The Networks of the "Dissident Right"

[AryanGenius1488]

There are a number of dissident right ("DR") networks, mostly revolving around "content creation", each with different schools of thought, etc. Keith Woods lists a bunch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VgqovWGTNk

I wanted to make a thread to think about not only these different groups and their disagreements but also to think about what goes on "behind the scenes." The most important networks often do things other than just making content on free to use websites like Substack and Youtube. Some make a ton of money off catering to DR sentiments, and it's unclear where the money goes and why. It is also known that at this point there are big donors involved, including Thiel, Horowitz, and Andreesen, and several random bitcoin millionaires. In fact, the biggest networks can be split up according to their massive donors:

1) The Thiel-Horowitz-Andreesen network includes Yarvin, BAP, Red Scare, several congressional candidates like Blake Masters and JD Vance, Claremont Institute, Michael Anton, several other podcasters like Jack Murphy, Alex Kuschata, several Twitter orbiters like 0hpl and more minor people.

2) The Nick Fuentes network seems to be funded by random bitcoin millionaires, retarded superchatters, and includes Fuentes, his orbiters, Milo Yianoppolus, Andrew Anglin, potentially Alex Jones and some weak connections to Russia (Fuentes goes on RT now occasionally) and some weakly connected congress persons like Paul Gosar and Margery Taylor Greene.

3) The third DR network is more mysterious in terms of funding. It includes Keith Woods, Joel Davis, Neema Parvini aka Academic Agent, some guy named Mike who runs "Imperium Press", a book publishing website that publishes these guys, and a few others. These guys thrive on their not-banned, medium sized Youtube channels, while being banned from Twitter collectively (except Parvini who has a retarded sock puppet called "Original Roland Rat") while Fuentes is btfo from everywhere and the THA network is the most powerful and uses many platforms such as Substack, Youtube, Twitter, etc. THA network can definitely make deals since BAP has been banned at least 2 times and gets to come back each time, while Fuentes is banned after 12 hours on his numerous sock puppets, as are Woods and Davis. Both Davis and Woods are probably being funded from someone because they were able to quit their jobs to face fag on medium sized Youtube channels. It is unclear who is funding them. They could be trust fund kids funding themselves. They could be reckless. Maybe "Mike" is a bitcoin millionaire. Some have suggested they could be a THA project, because they purged somebody named Chris Bond for stating that BAP was a part of the THA network (is this supposed to be secret? he is definitely in the network, we know who he is, he's publicly friends with Yarvin and astroturfed on their media platforms). Maybe they just want to court the THA network and get accepted into it. They have been observed courting both the NF network and the THA network, which suggests they are not a part of either, since NF hates the THA network, has done far worse than Chris Bond, to BAP in particular, stating his real name, posting his face, talking about his family, discussing his Zionist network, and claiming he is a pedophile zionist Jew subverter. Bond only made reference to the Kant Bot name doxx and family background. I am guessing the funding comes from Mike, or a friend of Mike, because publishing houses take seed money as do coordinated, risky, experimental full-time face phag Youtube channels run by 25 year old philosophy majors like Woods and Davis. The Imperium network, as I will call it, seems desperate to either join the NF or the THA network, and does not care which.

4) It seems dead and I know little about it, but there is/was a Wignat network that seemed connected. Richard Spencer is a millionaire IIRC. He was central to it at least before his "fall." NJP is probably a part of this network. If anyone has experience with these people please post what you know.

5) HBD network. Academic, you can center around Emil Kirkegaard if you want. He has a few friends he publishes papers with -- Edward Dutton, George Francis, Richard Lynn some others. Money seems to come from this thing called the Pioneer Fund, maybe some others. It was founded by old Southern Eugenicists. This is probably why they mostly focus on Negro inferiority in their research. It is a very based, elitist, intellectual operation, centered around furthering race science and persuading academics. The other networks are power players and grifters because they seek mass appeal and as much money as possible from their efforts. The HBD network rejects grifting and survives off of philanthropy and personal funding. It is the closest thing to a DR academia.

