Posted on 12/23/2025 5:57:42 AM PST by ProgressingAmerica
John Stossel interviews James Lindsay, famous for fighting wokeness on the left. Lindsay is vigorously investigating wokeness on the right, mostly but not limited to those following the ideas of Nick Fuentes.
----
A new section of the right is foolishly bashing liberty … and even embracing Marxist ideas.
That's why some call them the "woke right."
Can you tell me some of his core beliefs that you reject?
I can personally list a whole bunch of his peculiar quirks and tangents that I disagree with. But I don't think there are many of his core beliefs that I disagree with.
His disrespect for women is something that I don't appreciate but it is a quirk that he will equivocate and go back and forth on. The stuff he says about Hitler and Stalin, he has explained in a way that I can accept. I understand his position although I don't feel the same way.
None of these are core beliefs though.
His political instincts and insight about how the world works and what actually moves the needle is unmatched.
They wanted a strawman they could beat anytime they wanted.
Then there's the fact he has literally NOTHING, no track record of accomplishment or anything that backs up his core beliefs. He's an empty vessel.
Finally, there's just no way on God's beautiful green earth that I can ever accept someone who speaks positively about Hitler and Stalin (who between the two killed tens of millions of people) out of one side of his mouth then "explain away" what they said out the other side of his mouth.
I honestly DO NOT CARE what he "says" his core beliefs are when he does all the crap above which shows a complete lack of character and integrity.
We're going to have to respectfully agree to disagree here.
Which is why you need to break the systems down to their basic parts. You need to use logic and discernment to determine which one has the best chance of doing what it is supposed to.
Comparing the highest aspirations of a Democracy to the worst failings of a Monarchy is never going to paint an accurate picture.
All governments are bad. Chaos is worse.
You need to look at the logical ends to the various systems to pick the best one.
“no track record of accomplishment”
I guarantee you that if you lived his life you would have gone into hiding by now.
“It is not the critic who counts;
not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.
The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly;
who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming;
but who does actually strive to do the deeds;
who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause;
who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement,
and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”
Teddy Roosevelt The Man In The Arena
I'm VERY familiar with that quote. It hung in my office at work for decades for 40 years.
Associating that quote with Nick Fuentes is just laughable.
Hans-Herman Hoppe, a rightwing libertarian, wrote a book in 2001 called 'Democracy, the god that failed'. In it, he makes some pretty compelling arguments against Democracy and in favor of Monarchism. I would highly recommend reading it, even if only to be able to counter arguments against an ascendent belief system that you disagree with.
Regarding the Constitution, there are only 2 options....
1.) It was designed well and the way it was designed, was always going to lead to the dystopian country we now live in. 2.) It was designed poorly and it was incapable of preventing the dystopian country we now live in.
Either way, it has become clear that it is no longer something to be respected. It is used as a false religion and magic spells by the right to try and hold off the unceasing move to the left and it is used as a weapon by the left to bash over the head of the right.
Dang it, Nitzy, it's a did-dad shame you're so anti-Israel, because you make a lot of sense. Any study of world history will show that monarchy is the most common, universal, and perhaps "natural" form of government there is. Every people from the most resplendent empires to the most miniscule and primitive tribes have had kings--not presidents.
I am not arguing that liberty should not be the highest goal of a civilization. Although, I would entertain that there could be higher goals...(prosperity of the people, happiness of the people, longevity and continuation of the culture and traditions, etc...) However, even accepting that liberty IS the highest goal...the question becomes, "What is the best system to achieve that end?"
And now you go and blow it. The ultimate goal of all humans everywhere is to worship and exalt G-d and be loyal to Him. Why is the Right--especially the so-called "paleo" Right--so utilitarian and identitarian when it comes to religion? No "paleo" seems to believe that any religion, even chrstianity, is true. They just believe it is masterpiece and identify marker of "Western Man" and that it's sole purpose is to make his civilization successful and enduring. Only an atheist could believe this. There is only one goal for a religion and that is to be TRUE. That means there's only one and that any other, no matter how useful it is for sustaining a society or how proud its practitioners are of it, is not only useless but positively forbidden. There can no more be more than one valid religion than there can be more than one G-d. I have long doubted whether "paleos" believe this, however.
The next question becomes...."Is the current system the best system?"
I would argue an emphatic "NO".
Because the US and its ideology are products of the "enlightenment." How anyone can take a look at our Founding Fathers and see them as flaming holy crusaders is literally beyond me, and I would not believe that if I were the most convinced chrstian in the world. Religion is about objective universal truth--nothing else!
Fuentes has taken a lot of slings and arrows—in fact a ridiculous amount.
The late Founder here on FR has done that.
Not many others here have had that experience.
It's not that conservatives are embracing "Marx." But they're moving away from a slavish devotion to free markets, and an uncritical admiration for corporations, big business, and rich people.
In the 1980s, when I was young, conservative media used to practically worship Big Business and idolize the wealthy. It's was the Ayn Rand influence.
National Review carried ads for posters featuring rich people and slogans like: POVERTY S*CKS.
