A Short History on America First and Nick Fuentes
medium.com
A cold war is being waged within the United States, a conflict not seen on a scale since the Civil War. Rather than an economic conflict, the combatants fight over irreconcilable differences in their approach to American identity, race, and culture. Americaâs slow but steady shift towards progressive social values has put conservatives between a rock and a hard place. Conservative and traditionaist American values have lost seemingly lost every cultural battle fought since the 60âs; abortion, the blurring of gender roles, White demographic preservation, the erosion of the nuclear family, and acceptance of the LGBTQ to name a few. In an electoral sense, the Republican party is struggling to stay afloat; with shifting racial demographics, former Republican strongholds like Texas are turning into swing states.
Young conservatives seem to be the most aware of these changes. Feeling alienated by our current political paradigm and culture, they are seeking alternatives to the mainstream, which seems content to cede victory after victory to the left. From their perspective, their country, a birthright won by their ancestors through conquest, has been stolen out from under them economically by rootless transnational corporations, and culturally by immigrants, political correctness, and liberal permissiveness. Beyond these problems, there is a social malaise that seems to have enveloped young people of all creeds. Despite material wealth and standards of living being the highest in history, young Americans are more depressed than ever before. A surge in the presence of online right wing nationalism has emerged to address these deficits, championing the return of traditional values, community, and religion. At the center of this push is 22-year old Nicholas J. Fuentes, the leader of America First, a paleoconservative movement tailored for young people.
As strange as it may sound, the path to America First begins with Gamergate. Framed by detractors as a coordinated harassment campaign against women, or by proponents as a consumer movement to hold gaming journalists accountable, in truth, Gamergate was neither. It was a cultural pushback against industry efforts to increase inclusivity in a community that was decidedly unwelcoming of change. As gaming became more mainstream, efforts to market to a wider audience inevitably followed, leaving many disgruntled that their culture was being disrupted by influxes of new participants who seemed uninterested in assimilating to their values. Gamers were criticised roundly by social critics and the industry that formerly catered to them as sexist and racist for their handlings of different identities. The left-leaning social critics, the âSJWâs,â did themselves no favors with their poor optics and shrill soundbites, allowing their reactionary opposition to gain an overwhelming amount of populist support from the internet at large. Because of its online prominence, Gamergate was a cultural and political event that shaped much of young peopleâs political beliefs, being the first they were ever exposed to. Gamergate quickly became less about gaming and more about a widespread skepticism and reactionary push-back against liberal and progressive ideals, sentiments that have never truly dissipated.
A few years later in 2016, Presidential hopeful Donald J. Trump based his campaign off of a similar idea; Americans are being displaced and invaded by migrants who threaten the existence of the United States. Trumpâs appeal to nativist populism was a welcome one for the Republican base. After years of neoconservative hegemony and candidates who seemed more concerned with material economic prosperity and enabling unnecessary foreign wars, the public ate up Trumpâs uncompromising promise to push back against the establishment on what mattered most to voters; the changing culture, neglect from the elites, and smug unsympathetic media outlets. Years of mass migration from the third world for the purposes of cheap labor, and the continued dominance of progressive values throughout the culture left White conservatives feeling alienated, as if their own government didnât care about those who had been in the country the longest. These feelings have created hard questions that we grapple with today. What does it mean to be an American, and who has a right to claim American identity? Trumpâs defeat of the neoconservative Republicans in the primaries led new online pundits among the dissident right wing to emerge as cultural leaders, attempting to answer these questions. The neoconservative establishment had failed to put their preferred candidate into office. Combined with the animosity leftover from Gamergate years earlier, young minds welcomed the nationalists who wanted to make their voices heard.
The new online right coalesced around two camps; the civic nationalist alt-light and the ethno-nationalist alt-right. The alt-light, which largely consisted of the same pundits who had championed Gamergate years earlier, was concerned only with culture, opposing Marxism, third wave feminism, political correctness, and identity politics. Due to the lack of focus on race, and a sizable presence on YouTube, the movement had the most mainstream appeal of the two.
Where the alt-light rejected identity politics, the alt-right embraced it, believing that culture was downstream of race and ethnicity. They claimed that there was something intrinsic about the way Europeans settled civilization unique to them, something that canât be replicated by other races. Their goals generally necessitated the creation of a White ethnostate within the United States through forms of genocide, forced deportations, or balkanization. Needless to say, the alt-right caused a major media stir when they made themselves known to the public.
