Something that strikes me about mornings is that it’s the time when inspiration strikes. For example, I went to bed and woke up planning to spend the morning reviewing the chapter against Sigmund Freud in my Hojas Susurrantes, which I’m translating into English. But inspiration struck while I was getting ready, so I decided to write this post instead.
______ 卐 ______
I’d like to clarify what I have said in my two previous posts, about the movie The Village and Nick Fuentes (here and here). The crucial phrase doesn’t appear in the articles, not even in the question I posed in the last one (“Does such 21st century American film exist…?”), but rather in the comments section and even in parentheses: “Who needs Jews when we have white nationalists?”
I will explain it in this entry.
I’ve been reading the recent articles about Fuentes published on Counter-Currents. I think we’re all missing the main point.
Fuentes is like the kid who says the emperor has no clothes. At 27, he doesn’t have my maturity, or the erudition of the authors of C-C. Compared to me or my mentors William Pierce and Savitri Devi, Fuentes seems like a child. But it’s important to remember that it’s precisely that naive cry to a cowardly public—that the emperor has no clothes—that’s the first step in making them see the obvious.
In racialist forums I’m ignored for taking the message of white nationalism to its logical conclusion: violent revolution à la Third Reich. And I’m not just referring to the question I asked yesterday, which was left hanging (although I admit that only a film expert could answer it). I’m referring to the fact that regarding those crucial words conflating my last posts (“Who needs Jews when we have white nationalists?”) I haven’t received any response on X either, where I tweeted them a day ago. Of my 259 followers on X, nobody has said a word yet. As I was told in an email yesterday, they leave me talking to myself “because increasingly—silently, clandestinely—their egos are bruised by the scolding truth brings, and they are otherwise in distaste, having disagreed silently in the background but without the balls to add more.”
But let’s return to Fuentes, who, unlike my followers in X and here, is always willing to discuss important issues with great frankness. He’s like the kid in the story because he speaks the truth—as far as he understands it—about the ethnocidal levels of migration and feminist ethnosuicide: the cancer in the Aryan collective unconscious of our times (cf. what I said yesterday about The Village).
In fact, young Fuentes is far more mature than the veterans Jared Taylor and those of VDARE, insofar as he has already awakened to the JQ (see this clip). On the other hand, by obeying the Christian mandate to love all human beings (remember that from our POV most are exterminable Neanderthals), Fuentes falls into a great contradiction (see, for example, this other clip).
At the end of Tucker’s interview, he asked Fuentes if he would run for president in the future, and Fuentes said perhaps. Tucker asked him what he would do in power, and Fuentes replied that, since the Left wants to crush us (remember that if Harris had won, the First Amendment would have been at her mercy), the Right should crush the Left as a prophylactic measure.
Fuentes is right. Trump promised a Wall in his first term, and there’s nothing of the sort. In his second term he has promised to destroy Antifa, and the same thing happened: there aren’t thousands upon thousands imprisoned like Nayib Bukele is doing in El Salvador, or much better: what Hitler asked Himmler to do in Dachau, a place I love with all my heart and which I visited this very year!
César Tort, the Editor of The West’s Darkest Hour in Dachau Camp, Germany (see my report on that trip here).
Fuentes’s humanitarian sentiments in the second clip are that American whites must resign themselves to the fact that 100 million non-whites will be residing in the US, even though the Enemy imported them without any plebiscite. This represents a major contradiction with what he told Tucker, the same contradiction as Trump’s unfulfilled promises. Tellingly, both Tucker and Fuentes concede in that interview that it is precisely Christian scruples that compel them not to solve the problem (as Himmler was solving it before the deluded Anglo-Americans intervened).
This said, the adolescent way in which Fuentes speaks, shattering post-WWII taboos, is the right one. He speaks out in a crude manner, like an innocent child with no self-consciousness surrounded by adults under the delusion that the emperor has clothes. It doesn’t matter that compared to us, the 21st-century National Socialists, Fuentes seems like a kid. He uses the exact tone that the Aryan collective unconscious needs to awaken!
