presentation includes challenges to the historiography of the Holocaust, particularly regarding its documentary evidence and the Nuremberg trials. Finally, he rejects the idea that the memory of the Holocaust justifies contemporary Israeli actions and argues that the assessment of these events must take precedence over ideological loyalties to the Left or the Right.

Judging by what we can observe on social media, Hoppe’s words have caused considerable distress within certain libertarian circles. It is, at the very least, curious that some would go so far as to claim that Hoppe’s position resembles that of David Irving. Even more curious is the fact that this criticism rests on the argument that the intentionality of the Shoah is “historically established.” Yes: virtually the same group of people who have long questioned the evidence, public health measures, and impact of COVID-19, as well as 9/11, now find Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s position and statements objectionable. In other words, it seems that certain subjects are simply beyond questioning or debate. While sympathy for Hoppe within certain circles associated with the Alternative Right is genuine, it would be dishonest to classify the author as belonging to that Right, particularly because the overriding goods he has championed throughout his work are liberty and property, condemning not only the historical manifestation of Nazi-fascism during World War II, but also the ideologies that have emerged from those same roots.