A handful of smaller factions existed on the periphery of these two spheres, competing for primacy and recognition within the wider dissident right movement, including libertarians and paleoconservatives. The alt-right had gained a significant amount of momentum as a pipeline effect began to radicalize people from the alt-light, which looked facile and unwilling to take action by comparison. The alt-right as a whole, especially Richard Spencerâs brand of White identitarianism, seemed to be on the rise until August 11th, 2017, when everything changed.
The disastrous failure of the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia crippled the alt-right and splintered the dissident right at large around the topic of optics; the ability to appear presentable to the general public. Charlottesville was the alt-rightâs first attempt at gaining support from outside online spaces, but the media firestorm surrounding the death of Heather Heyer destroyed any chance the movement might have had to gain mainstream relevance. Even before the incident at Charlottesville, there were signs that thought leaders within the movement would alienate average people; Richard Spencerâs infamous roman salute comes to mind. The gaffes continued to pile up after the rally with Spencerâs endorsement of âethicalâ child porn, Patrick Littleâs open hatred for Jews during his run for public office, and Matthew Heimbachâs arrest for assault of a family member.
These continuous embarrassments pointed to one conclusion; these people were not serious about any of their convictions, and would never survive in the real world of politics. This is something that Nicholas J. Fuentes knew from the start. What followed was a series of battles in the form of live debate called âThe Optics Wars,â a fight within the dissident right over the importance of utilizing optics. The nationalist pundits would collaborate with streamers from the âInternet Bloodsportsâ community to take each other to task. The debates were more about spectacle and drama than politics, but Fuentes proved very effective at driving home his pro-optics stance, garnering a reputation as a fierce opponent. âNick the Knife,â as he came to be known, was able to pull in the people that the alt-right had alienated, earning him many enemies among the formerly powerful figures of the right. With Richard Spencerâs influence quickly waning, the time was perfect for Fuentesâs paleoconservative America First movement to fill the vacuum.
Fuentes had many criticisms of the alt-right aside from optics, however. He felt the movement drifted too far away from American identity, and focused too much on European identity. The White population of the United States is far removed from Europe culturally, so it would not make sense to model the country around a European way of life. Fuentes also rejected hard racialism, though he still concludes that behaviors stem from race to an extent. Fuentes is also a Traditionalist Catholic, setting him apart from many of his contemporaries, who are largely atheistic or Pagan. In large part, his belief system seems intent on trying to replicate the culture of America during the 1950âs with a few liberties taken to ensure that it could be re-implemented in the modern age and preserved into the future:
- The government should take an active role in shaping the culture of the country. People are not smart enough or do not have the faculties to decide what is good for them, they have to be guided into it by strong social institutions.
- Christianity should be the most fundamental cultural building block, shaping morality and informing the laws of the society. Fuentes argues that it is necessary to return to this Christian base, and doesnât believe that modern empiricism can account for the metaphysical aspects of morality.
- America and its institutions were built by White people, so it follows that the culture should inherently favor Whites. The culture is informed by its population and its demographics, forming a different âtexture of lifeâ based on its inhabitants, and thus different value systems. Fuentesâ goal is to secure this texture of life through the maintenance of a White super-majority population. Conflicting values from different populations create a divided, lawless, and unsuccessful nation.
- Neoliberalism has allowed for unchecked mass migration from third world countries at the behest of billion dollar corporations, fundamentally altering culture in ways that cause racial tension. Fuentes often states that an immediate and total halt on third world immigration is in desperate need of implementation.
- If one population has a concept of racial identity, it is necessary for those around them to have a racial identity as well to effectively lobby for policies in their interests. As White Americans become an ethnic minority in America, Fuentes believes it is necessary for them to form a racial consciousness.
- Traditional American gender roles should be strongly socially enforced. The workforce should be made up of men, and women should be homemakers focused on raising children instead of careers. Womenâs loosening principles around chastity following the sexual revolution has promoted a society in which people focus on sexual gratification instead of the creation of long-term familial ties. As such, promiscuity should be eliminated.
- Young people are finding that creating families is nigh impossible in todayâs economy. Therefore the economy should aim to cater to the creation of families and the resurrection of the nuclear family, as opposed to a continued focus on national growth.
- Transgenderism and homosexuality are deviant lifestyles attached to degenerate cultures that should be strongly socially discouraged.
- America should enforce a heavily nationalistic foreign policy, only engaging in deals that directly benefit the populace or well-being of the country. In particular, Fuentes differs from many conservatives in his stance on Israel, believing that the Jewish lobby has far too much power in influencing the American political system. The America First platform is not anti-war however, and encourages violent engagement when it will directly benefit Americans.
