2,817 words

Nick Fuentes officially launched “Groyper War 2” on Monday, August 12. Fuentes’s stated goal is to save Trump from his disastrous campaign, and by extension, America from four years of gay race communism under Kamala and Tim Walz. You can learn more about the first Groyper Wars here and here, in which Fuentes aimed to push Turning Point USA further to the Right and away from Conservatism Inc.

There have been some criticisms and concerns about Groyper War 2 within our sphere. Many of these are more about Nick Fuentes than the actual Groyper War, so I will analyze the Groyper War as independently as possible from Fuentes, and then in conjunction with Fuentes.

At first glance, Groyper War 2 may seem counter productive. Some have cast it as resentful, petty, immature, or even a ploy by Fuentes to chase clout or to subvert the Trump campaign as a bad actor. So, what do the Groypers want that is so supposedly controversial?

One of their main criticisms is that the Trump campaign is destroying itself by pandering to every identity group except whites, which is essentially going “woke.” For reference, a Homeland Institute poll found that a charge of “wokeness” is almost twice as damaging as a charge of “racism” among white Republican voters for a political candidate, so it naturally follows that this is a sound criticism of the Trump campaign.

Two other major items on the Groyper War agenda are no immigration and no foreign wars, especially against Iran on behalf of Israel. While Trump has promised the largest mass deportation of illegal immigrants in history, he has also promised to hand out green cards to foreign college graduates. Trump’s recent stance on green cards and failure to build a wall cast doubt on whether he will follow through with mass deportations, absent overwhelming pressure. For reference, Trump’s green card proposal is another topic which the Homeland Institute has polled on.

Trump has also been pandering hard to the Jewish vote (and more importantly, their donors) and promising to support Israel even more than the Biden/Kamala administration. This is despite systematic war crimes in Gaza, even including Israeli officials publicly debating whether their soldiers should be allowed to rape Palestinian prisoners. Older white voters may like Zionism, but for many young voters it is morally repulsive because they know more about Israel. Furthermore, Zionism is against their interests because they would be the ones at risk of being drafted if the US is dragged into a broader conflict. For reference, a Homeland Institute poll from early 2024 found that there was widespread opposition to direct military intervention in the Gaza conflict with airstrikes or boots on the ground, along with significant opposition to a draft.

Fuentes also wants Trump to pick a new Vice President. I disagree with him on this. That Vance is mutuals with people on X/Twitter who are adjacent to us is an opportunity. Nor do I think switching VPs is a realistic goal. I admit part of this is how both Vance and I went down the “smart white boy without a trust fund to military to law school” focus tree. This highlights the importance of identity politics in the current era, which I will discuss later.

However, I am in strong agreement with Fuentes’s demand that Trump fire two of his campaign managers, Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita. Wiles has stated that “For every Karen we lose, we’re going to win a Jamal and an Enrique” which aside from being flagrantly anti-white is also the exact opposite of the implicit White Nationalism which propelled Trump to victory in 2016.

The exact details fall outside the scope of this article, but the attempt on Trump’s life appears to have been an inside job, much like the JFK assassination. If elements within the establishment are able and willing to send assassins against Trump, it would be reasonable to assume that they are also able and willing to send saboteurs. I generally dislike the paranoid ideation that “everyone I disagree with is a fed” but I would be surprised if the regime hasn’t infiltrated the Trump campaign with at least one major saboteur. They certainly like to send bad actors to derail pro-white organizing. I don’t have any hard evidence that Susie Wiles or Chris LaCivita are feds, and there is an abundance of credentialed idiots running around in politics. But it wouldn’t surprise me if they are saboteurs. More on this later.

I see Groyper War 2 less as an attack and more as an intervention of the anti-drug kind. For an intervention to be effective, it must be tough. Politeness will only further encourage self-destructive behavior. My main criticism is that it should have come earlier. However, this wasn’t really possible. Concerns had been mounting for some time, but Fuentes needed strong evidence before he could launch an intervention, or he would be accused of acting in bad faith even more than he currently is. The perfect time would have been when Trump initially disavowed Project 2025, but shortly afterwards, Trump was almost assassinated, so it was for the best that Fuentes didn’t launch a Groyper War then. Launching it too soon after the assassination would have been terrible optics and counter productive. Thus, now is the earliest reasonable time a second Groyper War could be launched.

In their order of likelihood, there are three possible electoral scenarios:

1. Trump wins.

2. Kamala wins but not because of the Groyper War.

3. Kamala wins at least in part because of the Groyper War.

Groyper War 2 makes sense for all three scenarios.

