The Final Solution to the Fuentes Problem
#1
I was going to make this a reply in the Scenarios for the 2024 Election thread, but it would be far too long and off topic, so I'd like to make a thread for this discussion. The discussion being: How Do We Dispose of the AFricans in WWWW? Now, there are some people among us who think that the Multiracial Anti-Semitic Co-Prosperity Sphere of the Niggers First movement are useful, even potential allies! I would like to dispel all of this nonsense as soon as possible, as Fuentes and his group are a blight on anything remotely "right wing".

For those of you who don't want to discuss this person at all, this can be seen as a study of sorts as to how someone can go from a person with a bright future to being a disgraceful plaything of powers he doesn't understand.

I will lay out my argument, and then respond to these comments in kind

Why I Originally Liked Nick

Before any of his issues, Fuentes was a normal kid who wanted to do good and I think many posters let this somewhat endearing quality overtake their better judgement. At the end of the day, what we want is to Win, and Win, and keep Winning, and this individual is an impediment to that. 

As for me, I remember the first few episodes of "America First". Nick was awkward, but he was on point. He focused on the Big Three: Immigration, Trade, and War, with implicit anti-semitism and racism--that is, never overtly Naming Them, but guiding people towards that direction. His show could have been seen as a supplement to Trumpism for a younger audience. Could have.

Where Did Things Go Wrong?

The point was likely the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville which was, in reality, a Fed Op to associate Donald Trump with Naziism and Anti-Semitism: "There were good people on both sides". This is true from the perspective of the liberal worldview, but the Media played it as if everyone at that rally were a Nazi; thus the damage was done, to Trump, and to one Nick Fuentes.

From The Independent:

Quote:[Nick Fuentes] has said he is leaving Boston University because of the violent threats he has received since [Charlottesville].

Mr Fuentes said his reason for attending the Charlottesville rally was to demonstrate against immigration, multiculturalism and post-modernism.

On his Facebook page, Mr Fuentes proclaimed his fervent support of President Donald Trump and his belief that “multiculturalism is a cancer.”

Back in 2017, he was completely on message. The above is precisely what one should say overtly when one operates publicly. 

After this event, however, many people on the far right were lost, specifically younger people who were newly red-pilled like myself. This was supposed to be the moment "a tidal wave of White Identity is coming" per Fuentes, and I remember thinking the same. It was some time after this event that Andrew Anglin's The Daily Stormer declared Fuentes to be The Leader of The Movement™... perhaps he let this get to his head? I'm not sure.

[Image: anglin-cucked.png]

I finally have an excuse to use this

To The Point

Now, I could wax poetic about his problems with the "Reformed Homosexual" and Federal Informant Milo Yiannopolous, or the debacle of the capital where his own people were set up but he was let off scot-free, or his myriad inconsistencies in belief we all know; but that in and of itself is the point. We all know his problems, his inconsistencies, the immense evidence that he is a plaything of the feds, so why continue to go to bat for him?

An especially egregious and illustrative moment was when in 2022 he began attacking BAP and that sphere right before the primary elections while simultaneously using the very common leftist trope of the Evil CIA Agent against a very promising candidate named Joe Kent. Whatever you think of BAP and his orbiters, they are consistently on message towards electing smart, Trump supporting people. Most importantly, they understand the power of the Q Anon Movement. 

For some reason Nick ordered his faux groypers to attack BAP at this moment over something that happened 3 years prior. A moment where BAP never attacked Fuentes, but rather said something to the effect of "be careful about going to a convention that will be presented as a White Nationalist meeting". For this benign statement 3 years prior, Fuentes divided the online right at a crucial moment. The most important thing to understand here is that this hurt Donald Trump and the MAGA agenda and prevented someone who is truly and openly hard right from being accepted in the public sphere which could have potentially been a watershed moment.

[Image: F-cfa-M5a-YAAs-YJe.jpg]

My sources indicate Fuentes received this text immediately after the election.

In Conclusion...