Let’s compare Fuentes’s most controversial statements in the clips the Left has been circulating with the boring C-C articles or those published by Jared Taylor and VDARE. Alex Linder compared them to those gatherings of posh people who eat crustless sandwiches and speak in politely low voices. With those bourgeois types we’re not going to get anywhere! We need classy thugs. We need an archipelago of Dachau camps throughout the West! Linder spoke with the right tone—the way potential revolutionaries speak.
Since Linder is no longer with us, I think that for the American collective unconscious, a voice like Fuentes’s is the first baby step across the psychological Rubicon in our direction.
3 replies on “On Nick Fuentes”
Wow… I just reviewed the first of the Greenwald clips you share, during his ‘acting on principle’ moment.
I must say, the other day when I discussed him with you I was particularly unaccommodating, having lost patience over his Christian morality drives, but, yes, looking at it again today in light of what you say, I realise now, though young, that he isn’t without merit.
There seems to be some order to doing this that is most pragmatic. Clearing out the left with a Dachau-esque set of establishments does indeed seem like a more productive first move, rather than trying to launch a racial struggle where there are still hordes of lower level (white) anti-white traitor foot soldiers scattered across all levels of society, from the Antifa of the street, and similar groups, to Hope Not Hate tier ‘charities’ and wire-pullers, to positions in council and government and the organs of the System that rely to some degree on those massed braindead street agitators and subversives for divide and conquer strategies of tension (much as I think Muslims would still retain the advantage to initiate racial war this country – the UK – being well in advance of the natives, that’s not the case in America).
We risk otherwise having too many counter-revolutionaries to handle, what with their long-term attempts already to side with the non-whites, however manipulated they are by the latter (thinking of their naïve, ill-fated Islam-communist alliance in this country, or those activists prepared to lick the feet of BLM before punching right-wingers to the ground, baseball bats in their hands).
Much as so far their assassinations and attempts at such have been of the political leader calibre, or otherwise the school shooter variety, they are still it seems weapons-training into militias in the background, and could pose quite a problem directly in combat against any guerrilla force our groups could rouse if left unchecked.
Those leftists could be rehabilitated then following deprogramming, if such was successful. So I think he’s right on that (even if he might use more legitimate – probably more successful too for that reason – means than us in the establishment of detention facilities, though the message they imparted certainly would not be so coherent as ours).
It’s just a shame about the Christianity. I don’t know if that’s something that you think would change in him in time. I was under the impression that if someone is Christian by 12 they’re like that for life, but, unlike the devout, self-centred cowardice of Brad Griffin, Fuentes does seem more ambitious somehow, almost as if he feels his hands are tied on the matter more by politics than by religion. That’s just the subtle feeling I got, on listening again.
His tone does at least have a marvellous ‘oh yeah, and by the way…’ frankness to it.
Unlike other Nazi concentration camps, Dachau’s objective was to re-educate the wayward Aryan. I don’t know if that is now possible… During my visit this year, I saw a reconstruction of the Dachau crematorium, although comparatively very few were cremated there (obviously, many white traitors died in the camp’s conditions).
My point is that only the spoken word galvanises the masses. That’s what the young Fuentes does! The posh literature of the racial right crushes my spirit because it fails to galvanise the masses. Not only those on our side knew this—Hitler, Goebbels, and Mussolini—but also our enemies, like Lenin.
Linder said that the only important article C-C ever published was this one by Andrew Hamilton, where he spoke precisely about the power of Hitler’s oratory.
P.S. sorry, I wasn’t sure if I could type this in time. In terms of controversial quotes to compare, in light of what I said about the difference between him and the worldview of, say, ‘Hunter Wallace’… I think this is pretty controversial as far the latter and his ‘just raising my family’ hands-washing isolationism is concerned: