Glad I followed my instincts on being a groyper. From my very brief exposure to Nick's content, it seemed fine, but when I followed him my algorithm on Twitter was ruined with pedos, tranny's, and people just saying disgusting things (listen, my views on race are highly unorthodox, but at some point you're just saying something evil). I blocked the weird accounts, eventually stopped using Twitter altogether for unrelated reasons and mostly ignored groyperism in favor of higher quality dissident right wing content.
But Pete Quiñones and John Carter are essential recommendations.
As far as Yarvin I still read everything he publishes and have read most all of his work. I see a lot flaws and things I don't agree with but for someone new to heterdox rw ideas you should read him for his bibliography if nothing else. I have a similar position on AA too, been a member of his youtube channel for years and read all his books not sure I'm on the same page lately but I will continue to follow his work for the unique analysis
Seems like your common theme is: they do not have anything negative to say about Jewish power, right? These seem like alternative but still "safe" right wing picks along the same lines as charlie kirk, ben shapiro, steven crowder, who are already bigger and say the same things to a larger audience afaik. How is it dissident if there is no distinction from the establishment's kosher-right figures? Did you accidentally use dissident as if it were a synonym for "small and powerless/toothless"?
To each his own I guess. I like many groypers, but the movement just had too many freaks and mentally ill takes to be something worth associating with.
This is unrelated to the article, but if you like those guys you'd probably enjoy Blood $atellite. It's been my favorite podcast in this space for several years now
Shocking that this article has generated so little interest.
I suspect the left has run amok to such an extent in the US that most on the right there are less interested in the sins of its particular members and allies than they are worried about the threat from the mass left. Like Stalin and Communism in WW2, the sins of their allies can be left to another day if ever.
I'm only a few pages into this and you're already off to a not so great start. You're giving him the Trump treatment and labeling him as something based on what somebody else has said because he was associated briefly more or less. There isn't any smoking gun evidence that I'm seeing yet (which should have been revealed from the start if you want to keep a readers attention). I'll charge my phone and continue reading to give my final thoughts.
From examples #50 to #2, they fail to signify the extent of these ties and just HOW involved was Nick's hands in all of these examples. The reason why this matters is because when you have such a large group such as America First, it's obviously going to be prone to bad apples. What matters more, is the extent of Nick's direct involvement and wether he condems the actions of others in which he doesn't have control of obviously in the midst of their association (not to mention, just how strong are these associations?).
The people you mention certainly make AF movement look bad but where are the examples of all the good apples? And do those good apples outweigh the bad, and by how much? It's clear that you didn't give a fair critique off all the people associated with the movement. You picked out the ones with glaring problems that have more to do with themselves and less so with everybody else.
As for #1 this certainly makes Nick look bad for not being proactive enough to boot a disgusting prick such as Ali from his movement. And it's very questionable as to why Nick didn't solve that issue right away.
That being said, it's clear what the purpose of this piece was. It was to make Nick Fuentes look bad. It was to bring the movement to a screeching halt but this doesn't suffice because you didn't bring any smoking gun against the man himself. This fails to do anything really, because it's clear you just have a vendetta against him. The AF movement lives on and if Nick can learn from previous mistakes then I think the movement will only become stronger 💪.
The groypers will minimize any wrong doings and dismiss them as a joke or a few bad apples. In reality Nicholas is high connected to these people and has spawned these examples with his loyalty pledge and his pure vitriol for those he doesn't deem worthy.
Some of the stuff in this article is pretty tenuous, but I can tell you right now that the bad outweighs the good. For every Pinesap or Classical Theist associated with the AF movement, there are like 5 snowflake emoji people talking about lolis all day that are much more active than the average "normal" Nick watcher.
I wanted to express my heartfelt gratitude for featuring me on your Substack, Karlstack. The exposure has had a profound impact on my career, culminating in my recent promotion from Major (❄️❄️) to Lieutenant Colonel (❄️❄️❄️). Your platform has not only highlighted my work but has also inspired me to push further and harder in my endeavors. These children need to be corrected 💢😭
Your support and recognition mean a great deal to me, and I am deeply appreciative of the opportunity you provided. I look forward to continuing to make meaningful contributions and advancing in my field, thanks in large part to your influence.