Once the different networks are identified, the people in them can be judged as to whether or not they are grifters or subverters. You can judge whole networks by understanding what range of traits are allowed to join, and who sits at the top of their hierarchies. Sometimes whole networks are bad, sometimes only individual members suck. For example, in the Imperium network, Neema Parvini is a mixed race mega grifter. He sells web courses for over 700 GBP. They consist of power point slides summarizing books he merely skimmed, like Jouvenel's On Power. Probably 80% of his substack posts are paywalled. He doesn't face fag and only name fagged once the income got good enough. He is a narcissist with anger problems and is 100% only in it for the money. His job which he recently quit was also grift -- he was a Shakespeare professor. Shamelessly parasiting off of students, first in the actual education system, now on the DR. Davis, Woods, and Mike don't seem as bad though. They seem like they might actually be based in some ways and wanted to go out of their way to make a modest living spreading basedness. Their main shortcoming is low intellectual rigor -- low enough that they let a notorious, noxious grifter into their ranks.

The NF network can basically be judged by judging Nick Fuentes, because he demands personal loyalty and, like it or not, has erected this network through personal comedic talent. There's little room for dissent, so you're basically either on board with his brand of Christian Nationalism or you aren't. He names the Jew, wants an 80%+ white Christian nation, and is based on the woman question. For now, he simps for blacks, pop culture, and his network is basically devoted to entertainment. I hope that he will support the HBD network eventually a start a think tank operation, but this has not happened yet.

The THA network is the largest and has the most variance, but Thiel-Andreesen-Horowitz are at the center, and you can't stray too far from the center. Nobody in it is anti-gay or pro-traditionalism, probably because Thiel won't tolerate it. Several big players are gay themselves. The network supports Israel, because of Horowitz. They are based on black people. They are not essentially Christian. They are basically Yarvinists -- BAP is the most extreme among them but is allowed to accrue influence among the hyper based on Twitter because they know he's loyal to the network IRL and doesn't disagree with the fundamentals.


The HBD network is based but not overtly political in a lot of ways. Respectability is big and 0 optics poasting is looked down on. BAP sphere is the main outlet for that currently -- THA has given it refuge and is harnessing its energy.

Will be posting more observations / classifications of people by network affiliation in the future.

---

Recently Joel Davis and Academic Agent sperged out on each other and Davis also got a cozy.tv (NF streaming site) channel https://cozy.tv/joeldavis.  Keith Woods made a youtube video trying to debunk what AA was arguing that made Davis sperg. So it would seem that AA might be drifting away from the Imperium network, which is in turn drifting towards the NF network.

[Image: https://i.imgur.com/4nfrhMr.png]
[Image: https://i.imgur.com/gjXpID0.png]

Davis might fund the Imperium network with bitcoin bux or trust fund or something, I'm trying to figure out why Keith Woods acts like his bitch when Davis is lazy and has 8k youtube subscribers after like 3 years and Woods has 40k. Davis does not act like he needs money, a larger direct audience, and has no fear that starting tons of drama will negate people's loyalty to him. Similarly, NF starts tons of drama, resting secure on a few million from super chats and gay bitcoin donors who wanted to take the little catboy to baseball games.

[anthony]

Where did you pick up on the thought that Thiel paid Yarvin to make UR?

[AryanGenius1488]

Where did you pick up on the thought that Thiel paid Yarvin to make UR?

It's from a witness. Basically Yarvin was friends with Thiel before UR, Thiel would often have dinners at his estate or whatever with people and they discussed creating UR there before it was done. Thiel provided the funds for the "labor" (even though Yarvin had retired by dot com lotto)(this explains why Yarvin treated it like a 40 hr a week job too). These connections were responsible for stuff like Andrew Sullivan shouting out UR on its forth day. This is obvious when you think about it, I could have written UR in 8th grade but Andrew Sullivan wouldn't have shouted it out after 4 days because he wouldn't have even known about it. But also if I wrote UR in the exact same way word for word, it just wouldn't be the same for those kinds of people, that is it wouldn't be the product of one of their Jewish friends so they'd just ignore it.

