Read more

Much of the Right expected the assassination to inspire a social revolution similar to how George Floyd’s death changed the country. America would experience a cultural shift to the Right, a crackdown on the Left, and a religious revival in the wake of Kirk’s assassination.

But that didn’t happen.

Kirk’s death has instead been trivialized. Charlie now serves as a source either for crackpot theories or for irreverent memes. His murder ended up exacerbating the Right’s divisions and retardation while the Left cast aside its caution to revel in the assassination.

Kirk’s death was a tremendous loss for America, and a sign that our country increasingly can’t take anything seriously. Terror attacks, assassinations, and other horrific acts can be quickly forgotten and turned into memes. In the TikTok age, it’s hard to turn anything into a serious call for action. Everything can be forgotten and trivialized. Even George Floyd has gone from a martyr to a meme. The same happened with Kirk.

The fault for this lies with both the public and elements of the Right. The public became indifferent to the murder and moved on, allowing the Left to exploit it as a joke. Meanwhile, the Right turned Kirk’s murder into a carnival of bullshit that further undermined the seriousness of it with idiotic conspiracy theories designed to increase audience engagement rather than public memorialization of the fallen conservative.

Kirk was arguably the most important conservative in America. He was a critical player in the transformation of the Right, as told in Whitepill. He helped mainstream ideas once consigned to the fringe, such as the Great Replacement and criticism of MLK. He pushed for immigration to become one of the central planks of modern conservatism. Most importantly, he was able to translate these ideas into real-world engagement through his campus events and deep connections to the GOP. No one has emerged to fill his massive shoes. He was a unique figure who deserves to be memorialized as a great American.

Ordinary conservatives still properly revere Kirk. Turn on Fox News today and you’ll be greeted by earnest tributes to the TPUSA founder. The tens of thousands preparing to attend remembrance services across the country still treat the murder with the appropriate level of seriousness. Republican politicians will still try to remember Kirk through public memorials and naming landmarks after him. Kirk will certainly not be forgotten.

But the public isn’t as concerned with him. According to a conservative polling firm, only 24 percent of the public even knows Tyler Robinson was a leftist. Very few believe the country is menaced by left-wing terrorism. Kirk, for regular Americans, was just a nice young man cut down by a random maniac. In their eyes, that’s all there is to it.

It’s difficult for normies to deeply care about anything that doesn’t directly impact their lives. Unless you were a highly-engaged conservative, or a liberal who hated him, you weren’t invested in caring much about Charlie Kirk. He wasn’t the president or a widely-beloved entertainer. One could even argue that Dolly Parton’s natural death upset normies more than Kirk’s murder. The average normie thought the Kirk slaying was awful, but that’s about as much as it registered. As soon as the murder was solved, there was no more reason for them to keep up with the story. It was a terrible thing, but it didn’t change anything in their lives. They moved on.

This is how normies not that plugged into social media think of Charlie Kirk. For those plugged in, Kirk has become a meme. Hop onto TikTok and you will find numerous AI-generated videos of the TPUSA founder going on adventures with George Floyd and Jeffrey Epstein. “You have created a million Charlie Kirks” and the “We are Charlie Kirk” song are now internet punchlines. Clips from his assassination are now regularly used to jokingly react to sports and entertainment news, further trivializing his murder. If you see Kirk content now–and it’s not about how his wife or Israel killed him–it’s most likely going to be a goofy meme.

The normie indifference to Kirk has helped the Left. No longer do leftists need to tiptoe around the slain conservative. Now they relish every opportunity to mock Kirk’s death and condemn the victim as a “bad” person. You no longer have to worry about losing your job or getting harassed by a right-wing internet mob for minimizing or reveling in Kirk’s assassination. In fact, the only people who still face any Kirk-related consequences are those who witnessed the murder and conspiracy theorists suspect are in on it.