Yes, Nick did start out with best intentions (barring conspiracy theories about him being a plant of the Wilks Brothers all along), but for years he has been an impediment to Donald Trump--including that impromptu meeting with Coonye--and an impediment to the right as a whole, as I will get to in the following replies.

JohnnyRomero Wrote:I think that [Fuentes] is a bit better than most people here make him out to be... but not by much. He has terrible, trashy tastes and an obnoxious negro-brained Zoomer fanbase, but he is nevertheless very much *not* in favor of mass non-white immigration. Tucker, on the other hand, seems to be a completely lost cause. I think it is now becoming painfully obvious that everything "good" about Tucker was just his Fox News writers copying right-wing Twitter.

I am not the biggest fan of Tucker Carlson. For being the best journalist of the day--and unfortunately that's true--he falls very short. He rarely meets with interesting people, and when he does (see Trump or Putin) he asks subpar questions. He also made a fool of himself with his low-brow Moscow tour; it reminded me of that one 50s commie nigger whose name I fail to remember talking about how much better Russia is than the US because people in Moscow didn't call him a nigger.

That being said, Tucker knows how to stay on message, even if some of that message isn't very good in the long run. Fuentes, on the other hand, does not. You say he doesn't like mass immigration, yet I remember many times him saying that we need latinos because they're Catholic and believe in Wholesome Family Values™ unlike those evil White Liberal Coastal Elites™. His line is Tinkzorg but with a Catholic veneer. I won't go on about how retarded it is to try and turn America into a Catholic Monarchy(how?), which is his stated goal.

[Image: FXj3ao-IXo-AEm-Zuc.jpg]

BillyONare Wrote:Fuentes is a witty, good-hearted SYM. The Jews melted his brain, but not as badly as you would believe by following the Zero HP Lovecraft sphere who retweet his worst coal takes. If you just scroll through his twitter without biasing the worst posts you can see that he's a pretty staunch and reasonable white nationalist. Not that we should stop making fun of him for turd worlding it up and being deranged about Zionism.

It may very well be true that that his anti-immigration posts are his real beliefs. I personally believe his Catholicism is merely a religious justification for his anti-semitism (a bad one at that). It doesn't really matter what he truly believes, what matters is he has no backbone. He was exposed as a White Nationalist, then egged on and promoted by people like Andrew Anglin to become The Leader of The Movement™, a title he readily took yet was not prepared for the consequences. All he did was dig himself further into a hole, which is pitiable, but pity doesn't Win

[Image: 60230-Soy-Booru.png]

Selim Wrote:Fuentes often attacks what he sees as the "BAP sphere", but these are usually the most mild RW content farmers and unoriginal Substack grifters who have gravitated around BAP. These are those who were targeted by the 1488 accounts. Fuentes' xenophilic tendencies are rightly ridiculed, but exaggerated in the zeitgeist. Just recently he was talking about Mexicans being parasites on productive people. There are a lot of keyed little things about his e-persona I could list. He supports child marriage. As a testament to his Sensitivity, he will go on a tangent and start bitching about how tedious and cluttered the internet is to use, or talk about all the epic things he would do in a post-apocalyptic scenario.

Quote:his e-persona

That's just it though isn't it? It's an e-persona. It's a show for his audience of 10 Whites and 1000 niggers. Who gives a shit about what someone says? What matters is what someone does and whether or not it helps us Win. Imagine how absurd it is to a normalfag to see someone talking about child marriage. All it does is give legitimacy to the ADL/SPLC "Hate Watch", where they can say "he had a meeting with Trump", "he was a part of the J6 Insurrection", etc. That does not help me Win, which is all that matters.

Quote:An especially egregious and illustrative moment was when in 2022 he began attacking BAP and that sphere right before the primary elections while simultaneously using the very common leftist trope of the Evil CIA Agent against a very promising candidate named Joe Kent. Whatever you think of BAP and his orbiters, they are consistently on message towards electing smart, Trump supporting people. Most importantly, they understand the power of the Q Anon Movement.

