Interview with Zoomer Historian

The WWII Historian Building a Counter-Archive from Guernsey to Rhodesia

Zoomer Historian built one of YouTube’s most unexpected history channels—long-form documentaries on the Spanish Civil War, the foreign SS divisions, Cecil Rhodes, and the outbreak of World War II that collectively accumulated millions of views. His audience skewed young, drawn to production quality and a willingness to engage primary sources that mainstream history channels largely avoid. Then the channel disappeared. No warning, no strike system playing out in slow motion—just gone. His archive of dozens of videos, some running several hours, wiped from the platform overnight.

The work itself had always operated in territory that made removal a matter of when, not if. Zoomer Historian presents a revisionist framework for the Second World War that challenges foundational elements of the standard narrative—who wanted the war, who financed it, and whose interests it ultimately served. He draws heavily on David Irving’s research, treats the foreign volunteers who fought for the Reich as ideologically motivated Europeans rather than dupes or fanatics, and reads the Nuremberg Trials as the origin point of a political framework still governing what Western societies are permitted to think. These are positions that place him well outside the boundaries of acceptable discourse on any major platform.

What makes his work worth engaging with, regardless of where you land on his conclusions, is the seriousness of the underlying research and the questions it raises about how historical narratives are constructed and maintained. He scripts from primary sources, covers conflicts and figures that most popular historians won’t touch, and produces content at a scale—twelve-hour documentaries, book-length scripts—that reflects genuine commitment to the material. He now publishes on Substack and Rumble, with a Rhodesia book in progress and biographies of Goebbels and Mosley on the horizon. This interview covers his path from Guernsey to revisionist history, the financial networks behind Churchill’s rise, why so many Europeans volunteered for the Reich, and what he sees as the way out of what he calls “global Nuremberg.”

With thanks to Zoomer Historian.

Zoomer Historian | Substack

---

Support Independent Research

This work remains free because paid subscribers make it possible. If you find value here, consider joining them.

What paid subscribers get: Access to the Deep Dive Audio Library — 180+ in-depth discussions (30-50 min each) exploring the books behind these essays. New discussions added weekly. That’s 100+ hours of content for less than the price of a single audiobook.

[Upgrade to Paid – $5/month or $50/year]

Get in touch Essay ideas, stories, or expertise to share: unbekoming@outlook.com

---

1. You grew up on Guernsey, a place you describe as almost entirely apolitical—no real parties, a joke candidate winning elections, demographics that meant certain social issues simply didn’t exist there. How did growing up in that environment shape the way you eventually came to engage with history and politics?

Guernsey is, or at least was, a relative paradise. I came to both history and politics quite late, although I always had a vague interest in the former. As I mentioned in my first article on Substack which covered this topic, politics came to me over time with the realisation that my people, the British people, and, more broadly, White people, were being replaced. As time went by it just quite simply became unavoidable. My interest in politics came to me purely through that phenomenon and so Guernsey itself had very little impact on the matter. We never really had third world immigration of any kind until a couple of years after the COVID fiasco. My interest in politics has obviously grown since then, but it doesn’t relate to Guernsey.

As for history there is a decent bit more to it. My island is an outpost of British civilisation and I think quite naturally that caused me to take a particular interest in the British Empire and colonialism, after all, are Australia and New Zealand especially not just larger Guernseys? Smaller versions of Britain, made by Britons, separated from their original homeland.

Growing up in such a wonderful place also allows me to have a rather unique understanding of just how good things can be. For many in England they can only look at old British Pathe footage on YouTube or something and think, “Wow, that looks nice, look how far we’ve fallen!’‘‘ Whereas I actually grew up in a place which was essentially a lovely English town in a time capsule, at least in most regards. They said of Rhodesia in the 1970s that touching down in Salisbury airport was like setting your watch back 20 years. In Guernsey this was very much also the case but perhaps to an even greater extent.

2. You’ve produced extensive work on the Spanish Civil War—Franco, the Condor Legion, the Siege of the Alcázar. That conflict is often treated as a prelude to WWII, but you seem to engage with it as significant in its own right. What draws you to it, and how does it connect to the larger European story you’re telling?

