why we shouldn’t ignore ‘America first’
Recent viral clips of American far-right and neo-Nazi political activist Nick Fuentes making racist attacks on Indians, Indian food, and Indian-origin Americans have brought renewed focus on his agenda and growing influence positioning on American politics and culture.
His strident opposition on racist grounds to Indian-origin entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy’s bid for governorship of Ohio as a Republican candidate have also spotlighted a growing strand of extremist U.S. political thought which goes far beyond the nativist ideology of the MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement championed by US President Donald Trump. In fact, Trump, in this worldview, is seen as too liberal!
For example, Fuentes rejected US Vice President J.D. Vance’s dinner invitation for a traditional Indian family meal, saying “I didn’t want to eat shit.” He said “we don’t want them [Indians] here because… they literally eat cow shit in India. I know they will scratch their ass and then prepare food and eat shit that way also.” Comments like these indicate how Indians are now at the centre of attacks racist attacks by Fuentes, as much as Jews and other ethnicities.
Nick Fuentes reacts to JD Vance telling him to “eat shit”:
“It’s honestly so flattering that the vice-president would invite me to join his family in a traditional Indian dinner.”
— Spencer Hakimian (@SpencerHakimian) December 24, 2025
Such comments are amplified by a vast ecosystem of his far-right followers, loosely called ‘Groypers’. American podcaster Joe Rogan has even speculated that in “20 years from now someone like him [Fuentes] could be President.”
Joe Rogan and Shane Gillis praise Nick Fuentes and say he could be the president in 10 years. pic.twitter.com/dXAkPG4IrK
— Nick Fuentes WarRoom (@fuentesnation) December 27, 2025
Who is Nick Fuentes and why he matters
Nick Fuentes is an openly neo-Nazi political commentator and organiser associated with the “America First” movement whose significance today lies less in his formal platforms than in the scale at which his rhetoric circulates online. While his owned channels are relatively small and heavily moderated or banned, short clips of his statements routinely achieve mass reach, with multiple videos on X surpassing 10–20 million views through reposts, quote-tweet pile-ons, and algorithmic amplification.
His influence now operates through intermittent viral exposure, not steady audience growth.
That exposure carries explicitly extremist content into mainstream feeds. Clips featuring Fuentes praising Adolf Hitler—calling him “really ****ing cool” and complaining that “we’re not allowed to say anything positive about Hitler, even though he did a lot of good things for Germany”—have circulated far beyond any audience that intentionally follows him.
Piers Morgan: “Do you think Hitler was ‘very fucking cool?’”
Nick Fuentes: “Yes, and I’m tired of pretending he’s not”
This vile piece of shit adores Hitler, who murdered 6 million Jews, and still has the audacity to say he does not hate the Jews.pic.twitter.com/81xPc688ar
— Vivid.
(@VividProwess) December 9, 2025
These moments of virality detach the statements from context and present them as spectacle, debate, or controversy, dramatically expanding their reach.
“The things that are killing our country are mass migration, feminism, and our jewish oligarchy. Our country is being MURDERED by these three things.”
– Nick Fuentes pic.twitter.com/s3WI2ALUgu
— Fuentes Updates (@FuentesUpdates) December 27, 2025
The same amplification applies to his antisemitic claims. Statements such as “Jews control the world,” “the Jews run the media, the banks, and the government,” and “Jews are the biggest problem in the United States” have appeared in widely shared clips that rack up millions of impressions. The effect is not persuasion through argument but repeated exposure to conspiracy theories historically associated with real-world violence.
Nick Fuentes calls out Jеws for complaining about the same barbarians they themselves brought into Western societies.
“Who brought them here in the first place? It was the Jеwish lawyers and the Jеwish groups that pushed the hardest.” pic.twitter.com/Hny3OWwJDx
— S.clips (@whitesocksclips) December 23, 2025
Fuentes’s racist remarks have traveled similarly far. Clips featuring him saying that “Black people should be in jail for the most part” have circulated widely, reframing mass incarceration as racial destiny in front of audiences orders of magnitude larger than his core base.
His misogynistic statements—such as “women need to shut the **** up” and claims that women’s suffrage was “a mistake”—are likewise amplified through short, shareable excerpts optimised for outrage.
Nick Fuentes sets the record straight.
