The American conservative movement has a clear history of elevating public figures to represent their cause with the purpose of destroying and replacing the same individuals later with others. The liberal movement has done similar, but tends to have people engaged for the long term who are not as immediately famous but endure for many years, even decades in their positions. The “right” will bring people to immediate fame with lots of money, book contracts, public engagements, and fame, only to take it away as fast as they gave it to the particular individual. This is not to say there are not “conservative” figures who have a long history in the movement, but that this tends to be the mode of operation for them.
This kind of behavior seems to be taking place right now with the conservative group Turning Point USA, a project funded by the Jewish financier Robert Shillman, who earned his wealth in the military-industrial complex through his creation, COGNEX corporation. He also is a known funder of the “counter-jihad” movement. Shoebat.com has exposed the connections between TPUSA and Shillman in our archives.
The controversy started after Nick Fuentes, an Internet media figure who participated in the “Unite the Right” protests in 2017 and who works with fellow National Socialist and supporter of racial theory James Allsup, began to “expose” the current head of TPUSA, Charlie Kirk, as a fraud who prefers to support Israeli interests over those of the US, thus making him a “fake nationalist” in the eyes of the new right.
The campaign, which has been heavily promoted by the Daily Stormer (but not necessarily tied innately to them), involved Fuentes sending people during the Q&A sessions to essentially “ambush” Kirk on stage with questions about Israel, the USS Liberty, and so forth. One can see some of the videos below.
Kirk did not handle himself in a “professional” manner, and it has been pointed out that the tables and public spots for TPUSA where Kirk would traditionally be are now vacant. This “campaign to out Kirk” has been following him from campus-to-campus, supposedly being organized by Fuentes all the way.
The entire affair is very interesting, because in spite of his public persona, nobody really knows who Nick Fuentes is other than as a “campus activist” who is presented by some as a “white supremacist” and as some have said, an “anti-semite” because of his position on Israel and his involvement with the new right.
We know for a fact that the entire leadership of the new National Socialist movement is, without exaggeration, infested deeply with persons of admitted or highly suspect ties to Israel and Jewish causes and persons. The webmaster of the Daily Stormer is an admitted Jewish atheist with direct ties to the US government (Andrew Auernheimer), and Andrew Anglin, the “publisher”, invites more questions about who he is that he will not answer than what he has answered to the point that a tremendous amount of suspicious about who he really is naturally is in order.
Mike Peinovich, a.k.a. Mike “Enoch” is married to a Jewish woman, and his own surname is unique in that it would be found disproportionately, and perhaps almost exclusively in many cases among Ashkenazic Jewish populations. The now-pase Richard Spencer, who we know very little about who he is, in spite of all of the claims of “anti-semitism”, is very close with the eugenics-supporting Jew in the Trump administration Stephen Miller. Then there are the curious cases of Matthew Heimbach, Andy Warski, Natt Danelaw, Tim Treadstone (“Baked Alaska”), and many other individuals whose personal and professional associations, while not outright declaring it clearly, suggest strong ties to Israel and all things Jewish that the more one tries to investigate, the more difficult it becomes to find proper information.
Shoebat.com has noted before that the Jewish support of Nazism is not unique. National Socialist philosophy has been admitted by the National Socialists themselves, including in the words of one of the main architects Rudolf von Sebottendorf, to be a direct product of Talmudic and Cabbalistic philosophy taught to him by a Jewish family with deep roots in the Cabbalah. It is known that many Jews supported National Socialism as well, and did so at proportionately higher rates than the Germans.
Now while Charlie Kirk’s background is an issue for another time, we know for a fact that Kirk is directly tied by his professional associations to the Jewish financier Robert Shillman. But what about Nick Fuentes?
We do not know right now who, if anybody, is paying Mr. Fuentes to do what he is doing, but one would suspect that he is getting paid as what he is doing requires time, and time is money. There is very little egalitarianism on the right, as money generally tends to override principle lest it is for show. The funding source, if any, is something that is yet to be clearly ascertained.
However, from what little we know about Mr. Fuentes, there are some interesting points.
First, the last name “Fuentes”, while not exclusively so, is a known name with a history of association with Spanish Sephardic Jewry.
Second, Fuentes claims to be “Catholic”, but there is no proof of his supposed “Catholicism”. It reminds one historically of the reason for the Inquisition, as many Jews and Muslims claimed Catholicism to maintain assets or to rise to positions of power, but they did not believe and many times worked to attempt to subvert the very faith they claimed to associate with.
Third, he claims to be a “comedian”, something that while many people can be, is not only overwhelming associated with Jews, but also tends to overlap with their political interests. One might laugh as somebody such as Newt Gingrich, but nobody will call him a comedian, yet there is a history of Jews presenting themselves, as though it were in the same package, as a four-for-one deal of a “respected man”, “intellectual”, “comedian”, and “philanthropist”.