- Censorship and deplatforming of conservatives and reactionaries by companies like Twitter, Google, and Paypal is unjust and needs to be opposed. If platforms are large enough that deplatforming results in loss of livelihood, they should be forced to act as public utilities, abiding by the First Amendment instead of their own TOS guidelines.
- While capitalism is still the preferred economic system, the movement is far more focused on social issues, viewing mainstream conservative obsession with the dangers of socialism as a rhetorical relic from a bygone era. They are more willing to endorse left-leaning economic policy, attracting economic progressives who may have otherwise supported Democratic leadership. Fuentes has stated that it is far easier for the right wing to move left on economic issues than it is for the left wing to move right on social issues.
Fuentes, who had spent most of his young life as a promising up-and-comer in the neoconservative sphere before Trumpâs election, morphed into a paleoconservative after becoming disillusioned with the mainstreamâs unwillingness to address demographic change. The Nicholas J. Fuentes Show, which evolved into America First, was broadcast as a stream on YouTube. The show is meant to cater primarily to White male Gen-Zers (Zoomers as they are colloquially known), those whose most significant political beliefs were shaped by Gamergate and Trumpâs candidacy. They have grown up in an atmosphere that always seemed more interested in catering to the needs of women and minorities, and are more than happy to take aim at these protected classes. The culture of the America First movement can trace its roots back to 4chan, a website known for its similarly politically incorrect and irreverent humor, practical jokes, trolling, anonymity and meme creation. The movement draws in those who may not be completely politically aligned, but share the same sensibilities, dialectic, and sense of humor. This has proven to be an effective political messaging tool as well, forcing opposition to engage with the movementâs dialectic through post-ironic comedy and spectacle. Post-irony is a form of joke-telling in which the performer plays up a cartoonishly exaggerated version of their own belief system. Part of America Firstâs appeal is the utilization of these techniques to entertain, with Fuentes blending serious politics with ironic jokes and performative bullying. Many criticisms and condemnations of the movement relate to these types of jokes, particularly from journalists who are unable to decipher what is real and what is an exaggeration due to unfamiliarity with the culture.
America First gathered loyal supporters during the remainder of 2017 and 2018, but the movement found its big break during the coordinated crashing of mainstream conservative events called âThe Groyper Wars.â
Following the decline of the alt-right, the âalt-right vs alt-lightâ dichotomy became largely useless and fell by the wayside. Instead, the dichotomy began to reflect a war within the conservative movement for control over the mantle of âtrue conservative.â In all respects, this is a reignition of an ideological feud dating back to the 80âs between neoconservatives and paleoconservatives when the latter was pushed out of the conservative movement by prominent intellectuals. Neoconservatives view paleoconservatives as bigoted isolationists who threaten the economic hegemony and globalist agenda of the United States; meanwhile the paleoconservatives view the neoconservatives as socially permissive libertarians whose economic goals have hollowed out and destroyed entire American communities.
Neoconservatives began to push figures like Ben Shapiro, attempting to market their brand of conservatism to Gen-Z voters. Student groups like Charlie Kirkâs Turning Point USA (TPUSA) climbed the ranks too, setting up chapters in colleges across the country. Kirk, Shapiro, and their compatriots continued to espouse the boilerplate talking points about free-market capitalism, gun rights, the marketplace of ideas, and limited government, while completely ignoring the growing questions about changing social values, demographic change and immigration in America. Meanwhile, Trump himself began to change. The firebrand who promised to build the border wall, and appealed to the right wingâs nativist desires, proved ineffective at accomplishing his tasks. Instead, Trumpâs policy had begun to morph into familiar neoconservative territory, offering tax cuts to the rich and bending the knee to corporate interests. Whether this is a result of Steve Bannonâs removal, or the influence of Jared Kushner is widely speculated. The fight with the left wing would have to wait. A civil war over ideological legitimacy was brewing within the American right wing for control of the Republican party, conservative culture, and the Trump administration.
