Factions of the Rightosphere - The Racialist Right

Classical Liberal HBDers, White Advocates, Groypers, and the Neo-Alt Right.

Here comes the most controversial of the bunch. The source of so much hysteria by the commentariat and managerial state.

Whilst I do not share the views of the more radical of these tendencies, I will avoid mentioning any non-anons that may put them at risk, only mentioning those who are already known by Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and other anti-free speech, pro-censorship, and anti-pluralism organisations.

Post-Charlottesville (the ‘Unite the Right’ rally which resulted in the unfortunate death of a counter-protestor), the Racialist Right largely dropped the ‘Alt-Right’ label and started calling themselves ‘Dissident Right’, even though they are a very separate movement from the Elite Theory-focused, NRx adjacent ‘Dissident Right’ we talked about in the last entry. So, for simplicity's sake, I will use the term ‘Racialist Right’.

In this entry I will discuss four factions of this grouping: Classical Liberal HBDers, White Advocates, Groypers, and the Neo-Alt Right.

Classical Liberal HBD

The ‘Classical Liberal HBD’ is sufficiently distanced from the Alt-Right, and has a high enough attention to scientific detail and empirical methods, to be somewhat palatable to certain sections of the mainstream.

The term ‘Human Biodiversity’ (HBD) was first termed by Steve Sailer, who belongs to this faction and is a very influential and significant figure within it. 

However, the components of the theory in their modern form came to public relevance with the publishing of Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray’s bestselling 1994 book ‘The Bell Curve’, which used an empirical, scientific approach to conclude that inherited factors are crucial in determining average group outcomes. 

The book was very successful when it was released, but was highly controversial due to it suggesting a correlation between race and average IQ. 

Despite the original research fading into obscurity, in recent years you have seen figures like Bo Winegard from Aporia Magazine, a psychologist who was thrown out of higher education for his non-political research into human populations, revive these research projects. 

Nathan Cofnas’ ‘We Need to Talk About the Right’s Stupidity Problem’ makes the case that the theories of Wokeism presented by Chris Rufo and Richard Hanania are incomplete unless an alternative explanation for unequal group outcomes is offered, which as an advocate of HBD, he believes is genetics.

What distinguishes this group from others in this grouping is that they are not explicitly White advocates. They will defend their HBD conclusions from charges of racism by admitting that Asians and Jews are on average more intelligent than Whites, but by the same logic as they believe Asians and Jews outperforming Whites isn't proof of anti-White racism, Whites outperforming Blacks isn't proof of anti-Black racism.

When they do talk about anti-White racism, they will usually include ‘anti-Asian and anti-Jewish racism’ as well, which to be fair, does not mean that they say the DEI policies are NOT anti-White, just that they recognise that focusing on overachieving minorities is necessary to get a more sympathetic ear, and challenge the narrative of Whites keeping minorities out of high status positions. 

The Classical Liberal HBDers therefore really are ‘colourblind meritocrats’. They take the ideals of their worldview to a consistent conclusion, judging every person as an individual as opposed to membership of a specific group. It is an essential defence of colourblind meritocracy against Critical Race Theory (CRT), which will always point to unequal group outcomes as proof of racism, and so cannot be ignored if we want to move past Wokeness.

However, Classical Liberal HBD has been criticised by more radical racialist factions for not taking into account the inevitability of racial conflict, and thinking that just understanding genetic differences would result in racial harmony. In fact, Hanania and Keith Woods have argued, coming from different angles, that this would not change the impulses that motivate Wokeness, a commitment to egalitarianism and racial self-interest. They say that even if Race Realism was accepted, it wouldn’t change these core sentiments, they would just be justified in a different way.

Still, this is a very significant faction, and many other factions subscribe to HBD in one form or another, getting their data mostly from the Classical Liberal HBDers.

White Advocacy

This faction is personified by Jared Taylor and ‘American Renaissance’, as well as the ‘New Century Foundation’ of which Taylor is also President. Other examples of this faction include Occidental Quarterly (Charles Martel Society), Mankind Quarterly, and VDARE.

Jared Taylor is an interesting figure. Having grown up in Japan and speaking fluent Japanese, he is a cosmopolitan with a deep respect for other cultures, always cordial, civilised, polite, and speaking in a transatlantic accent, like a New England WASP gentleman from the early to mid 20th century (1).