As for the attacks on the BAP Sphere, please see the full post body.

[Image: 29961-Soy-Booru.jpg]
[Image: cca7bac0c3817004e84eace282cc7a3d.jpg]
#2
Fuentes was on point pre-Charlottesville because he was taking all of his talking points, and focus, from My Posting Career. As soon as that forum closed up, coincidentally Yang Gang started.
#3
The greatest critique of the AFers is that they are lignite coalers, to such a degree that for someone vaguely sympathetic to them I now have a very strong distaste.

Addressed earlier was the fact that the character of many of Nick Fuentes' beliefs are correct, he understands white nationalism is a good thing and has some good rhetoric, but is striking is the 'optics war' if any oldtroons recall; it boiled down to the sides of wignats VS civnats represented by Spencer (as much of a facefaggot as Nick) and Fuentes respectively. Nick explained why cucking for optics is le good essentially from a realpolitik lens, an understandable argument. But then you get into his association with faggots, niggers, and other non-whites, someone generous might say that it is tokenism for normie appeal, but more likely it was to gain popularity from the nigger jester of the week, which I personally don't care to abide.
#4
I unfortunately don't think there's any way to dispose of AF in the current political climate. As BAP never tires of saying, any political movement in the modern (mass democratic) state is always going to be sub-par at best; Fuentes has obvious mass appeal that can't be meaningfully combatted, at least not on its own terms. For the moment, ignoring the AF crowd seems to be the only sensible course of action. Engagement with them is pointless and almost always devolves into the most crude of mudslinging imaginable; anyone who tries to go toe to toe with that sort of thing is going to become another retarded shit slinger in short order.[Image: F248maiWkAAelyH?format=jpg&name=large]
Most Coherent AF Argument


 I also don't think it helps much to stir up shit with Fuentes and co. at the moment. To anyone looking from the outside, there's hardly a difference between an AF TradCath and a Nietzschean; they just see "The Far Right". These squabbles are inscrutable to anyone not already in the thick of it and seriously dilutes from the key questions of the day, which still must be Trade, Immigration, and Scientific Racism. 

Going forward, I think the best best is to ignore and relentlessly stay on point. Never stop punching left. Always hammer the immigration issue, always push against left wing activism wherever it appears, always back Trump (whatever his faults, he is our only real mainstream avatar and a Man of Power). Humor, facts, and a staunch refusal to start shit with other factions on the right is key. If AF still wants to come for us, then fine, let them. If they have an issue with humorous and insightful critiques of leftism or advocacy of immigration restriction, it will be on them to justify why these are bad things.

Long term, a strategic exploitation of the "Based Latino" (insofar as that is a real thing) may be in our interest. Just as Leftist, Brown, and Jewish organs of power tactically exploited middle class white liberals (and continue to do so, though with decreasing return on investment) to promote GNC before unceremoniously throwing them under the bus, so too could a right wing movement exploit minorities willing to vote in Trump or a similar candidate. If 20 or 30% or Latinos or Asians can be brought on to a ticket of immigration restriction and mass deportation, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed on. If it succeeds and a white majority is preserved in the US, there's no reason that an emboldened White majority couldn't turn the screws on their now electorally weakened minority "allies" once said minorities have helped deport their own co-ethnics.
#5
Golden Birch Groyper Wrote:Fuentes has obvious mass appeal that can't be meaningfully combatted,

Prove it. Nick as I am fated to constantly repeat to the retarded dogs that somehow found this place is A IRRELEVANT  STREAMER OUTDONE IN VIEWCOUNT BY INDONESIANS WHO PRETEND TO BE ANIME GIRLS he, as in a long line of retards since 1945 has a spotlight because he is such a drooling mongloid he is the ideal foil for our kike nigger establishment and also appeals to defenders of the West who are insults to The West.  I will now just quote from the conversation had here(Wherein nothing I said was refuted) the last time someone months ago dragged up a person ideally, that the next time I see mentioned is that Trump's FBI sent him to a ICE center on GITMO. 
NuclearAbsolutist Wrote:
anthony Wrote:And more specifically for Fuentes, related to the above thought. He's absolutely disgusting. Bloated unhealthy wigger who got famous preaching to the choir repeating the trashiest and most retarded parts of /pol/ back to the trashiest and most retarded parts of /pol/. AF are not a collection of the best. I believe that right to rule is naturally a matter of taste. What kind of person is into this garbage and why? What do we get for its existence? Energised ugly brown people who enjoy posting in livestream chats now consider themselves "right wing" and will proudly tell as many people as possible that they are what that means.