[Manteuffel]

While these groups populate the same spheres and share ties, they are by no means ideologically or tactically uniform. For example, there are several people in the America First sphere who advocate ruralist homesteading faggotry, which is rather explicitly at odds with Fuentes' stated goals of infiltrating the Republican Party. There are also strong differences within the Thiel network.

The big divide in the DR is ideological-spiritual: the Vitalist Right (most prominent figure: BAP) vs. the Religious Right (most prominent figure: NJF).

[Zed]

While these groups populate the same spheres and share ties, they are by no means ideologically or tactically uniform. For example, there are several people in the America First sphere who advocate ruralist homesteading faggotry, which is rather explicitly at odds with Fuentes' stated goals of infiltrating the Republican Party. There are also strong differences within the Thiel network.

The big divide in the DR is ideological-spiritual: the Vitalist Right (most prominent figure: BAP) vs. the Religious Right (most prominent figure: NJF).

That gives Fuentes an astounding amount of (undeserved) credit. The dissident aspects of the religious right have fairly deep roots and an actual functional political/influence network - Fuentes has a poorly programmed streaming service which is more about the trials and tribulations of his daily life, and his drama with other streamers - than about anything political.

Someone like Robert P. George is infinitely more noteworthy and influential in the RR circles - he has personally done a great deal to cultivate the 'intellectuals' involved in the integralist movement.

[Manteuffel]

While these groups populate the same spheres and share ties, they are by no means ideologically or tactically uniform. For example, there are several people in the America First sphere who advocate ruralist homesteading faggotry, which is rather explicitly at odds with Fuentes' stated goals of infiltrating the Republican Party. There are also strong differences within the Thiel network.

The big divide in the DR is ideological-spiritual: the Vitalist Right (most prominent figure: BAP) vs. the Religious Right (most prominent figure: NJF).

That gives Fuentes an astounding amount of (undeserved) credit. The dissident aspects of the religious right have fairly deep roots and an actual functional political/influence network - Fuentes has a poorly programmed streaming service which is more about the trials and tribulations of his daily life, and his drama with other streamers - than about anything political.

Someone like Robert P. George is infinitely more noteworthy and influential in the RR circles - he has personally done a great deal to cultivate the 'intellectuals' involved in the integralist movement.

I'd make a distinction between the RR as a whole and the RR as it manifests online. George (who I have never heard of) might have more clout on Capitol Hill, but I guarantee most poasters on Twitter have never heard of him.

[BillyONare]

Oftentimes things that you latch onto and say "THATS A CONTRADICTION" are actually just a basic level of nuance. Fuentes has made fun of some aspects of ruralites but that doesn't mean he is "against" them or against doing it. Some men are better suited to a rural lifestyle and some men are more cosmopolitan and it's definitely not a good idea for Everyone to Infiltrate The Enemy. I don't think that's a good strategy at all; not sure exactly Fuentes' position on it, but shitting on him and his followers who choose to homestead is unmerited.

---

Cozy.tv blows all other alt streaming websites out of the water. Works perfectly well except when busy. Pretty impressive for a young guy to program in a year.

[anthony]

Where did you pick up on the thought that Thiel paid Yarvin to make UR?

It's from a witness. Basically Yarvin was friends with Thiel before UR, Thiel would often have dinners at his estate or whatever with people and they discussed creating UR there before it was done. Thiel provided the funds for the "labor" (even though Yarvin had retired by dot com lotto)(this explains why Yarvin treated it like a 40 hr a week job too). These connections were responsible for stuff like Andrew Sullivan shouting out UR on its forth day. This is obvious when you think about it, I could have written UR in 8th grade but Andrew Sullivan wouldn't have shouted it out after 4 days because he wouldn't have even known about it. But also if I wrote UR in the exact same way word for word, it just wouldn't be the same for those kinds of people, that is it wouldn't be the product of one of their Jewish friends so they'd just ignore it.

And you believe this same circle built up and propagated BAP and Red Scare?

[AryanGenius1488]

And you believe this same circle built up and propagated BAP and Red Scare?