“Do people think I genuinely hate non-whites, jews, women?” pic.twitter.com/oJum6dL90Z
— Fractured Light (@FracturedLight0) December 18, 2025
Even his most extreme claims, including comparisons of interracial relationships to bestiality and assertions that “miscegenation” violates nature, have reached mass audiences via clip culture. This is not marginal exposure. It is millions of views at a time, repeatedly, across news cycles.
The central fact is not who Fuentes is, but how far his words travel.
In the current media environment, an openly neo-Nazi worldview—Holocaust minimisation, antisemitic conspiracy, racial hierarchy, misogyny—can be injected into the feeds of tens of millions without institutional backing or sustained platforms. Fuentes’s reach demonstrates a system in which extremism is amplified by design, and where the true danger lies not in niche followings, but in viral scale.
Casual humour, racism and provocation: why Fuentes’ messaging is effective
These statements are not merely offensive; they follow historically dangerous patterns. Antisemitic conspiracy theories portraying Jews as secretly controlling society have preceded violence, exclusion, and genocide in multiple historical contexts. When Fuentes says that Jews collectively control governments or media, he is invoking the same logic that has been used to justify persecution by framing violence as self-defence.
The danger extends beyond antisemitism. Claims that Black people are inherently criminal normalise collective punishment and erode the principle of individual rights. Claims that women should be politically silent undermine democratic legitimacy itself. Together, these ideas reject pluralism in favour of an authoritarian social order based on race, gender, and obedience.
What makes Fuentes especially dangerous is how these ideas are delivered. He presents them casually, often with humour or provocation, encouraging audiences to laugh along. This lowers social resistance. Statements that would once have triggered immediate rejection become familiar through repetition, transforming extremism into background noise rather than a red flag.
The scale of exposure intensifies the risk. Short clips of Fuentes’s statements—often stripped of context—have circulated widely on X, with individual clips surpassing 10–20 million views when amplified by large accounts and algorithmic promotion.
This level of reach far exceeds his core audience and repeatedly injects extremist rhetoric into mainstream feeds.
‘Groypers’ as stormtroopers: how they mobilise and communicate
Fuentes’s supporters, known as the “Groypers”, are not passive viewers. They are organised and active. Groypers have coordinated harassment campaigns against journalists, academics, Jewish organisations, and political figures they perceive as enemies. These campaigns have included mass trolling, targeted abuse, and doxxing.
At political events and campus talks, Groypers have appeared in coordinated groups to heckle speakers and chant antisemitic slogans, sometimes forcing events to be altered or cancelled due to safety concerns. Their actions are designed to intimidate rather than persuade.
Online, Groypers frequently flood comment sections and social media with antisemitic and racist messaging that mirrors Fuentes’s own language about Jewish control and racial hierarchy. Jewish journalists and public figures have been disproportionately targeted with messages repeating conspiracy theories about Jewish power and disloyalty.
This behaviour reflects the ideology itself. Fuentes regularly frames opponents as enemies rather than fellow citizens, encouraging confrontation over debate. The movement rewards escalation and loyalty, creating a feedback loop in which increasingly extreme behaviour is normalised and encouraged.
Virality and visibility: Gen Z and why Fuentes represents a challenge to the old order
Nick Fuentes is dangerous not because he is shocking, but because he is representative of the current media and political environment. His explicit statements—praising Hitler, blaming Jews collectively for global events, dehumanising Black people, denying women political voice, and comparing interracial relationships to bestiality—are not slips or jokes. They are the foundation of a coherent authoritarian worldview.
The fact that such rhetoric can reach tens of millions of people through viral circulation reveals a deeper problem. Extremist ideas no longer require institutional backing or mass agreement to spread. They require only visibility, controversy, and repetition.
At a time when Gen Z largely consumes information through Instagram feeds and social echo chambers increasingly define our world view, Fuentes is not an outlier to be dismissed. His growing social media base is reflective of his reach and influence.
He is evidence of an information system in which openly bigoted, anti-democratic ideas can circulate at scale with minimal resistance. Ignoring that reality does not neutralise the threat. It allows it to continue, normalised by exposure and shielded by irony, until the consequences become impossible to ignore.
He is not important because he is unique, he is important because he is not.
(R. Mehta tracks US far-right political movements, social trends and commentary).
Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the author’s own.
END OF ARTICLE