I disagree with Fuentes that Trump is headed towards a defeat. But it would make sense to launch the Groyper War even if Trump is going to win. This is because Trump has a well-established pattern of doing the exact opposite of what Sulla did: he rewards his enemies and takes his friends and allies for granted. Or even worse, throws them under the bus. Perhaps due to his business background Trump sees his supporters as employees whom he can boss around and his enemies as people he has to make a deal with. Perhaps something more nefarious is going on. Regardless, this is illogical because politics is more akin to war than business. Fuentes is focusing his ire on Trump’s campaign but not Trump. While I agree with this for strategic purposes, I see Trump as part of the problem.

If I am correct that Trump will likely win, then the Groyper War doesn’t really threaten Trump’s chances of victory. But we will need to constantly pressure Trump to keep his campaign promises once in office. And given how poorly Trump performed during his first term, the best time to start that pressure is now, before he takes office.

The die-hard MAGA crowd has been rather perturbed by the Groyper War. Part of this is cult-like loyalty to Trump, which they also accuse the Groypers of having to Fuentes. This is like the pot calling the kettle black. Many of the X accounts which have added red and blue shading to their profile pictures to signal support for Trump have also been saying things that imply the Groypers and Fuentes are inconsequential. They have also been accusing Fuentes of being a bad actor trying to derail the Trump campaign— and oftentimes in a tone that seems shrill and panicked even across the cold text of the internet.

An extreme example of this was when Milo (talk about inconsequential) threatened via X: “I’ve identified 32 inner circle Groypers so far and using public records been able to verify their full names, addresses, and in most cases phone numbers and employers. Drops will begin tomorrow.”

Interestingly, on Saturday, August 10, I was permanently suspended from X for allegedly impersonating myself. This was after I had voiced support for Groyper War 2. I doubt the timing was a coincidence. I expect to have my account back in a few days. In the meantime, it further suggests that the MAGA sphere has become quite triggered.

They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. The Groypers being inconsequential is mutually exclusive with them having the ability to endanger Trump’s chances of victory. Whether Fuentes is a fed falls outside the scope of this article. But if he is working for the feds to sabotage Trump, then it is even more likely that some of Trump’s campaign advisors are also federal saboteurs, as mentioned above. If so, Fuentes’s federal subversion would have been impossible without them first subverting the Trump campaign. This is because Fuentes would have had little ground to criticize the Trump campaign on—let alone launch a second Groyper War.

If Fuentes were acting as a fed, I would expect him to tell his followers not just to stay home on election day, but to vote for Kamala out of irony or spite, and under no circumstance whatsoever try to pressure the Trump campaign to make good decisions. While Fuentes has encouraged his followers not to vote, he has not encouraged them to vote for Kamala. Most importantly, all the demands Fuentes has made aside from replacing JD Vance are excellent and realistically attainable, as discussed above. If Fuentes launched Groyper War 2 because he is a fed, then someone at Langley has made a grave miscalculation.

In fact, while Trump has yet to fire Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita, on August 15 he brought back his 2016 campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski. Despite some pundits insisting that this was mere coincidence, that this was a just three days after the official launch of Groyper War 2 strongly suggests that Groyper pressure was at least a substantial factor in this decision. The Trump campaign is already better off.

What if Trump isn’t likely to win? Despite how the mainstream polls were wrong in 2016, the MAGA camp is nonetheless shaken because of polls showing Kamala stealing Trump’s lead. Furthermore, Keith Woods wrote an article predicting a Kamala win based upon a Cold War era methodology of predicting US elections. And electoral politics has become more about galvanizing one’s base through identity politics than changing people’s minds, which is the opposite of Trump’s current strategy.

Like the Hand Formula in tort law, we should analyze risk by multiplying the likelihood of a loss by its magnitude. Even if a Kamala win isn’t likely, the magnitude of loss would be huge, albeit more so for some people than others—more on that later.

If the Trump campaign is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, then Groyper War 2 makes total sense as a desperate Hail Mary. What is there to even lose? If I’m wrong about the Groyper War being helpful, then the only damage done will be that Kamala may have a slightly stronger electoral mandate. This would be worth it if it helps discipline the GOP so they can prevail in 2028, assuming we still have a country then.

Pedro Gonzalez, who sided with Ron DeSantis over Trump in the primaries has also noted a “vibe shift” since Kamala was anointed. And while he has reversed course after being dog piled by MAGA, Kyle Rittenhouse said he would write in Ron Paul on the basis that Trump is tepid on defending gun rights. Returning to the fed accusation against Nick Fuentes, both Pedro Gonzalez and Kyle Rittenhouse have fought with Fuentes. Are they also criticizing the Trump campaign as part of a vast, all-encompassing federal plot? That seems unlikely.