Taylor, like figures in the ‘Classical Liberal HBD’ category, explains unequal group outcomes with a HBD/Race Realist analysis. He attributes differences in achievements to biological differences, of which East Asians and Jews are on average more intelligent than Whites, and Whites on average more intelligent than Blacks, though he acknowledges Blacks have areas where they are superior, like sports and music. 

Where he differs from the Classical Liberal HBDers is his explicit ‘White Advocacy’. His time in Japan, with its safe, clean streets and social cohesion, inspired him to advocate for racially homogenous communities, specifically for Whites. 

In many ways Jared Taylor echoes the Nouvelle Droite and the idea of Ethno-Pluralism; indeed he was responsible for bringing various European New Right ideas into the US, specifically the works of Alain de Benoist and Guillaume Faye.

Taylor opposed mass immigration into the United States before it was fashionable, and when the GOP generally wouldn’t touch the issue. He opposes the 1965 Immigration Act for changing the ethnic composition of the United States, despite promises at the time from its advocates that it would do no such thing.

He condemns Jim Crow and agrees that interracial marriage should be legal. Jared Taylor simply wants to advocate for the interests of Whites, to be able to have free association and voluntary racial segregation, in the same way that other groups can have their own spaces and communities, and which was seen as entirely in-keeping with classical liberalism pre-1964.

Taylor does not indulge in the antisemitism of many on the Right, and in fact praises the Jews for their disproportionate achievement.

Whilst seeming very moderate and reasonable, the establishment sees this group as a uniquely dangerous threat, precisley because it seems reasonable and has the potential to persuade the well-educated. V-Dare was forced to close down due to lawsuits, and Jared Taylor remains banned on X, even whilst more extreme figures have been reinstated by Elon Musk.

Groypers

So the Groypers more-a-less replaced the Alt-Right in terms of their reach and visibility. Nick Fuentes, the undisputed leader of the Groypers, is of a different generation compared to the Millennial Alt-Right leadership, and gives a distinctly Zoomer feel to it.

Basically, the big divide in what remained of the Alt-Right post-Charlottesville was known as the ‘Optics War’. The optics of Charlottesville, with the explicit Nazi imagery, was disastrous to the movement’s mainstream credibility. Some, like ‘The Right Stuff’ who I will talk about later, thought there was essentially no problem, but wanted to distance themselves from mainstream conservatism, as they saw Charlottesville as a betrayal from them. 

However, another faction, seeing how the CRT crowd were accusing traditional Americana iconography of being ‘White supremacist’, wanted to move away from the Nazi vibes towards a more Old School Americana, America First aesthetic, that would connect better with mainstream conservative circles and MAGA.

This is where Fuentes came in. Fuentes was, whatever you think of his opinions, a very skilled communicator. He retained the most effective parts of the Alt-Right movement. For instance, the usage of ‘Pepe the Frog’ (creating their own deviation in ‘Groyper’), the heavy use of humour, irony, counter-cultural rebelliousness, and ‘fun’. However, they swapped out the ‘Sieg Heil’s’ for ‘America First’, with the aesthetics of the Groypers intentionally becoming merged with those of MAGA. If you want to hear Fuentes completely serious, explaining his tactics, watch this interview.

The key moment when the Groypers emerged triumphant from the ‘Optics War’ was at Turning Point USA in 2019, when hecklers aligned with Fuentes publicly accused Charlie Kirk of selling out to Israel and ‘LGBT Conservatives’.

Whilst the Groypers are still marginalised at places like CPAC (Fuentes creating his own AFPAC, with Marjorie Taylor Greene attending), it’s clear that the narrative has shifted, something that is down to the communication and tactical skill of Fuentes. Turning Point USA has gone from a bland, ‘Beltway Libertarian’, ‘DEI Conservative’ containment organisation to Charlie Kirk criticising Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Movement, clearly knowing where the movement is heading. Fuentes himself has said that Kirk sounds like him a few years ago.