Though the conflict known as the âGroyper Warsâ began in earnest during late October 2019 when Nick Fuentes was barred by police from entering a TPUSA Q&A, the opening shot came earlier that month. Ashley St. Clair, a representative from TPUSA was fired unceremoniously after being publicly photographed with Fuentes at the Miami Uncensored free speech rally. Kirk was undoubtedly trying to distance himself from Fuentes and his paleoconservative brand through somewhat extreme measures. This was seen as a betrayal in the online right, one conservative trying to backstab another. Kirk was confronted by Fuentesâ fans at subsequent live Q&As. He was also questioned about a number of other grievances that had gone unaddressed by establishment conservatives; shifting racial demographics, uncritical aid to Israel, the increasing unwanted presence of pro-LGBTQ stances in conservative spaces, unwanted foreign wars facilitated by the US government, online censorship, and unchecked mass migration from third world countries in the name of cheap labor. Fuentesâ supporters, many of whom use a permutation of Pepe the Frog called âGroyperâ in their Twitter avatars, descended on Kirk and his allies in increasing numbers online and at the remainder of his speaking events for his âCulture Warâ campaign. Initially caught off-guard, Kirk was put on the defensive. Further into the campaign, he and his peers opted to use a number of tactics in an attempt to block the barrage of disruptive questions, profiling questioners based on ideology and attire to avoid questions from young paleoconservatives. In some cases, he withdrew opportunities for previously planned Q&A sessions altogether. The story began drawing press attention when Kirk tried the latter tactic and was booed offstage while guest hosting Donald Trump Jr. Kirk attempted to blame the outburst on rowdy leftist protestors, but nobody bought this narrative. In another eyebrow raising instance, Texas Representative Dan Crenshaw, who had accompanied Kirk as a guest speaker, lobbed veiled threats at a Groyper who criticized anti-BDS laws.
While most media outlets did not cover the Groyper Wars, online observers saw these events as a critical defeat for Charlie Kirk. His blackballing of a fellow conservative looked particularly hypocritical after touting his love for the âfree marketplace of ideas,â and then doing everything in his power to avoid addressing criticism. To make matters worse for Kirk, several chapter leaders of TPUSA disbanded their operations, some even joining America First. The event caused such a stir that prominent conservative pundits Ben Shapiro, Sebastian Gorka, and Matt Walsh derided and condemned Fuentes and his fans as anti-semites, racists, losers, and fake conservatives. If someone with Fuentesâ beliefs is a fake conservative, it begs the question âWhat is a real conservative?â Within the framing of the accusation the only people allowed to be âreal conservativesââ are people who exist within the ideological framework of neoconservatism.
The reaction to the Groyper Wars catapulted Fuentesâ beliefs and viewership closer to mainstream levels than had ever been achieved by anyone in the contemporary dissident right wing. Fuentes continues to push forward and gain support to this day, even starting his own parallel event to CPAC, AFPAC. However, America First has had its fair share of setbacks; America First recently tried to develop a presence on popular video app Tik Tok to reach more young people, confronting some of the Gen-Z conservative thought leaders on the platform, but was eventually shut down. Earlier this year, YouTube initiated a purge of channels that violated its community guidelines, and America First was one of the casualties. Since then, Fuentes has made the switch to streaming service DLive and hopes to launch his own proprietary streaming website in the near future. While this kind of deplatforming usually spells the end for most content creators, Fuentes has proven his resilience thanks to his loyal followers who help him top DLiveâs charts every time he streams. The war for the mantle of âconservativeâ is far from over, and despite what mainstream pundits want, Fuentes and America First donât appear to be going anywhere anytime soon.
Although Fuentes is generally very careful about how he presents himself to the public through his show, he himself has had a few unoptical moments that many detractors will bring up:
- Perhaps the most referenced is a joke Fuentes made about the holocaust, making an anology about how many cookies the Cookie Monster could bake within a certain span of time, and subsequently declaring there was no possible way to bake so many cookies. This lead many mainstream pundits to accuse him of holocaust denial, though it was likely a joke meant to poke fun at sensitivities surrounding the topic.
- Fuentes was once secretly filmed in a meeting with other students, engaging in a heated argument with a young woman over race-mixing. He declared that he thought a white woman having sex with a black man was akin to bestiality when she pushed him on his beliefs. He defends his comments as a deliberate exaggeration of his views to provoke an angry response from the person he was arguing with.
- The America First leader referred to Daily Wire journalist Matt Walsh as a âShabbos Goyâ and a ârace traitorâ after the pair got into a fight on Twitter. The choice insults were meant to highlight Walshâs ideologically inconsistent employment under Ben Shapiro; Walsh is Catholic, though he frequently endures flippant public remarks about Jesus Christ from his boss.
Fuentesâ detractors have long branded him a white nationalist, a white supremacist, a neo-Nazi, or alt-right for instances like these, as well as his association with figures like Richard Spencer and Mike Peinovich in the broader context of the dissident right. Although he does not share their belief systems, he has enough in common with these figures to warrant concern in the eyes of many, despite Fuentesâ more recent efforts to distance himself from them. For anyone left-leaning on social issues, paleoconservatism and White nationalism is a distinction without a difference.