Hasan Piker defines the Left’s current mood towards Kirk. He jokingly sang “We Are Charlie Kirk” at a recent event, prompting outrage from conservatives but with no real consequences. He also praised Candace Owens for spreading conspiracy theories about Kirk, arguing the idiotic notions undermined the Right’s response to the killing and helped the Left avoid blame for it.

I couldn’t put it better myself.

As I’ve long argued, the Right’s response to the murder has been a disaster in itself. While many right-wingers were confident the assassination would trigger a civil conflict, it only generated a civil war within its own ranks. The most obvious source for dissension was the conspiracy theories that blame the murder on Israel, TPUSA, Erika Kirk, France, and pretty much everyone but the Left. Instead of worrying about left-wing extremism, the conspiracists fixate on Trump, Erika Kirk, Blake Neff, and other conservatives as the real villains of the story. It makes its adherents turn into Tyler Robinson fans, with many prominent conspiracists wishing to free the man who killed Kirk. There is no evidence for the conspiracy theories besides altered camera images and hallucinations from Candace Owens’s imagination.

It has genuinely convinced millions of people. Tyler Robinson’s trial should’ve convinced any person with a functioning brain that he alone killed Kirk. But the trial did little to dampen enthusiasm for the conspiracies surrounding Kirk. They’ve become a matter of faith for those who entertain them.

It begs the question as to why right-wingers so eagerly believe theories that undermine their own side and aid the enemy. One reason is that our side can’t resist conspiracy theories, no matter how idiotic or libtarded they are. They’re addicted to conspiracism. This explains the audience’s belief. But most influencers should know better. They spread these ideas because it increased viewership and kept the Kirk story alive. It gave them firepower to attack their rivals within the Right and turned the murder into a never-ending soap opera. It was perfect for engagement, and certainly much better for that all-important factor than telling the truth about the murder.

There’s another popular influencer narrative that’s far less malevolent but also redirects anger away from the Left and on to the Right. This narrative insisted Kirk was killed by an elaborate Antifa terror network that the admin has done absolutely nothing about. In spite of explicitly blaming the Left, this content usually rips into the admin and other right-wingers for being too “weak” to intern tens of thousands of leftists. Believers in this narrative rile themselves up against the rest of the Right over this apparent failure.

The admin has done a lot to crack down on leftist terror since Kirk’s death. Several potential terrorists have been arrested and convicted of serious charges. Federal law enforcement now focuses far more on left-wing extremism rather than anything on the Right. The feds labeled numerous international Antifa groups as terrorists, including a digital collective that helps numerous leftist websites. This resulted in several Antifa sites going offline. These moves have greatly upset the mainstream media and liberals, but have done nothing to satisfy the demands of the influencer set.

Tyler Robinson obviously killed Kirk over politics. The extreme rhetoric pushed by leftists made the killer think he would be justified in the act. The celebrations vindicated that opinion. However, there wasn’t a terror network behind Robinson. He acted alone to impress his troon partner. Robinson’s family and friends, including the trans roommate, all cooperated with authorities. Demanding a roundup of all leftists in response to the shooting was never feasible, especially at a time of increased concern for civil liberties. People are far more worried about Flock and public surveillance than they are about terrorism. That even includes the people criticizing the admin for not interning thousands of leftists.

The narrative the admin did nothing about the Left after Kirk’s slaying isn’t as malevolent as Kirk trutherism. It still is directionally correct and gives proper respect to Kirk and his family. But it also demoralizes the Right and convinces people that the guilty parties still roam free.

These narratives are motivated in large part by the desire to keep the story alive. A lone gunman randomly killing one of the most important political figures in America isn’t easy to accept. It isn’t satisfying for the story to end with the conviction of Robinson. Many want there to be more there, and for more to pay for this tragedy. The conspiracy theories and the incessant demands to arrest thousands of leftists keep the story alive within the influencer sphere.