There’s a few things that draw me to the Spanish Civil War, although I find the whole ‘prelude’ thing pretty lazy and overdone since Spain had drifted apart from the rest of Europe in a lot of ways over the previous few centuries.

Spain obviously has a lot of parallels to our times due to the stark, irreconcilable political divide they had. The Spanish left, especially, with their militancy and bloodthirsty hatred of things such as the family and religion are extremely similar to how the contemporary left is today in our own countries (and Spain still).

The continued escalations of the left and the changing attitudes of the right, especially figures like Franco who were constantly trying to weigh up their options when it came to crossing the Rubicon of open defiance against the Government, are also particularly fascinating to me. Today almost everyone is cowed into behaving. Despite all of the horrors that are being committed against us we continue to behave and there is no open defiance. I find it interesting to see what pushes people to that point, and by 1936 in the Spanish case, well over half of the population was eventually willing to take the risk and throw in their lot with the Nationalists, all it took was a few brave men standing up and leading the way. I think we’re in a similar situation today where most of the population is just waiting for the option, an actual serious chance at breaking their chains, so to speak, much as the Spanish people were waiting for their Caudillo.

There is also the matter of the left wing willingness to leap right to violence compared with the restraint of the right wing. There is also the gulf in competency between the two sides. Much like in our own times, the left (both the non-White left and the liberal left) dominate the terrorism statistics and commit almost all of the political violence. Once the war itself broke out, though, the right absolutely swept the floor with the left. It was no contest. This will, of course, be no different in our own times if the right is provoked into responding.

I do find Franco himself to be a particularly fascinating figure. For what he was able to do but also for what he was not able to do. He’s judged very harshly by many on the right these days for his failure with the succession, and I think deservedly so, but it’s also worth remembering the world he existed in. Spain, after World War 2, was a right wing island within a very large left-liberal ocean. I spoke about this on my interview with Kevin DeAnna from American Renaissance, the Spanish situation really goes to show that we’re all in this together. One country can’t just break away and ‘exist’ outside of the current world order. Neither the Spanish nor the Portuguese regimes were able to outlive the deaths of Franco and Salazar. There were also huge limits placed on how far they could actually revolutionise themselves internally whilst existing in such a world, plus there is also the fact that the outside world will always influence your people regardless, much as the Iranian people today are much more liberal than their own Government and increasingly so. The Spanish people were drifting left under Franco and there was nothing he could do about it.

The lesson? We’re all in this together as White people.

3. You’ve said that watching The Greatest Story Never Told turned your world upside down, despite recognizing it as “opposite propaganda” with exaggerations and falsehoods. What specifically in that documentary cracked open your existing framework, even through the noise?

I just hadn’t been exposed to anything like that before really. I was racially aware to a decent degree, right-wing in general, and always had been, but there was just something so world-shattering about being exposed to that opposite view. So much of it just made so much sense. As I think I said in the Substack where I talked about this, I had to go and sit outside by the lake and think about things, it was just all so much. In terms of specifics I think it was just little things like why Hitler did the things he did, especially when it came to the crises with Austria, Czechoslovakia and then Poland. There was of course also the matter of who actually started the war and why. It was just all very revealing and hard to dispute.

4. David Irving became central to your understanding of this period. For readers unfamiliar with him, what does Irving offer that mainstream historians don’t, and why did you find him trustworthy?

David Irving was a man very much ahead of his time. He saw some of the narratives beginning to form around the Third Reich and instead of just ‘going with the flow’ like other historians he chose to actually consult the primary sources and, even more importantly, the people who were actually there (since most of them were still alive at this time!) and got to the actual truth of the matter.

Sure, there has been a few times when David has got some things wrong, had to recant or made silly mistakes, but that’s true for every historian. David’s shortcomings have just been massively amplified by his enemies who have harassed him all throughout his life and sought to bring him down.

5. Your content argues that the foundational narrative of WWII—the story we’re taught about why it was fought and who the villains were—is fundamentally false. What do you consider the most important lie, the one that props up the rest?