However, Rittenhouse does appear to have extracted some sort of concession(s) from the Trump campaign on gun rights in return for his renewed support. What exactly this is remains vague, and Trump is known for breaking campaign promises. Regardless, similar to Trump hiring Corey Lewandowski, this shows that pressure works.

What if the election is balanced on the edge of a knife in several key swing states, and the Groypers can directly with their votes or indirectly with their memes decide the outcome?

We don’t know how many Groypers are in the swing states, but it’s unlikely they have enough votes in and of themselves to make a difference. But we do know that the Alt Right’s memes and energy helped propel Trump to victory in 2016. If this weren’t true, the Left wouldn’t still be seething about it to this day, as seen by their hitting Douglass Mackey, aka Ricky Vaughn, with bogus charges over memes. The Groypers can choose either to meme against Trump, or to meme for him, thereby influencing many times more people than just themselves. Furthermore, they can choose to volunteer for the Trump campaign or not. This is important because I do believe Fuentes when he claims that his followers have infiltrated Turning Point USA, College Republicans, Young Republicans, and several campaigns and organizations. Charlie Kirk has been constantly encouraging people to volunteer and do the grunt work of ballot harvesting, calling voters, etc. to match the machine of the Democrats. Like memers, volunteers are worth several votes.

This is especially true since a hotly contested swing state could be decided by just 1-2% of the vote. Fuentes doesn’t need to build a mass movement to influence such a slim margin, just a cohort of radical visionaries. He already has this. Furthermore, while Groyper War 2 is not exclusively being waged by the Groypers, it is mostly a Groyper affair. The establishment is therefore really only fighting one faction of the broader dissident right. We have yet to bring our full force to bear.

It is still unlikely that the Groypers could decide the destiny of several swing states—in this election. In 2028, more boomers who reliably vote GOP will have died off, the country will be browner, and the Groypers who are currently 14 to 17 years of age will vote for their first time. Unlike older voters who forgot and forgave constant GOP betrayal, these new voters will remember how the Trump campaign is acting today. Courting them now would be wise, especially since very few on either side of the aisle are going to be deradicalized by a mortgage these days, given that home ownership for young people has become almost as fantastical as dragon ownership.

Even if the Groypers only have a slim chance of tanking Trump this election, the establishment GOP would be wise to listen to their demands. They have a lot more to lose than we do. In fact, some of us have something to be gained by a Kamala victory. If she were to implement price controls, it will lead to Soviet-style shortages. Maybe mere inconveniences at first, but they would probably worsen over time. The regime’s legitimacy would drop even more when it can no longer provide basic consumer goods and comfort. We would see soccer moms fed posting in skull masks on TikTok.

The Groypers would only need 1 to 2% of the vote in a hotly contested swing state to decide the fate of the country. Buttering their biscuit as lavishly as the GOP does for Israel, megacorps, the pro-life lobby, and the gun rights lobby would be wise.

Because the magnitude of a potential election loss is so great it can’t be discounted even if the likelihood of it happening is slim. Fuentes and his Groypers are therefore in a good position to issue reasonable demands. The GOP should treat them like every other respectable lobby.

On X, Fuentes stated:

“The Groyper War is based on the radical notion that young men have the power to exert pressure on presidential candidates just like Silicon Valley, Wall Street, or the Israel Lobby. The forgotten Americans can’t donate $100 million but we can withhold 10,000’s of votes in MI.”

The Groyper War is not extreme or immature. We have tried to work within the system and have been rebuked at every turn. Everyone else does pressure campaigns such as coordinated letter writing and phone calling congressional offices. The only real differences between such political activity as usual and the Groyper War is the intensity, innovation, who is doing it, and their ultimate, forbidden goal of securing a future for our people.

All is fair in love and war, and I would add in politics since it is the waging of war by other means. The people upset with Groyper War 2 should hate the game, but not the players. It was Trump and the GOP, after all, who have incentivized playing hardball and disincentivized cooperating with them.

The Groyper War is justified regardless of the the state of the election and regardless of what one thinks of Fuentes. And those who are questioning its efficacy should recall that the first Groyper War successfully pushed Charlie Kirk further to the Right—although I suspect some who are attacking the current Groyper War are doing so because they are afraid it could be effective.

Groyper War 2 is about demanding our seat at the table. And if we aren’t given our seat, we will flip the table over.