We can say he's a "broadcaster" rather than an aspiring aristocrat. What the hell do we need broadcasters for? Why should they exist? Limbaugh didn't sow the seeds of what we are today. The internet and free association of the intelligent was enough to make this explode into life. Maybe he kept some fire going, was an entryway for some pre and early internet guys who themselves spread a lot more fire. Even then, that time is past. If that charitable reading was true, good on Rush. But the internet is so different to being a radio guy in the 20th century that I don't believe it's possible to be a Rush Limbaugh of our time. It's too different. The comparison doesn't strike me as helpful beyond a very basic level.

I completely agree with this astute analysis and find it telling it has not been addressed, no did anyone broach  what I posted months ago in this thread(Which I'll touch on later), instead saying this sort of thing again
weev Wrote:Nick Fuentes is a talented broadcaster that has succumbed to the hubris that seems to infect every single dissident broadcaster.

BillyONare Wrote:Nick Fuentes is the spiritual successor to rush limbaugh (that's a good thing)

I don't know what either Weev or Billionaire  mean by talent or on par with Rush here, Rush had a audience of millions the appeal of his speaking was such even those who loathed him had to cover him in the way they do for all "A-listers"(But with negative spin of course, or the manner of symbol of dark undercurrent you have to unpack). In contrast Nick's gets the attention  of the worst kind, brought by trash fires he lights up(Getting his young followers to yell at Charlie Kirk about Israel and making sure they can never find gainful employment again) or joins (Mr Kardashians typical holly-wood mental break down that had a dash of black nationalism) he is either a drama source or used by hacks as the face of the far right both a evil figure but also a circus clown they can laugh at beyond his fan base of Mexican /pol/ tards. Then there's the serious manner I posted many months ago about which suggests he is either so incompetent he has no standards or is up for covering for pederasts if they tick the right based marks.
https://archive.ph/4WF04
New York Magazine Wrote:In one of the interviews, a young man named Aidan Duncan described how Alexander had allegedly solicited nude pictures from him when Duncan was 15 and Alexander was 32. He claimed Alexander had promised to share his “entire network” with Duncan if he kept their situation secret. “Boundaries are cool,” Alexander wrote, according to a screenshot of a text conversation obtained by The Daily Beast. “Allowed to say no. However, the less you deprive me of, the less I deprive you of.” But by May 2019, Alexander was annoyed that Duncan would never send him “good jack off material,” according to another screenshot.
“When I was 15 I was naive and desperate,” Duncan tweeted last week. “I thought I had no choice but to cooperate with inappropriate and humiliating requests if I wanted to make it in politics. I figured that was just the nature of the game.”


As far as I know Nick has of course never commented on this(EDIT:My bad, I forgot he did and simply denied he knew anything) which is his pattern of course(He never said anything when he brought sub trailer trash like Ethan Ralph or the Latino Groyper(Another case but purely about CP) on after all). Which raises the question of why bother with him, why talk about a man who was born too late for the Howard Stern show but just in time for live stream ranting.  A man even in that field so clearly looses out to THIS!
[Image: tZOT13M.png]
As with every E-Parliament lens I wish to raise why are these headcases around us? Why is it that on the fringe you have this.
[Image: 3RVIe13.gif]

“Power changes its appearance but not its reality.”― Bertrand De Jouvenel
#6
NuclearAbsolutist Wrote:
Golden Birch Groyper Wrote:Fuentes has obvious mass appeal that can't be meaningfully combatted,