Most people believe that Hitler was some kind of madman that just irrationally wanted to conquer the world. Honestly I think that’s the best starting point for someone just beginning to look into this, it’s what kind of holds the whole thing together and it’s also the easiest part to dismantle. When you start to think about Hitler more like an actual person, another European, rather than a despotic conqueror from a bygone age like Genghis Khan or something, then you can actually start to look at the overall situation rationally rather than emotionally and come to a lot of the right conclusions naturally.

6. In your work on the outbreak of WWII, you discuss the Focus—a group funded by figures like Sir Henry Strakosch and Robert Waley Cohen that paid British politicians, including Churchill, to push for war with Germany. You’ve described how Strakosch personally cleared Churchill’s debts in 1938. How central is this financial relationship to understanding Churchill’s trajectory, and what sources have you found most useful in documenting it?

Churchill was chosen because he was already a warmonger who had directed his ire at Germany, but ultimately the ravings of a drunken madman were able to become the almost united voice of a nation thanks to him being chosen by that group of men. He was taken from the political wilderness to 10 Downing Street with their help.

This is a topic which I, frustratingly, didn’t manage to get around to covering in as much depth as I’d have liked to yet. David Irving’s coverage of the matter is great in Churchill’s War, since I don’t have anything of my own to offer yet though then I would highly recommend Horus’ work on the topic here on Substack.

7. Looking at your archive, the WWII material is extensive—Hitler, the SS, Mussolini, Franco, the various foreign volunteer divisions. But WWI is almost entirely absent. Given that the first war created the conditions for everything that followed, why haven’t you tackled it?

When I started my channel I began with World War 2 since I considered it to be the most important topic and also because I knew it would serve as the initial draw for a lot of people, from there I could then introduce them to other topics which they might not perhaps have originally been looking for. It’s literally just a matter of ‘I haven’t gotten to it yet’ with World War 1 really, there is just so much to cover and it’ll take me time to get there.

8. Your Rhodesia content has become a major focus, with a 12-hour documentary in production and a book deal attached. What drew you to Rhodesia specifically? It’s a significant departure from interwar and WWII Europe.

I think the times we’re in will result in colonial history being very much ‘in’ going forwards. We live in extremely racially charged times and we’re constantly beaten over the head about how evil we were to all the other races during our escapades around the globe over the last few centuries.

Rhodesia I think ticks all of the boxes. People find ‘first contact’ stories interesting where Whites first arrive in foreign lands and meet foreign peoples. People find colonialism interesting, we turned up in 1890 and within a few decades we had created a modern, first world nation with just 10,000s of Europeans, I think people like those kinds of ‘something to nothing’ stories when it comes to our people. Our treatment of the Africans, too, is not something which many right wingers (read: my audience) even know much about, just that they’re lied to about it. I think it’s important to learn some of the realities.

Rhodesia, after the Second World War, found itself in a very racially delicate situation, and I think people find that kind of thing interesting given how much it mirrors our own problems today. Britain took the side of the non-Whites, knowing that giving them power would destroy the country. It’s the perfect case to show how dream-world liberalism works vs stone cold reality. Europeans can build and rule functional countries, Africans cannot.

There is also the answer where you can just say ‘Rhodesia is really cool’, which, I mean, is just true. The aesthetics, the one-sided battles and the lost cause all scratch some kind of right wing itch for people.

9. The practical side of this work is striking—writing scripts with a baby on your lap, working in a -20°C freezer, shipping books via a Latvian van driver who made monthly trips to Guernsey. What kept you convinced this would work when the external circumstances suggested otherwise?

A short answer, really, but I just knew it would work out. I knew people would want to know about these things. The history I put forward isn’t just a ‘fad’ or some passing thing, but rather integral to the incredibly trying times we’re going through. The demand was big then and even bigger now. I knew it was just a matter of time until one of the videos ‘popped’ on YouTube (which ended up being the book burning video) and the snowball just kept on going from there. I trusted that censorship had been scaled back enough for it to work now, too.

10. Carroll Quigley—a Georgetown professor, not a fringe figure—documented the Rhodes-Milner Round Table network and its influence on Anglo-American policy in works like Tragedy and Hope and The Anglo-American Establishment. Given your research into Cecil Rhodes and the financing networks behind Churchill, have you engaged with Quigley’s framework? How does it intersect with what you’ve found?

