Today Tucker interviewed Nick Fuentes,
And i watched the full thing. (2x speed, will not give him any more of my time than necessary), my stance with him is unambiguously clear, i find him extremely DISHONEST.
Nothing special IMPO, here are my minutes but you can watch it.:
-Nick telling his story for the 100th time,
-Trucker indirectly asks if ALL the jews are deffective genetically and Nick flipflops (because he has said it is genetic, but because he's on Tucker's show now he "fully agrees with Trucker")
-White americans becoming a minority, and how christian zionists aid israel (fair point but no conversation or why this is or accountability)
-And how women are primal, simple minded beings who should just stick to the kitchen....
But men have to lead....
And men aren't inspired by females that act like OF hoes and boss their man around and the guy lets them get away with it AKA simping.
-conversation about porn, videogames and how that affects the youth in the political extrimism realm and in the dating realm
What was NOT discussed.
No discussion about Nick's fair claims of Tucker's CIA past and his dad's CIA connections (which was Nick's response to the Tucker / Candace interview)
No conversation about Candace and his CNN style attack on her for a month
No conversation around white americans joining the millitary and then blaming the jews for all the wars (other than Lucas Gage, i haven't hear many white nationalists addressing it head on)
No holding Nick accountable for any of his pathethic beta male attacks on Candace's investigation
Barely any pushback about his stances on women and his (latent hate towards them)
No conversation about Charly (other than maintaining it was a leftist despite Candace's evidence) clearly because he commited to that lie, and now that he is loosing that plot he wont bring it up to Tucker's audience.
No conversation about how men act lile man-children , how men don't lead or missinterpret leading with authoritarianism or aggresivity.
The interview felt like eating a bowl of oatmeal with water to me, softball, but maybe others who never heard this before would learn something who knows, this felt more like part of a media tour and a platforming symbolic excersise than anything else.
Nevertheless i maintain my stance.
On a different Note
I have a problem with a general point i keep seeing, it came up in this interview
The idea that " rethoric doesnt cause violence" and that statement in and of itself is rethorical, it came up in this interview,
on the one hand Nick has said that the allaged shooter was a "radicalized leftists" and all this rethoric and drugs and deep web forums and all that caused this person to go off, and on the other no accountability for his own (could easily be interpreted as) incendiary rethoric, and that is not exclussive to Nick, everyone uses this rethorical point that "words don't cause violence" and in the realm of rethoric, it is a chess move, that makes sense, but IN reality *REALITY* though, ABSOLUTELY words can 100% lead to violence.
...maybe it's just me getting older by i find these rethorical false points incredibly tedious and even annoying, symptoms of political stagnation going over the same overcooked points endlessly.
The other day i was watching a Simpsons clip and thought, this episode is from 1997, and this has been a thing since probably the 60s, 60 years and people STILL get cat-laser-pointed , walked in circles with rethoric like this..
Rethoric is a sales pitch, reality is reality.
EDIT: sentence / word out of place
) when his viewer suggests to look into diet in order to improve his health issues...
:
)