But it didn’t stay alive with the public, at least not in the way the Right intended. The public wasn’t inspired to do more than shake their heads at such a terrible event. They weren’t eager to hand over their liberties to allow the admin to intern Democratic leaders, left-wing influencers, and random people who celebrated Kirk’s murder. They did find the mockery of Kirk awful after his death and weren’t upset that people lost their jobs over such behavior. But they no longer care about it. The expected religious revival didn’t quite pan out either, with data showing no discernible surge in church attendance or faith after Kirk’s death. The normies moved on to other matters.

Charlie Kirk’s death was an irreplaceable loss for the Right. There is no one like him who can connect the Right’s vanguard with its established politicians and institutions. There is no one like him who can keep the peace among the Right’s many factions. There is no one like him who can present an optimistic, normie-friendly face of conservatism to millions of college students. There is no one like him who can communicate the frustrations of the base to President Trump. And there is no one like him who can make a movement focus on winning rather than delivering non-stop ragebait.

The conspiracy theories are far worse than random leftists posting memes about Charlie Kirk’s murder. We know the Left is filled with scumbags, and it’s good that they expose themselves. The callous memes don’t convert anyone. The conspiracy theories and demoralization narratives actually do persuade people on our side. That’s why they’re more of a menace.

We can never replace him, but we can honor his memory by not letting his death be used to turn the Right into a carnival of bullshit.

Order Scott Greer’s new book, “Whitepill: The Online Right and the Making of Trump’s America,” from this link.

Edit: now with the proper upload!

Read more

Last month, she announced she had rejoined the DSA after her membership lapsed years ago. It’s something she may have not done in a 2024-like atmosphere, but with DSA candidates winning primaries across the country, it’s now a smart idea.

I explain why in my latest American Conservative column:

Socialism has won Democratic primaries nationwide and will play a major role in the 2028 race. AOC is an opportunist. She knows that reaffirming her DSA credentials is a smart play for ‘28 and could give her the edge she needs to win. It also shows how much Democratic politics have moved closer to the DSA’s agenda. No longer do Democrats need to shy away from Israel criticism or calls to abolish ICE. They’re now within the mainstream of the party.

Read the rest here.

Read more

Read more

Does Trump need pop culture support to win in the political arena? Not at all. He was far more hated in the first term when he did a fraction of the things he’s doing now. Most importantly, the Republican base is still devoted to Trump.

But the mood that helped Trump in 2024 has changed. It’s not a return to peak woke or the Trump derangement of his first term. It’s an incoherent populism whose only consistency is hostility towards authority. It’s spiritually libertarian, even when it advocates for socialism. Unlike the 2024 vibe shift, it’s not a backlash against woke. It’s a backlash against the establishment, whatever that may be perceived to be. Trump is in power, so he obviously doesn’t benefit from it. But the president isn’t the central villain of this new vibe. If it’s anyone or anything, it’s the tech industry.

The new vibe shift is already making an impact on the midterms and will play a role in the ‘28 election. Whether it will decide who’s the next president is another matter.

The MAGA vibe shift wasn’t going to last forever. The policies Trump campaigned on were not going to please entertainers or the media, regardless of how many athletes did the YMCA dance. The vibe shift was over as soon as the ICE raids became a permanent fixture. The Epstein files and the Iran War just made it clearer.

The new vibe is not just a natural result of Trump trying to fulfill his campaign promises. What the public cares about has changed from 2024. Back then, people had enough of the open borders, disorder, and wokeness of the Biden years. They voted for Trump as retaliation. The culture, naturally, began to reflect this mood as cancel culture weakened and people started enjoying politically incorrect jokes again. People liked Trump as a symbol of woke’s dethroning.

But normies have short memories. What made them vote for Trump in 2024 now seems like a distant memory.

The border is effectively closed, so now the normies no longer care about illegal immigration and feel queasy over deportations. Violent crime is at a historic low, so the normies now feel Flock cameras are more threatening than criminals. Woke seems like old news, so the normies now laugh about how crazy woke 1 was.