Yep, all the same Atlantic, Claremont, and other MSM articles, Yarvin was shilling BAP's book, etc. Red Scare I haven't looked into but it's definitely true for BAM.

[anthony]

Yep, all the same Atlantic, Claremont, and other MSM articles, Yarvin was shilling BAP's book, etc. Red Scare I haven't looked into but it's definitely true for BAM.

Now I have to ask, why?

[AryanGenius1488]

Yep, all the same Atlantic, Claremont, and other MSM articles, Yarvin was shilling BAP's book, etc. Red Scare I haven't looked into but it's definitely true for BAM.

Now I have to ask, why?

Why what?

[anthony]

Yep, all the same Atlantic, Claremont, and other MSM articles, Yarvin was shilling BAP's book, etc. Red Scare I haven't looked into but it's definitely true for BAM.

Now I have to ask, why?

Why what?

What is the value in starting UR? And then like ten years later starting the rest?

[AryanGenius1488]

Yep, all the same Atlantic, Claremont, and other MSM articles, Yarvin was shilling BAP's book, etc. Red Scare I haven't looked into but it's definitely true for BAM.

Now I have to ask, why?

Why what?

What is the value in starting UR? And then like ten years later starting the rest?

It's pretty obvious, UR was meant to be what it is, an agreeable Schelling point and nucleus of propaganda.

[anthony]

Yep, all the same Atlantic, Claremont, and other MSM articles, Yarvin was shilling BAP's book, etc. Red Scare I haven't looked into but it's definitely true for BAM.

Now I have to ask, why?

Why what?

What is the value in starting UR? And then like ten years later starting the rest?

It's pretty obvious, UR was meant to be what it is, an agreeable Schelling point and nucleus of propaganda.

Yes but what comes of it?

[Verl]

While these groups populate the same spheres and share ties, they are by no means ideologically or tactically uniform. For example, there are several people in the America First sphere who advocate ruralist homesteading faggotry, which is rather explicitly at odds with Fuentes' stated goals of infiltrating the Republican Party. There are also strong differences within the Thiel network.

The big divide in the DR is ideological-spiritual: the Vitalist Right (most prominent figure: BAP) vs. the Religious Right (most prominent figure: NJF).

I wholeheartedly agree with your division, although it can be defined to a finer degree. For example, you can divide up the RR by whether they are Christian or not. For example, I'd put Woods' network in the 'Religious Right' but is definitely not Christian. You can see this most explicitly from videos like "Platonism Explained" and "The Roots Of Our Ecological Crisis" Obviously he is getting these ideas from the Perennialist-Platonist Youtuber Aavroll in Woods' video "Understanding Platonism." Aavroll in turn associates with people like E.C. Winsper (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8NIJQN1o1c), who in turn is linked to fellows like Survive the Jive. These three last personalities mentioned are of a group I like to call the "Pagan" network, as they are all Pagan, although you can equally call them the "Philosophers/Historians/Anthropologists/etc" as they all concentrate their work almost solely on those types of topics, with their opinions being completely implicit through subtext.

Of course there are more groups to mention. What about "Luke Smith" who I am well assured some of you watch. He is obviously "Dissident Right" in a very very broad sense. Of course this gives another dire question: what even is the "Dissident Right"? Because increasingly it seems to be basically anybody who is against the status quo. One could go as far as to propose that persons like Infrared/Haz could be considered "Dissident Right" in a sense.

However to return to your main point, yes it is a very apt way to categorise the DR. Another way to divide it would be between those who are antisemitic and those who aren't, as this seems to be another great point of contention.

[Guest]

Keith Woods & co have been of interest to me lately, mainly because of his sphere’s recent sperging about BAP on twitter and seemingly throwing it in with Fuentes. I used to follow Woods consistently going back 2 years or so. If I were to give a TLDR on Wood’s ideology, it's a sort of perennialist social nationalism. He advertises the Traditionalist School, political third positionism, and trad socialism consistently. Any sort of Nietzscheanism or BAPism are anathema to the Woods sphere.