Fourth, he claims to be “Afro-Latino”. Now while there is much diversity in the Spanish-speaking world, and while many people might look different than what they are by heritage, Nick Fuentes does not immediately strike anybody as “Afro-Latino”, even in a small way. To the contrary, he would appear more to have the image of Ben Shapiro, as thus would likely seem to have ancestry straight out of the Pale of Settlement.
Fifth, and building on the previous point, Fuentes has no proof that he is “Afro-Latino” save for one video that he released supposedly presenting his “DNA test results”, which RationalWiki says reported him to be mostly “European” and “Native American”, but he would not specify further.
Sixth, if Fuentes is a so-called “white nationalist,” it is highly curious that he does not give specifics about his family history. If anybody talks to a serious white nationalist, they know their history down to specific villages and areas because of genealogy and they consider it part of their identity.
Fuentes does not give specifics. Saying he has “Mexican” heritage is not an excuse, because considering if he really is part Mexican, can he not provide a state and town that his family came from? There is no excuse with this, for even people with limited knowledge of their foreign roots have more to offer than ambiguous associations with various nations.
The failure to provide specifics of one’s background is likewise a historical hallmark of Jewish groups. They will take names such as “Rome” or “Pisa” yet can say nothing of a specific Italian heritage, or the name “London” or “Washburn” but nothing of English or Scottish heritage, or “Warsaw”, “Moscow”, “Lubavitch”, or any number of random cities, towns, or even villages scattered throughout Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia, but have nothing of a Slavic heritage they will speak of. A link to a cosmopolitan area says nothing about the man, and the failure to provide one’s roots and to remain ambiguous about ones past, as though one was in a state of perpetual rootlessness is a common trait shared throughout history since the Crucifixion.
Seventh, we do know that Fuentes comes from La Grange Park, IL, a suburb of Chicago. It is interesting to note that while it is small, it seems to have a historical Jewish community in it with a history of Jewish political activism.
Eighth, Fuentes is being heavily promoted by the “alt-right”/neo-nationalist movement, which as I noted is heavily influenced by Jewish or strongly Jewish-associated activists, including the Jewish-administered Daily Stormer.
Nine, Fuentes is specifically involved in “campus activism”, which while not limited only to Jewish activism, has a history of being targeted by Jewish activists be they on the right or left.
Tenth, Fuentes is not unique, but if one looks at his positions, he seems simply to support the status quo for the right wing, but under his own name and for Millennials and younger. It is not at all different from “boomer politics”, except this is “zoomer politics” with video games.
Eleventh, one will constantly hear Kirk refer to Fuentes’s supporters as “groypers”. This was a variant of “groper” that arose following President Trump’s “grab ’em by the p*ssy” comment, and has been associated with the alt-right as well as aggressively promoted by the Daily Stormer.
Now to be very clear, I am NOT saying that “Fuentes is a Jewish operative” or something of this at all, for there is absolutely no proof to substantiate this definitively.
What I am saying is that a man is known not just by what he says, but also by his associations. This is something that has to be taken in firm consideration of all circumstances, for looks can be deceptive, but many times they are not, especially in the world of politics, where one’s actions say far more than one’s words.
I am saying that Fuentes has very curious personal and professional associations with Jews and Jewish causes, and that in spite of his “criticisms” of Israel, Jews, and his supposed ties to “white supremacy”, there may be a lot more here that is taking place than what is being intended for consumption. This becomes all the more suspect that the more one attempts to find answers to who he is and how his connections operate, there are none to be given.
What is needed now is clarity, and usually when there is a lack of clarity or a series of questions that only lead to more questions in any situation such as this, while not always so, many times it suggests that something is being intentionally distorted, hidden, or omitted for personal or political gain, or because somebody does not want somebody to know something, regardless of what it is.
Charlie Kirk was an open puppet for Shillman and his associates. However, this could be easily ascertained, and one could determine what his positions were. This is not the same for Fuentes, for while holding to many common patterns of association, he remains unknown.
Are we seeing a “changing of the guard”, or perhaps a “staged conflict” meant to distract people from real issues?
That is yet to be determined.
What one can say is that all of these racialist movements and ideas of racialism are all evil, they are not about what they profess, but are contests of power for those who care nothing for other people, let alone those who they claim to support. It is a contest of darwinian lies and falsehoods by men who, like in Wisdom 2, would seek only the good of this world while hurting others.
Regardless of who Nick Fuentes is, he is not going to be any sort of “political messiah”, for all politicians and activists who claim this never follow through on their words, but are there to speak truth only in so far as it justifies their own power. It is one fox deposing another fox who is still going to consume the hens.
No political answer will come from people such as this. The only true “turning point” is when a man turns to Christ and, having done this, he then turns towards himself as observing himself and his sins, seeks to rid himself of them that he might be gradually transformed into Christ, beginning now and being perfected upon death.