The Trump administration is arguably a victim of its successes, at least in regard to these matters. The admin curbed illegal immigration and helped push back wokeness so much that Americans are now bothered by other problems.

In the current year, the people worry more about the elites imposing data centers and Flock cameras on them rather than white privilege checking and pronoun announcements. “Leave us alone!”, which animated the backlash against woke, also prevails here.

This vibe shift is exemplified by the brocasters who helped Trump win in 2024. Back then, these podcasters and comedians railed against woke and how it imposes on them. Now they’re lambasting Trump and showing interest in the DSA. I predicted over a year ago that this demographic could shift to the Left. I was proven right. These guys are far friendlier to Abdul El-Sayed than they are to any MAGA personality.

The brocasters no longer seem greatly concerned with wokeness or open borders. Woke, in their view, is defeated. What’s bad now are BILLIONAIRES and government agents hurting immigrants and not respecting the public will. They started turning on Trump over the ICE raids and have been complaining about them since the spring of 2025. They also soured on Trump over how the Jeffrey Epstein files were handled and the first bombing of Iran.

They don’t have clear politics besides suspicion of authority. They’re upset over data centers and Flock. They don’t like taxes and regulations. They like the individual having total control over his own decisions. They don’t mind legalized weed or gambling, and they don’t have a problem with guns. If you wanted to give them a label, you would call them libertarian. But that’s too coherent a term for what the brocasters believe. They also like universal healthcare and nod along to price controls and other socialist nonsense spewed by their guests.

Then again, that’s also how many voters approach the issues. The majority of Americans aren’t ideologues and many of them have incoherent political views. Like the brocasters, they want to be left alone to pursue their own happiness and many are broadly suspicious of authority. The insane reaction to COVID still haunts the heartland.

It’s why the people are suspicious of AI and the infrastructure that comes along with it. It’s why conspiracy theories are more popular than ever. It’s why social trust continues to plummet.

The issue is that the main beneficiaries of the vibe shift are the people who championed woke and the lockdowns in the first place. The Right doesn’t benefit much from it. The vibe doesn’t see illegal immigrants, Antifa, and criminals as the real threats to the people. Many right-wing commentators try to accommodate this mood even if it undermines their stated priorities. There are plenty of pundits who demand 100 million deportations and the mass arrest of leftists that also insist on banning the technology that would identify illegal immigrants, criminals, and left-wing extremists.

The new vibe’s true beneficiaries reside on the Left. Democrats, especially DSA candidates, are catering to this sentiment in their campaigns. They promise to ban data centers and Flock and restrict AI development. They promise to do nothing about the legalized vices the masses have come to enjoy. They insist that woke 1 is in the past, and they no longer care about all that nonsense.

But this is all a facade. Democrats haven’t given up wokeness at all. They still want schoolkids to be indoctrinated by DEI, open our borders to the entire world, advance “trans rights,” and entertain reparations. They just don’t talk about these things as much as they accommodate the new vibe.

Make no mistake: the Left will pursue the exact same agenda that pushed the brocasters to back Trump in 2024, and they will do it with just as much vigor as before.

There is one important upside for the Right amid this new national mood. Trump’s low approval ratings haven’t shifted the Overton Window back to its factory settings. Cancel culture is still much weaker than it was in the early 2020s and right-wing memes and rhetoric continue to proliferate on social media. It’s never been easier to be “redpilled” than it is today. But, thanks to the new vibe, these redpills often lead the “awakened” to focus on insane clown populism rather than identitarianism.

Like the previous vibe shift, our current mood won’t last forever. People will find new villains and new issues to be worked up about in a few years’ time, especially if Democrats take back power.

But this is the political vibe for now. DSA libertarianism may make no sense to us, but it does to a lot of voters.

Order Scott Greer’s new book, “Whitepill: The Online Right and the Making of Trump’s America,” from this link.