I think these two videos basically sum up his ideology: https://youtu.be/fg_rhpiyQuQ and https://youtu.be/RxSxlZC4-wA

The first is an early video of Woods’, and most of the talking is done by an affiliated character named Tyler Hamilton, (like Davis he’s a catholic), but both parties are in agreement on the video's thesis. For them it was not Cultural Marxism or some other kind of external subversion which brought about the ills of America today, but internal contradictions within American society between capitalism and traditional social mores. Capitalism is seen as an autonomous force, outside the control of the state and society. Hamilton references a common narrative of how capitalism, in its insatiable hunger for growth and expansion, erodes traditional social customs and institutions. It tears down all boundaries that restrict its growth such as these traditional institutions. Capitalism must transform everyone into identityless, atomized consumers, and commodifies all.

Woods is an explicit idealist, liberalism precedes and allows for capitalism, and liberalism has ingrained in itself instrumental reason. Instrumental reason comes from Weber and the Frankfurt School, and in the current usage supposes that the ‘reason’ of the Enlightenment conceives of the world as a fixed, mechanical thing to be manipulated and instrumentalized towards specific ends. This is an idea at the core of liberalism for Woods, and one of the central objects of his critique of liberalism. From instrumental reason you get a ceaseless desire for efficiency and progress. The natural world is exploited as are people, anything ‘higher’ which interferes in efficiency, or which forbids the instrumentalization of the world, must be done away with. From instrumental reason comes the logic of capitalism, a drive towards instrumentalization, rationalization, and material progress at the expense of tradition, tribe, and order. The second video linked is basically him applying this to environmentalism.

In another video of his he places blame for the slow degeneration of western society on the 'ontological egalitarianism' present in early liberalism's rejection of Natural Law. Woods & co believe liberalism itself is innately harmful coming from its philosophical foundations, and GNC, ZOG, etc are just the natural evolution of it, and that outside subversion does not explain liberalism's evolution over the past century. But was the philosophy which oversaw Manifest Destiny, racial segregation, and the total subjugation of the third world really the same as today's mass democracy? I think reading Gottfried would cure a lot of these third positionist types.

Something anons on Twitter were recently talking about is a tendency in the online right for people to attempt to rehabilitate or engage with leftist philosophy. In the first linked video on 'Cultural Capitalism', blame is consistently taken away from the left for social destruction and levelling and instead placed on capitalism or CIA subversion. You can see a running philia for elements of the old left and hatred for the new left in the Woods sphere and adjacent strains of the online right. Woods obviously has some level of substantial funding in the background, given that he quit his job and facefags, producing content full time. It is very clear where his hatred for BAP comes from knowing his positions. Like Manteuffel said, the big divide seems to be between the Religious Right and the Vitalist Right.

---

Keith Woods & co have been of interest to me lately, mainly because of his sphere’s recent sperging about BAP on twitter and seemingly throwing it in with Fuentes. I used to follow Woods consistently going back 2 years or so. If I were to give a TLDR on Wood’s ideology, it's a sort of perennialist social nationalism. He advertises the Traditionalist School, political third positionism, and trad socialism consistently. Any sort of Nietzscheanism or BAPism are anathema to the Woods sphere.

I think these two videos basically sum up his ideology:  https://youtu.be/fg_rhpiyQuQ  and https://youtu.be/RxSxlZC4-wA

The first is an early video of Woods’, and most of the talking is done by an affiliated character named Tyler Hamilton, (like Davis he’s a catholic), but both parties are in agreement on the video's thesis. For them it was not Cultural Marxism or some other kind of external subversion which brought about the ills of America today, but internal contradictions within American society between capitalism and traditional social mores. Capitalism is seen as an autonomous force, outside the control of the state and society. Hamilton references a common narrative of how capitalism, in its insatiable hunger for growth and expansion, erodes traditional social customs and institutions. It tears down all boundaries that restrict its growth such as these traditional institutions. Capitalism must transform everyone into identityless, atomized consumers, and commodifies all.

