Nick Fuentes Is Off of Twitter (And That’s a Good Thing)

I think the main take away from all of this is not that Nick got kicked off Twitter, but how long he was able to stay on, and even verified. Regardless of what your thoughts are on the January 6th protest, it’s obvious that the much of the mainstream media and many politicians consider this an insurrection against the US government.

Yet some of the main perpetrators of the event such as Donald Trump, Don Jr, Rudy Giuliani, Alex Jones and Nick have gotten off extremely light compared to many of their followers who could be facing years in prison.

Overall, I think the Fuentes ban is a great thing for us because the more conservatives are forced to play on our playing ground, the more people we win over. How many of Nick’s more lukewarm followers will leave twitter because of this banning and start following people such as Keith Woods, Mark Collett and Eric Striker on telegram?

I understand many in our movement think it is a good idea to oppose these bannings simply out of principle. However, whatever principled support I would have for a conservative who just got banned goes completely out the window when they lead people into potential legal trouble as we saw on January 6th. Conservatives pose a far greater threat to the average citizen than so-called “Blackpilled Wignats.” You can break people from finkelthink (sometimes). You can’t break them out of prison.

Our mentality as nationalists needs to be if we aren’t allowed on platforms such as Twitter or Facebook, then neither should any conservative grifter, especially when they don’t take up a principled stance for us when we get kicked off. And why would they? All they serve to do is co-opt our rhetoric, ignore us, or outright cancel us. The reason why Charlie Kirk, Nick Fuentes and Ben Shapiro have audiences as big as they do is precisely because nationalists get censored.

14 Comments

  1. Mr. Wallace, love or hate Nick Fuentes, I can’t believe you or anyone else would put him in the same category as Shapiro or Kirk. Feel free to respond to that, but that’s not really the main point of my post. I feel my question is related to this post, though. You’ve criticized the “optics cucks” in the past. So does that mean that you think it’s just fine for pro-white activists to go out in public dressed as world war 2 era national socialists or in other ways that are most likely to turn off mainstream, white working class people/ white working class normies? Do you think it’s a good idea to go out with signs with various derogatory terms on them? Please note that these are sincere questions. I’m not saying you do or don’t support such tactics. I’m truly just trying to understand your point of view and objectives.

    The work of “the optics cucks” has been far short of a success, in my opinion. However, I’m not sure what you would have them do differently, at least when it comes to external appearances. Then again, perhaps you wouldn’t have them do anything differently at all, when it comes to external appearances.

    All that said, at least you don’t detest the white working class. Unfortunately, I can’t say the same thing about another gentleman who once had a prominent and influential role in the movement and who shall remain nameless.

    I hope you don’t mind the comments and questions. I assure you I have no intention of “spamming” your website, nor am I “trolling” Coincidentally, you wrote two posts on the same day that inspired my comments and questions. Thank you for your time.

        • You can pretty much discern what I think and believe from my posts.

          I have written prolifically about hundreds of topics here. I identify as a nationalist and populist. I don’t have any interest in fascism or Neo-Nazism or any of that weird esoteric stuff that plagues the White Nationalist movement. I also enjoy debate and don’t want this site to be an echo chamber. I don’t really care what other people think. People complain all the time about the comment section here because I generally let people have their say so long as they don’t post anything violent that could cause us problems.

          • I would say that Nick has certainly created a movement and is able to appeal to the younger crowds through his flashiness, his branding, and his livestreams where he will often tell personal anecdotes. A lot of people I know who like him claim it is like he is their friend and it is some type of personality thing. Some people just have charisma and magnetic personalities. He also does a bit of trolling and stuff like that which appeals to teenagers.

            The older guard of White Nationalism which is generally age 40 and up aren’t as into that stuff because they want actual solutions. Sure they appreciate a good joke every now and then but don’t want to get lost in the internet meme rabbit hole.

            By the way, I’m not an expert, just an observer.

            Am I in the ballpark?

    • ” You’ve criticized the “optics cucks” in the past. So does that mean that you think it’s just fine for pro-white activists to go out in public dressed as world war 2 era national socialists”

      What a false dichotomy. This is exactly why I agree with Vlad about Nick Fuentes being forced to play on the same playing field as everyone else. Everything he has ever said about the movement is a lie or is framed in a dishonest way to paint the kind of picture he wants to paint. Nick Fuentes consistently claims that Richard Spencer “came out of nowhere” and “hijacked” the Trump movement when Spencer has been around for awhile and Fuentes and other Alt-Lite figures came late to the party and claimed it was their thing (many of who were former Cruz guys in 2015/2016). He aligns himself with faggots and grifters and then claims he it’s part of some grand strategy. He co-opted the trolling of Charlie Kirk and turned it into his own thing even though he had nothing to do with it initially. He told everyone to not do activism because it’s “cringe’ only to go out and do activism which has had the result of putting innocent people in jail.

      Nick has spent the last 5 years doing nothing but stirring shit and causing infighting to the point he has broken the mind of people who think that the alternative to him is a fat drunk dude in an SA uniform. Meanwhile everyone is moving on to working on their projects to try to get the information out there while also watching their and their audiences OPSEC while Fuentes plays video games and having on again off again feelings about Trump.

      • @Outlander,

        Dead on.

        Nicholas Gay Fuentes and Milo are the J.Edgar Hoover and Clyde Tolson of the grifter alt-lite. If they added Paul Joseph Watson, it would be queerer than a three dollar bill mànage a trois.

  2. The White Nationalist movement needs hard men not bitchy effeminates like Nic the Spic and Spencer. HW is living in a fantasy world if he thinks there is any salvation for Whites within the fake and ghey system of democracy – this isn’t the 1700s ffs. Look no further than SA if you want to see what Muh Voting gets Whites.

    • Nationalism and populism would have worked fine in 1930s Depression Era America with a 90% (88%, if you remove the fellow white ” percentage), but in 2021, it’s pretty CivNat.

  3. “How many of Nick’s more lukewarm followers will leave twitter because of this banning and start following people such as Keith Woods, Mark Collett and Eric Striker on telegram?”

    None, because Catboy Fuentes talks shit about real nationalists and only endorses Gay-Old-Partyism

    Fuck republicans

  4. Reminder that fat alaska is either a federal informant or a snitch or both

    Fbi used Yofas captiol stream to identify people 1000’s of people no chance of bail, solitarily confinement some up to 30 years but mr “we love our cops” gets to walk?!

Leave a Reply