My work on Rhodesia has kept purely to the territory itself and it’s fate, really, rather than chasing up Rhodes’ fortune or what happened with his associates/organisations. An interesting topic, but one which others would find more interesting and could cover better than I could.

11. Your work documents Rothschild financing of Cecil Rhodes’s imperial ventures, Jewish financiers like Strakosch funding Churchill through the Focus, and the Transfer Agreement in which Zionist organizations and the Nazi government found common cause in moving Jews to Palestine. How do you understand the relationship between these financial networks and Zionist political goals? Were these actors pursuing a coherent long-term strategy, or responding opportunistically to events?

I think there is a mixture of both going on there. Jews, I suppose due to their historical experiences, can be very hysterical and so when Hitler came along and spoke in such blunt terms about them he was bound to ruffle some features which resulted in the vast majority of Jews treating him as some kind of existential threat to be destroyed by any means from the get-go regardless of where they fell on the political spectrum. The Zionists who worked with Hitler to boost Jewish immigration into Palestine were treated as pariahs by their own people, they were very much the exception. Despite the hysterical reaction though, of course, their actions benefitted Jews just as the actions of the Jews boycotting Hitler or those trying to instigate a war against Hitler did (at least in the long-term I should add given what happened next). There is the well known meme about right-wing Jews causing wars in the Middle East and left-wing Jews bringing the refugees from those wars to Europe despite the two fundamentally disagreeing with each other, both benefit Jews.

I’m more inclined to believe that it’s more a case of that when it comes to these things. There isn’t just one big conspiracy that they’re all in on, but rather lots and they’re all working against us and for themselves, always for themselves.

I prefer to look internally when it comes to solving such things. At the end of the day all we have to do is take our own side, reject liberalism and say no, attempting to react and peel back every conspiracy and undo every little agenda of every other group (mostly Jews) would be far more difficult. They’re always (to get to your original point) working on both a coherent strategy and also reacting opportunistically. The main point is that everything they do is for them and them alone, which is what we need to do.

12. You haven’t made a dedicated video on central banking, but financial institutions appear throughout your work—the Bank of England moving Czech gold to Germany, the economic pressures that shaped the Reich’s options, the financiers behind political movements. How central is monetary control to the history you cover? For readers trying to understand this period, how much attention should they pay to banking and finance versus the political and military narratives they’re more familiar with?

This is another one of those ‘I haven’t gotten to it yet’ topics (it’s quite a long list).

I think people can often jump the complete opposite way and put too much down to ‘elites’ and those that control the money to the point of just disregarding literally everything else, but ultimately it’s extremely important.

In this specific case, of course, as I mentioned in one of the earlier answers, if the men of the Focus had not picked up Winston Churchill, funded him, and opened the doors to get him where he needed to go, then Churchill never would have got there. There would have been no world world two. Millions would have lived. The world would have been completely different.

Ultimately, in the world we live in, you need funding to make anything happen. Our enemies have very deep pockets and can afford to just throw money around to try to maintain the world they’ve now created. That can get you so far, but not all of the way, after all, at a point, ‘reality’ eventually takes over. Hitler was for the longest time funded by membership dues and patriotic fellow travellers. His message was so irresistible to the German people in such a tough time for them that ultimately the rich industrialists and others like them had to come to him and make terms with him about their own future.

The short answer, there is a balance. Both need to be looked at. Both are very important. You shouldn’t just look at actions and feelings and completely discount finances and the man behind the curtain, you also shouldn’t do the reverse and retreat into a world where you think nothing matters except money. The two compliment each other.

13. You’ve covered the French, Latvian, Flemish, British, Irish, Muslim, and Bosnian SS divisions—an enormous range of non-Germans who fought for the Reich. Why did so many foreigners volunteer? What does their participation reveal that complicates the standard narrative of WWII?

I think this very much ties in with what I was saying earlier about us all being in this together. Hitler, like Mussolini, achieved what many others all across Europe were seeking to do in their own countries. Hitler was far more successful, transformed his country so much more and was so much more powerful than his hero whom he emulated. Therefore it was only natural that when Hitler put out the rallying cry, the European right wing would form up behind him and offer their lives for the cause.

People can go too far sometimes and view the conflict through too much of a pan-European lens, but ultimately World War 2 was very much an ideological war for the future of White people, it’s only natural that so many Europeans were willing to get behind Hitler, especially when his victory looked so certain. It’s telling that they had so much faith in Hitler, despite his (perhaps natural, as most nationalists are this way about their own people) German-chauvinism, it says a lot that they were willing to throw in their lot with him for better or for worse, for what they believed would be a much brighter future for Europe.

14. Your video on the Nuremberg Trials covers the process by which the postwar narrative was legally established. What do you want readers to understand about those trials—how they were conducted, what they established, and how they shaped what we’re permitted to think about this period?

It’s as if the trials never ended, really, that’s one way of viewing it. The precedent that was set there, that nationalism is bad, evil even. The complete triumph of emotion over facts. The trials were just so hysterical and unobjective, a completely foreign way of doing things to Europeans. It’s very telling that the trials, much like our modern world, were set up essentially for Jews, and not us. Our society still operates under this Nuremberg framework. Anything for us is bad, anything against them is bad. Anything for them is good. When you actually look into the trials all of this is very clear and in your face. You can’t avoid the parallels. We live in global Nuremberg, and, much like those trials, the rules only apply to Europeans.

The way out of this situation to me is very much like I said earlier, all we need to do is unapologetically take our own side again and say enough. We need to get over our collective European World War 2 guilt. Nationalism is good, actually. Taking our own side is good, actually.

15. Your upcoming projects include biographies of Goebbels and Mosley, a trilogy covering Imperial Germany through the Third Reich, and eventually a complete history of the British Empire. For readers who want to follow this work, where should they go, and what’s the first thing they’ll see when they arrive?

Since my ban on YouTube the place to find me is right here on Substack (or Rumble at ZoomerHistorianReal, but Substack is my main platform)! Upon arrival on my page you’ll find me still very much in the middle of my Rhodesia project. I’ve got a book to finish, many articles to write and a few videos left of my video series on the topic! After that, though, it’s onto the projects you’ve mentioned there and so much more. All very exciting stuff.

Thank you for having me, appreciate the opportunity!

---

Book: Medicalized Motherhood: From First Pill to Permanent Patient

Available as a free download. 123 interventions documented across six phases—from pre-conception capture through postpartum surveillance. Includes practical tools: birth plan template, provider interview questions, quick reference card, and a new chapter on interrupting the cascade. Download it, share it with someone facing their first prenatal appointment, their induction date, their cesarean recommendation. The cascade works because women don’t see it coming. This book makes it visible.

Download the free PDF here

Support Independent Research

This work remains free because paid subscribers make it possible. If you find value here, consider joining them.

What paid subscribers get: Access to the Deep Dive Audio Library — 180+ in-depth discussions (30-50 min each) exploring the books behind these essays. New discussions added weekly. That’s 100+ hours of content for less than the price of a single audiobook.

[Upgrade to Paid – $5/month or $50/year]

Get in touch Essay ideas, stories, or expertise to share: unbekoming@outlook.com

New Biology Clinic

For those of you looking for practitioners who actually understand terrain medicine and the principles we explore here, I want to share something valuable. Dr. Tom Cowan—whose books and podcasts have shaped much of my own thinking about health—has created the New Biology Clinic, a virtual practice staffed by wellness specialists who operate from the same foundational understanding. This isn’t about symptom suppression or the conventional model. It’s about personalized guidance rooted in how living systems actually work. The clinic offers individual and family memberships that include not just private consults, but group sessions covering movement, nutrition, breathwork, biofield tuning, and more. Everything is virtual, making it accessible wherever you are. If you’ve been searching for practitioners who won’t look at you blankly when you mention structured water or the importance of the extracellular matrix, this is worth exploring. Use discount code “Unbekoming” to get $100 off the member activation fee. You can learn more and sign up at newbiologyclinic.com