But, as I argue in my latest American Conservative column, there’s a major omission in this debate. Namely, it completely ignores the actual sentiments of Republican voters.

They’re not into the common good, however it’s defined. Instead, they’re doubling down on their traditional stance of “Leave us alone!”

The people take a different view of the matter. Their main problem appears to be the government telling them what to do, not the government letting them do as they please. Ballot referendums legalizing vices gain overwhelming support. Impositions on individual liberties are hated. NIMBYism has never been more popular. People don’t even want to pay property taxes anymore to fund the common goods of their community.

These tendencies seem strongest among the Republican base. An instinctive libertarianism, rather than high-brow common goodism, motivates them. This is why they strongly opposed both woke and the lockdowns. They didn’t see these measures as examples of excess individualism. They saw them as limits on their liberty.

Read the rest here.

Read more

However, influencers cause a lot of headaches for politicians. Piker’s bizarre antics and inflammatory comments provide ample material for the opponents of the candidates he endorses. In spite of the Trump administration’s cultivation, many right-wing influencers have turned on the president and the GOP, with a number of them now calling for their listeners to support the Democrats. Anyone who’s spent time on X knows how insane online political spaces are.

Influencers aren’t the first media pioneers to suddenly have sway over real-world politics. Radio and cable news hosts came to play a massive role in American politics starting in the late 20th century. But influencers are very different from these figures. They’re not like newspaper columnists of old either. They’re far more like reality TV stars.

It doesn’t matter if these influencers have aspirations of being serious political operators or intellectuals. They all have to be like Snooki of Jersey Shore fame to succeed in this chaotic environment. That gets a big audience, but it also handicaps their ability to change politics. Entertainment matters far more to their audiences than getting their preferred candidates elected.

For those who might not remember the early Obama years, Snooki was the most popular reality TV star of her time. The diminutive guidette captured America’s attention through her obnoxious personality, constant feuds with her Jersey Shore co-stars, and never-ending personal drama. The people couldn’t get enough of her antics. Jersey Shore, like most reality TV shows, became popular because it gathered together walking cartoon characters and set them at each other’s throats. These seemingly real people couldn’t stop cheating on each other and having the messiest personal lives imaginable. Their erratic behavior would get them ostracized in normal circles, but it made them celebrities when done for the sake of the camera.

The worse the behavior, the better.

The influencer space has a lot of similarities to reality TV. Petty feuds and aberrant behavior are constants in this sphere. These feuds are ostensibly about political differences, but they’re usually motivated by the same base emotions that fueled reality TV drama. They also descend to the same low-brow realm of Real Housewives’ fights. While both sides may insist the fight is over politics, both sides begin trading personal barbs about the opponent’s sexuality, drug abuse, looks, relationships, and, most importantly, alleged betrayals. Many influencer feuds, like reality TV feuds, are between former friends or associates.

This isn’t how Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’Reilly conducted their affairs in their prime. It’s hard to imagine Pat Buchanan or Bill Buckley dedicating their columns to the sex lives of their political opponents. But this is how things play out in the influencer world.

This is what audiences want. The most successful influencers obsess over engagement numbers. They know they’re guaranteed a viewership boost if they dedicate a stream to spilling the beans on a rival influencer or a former associate who “betrayed” them. Audiences can’t get enough of this drama. Many of them care more about this pettiness than about anything going on in the world. Engagement is often higher for many of these influencers when they’re engaged in a bitter feud with another podcaster rather than analyzing some current event. Many podcasts now exclusively devote their time to shit-talking other influencers while ignoring actual issues. It appears the market rewards that content focus.

Candace Owens’s war against Erika Kirk isn’t just a mark of low character. It’s a conscious business decision to increase viewership and attention for Owens. People can’t get enough of her “revelations” against Charlie Kirk’s widow, and Owens continues to deliver what the audiences want. It’s always worth remembering that these influencers are running businesses. They’re not going to engage in content they think will hurt their bottom line.