UBERSOY

has done a great analysis of the Groyper ‘America First’ movement and what it represents. In some ways it is similar to the more radical strands of Paleoconservatism, but as Paul Gottfried would say, in a ‘garbled form’. It separates itself completely from old school American WASP conservatism in favour of a unique blend of ‘America First’, ‘Christian Futurism’, and ‘Demographic Realism’. I would recommend checking out his article for a deeper analysis of Groyperism. 01/09/2024 edit note: My original version of this analysis contained some inaccurate information, and Ubersoy clarified some of the nuances of the Groyper position in his article, hence why I linked to it.

But what are Fuentes’ actual opinions? Basically, an unhealthy, extreme obsession with Jews and reactionary Christianity, the latter of which sharply distinguishes it from the secular Alt-Right. 

In the interview with Keith Woods, Fuentes mentions that he had his movement be more Christian-focused, as a means to blur the line between himself and mainstream conservatives, which the Alt-Right failed to do.

It’s hard to know when Fuentes is merely joking, and when he is being serious, which is a deliberate strategy. 

Similar to fringe Paleoconservatives like Joseph Sobran (in some ways the more intellectual, highbrow predecessor of Groyperism) Fuentes also supports Palestine over Israel, due to him and his movement’s pathological hatred of Jews and viewing them as the cause of Western decline. Despite not being a Neo-Nazi, as his hatred of Jews is religious and political rather than racial, Fuentes does deny the Holocaust, which is possibly the most sacred line in American conservative politics. 

All in all, whatever one might think of his opinions, Fuentes is a talented communicator who clearly understands his base, inspiring loyalty and devotion similar to that of Donald Trump, but on a much smaller scale. At only 24 years old, he could easily become a major leader of the right in the future.

Neo-Alt Right

Finally, I will talk about the remnants of the ‘Alt-Right’, that I will term the ‘Neo-Alt Right.’ These were the groups on the other side of the ‘Optics War’, who largely lost out to Fuentes’ Groypers. They maintain consistency with the previous Alt-Right aesthetic, being Pagan rather than Christian, and increasingly distancing themselves from mainstream conservatism.

This group is diverse, it can range from erudite intellectuals to Neo-Nazi skinheads. However, the difference between the Neo-Alt Right and the ‘White Advocacy’ of people such as Jared Taylor is that they tend to both be explicitly White Nationalist, i.e., they want the creation of a state whereby no non-Whites can live, and also far more antisemitic. 

People like Kevin MacDonald would be the ‘high brow’ of this faction, even though he predates the Neo-Alt Right and even the Alt-Right.

Other examples of the high-brow element include Arktos Journal and Imperium Press, that are more based around the European New Right, Nouvelle Droite, and the ideas of Alexander Dugin.

Counter-Currents is a remnant of the Alt-Right era that is still around, with it being somewhere between the highbrow, intellectualism of the previous two and the obsessive antisemitism of other groups. However, it is a good authority on analysing internal disputes in the Racialist Right, like New Right Poast is for the Dissident Right. More explicitly Neo-Nazi is ‘The Right Stuff’, who were bitter enemies of the Groypers post-Charlottesville.

The more low-brow Neo-Alt Righters continue with the optical disaster of the Swastikas, and all believe, to a greater or lesser extent, that Jews are a hostile force in Western society and are undermining White interests. Whereas the Groypers come at this from a religious angle, the low-brow factions of the Neo-Alt Right tend to come at it from a racial angle. They also almost always deny the Holocaust.

There are any communities subscribing to this faction, Stormfront being the most prominent example, which is basically just the classic skinhead scene that has been around for decades (that is also so obviously a Fed honeypot.) /pol/ these days is virtually indistinguishable from Stormfront.

Conclusion

The Racialist Right is an absolute pariah in mainstream public discourse, with people advocating for these positions usually having a black mark on their career, such is the society we live in.

Some are unquestionably very unpleasant people. However, many also are simply Whites defending their racial pride, like members of other groups like Blacks and Hispanics are allowed to do, or researchers trying to understand group disparities.

So long as the hypocritical taboo of White identity and the lack of discussion around genetics continues, these tendencies will continue to be a feature of the online right-wing ecosystem, as people seek answers to questions the establishment won’t answer. 

Bibliography

1. Nieli, Russell. "Jared Taylor and White Identity." Key Thinkers of the Radical Right (2019): 137-154.

Click here for the final entry, the Manosphere and Conspiracists.