Prove it right now you stupid, stupid nigger. Nick as I am fated to constantly repeat to the retarded dogs that somehow found this place is A IRRELEVANT  STREAMER OUTDONE IN VIEWCOUNT BY INDONESIANS WHO PRETEND TO BE ANIME GIRLS he, as in a long line of retards since 1945 has a spotlight because he is such a drooling mongloid he is the ideal foil for our kike nigger establishment and also appeals to defenders of the West who are insults to The West.  I will now just quote from the conversation had here(Wherein nothing I said was refuted) the last time someone months ago dragged up a person ideally, that the next time I see mentioned is that Trump's FBI sent him to a ICE center on GITMO. 
NuclearAbsolutist Wrote:
anthony Wrote:And more specifically for Fuentes, related to the above thought. He's absolutely disgusting. Bloated unhealthy wigger who got famous preaching to the choir repeating the trashiest and most retarded parts of /pol/ back to the trashiest and most retarded parts of /pol/. AF are not a collection of the best. I believe that right to rule is naturally a matter of taste. What kind of person is into this garbage and why? What do we get for its existence? Energised ugly brown people who enjoy posting in livestream chats now consider themselves "right wing" and will proudly tell as many people as possible that they are what that means.

We can say he's a "broadcaster" rather than an aspiring aristocrat. What the hell do we need broadcasters for? Why should they exist? Limbaugh didn't sow the seeds of what we are today. The internet and free association of the intelligent was enough to make this explode into life. Maybe he kept some fire going, was an entryway for some pre and early internet guys who themselves spread a lot more fire. Even then, that time is past. If that charitable reading was true, good on Rush. But the internet is so different to being a radio guy in the 20th century that I don't believe it's possible to be a Rush Limbaugh of our time. It's too different. The comparison doesn't strike me as helpful beyond a very basic level.

I completely agree with this astute analysis and find it telling it has not been addressed, no did anyone broach  what I posted months ago in this thread(Which I'll touch on later), instead saying this sort of thing again
weev Wrote:Nick Fuentes is a talented broadcaster that has succumbed to the hubris that seems to infect every single dissident broadcaster.

BillyONare Wrote:Nick Fuentes is the spiritual successor to rush limbaugh (that's a good thing)

I don't know what either Weev or Billionaire  mean by talent or on par with Rush here, Rush had a audience of millions the appeal of his speaking was such even those who loathed him had to cover him in the way they do for all "A-listers"(But with negative spin of course, or the manner of symbol of dark undercurrent you have to unpack). In contrast Nick's gets the attention  of the worst kind, brought by trash fires he lights up(Getting his young followers to yell at Charlie Kirk about Israel and making sure they can never find gainful employment again) or joins (Mr Kardashians typical holly-wood mental break down that had a dash of black nationalism) he is either a drama source or used by hacks as the face of the far right both a evil figure but also a circus clown they can laugh at beyond his fan base of Mexican /pol/ tards. Then there's the serious manner I posted many months ago about which suggests he is either so incompetent he has no standards or is up for covering for pederasts if they tick the right based marks.
https://archive.ph/4WF04
New York Magazine Wrote:In one of the interviews, a young man named Aidan Duncan described how Alexander had allegedly solicited nude pictures from him when Duncan was 15 and Alexander was 32. He claimed Alexander had promised to share his “entire network” with Duncan if he kept their situation secret. “Boundaries are cool,” Alexander wrote, according to a screenshot of a text conversation obtained by The Daily Beast. “Allowed to say no. However, the less you deprive me of, the less I deprive you of.” But by May 2019, Alexander was annoyed that Duncan would never send him “good jack off material,” according to another screenshot.
“When I was 15 I was naive and desperate,” Duncan tweeted last week. “I thought I had no choice but to cooperate with inappropriate and humiliating requests if I wanted to make it in politics. I figured that was just the nature of the game.”