Thank you again for your support and for being a catalyst for positive change.
This is... wow. No words. A part of me wanted to like Nick because some people I respect liked him (though I never was a groyper). I never really followed or cared for him though the past year really soured me on the guy. And this article just shattered him into the absolute dust.
Gold standard of what an expose should be. Excellent work Brunet
A lot of money going to Lefty writers, likely mostly using AI, to generate huge articles that no one will read. Just rambling scrolls of bullshit they’ve pasted together. This kind of shit will ruin Substack, IMO.
Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens would be interested to see this if you know how to get it to them: they were just discussing their mutual sense that Fuentes is a catspaw.
A group of loser males chock full of low-IQ rapists, unemployed pedophiles, misogynists, mass shooters, and literal murderers.
I'm sure they'll do a great job of putting America first and maintaining the white majority, especially since so many are non-white and their incel leader is a Mexican twink.
The sheer volume of material presented here is daunting. I am not sure I will be able to get through all of it. What I have read confirms my deep aversion to Nick Fuentes. People who are interested can check my publication and read an essay I wrote on that, but it only touches the surface of the personal scandals.
Glad I followed my instincts on being a groyper. From my very brief exposure to Nick's content, it seemed fine, but when I followed him my algorithm on Twitter was ruined with pedos, tranny's, and people just saying disgusting things (listen, my views on race are highly unorthodox, but at some point you're just saying something evil). I blocked the weird accounts, eventually stopped using Twitter altogether for unrelated reasons and mostly ignored groyperism in favor of higher quality dissident right wing content.
You're not going to namedrop what/who the higher quality dissident right wing content is?
Happy to do so
Dave Greene (The Distributist)
Academic Agent
Copybook Court
Most of the authors at Chronicles magazine
John Arcto (before he disappeared mysteriously like a week ago)
Based Barrister
I have mixed opinions on Auron MacIntyre and Curtis Yarvin but they're generally fairly good (at least they don't touch kids/cat boys)
Librarian of Caelano
Endeavor
Morgoths Review
Decent list my list would be similar
But Pete Quiñones and John Carter are essential recommendations.
As far as Yarvin I still read everything he publishes and have read most all of his work. I see a lot flaws and things I don't agree with but for someone new to heterdox rw ideas you should read him for his bibliography if nothing else. I have a similar position on AA too, been a member of his youtube channel for years and read all his books not sure I'm on the same page lately but I will continue to follow his work for the unique analysis
Honestly all of those people are lukewarm
Haven't seen Pete Quiñones and John Carter. Thanks for the recommendations.
Seems like your common theme is: they do not have anything negative to say about Jewish power, right? These seem like alternative but still "safe" right wing picks along the same lines as charlie kirk, ben shapiro, steven crowder, who are already bigger and say the same things to a larger audience afaik. How is it dissident if there is no distinction from the establishment's kosher-right figures? Did you accidentally use dissident as if it were a synonym for "small and powerless/toothless"?
To each his own I guess. I like many groypers, but the movement just had too many freaks and mentally ill takes to be something worth associating with.
Not a lot of these guys are exactly known for being soft on the JQ
This is unrelated to the article, but if you like those guys you'd probably enjoy Blood $atellite. It's been my favorite podcast in this space for several years now
Also Ubersoy
This post is so autistic lmao.
Shocking that this article has generated so little interest.
I suspect the left has run amok to such an extent in the US that most on the right there are less interested in the sins of its particular members and allies than they are worried about the threat from the mass left. Like Stalin and Communism in WW2, the sins of their allies can be left to another day if ever.
I'm only a few pages into this and you're already off to a not so great start. You're giving him the Trump treatment and labeling him as something based on what somebody else has said because he was associated briefly more or less. There isn't any smoking gun evidence that I'm seeing yet (which should have been revealed from the start if you want to keep a readers attention). I'll charge my phone and continue reading to give my final thoughts.
the first few introduce you to the Groyper movement, and they gradually get worse until #1 which is the worst
Here are my final thoughts on everything else.