America First has detractors from within the right wing as well. Neoconservatives like the aforementioned Charlie Kirk and Ben Shapiro have already been covered. Within the dissident right, Fuentes faces criticism for being unserious and not aggressive enough; they believe that any push for White identity should be unabashedly and openly racist. Fuentes and his audience describe these people as âwig-natsâ (short for âwigger nationalistâ to represent aggressive and belligerent posting habits and ties with white nationalists). Fuentes has been in several personal feuds with other prominent figures within the dissident right, including disgraced former figurehead Richard Spencer.
One of the most notable complaints is Fuentesâ rejection of women from the frontlines of America First. He has elaborated that allowing female pundits into the movement is antithetical to their core values; women should be in the home raising children, not pursuing careers in politics while they are young, unmarried, and childless.
Fuentes is distrustful of empiricism, viewing all societal institutions as ideological tools that are susceptible to corruption, no matter the methodological rigor. This leads some of his beliefs to contradict contemporary scientific consensus. Most prominently, Fuentes is an ardent believer that IQ is largely a byproduct of race, and uses it as an explanation for much of world history and the current political landscape; Africa lags behind the rest of the world because of low average African IQ scores, and Black criminality in the United States is at least partially the result of low African-American IQ. Many of these findings are commonly cited from Arthur Jensen and Charles Murrayâs works, which are widely criticised by those in academia.
There is a fundamental question of blame and responsibility that lingers as to who should be at fault for Americaâs downturn and contemporary racial conflicts. The American left holds that âWhiteness,â the culture, institutions, and policies created by the settlers of the country, are at fault. To change this hierarchy would mean to upend much of America as we know it today. The America First movement is a reaction to this notion that Whiteness and its mannerisms are inherently harmful, and in fact, should be actively fought for and preserved to benefit the descendents of the countryâs founders, and those who adhere to its principles. For them, if America were to change this drastically, it would become something else, something un-American. For an example, one needs look no further than the Smithsonianâs recently removed exhibit on the concept of Whiteness and the fundamental ideas behind it that inform much of American life; concepts like rational linear thought, the nuclear family, low time preference, and delayed gratification are listed as examples of Whiteness. If these cultural expectations were to change, America would alter in radical ways.
Regardless of what anyone thinks of America First or Nick Fuentes, the writing seems to be on the wall. Neoconservatism is no longer a viable solution in the eyes of Americaâs conservative youth, and America Firstâs rise represents a shift in how the American right thinks about politics. They believe the future will be based on identity and group advocacy rather than a âmarketplace of ideasâ or class warfare. While this future may sound grim and tribalistic to some, it may be necessary to recognize how our failures to effectively manage identity-based tensions lead us to our current situation. It may represent the first step in creating a clear and unambiguous negotiation for political and cultural power if the movement is successful in replacing the Republican Party.
America First is looking strong at the moment. It has overcome many of the barriers that come with being a dissident movement, and is poised to continue growing. However the movementâs immediate success will be heavily impacted by the results of the upcoming 2020 election. America Firstâs entire brand is based on Trumpâs 2016 appeal to nativism. If President Trump is re-elected, they are free to continue growing mostly unimpeded, pushing for more figures with ideals who are more aligned with America First ideology. However, a Trump loss would signal a rejection of American nationalism, a loss of momentum that would be hard to recover from. America First would be forced to adopt new tactics or look for smaller scale solutions, waiting for the next Trumpian politician to throw their weight behind before any kind of resurgence.
Another threat comes in the form of the mainstream conservative movement adopting rhetoric and talking points from America First. This would create a controlled and sterile brand for mass consumption while edging Fuentes and his coalition out. Matt Walsh and Charlie Kirk, two of Fuentesâ biggest targets, have recently begun to change their rhetorical strategy. Kirk, for instance, has shown much more resistance in recent days to legal immigration.
Finally, the rise of leftist content creators on platforms like YouTube has begun to create competition with America First, and the dissident right in general, for the loyalty of young viewers. With America First and many other right wing content creators recently banned or put in a limited state for violating TOS, the leftist YouTube creators collectively known as Breadtube, have been allowed to flourish. When Fuentes began raising his profile before the Groyper Wars, he was largely uncontested by any direct challenges outside of the online right; most online political figures appealed to different audiences by focusing on other forms of content like long-form video essays and podcasts. However, in recent days rhetorically similar leftists have begun to properly entrench themselves in the online ecosystem and rapidly gain viewership.
America First is in a precarious position, but it always has been. Whether it was weathering attacks from other dissident right groups or surviving its deplatforming from YouTube, the movement clearly has lots of staying power thanks to its devoted young audience and the careful maneuvering of its leader.
