Debate:The Groyper Wars

With the past controversies over Nick Fuentes, TPUSA, Michelle Malkin, YAF, Ashley St. Clair, etc., combined with Big Tech's and the federal government's current suppression of dissent, this is an important discussion to have.

Do you agree with this? Why or why not? Please discuss the content of the Essay itself, rather than the talk page.

1. REDIRECT Template:Hide collapse

My Opinion

This has definitely got to be the #1 most controversial topic amongst the right. I think it's an overblown subject. I do consider myself a member of the Groyper movement, though I do think that "Groyper" is a silly name for a political movement. Now, I can't speak for every member, but I really don't think most Groypers are inherently "eViL aNtI-sEmItIc WhItE nAtIoNaLiStS" like many will tell you. It's a traditionalist paleocon movement that urges America to put God and country first and to return the western values our society was founded on (by white people, hence Nick's many mentions of the anti-white agenda, the importance of white identity and shifting demographics, which many confuse to be racial, when they're actually cultural). The "antisemitic" claim is mainly due to Nick's edgy and often Jew-related jokes (which Nick has said are merely for shock value), as well as the Groypers' heavy criticism of Israel, especially from a foreign policy perspective, and can you blame them? Trillions of dollars in taxpayer money is funneled to Israel every year to help them fight their thousand-year war. They don't need all that money, they have a GDP of 402 billion. It's not like they're some third-world country that we're helping out of pity. Of course, say this at a Turning Point USA event or on The Ben Shapiro Show and you're deemed "Anti-semitic/racist", somehow. Vince Did 7-14 (talk) 12:53, November 16, 2021 (EST)

This is a curious and thought-provoking take. And I wouldn't characterize groypers as white nationalists or anti-Semites, though in the past I would have. A lot of conservatives like to jump the gun and disown anyone outside of the mainstream, condemning them in the harshest possible terms. I think I can give you an explanation why. Part of it is that conservatives are afraid of alienating left-wingers and centrists/moderates. They think if they embrace certain figures they won't be able to convince as many people to accept conservatism. In a lot of cases, the opposite is true. The other thing is that back in 2019, quite a few mainstream/popular right-wingers saw groypers as wignats. Nick Fuentes and Beardson Beardly are having to deal with actual wignats right now. I think the way they feel about TRS is how conservatives felt about groypers. "They're just trying to divide us." "They're infiltrators." "They don't have anything to offer." "They're idiots." A lot of stuff was coming out about Nick especially that just put people off. Like that awful Holocaust joke. I get that he tries to be edgy and says things for shock value, but a lot of times he goes too far. And that's why some factions of the right were concerned that Nick was the new Richard Spencer, and didn't want their reputations tarnished through guilt by association --- which ironically is a tactic they themselves unjustly used against those on the right who chose to associate with the groypers. I know groypers presently are frustrated by wignats. Now they know how mainstream conservatives felt. You're absolutely right that most of Western civilization was built by white people. And there 100% is an anti-white agenda: it's pervasive and vitriolic. It's institutionalized across the Western world. I don't see how white identity politics solves anything. Every group should be proud of its identity. Whites have done many amazing things. But embracing identity politics, as Nick seems to frequently advocate, is playing on the left's battlefield, and that's a dangerous game. Altering a country's core demography inevitably comes with long-lasting and severe consequences. White Americans have a sub-replacement birth rate. Black Americans are aborting and shooting themselves out of existence. Latin American and Middle Eastern immigrants to the U.S., meanwhile, have very high birth rates... and they're only rising. Those immigrants obviously vote for the people importing them and tell their kids and grandkids to do the same. I don't think that's inextricably tied to race, I agree that it's cultural. But there is a link between culture and race, they're not entirely distinct. And we can dispute the reasons why demographic shifts have such drastic consequences, but the point is they have drastic consequences. So we need to import less people. As for Israel, a lot of people seem to think anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. I used to think that, too, reasoning that singling out the only Jewish State must be bad-faith criticism. But that point defeats itself: Israel is unique, which is why it is uniquely criticized. Having an unconventional opinion about a foreign country is not inherently bigoted. I support Israel. Others don't. Who cares? Besides, Israel has stains in its history --- think Lavon Affair and some of the shady/unethical actions of the Mossad. I have to correct you on the foreign aid: I believe it's low billions, not trillions. And hypothetically, I support them getting that money. Sure they do well for themselves, but they're (in theory) the only democracy in the Middle East, surrounded on all sides by hostile powers. Israel also has a lot of holy sites (for Christians, not just Jews). But I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to fund their COVID regime --- while non-Muslims still can't pray at the Temple Mount. I like Ben Shapiro and TPUSA, though I sometimes disagree with them. In spite of those disagreements, I see their conservative activism as a net positive. ---BernieandTrumpFan (talk) 17:46, November 16, 2021 (EST)

I'm happy to say, then, that there's a lot of things we agree on; however, I don't think Nick is advocating for identity politics. I think he just wants whites to embrace their heritage and take action against the anti-white agenda. As for TPUSA and Shapiro, they're not advocating for conservatism. They're advocating for libertarian, capitalist-worshipping economic policy, and squishy, practically nonexistent social policy that is getting us virtually nowhere in this culture war. (Fusionism and its consequences!) If we want to see an actual return to traditionalism in America, the ideas these mainstream "conservatives" are pushing are not contributing in any way. They're pushing us in the opposite direction.(Plus, we all know Richard Spencer is a Democrat Psyop.) Vince Did 7-14 (talk) 11:45, November 18, 2021 (EST)

I think you're right about Richard Spencer. And I would like both Ben Shapiro and TPUSA to put more emphasis on social conservatism and less emphasis on free-market economics (as Michael Knowles and Matt Walsh have advocated for the broader conservative movement several times). Shapiro is sort of libertarian, and so are Charlie Kirk and most of the people at Turning Point. I'm not really a fan of libertarianism. I'm a huge fan of Walsh and Knowles partly because neither of them is remotely libertarian. As well, Shapiro in particular seems to support free-market absolutism and neoliberal, globalized capitalism, though I also just heard him say that America should put tariffs on non-American companies that use child labour and American companies that do so should be punished. I think some people on the dissident right tend to overlook the positives about Ben Shapiro and The Daily Wire: an alt-Hollywood, an alt-publishing company. Openly defying Biden's vaccine mandate and suing him over it. TPUSA has been engaging in conservative activism all over the U.S. for years at this point, and they've improved over time. Charlie Kirk now talks about demographics, marriage, and the nuclear family. Ben Shapiro talks about corporate tyranny. They're human, not controlled opposition. And I'm all for "telling whites to embrace their heritage and take action against the anti-white agenda." That's great. It's something Matt Walsh talks about all the time, at least in 2021. But here's what I mean by saying Nick advocates for white identity politics: here, at 31:24, Nick says "White racial identity politics is not going away." And it's not just that. Nick has explicitly rejected "multi-racial, working-class populism" and grouping together as Americans, patriots, conservatives, or even Christians in favour of white identitarianism. ---BernieandTrumpFan (talk) 20:58, November 18, 2021 (EST)