From examples #50 to #2, they fail to signify the extent of these ties and just HOW involved was Nick's hands in all of these examples. The reason why this matters is because when you have such a large group such as America First, it's obviously going to be prone to bad apples. What matters more, is the extent of Nick's direct involvement and wether he condems the actions of others in which he doesn't have control of obviously in the midst of their association (not to mention, just how strong are these associations?).
The people you mention certainly make AF movement look bad but where are the examples of all the good apples? And do those good apples outweigh the bad, and by how much? It's clear that you didn't give a fair critique off all the people associated with the movement. You picked out the ones with glaring problems that have more to do with themselves and less so with everybody else.
As for #1 this certainly makes Nick look bad for not being proactive enough to boot a disgusting prick such as Ali from his movement. And it's very questionable as to why Nick didn't solve that issue right away.
That being said, it's clear what the purpose of this piece was. It was to make Nick Fuentes look bad. It was to bring the movement to a screeching halt but this doesn't suffice because you didn't bring any smoking gun against the man himself. This fails to do anything really, because it's clear you just have a vendetta against him. The AF movement lives on and if Nick can learn from previous mistakes then I think the movement will only become stronger 💪.
The groypers will minimize any wrong doings and dismiss them as a joke or a few bad apples. In reality Nicholas is high connected to these people and has spawned these examples with his loyalty pledge and his pure vitriol for those he doesn't deem worthy.
Maybe you should work harder to be worthy instead of seething?
Some of the stuff in this article is pretty tenuous, but I can tell you right now that the bad outweighs the good. For every Pinesap or Classical Theist associated with the AF movement, there are like 5 snowflake emoji people talking about lolis all day that are much more active than the average "normal" Nick watcher.
Dear Christopher,
I wanted to express my heartfelt gratitude for featuring me on your Substack, Karlstack. The exposure has had a profound impact on my career, culminating in my recent promotion from Major (❄️❄️) to Lieutenant Colonel (❄️❄️❄️). Your platform has not only highlighted my work but has also inspired me to push further and harder in my endeavors. These children need to be corrected 💢😭
Your support and recognition mean a great deal to me, and I am deeply appreciative of the opportunity you provided. I look forward to continuing to make meaningful contributions and advancing in my field, thanks in large part to your influence.
Thank you again for your support and for being a catalyst for positive change.
Best regards,
GroyperInsider ❄️❄️❄️
based mesugaki corrector, I stan
Thanks for doing this Chris its very troubling watching people carry water for these freaks online.
I appreciate someone exposing the silent underworld Fuentes developed over the years. What's hidden in the dark will be revealed in the light.
This is... wow. No words. A part of me wanted to like Nick because some people I respect liked him (though I never was a groyper). I never really followed or cared for him though the past year really soured me on the guy. And this article just shattered him into the absolute dust.
Gold standard of what an expose should be. Excellent work Brunet
Seems Jewy
protip: when making important articles like this don't link to YouTube videos, several video have been removed after this article came out.
A lot of money going to Lefty writers, likely mostly using AI, to generate huge articles that no one will read. Just rambling scrolls of bullshit they’ve pasted together. This kind of shit will ruin Substack, IMO.
Character assassination. I don't see Nick involved with any of the site. I believe it was a setup by the FBI.
Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens would be interested to see this if you know how to get it to them: they were just discussing their mutual sense that Fuentes is a catspaw.
Something tells me Carlson wouldn't be interested.
Yeah, too many people don't realize all these influencers are bought and paid for degenerates
A group of loser males chock full of low-IQ rapists, unemployed pedophiles, misogynists, mass shooters, and literal murderers.
I'm sure they'll do a great job of putting America first and maintaining the white majority, especially since so many are non-white and their incel leader is a Mexican twink.
Amazing.
We will see Fuentes unnaturally endorsed in coming months.
The Adelson checks have hit his account, you can tell
This is horrifying I couldnt read at all. Props on good journalism though. Mass redact groypers with redaction squads
The sheer volume of material presented here is daunting. I am not sure I will be able to get through all of it. What I have read confirms my deep aversion to Nick Fuentes. People who are interested can check my publication and read an essay I wrote on that, but it only touches the surface of the personal scandals.