There is something very unsettling about certain decisive issues that are seeing a strange and unexplained resurgence as of late.  If you've been on social media in recent days, you'll see that formerly outlier subjects have all of a sudden been pushed to the center of the stage.   While there is the obvious threat of a Red/Green alliance – embodied in the guise of Zohran Mamdani and an illegal Islamic invasion here and around the world, for some unexplained reason, support for Israel is suddenly an issue of paramount importance in some circles.   And this comes while there are deep ideological rifts that are tearing apart the radical left, ripping it apart at the seams.   Now we're seeing a decidedly foul-mouthed personality who seems to think causing offense should be an Olympic sport.  He's being pushed into the limelight as some sort of 'thought leader' without actually engaging in the practice.

So, as the saying goes, you really have to question the timing in all of this.

Here we are, a year out from the most consequential midterms in the history of our constitutional republic, and some have suddenly decided that supporting those of the same Judeo-Christian values needs to be stopped.  

And a man who preaches collectivism and wants to 'give' on the free market, forgoing the crown jewel of Western civilization and freedom while destroying the GOP, is supposed to be a sort of leader.

If you've watched any of his content, you'll discover the two faces of Nick Fuentes.  His rumble rants are full of invective designed to energize his fanbase, but, unfortunately for him, he's also revealed too much of his underlying political philosophy, which decidedly leans left.  

Acolytes will almost invariably respond with a question on whether or not one listened to the entire broadcast. But that is just an obfuscation in hopes of nitpicking research on the subject.

Unfortunately, it's an irrelevant question anyway because when someone speaks of taking something out of context, that primarily means the words surrounding that particular discussion.  Not what was spoken 10 or 20 minutes before or later.

His words stand on their own, and taken in context, his assertion is that collectivist ideologies are superior, the right has to 'give' on the free market, and the GOP has to be destroyed.  Even more telling, his blurting out that some will say he's just a Democrat.

What is even worse is that he also reveals some of his most offensive content in this context, while he takes on a completely different persona in other interviews and podcasts.  

Conservative commentator Coleman Hughes noted this disturbing tendency in a recent video:

So, Nick Fuentes is essentially a two-man operation.

Rumble Nick energizes his core fans by attacking minorities, attacking women, and attacking America.

And then podcast Nick runs interference with the wider media, framing his sincerely racist rants as out-of-context clips, confident that most of, say, Tucker Carlson's audience will never see his Rumble streams and thus will never realize that adding context usually makes his clips sound worse, not better.

By playing this double game, Nick Fuentes ends up garnering sympathy from that wider audience while still keeping his "groyper" base energized. To make an analogy, it's Rumble Nick who commits all the crimes in private, but it's podcast Nick who shows up to the televised court date clean-shaven in a three-piece suit.

...

With Nick Fuentes, we don't need to wait for the smoking gun. He says what he believes every day on Rumble. If only we would listen. All we have to do is clear away the various smokescreens that he's thrown up to blind us to the sincerity of his dark ambitions.

Cancel culture doesn't work. But it's not a choice between cancellation on the one end and giving friendly interviews to Nazi sympathizers on the other.

What podcast hosts need to do is confront Nick Fuentes with the malevolent viewpoints that he has repeatedly and recently expressed, and arm themselves with the facts required to rebut him in real time. Or to put it differently, they need to be journalists.

That perfectly encapsulates his tactics of trying to sound reasonable in polite company and then going full offense in his other guise to attract his fan base.  This is how he operates, and now that it's been exposed, it will be hard to unsee it.   But it's even more important to understand why he's doing this, not just what he's doing.

We already know that in his unguarded moments, he's alluded to the attraction to the collectivist rather than individualist philosophy, which most assuredly places him on the left side of the political spectrum.  As the leftist ideologies – communism, socialism – are clearly collectivist.

In other unguarded rants, he's spoken of wanting to 'give' on what has led to 250 years of innovation and prosperity for the Western world.  Giving on the free market would mean the aforementioned Communism and Socialism – the pipe dreams of every violent leftist.  He also wants to destroy the GOP like the left.  So, how is he differentiated from the left?

Results speak for themselves.

It should be bloody obvious that attacking individualism, the free market, and the GOP will have a detrimental impact on the right, with the logical result of helping the left.  Two-faced Nick Fuentes needs to be treated in that context.

D. Parker is an engineer, inventor, wordsmith, and student of history, former director of communications for a civil rights organization, and a long-time contributor to conservative websites.  Find him on Substack.