As far as I know Nick has of course never commented on this(EDIT:My bad, I forgot he did and simply denied he knew anything) which is his pattern of course(He never said anything when he brought sub trailer trash like Ethan Ralph or the Latino Groyper(Another case but purely about CP) on after all). Which raises the question of why bother with him, why talk about a man who was born too late for the Howard Stern show but just in time for live stream ranting.  A man even in that field so clearly looses out to THIS!
[Image: tZOT13M.png]
I was speaking in relative terms. As far as the online Dissident Right goes, Nick is one of the better known names.
#7
Golden Birch Groyper Wrote:I was speaking in relative terms. As far as the online Dissident Right goes, Nick is one of the better known names.

You know, your right for many people a endless stream of unrefined 2015 /pol/ memes and fetishes are all they want and they make a constant noise that amounts to this online and slide up next to people with a "similar purpose". I just believe we should all make it plain, this is not even a different wrong headed position but skinsuiting of the past by minstrel savages. Men who in almost every aspect from their speech to thought pattern are just as a showcase of modern psychic casualties as XXX_Bunnyfurryantifa69_XXX and occupy a equally impressive corner in size.
[Image: 3RVIe13.gif]

“Power changes its appearance but not its reality.”― Bertrand De Jouvenel
#8
NuclearAbsolutist Wrote:
Golden Birch Groyper Wrote:I was speaking in relative terms. As far as the online Dissident Right goes, Nick is one of the better known names.

You know, your right for many people a endless stream of unrefined 2015 /pol/ memes and fetishes are all they want and they make a constant noise that amounts to this online and slide up next to people with a "similar purpose". I just believe we should all make it plain, this is not even a different wrong headed position but skinsuiting of the past by minstrel savages. Men who in almost every aspect from their speech to thought pattern are just as a showcase of modern psychic casualties as XXX_Bunnyfurryantifa69_XXX and occupy a equally impressive corner in size.

Fair enough, maybe you think the whole point of this thread is retarded then. Maybe it is. But if Fuentes is irrelevant, what exactly does that make us? He's a minstrel show of 2015 /pol/, you're exactly right. But unfortunately he and his cretins are one of the loudest voices in the online right. Either way, we both ultimately think the man should be ignored, so there's that. I've got nothing else to add, really.
#9
NuclearAbsolutist Wrote:why bother with him, why talk about a man who was born too late for the Howard Stern show but just in time for live stream ranting. A man even in that field so clearly looses out to [vtubers].

Yes. Why talk about him? This is what I kept thinking before making this thread, but I just couldn't take 3 guys IN A ROW on an interesting thread about 2024 election defending this sub-sub-submarnite piece of brown shit. I don't even remember how this person got brought up, why bring him up in the first place? As you say, this is an irrelevant person insofar as National Mass Politics is concerned. He is only relevant in online circles, and his public stunts are justification for the continued existence of the ADL/SPLC.

I think this has to be discussed when you have a forum filled with self-proclaimed elitists and Aristocrats stupidly defending a dumb castizo who appeals only to the LOWEST OF HUMANITY, and is a tool of the DC political class used as, as you say, "a foil" to the decaying post-1945 world order.
[Image: cca7bac0c3817004e84eace282cc7a3d.jpg]
#10
From my knowledge of the AF faction, I think of a lot of the people involved (talking about the participants here, not Fuentes, Milo, etc who have their own motivations) simply want to be a part of a movement that engages them. They want to go to parties, be a part of a group and go after enemies, feel like they're actually changing the world, and America First provides that experience to some extent. Fuentes has some charisma, and he knows how to build a feeling of consensus, even if it requires botting or inflating live stream numbers. A lot of them have also found ways to make money through Fuentes by engagement farming under whoever Fuentes is attacking currently.

Thus, I think the solution to the AF problem is just to win, basically, or at least have a more active group that works toward infiltrating institutions or does election support work. The majority of the sensible ones, which are the only ones that matter anyway, will simply jump ship to something that engages them more. I believe Antifa was the left's method of diverting such youth in their own factions toward useful ends too.



[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)