In the 1990s, Rush promoted a gloating admiration for rich people, big business, and smoking. Rush and Kennedy Montgomery promoted a smoking club in Manhattan, and they enjoyed lighting up cigars for all to see.
Part of this was a childish in-your-face assault on liberal sensitivities. Liberals hated the rich, big business, and smoking, so some conservatives celebrated these things.
But lately conservatism has embraced the populism of Pat Buchanan and Sam Francis, which is less celebratory of the free market. It doesn't make them Marxist.
Nick Fuentes and all that was and is about him is on the far fringe of most Conservatives consciousness and thinking. But some folks are working to divide masses of Conservatives by trying to make all things Nick Fuentes as mainstream issues to Conservatives; they’re not.
I'm not sure what "woke right" means. "Woke" is just an updated version of what used to be called political correctness, only amplified to mean "non-whites are entitled to everything and anything they want" rather than the milder "try not to offend racial and religious minorities." You may not like racial or ethno-nationalism, but calling them "woke" is absurd.
I have come across people saying maybe Monarchism wasn't such a bad idea, others saying the Constitution is ridiculous, and still others saying they no longer believe in the blessings of liberty. The call of tribalism is massive in 2025.
The fact remains that monarchism and other traditional authoritarian movements are right wing, it's just that they're out of place in the United States. The other day I was arguing with some ignoramus on this site who was saying that the Spanish Civil War was actually a war between two "leftist" factions, implying that Franco and the loyalists (i.e. Falangists, monarchists, traditional Catholics, the Castillian aristocracy) were actually "left wing" because they were opposed to "liberty". Conservatism and the right wing means preserving traditional institutions. In America that means the Constitution and Federalism. In Spain, it means monarchism and traditional Catholicism. Those who support the latter in the US aren't "left wing" or "woke", they're simply trying to import foreign institutions where they don't belong.
And why wouldn't there be a Nick Fuentes woke right? These children were doomed by their parents into the government schools.
There's a very simple way to make Nick Fuentes and other internet trolls who draw a following by posting "HITLER RULZ LOL" go away. Stop telling white teenagers, particularly white teenage males, that their race and ethnicity is the root of all evil and that they need to grovel and beg forgiveness for their existence from their non-white betters. The appeal of Fuentes and Co. is just a natural backlash to a generation's worth of this insanity.
“No “paleo” seems to believe that any religion, even chrstianity, is true. They just believe it is masterpiece and identify marker of “Western Man” and that it’s sole purpose is to make his civilization successful and enduring.”
My read of their views is not that they believe their religion is “true” or “not true”. They just believe “truth” is irrelevant on the ground.
They believe that those in power get to decide what is taught in schools—and therefore what young people and later adults believe.
If those beliefs (true or false or some combination) support civilization, prosperity, unity etc. then they are good.
If those beliefs do not support those things then they are bad.
Welcome to FR anyway :)
Fuentes is a gay Catholic Democrat. Most groypers are ideologically Democrats. They graduated school indoctrinated with every leftist ideology.. hatred of corporations, capitalism, the police , the free markets, Jews, Israel..
Words fumble, and misunderstandings so easily rage. The large wielders of words are clever and precisely imprecise, while seeming precise. Ergo, a game. So does it seem.
(& maybe that's why the world needs poets, eh?)
Ain't it the truth!
I am not anti-Israel. I am anti-my country being involved in their tribal disputes. As I have said many times...I wish I had a European-Christian country that cared for me and was a homeland for me as Israel is for Jews. I neither support or oppose Israel's right to exist. If they can secure that land and make it prosperous WITHOUT MY TAX DOLLARS OR MY POLITICIANS BEING BOUGHT OFF, then they have my congratulations. I wish them well and hope we can be allies.
Of course I understand that you will now tell me all of your religious beliefs that command me to support a foreign country who's people reject my Lord...etc... We will just disagree on that.
The ultimate goal of all humans everywhere is to worship and exalt G-d and be loyal to Him
Of course I agree with that. I was referring to the goal of the political entity...not the individual person. And I didn't say what my ultimate belief was on that. I just said in that post I wouldn't be disagreeing with the idea that it was to secure liberty. I might be convinced that a Christian Monarchy might be best outcome with the highest responsibility of the Monarch being leading his people to Christ.
Using "gay" instead of "homosexual".
Using the term "sexual orientation" instead of "sexual preference" is woke.
Using “gender” instead of “sex” is woke.
Using “Black” instead of “black” is woke”.
Using “Gender affirming surgery” instead of “genital mutilation surgery” is woke.
Using "Undocumented immigrant" instead of "Illegal immigrant" or "Illegal alien" is woke.
Saying that someone was "assigned" a sex (or worse gender) at birth is woke. A person's sex is merely recorded at birth, not assigned.
Using the term "equity" (equal outcome) instead of "equality" (equal opportunity) is woke.
Affirmative Action = quotas = discrimination = woke.
Progressive Republicans. Only the name has changed.
Yes. They would.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.