Woods is an explicit idealist, liberalism precedes and allows for capitalism, and liberalism has ingrained in itself instrumental reason. Instrumental reason comes from Weber and the Frankfurt School, and in the current usage supposes that the ‘reason’ of the Enlightenment conceives of the world as a fixed, mechanical thing to be manipulated and instrumentalized towards specific ends. This is an idea at the core of liberalism for Woods, and one of the central objects of his critique of liberalism. From instrumental reason you get a ceaseless desire for efficiency and progress. The natural world is exploited as are people, anything ‘higher’ which interferes in efficiency, or which forbids the instrumentalization of the world, must be done away with. From instrumental reason comes the logic of capitalism, a drive towards instrumentalization, rationalization, and material progress at the expense of tradition, tribe, and order. The second video linked is basically him applying this to environmentalism.

In another video of his he places blame for the slow degeneration of western society on the 'ontological egalitarianism' present in early liberalism's rejection of Natural Law. Woods & co believe liberalism itself is innately harmful coming from its philosophical foundations, and GNC, ZOG, etc are just the natural evolution of it, and that outside subversion does not explain liberalism's evolution over the past century. But was the philosophy which oversaw Manifest Destiny, racial segregation, and the total subjugation of the third world really the same as today's mass democracy? I think reading Gottfried would cure a lot of these third positionist types.

Something anons on Twitter were recently talking about is a tendency in the online right for people to attempt to rehabilitate or engage with leftist philosophy. In the first linked video on 'Cultural Capitalism', blame is consistently taken away from the left for social destruction and levelling and instead placed on capitalism or CIA subversion. You can see a running philia for elements of the old left and hatred for the new left in the Woods sphere and adjacent strains of the online right. Woods obviously has some level of substantial funding in the background, given that he quit his job and facefags, producing content full time. It is very clear where his hatred for BAP comes from knowing his positions. Like Manteuffel said, the big divide seems to be between the Religious Right and the Vitalist Right.

Woods is a simple "gibs me that" for huwytes. Many on the "right wing" are like this. They could be satisfied with a little prestige and a 6/10 wife/owner. Maybe some 6 figure salary or so. On mass platforms, these ideas will always gain steam.

[anthony]

This thread remains more or less pointless I see. Keith Woods was refuted on this forum already. The OP remains retarded and impossible to take in an interesting direction. Nothing to see here.

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/X2GQXv5/image.png]

Should also be noticed he has the same presentation instincts as Haz. Resting serious tough but cerebral guy face, and black/grey clothes. Have I seen Haz wearing this before? I feel like I have. Anyway, same face. "Everyone feels imposter syndrome it's no big deal" face.

[Guest]

  Capitalism

Capitalism is when your not forced at gun point to give all your money to a homeless man.

It’s such an absurd idea, needless moralizing of how money is spent and how much someone has. All those who use the word, capitalism, Use it under a facade of Social Good to implement measures of illogical tyranny. 

A natural state shouldn’t be presented as an aberration against a “True” social order. Trying to Systemize nature as unnatural and onerate it’s existence with a needless moralist posterior makes all interaction with its outwardly manifesting features on the level of abstract thought, distancing itself from its immediate instances, making the ability to truly handle whatever Ill-effects at hand progressively harder and impossible in proportion to belief in the abstraction. Such a thing is nugatory for expedience and leaves one Ill-apt to ever handle any position of governing or management of a nation or country. 

If you use the word capitalism you either see yourself as a demagogue or are the lowly untermensch being led by said demagogue.

[BillyONare]

Beating a dead horse but it’s marvelous how the wignats define “egalitarianism” as “capitalism, because EVERYONE has the equal right to own things and trade” as opposed to their “atavistic unegalitarian” third positionist utopia where the most creative people are forced at gunpoint to slave away to provide gibsmedats for The Common Volk and women are free to whore around until they fall in love with a tall Google Senior SWE making 300k with a 10 inch dick who shaves his toes and respects white women.

Capitalism, communism, and the third position are just three faces of the same Jewish coin. Sensitive young man catgirl eugenics is the true fourth position to escape the mind tyranny of the Jews.

[Datacop]

Is Amarna in it's own sphere in any tangible way?