For many, influencer politics has replaced reality TV as their favorite form of entertainment. Zoomer and millennial men aren’t going to watch the female-oriented reality shows of today, but they will closely follow the drama of their favorite podcasters.

Feuds are just as important to influencers as they were to Snooki. More than anything else, these conflicts shape the politics of influencers. These opinion makers will completely flip their views if a feud demands it. They can be an immigration restrictionist who suddenly decides immigration doesn’t matter, a Christian nationalist who suddenly loves Muslims, or a libertarian who suddenly admires socialism if they think this stance will own their opponent more effectively. This is how so many supposed right-wing extremists cheer on DSA candidates and cry over ICE shootings. What’s important isn’t their ideology, it’s score-settling with some rival right-winger.

Reality TV stars are notorious for their legal and behavioral problems. It’s not surprising that people who wish for their daily lives to be shown to the world would have issues. But these problems don’t diminish their star power. If anything, their indefensible behavior increases their popularity. More messiness means more drama.

We see the same thing play out with influencers. It’s insane what political influencers get away with. Hasan Piker proudly boasts of how he zaps his dog. A tiny fraction of the dirt on liberal streamer Destiny would’ve buried a political columnist 20 years ago. The same is true for right-wing influencers. Revelations of secret homosexuality, a transgender phase, drug addiction, spousal abuse, work with left-wing reporters, dependence on AI, and other tawdry behavior don’t diminish influencers’ popularity at all. As stated above, the worse the behavior, the better.

Both reality TV stars and influencers need a complete lack of shame. There’s no way someone with shame could air their dirty laundry every day to the entire world. It doesn’t matter what people think of you as long as they’re paying attention. Whatever achieves that goal is good, no matter how abhorrent the action is.

One difference between reality TV stars and influencers is that no one takes the former for role models. We expect them to be messed-up caricatures of real people. There aren’t cults formed around them.

Influencers are a different story. One could argue that the cults of the 21st century are the fandoms surrounding influencers. It doesn’t matter if these figures change their opinions every week and lack any moral compass. Their followers look to them as messiahs.

No one saw Snooki as prophet.

The reality TV model for influencer politics provides a large audience for these figures, but it certainly limits their ability to shape offline politics. While Hasan can boost youth interest in a left-wing candidate, he’s also a liability in both the primary and the general election. If Abdul El-Sayed loses in Michigan, you will see even DSA candidates keep their distance from Piker. Influencers on the Right don’t even seem to benefit Republican candidates who directly associate with them. Thomas Massie recruited a large number of influencers to campaign for him in Kentucky. He ended up losing his primary by 10 points. James Fishback got unprecedented levels of influencer support in a primary filled with weak candidates. He received a mere 10 percent of the vote.

The Snooki model of influencer politics is important to understand, especially when these commentators promise an independent movement that will take over American politics. This sphere is far too fucked up to ever conquer electoral politics in such a manner. It’s about as serious as the Jersey Shore cast, at the height of their popularity, forming a third party. America would die of laughter from that proposal. When influencers begin promising their own third party, we should treat it with the same level of seriousness.

Influencers aren’t going away anytime soon. The new media environment makes them an even more important presence on our timelines. They can shape the politics of young people and energize campaigns. This happened with Trump in ‘24 and is happening with DSA candidates in the midterms. But the influencers don’t present a sustainable model for real-world political engagement. You can’t base a movement around reality TV antics and petty feuds. You need people who will put these aside to focus on affecting actual change.

This may be tougher for the Right than it is for the Left, as more of our movers and shakers operate as if we’re a market rather than a movement. Whatever is good for business, even if it blackpills your audience into never voting, is a virtue. That’s why they stick to the Snooki model.

It’s great for attracting viewers and attention, and that’s all that matters.

Order Scott Greer’s new book, “Whitepill: The Online Right and the Making of Trump’s America,” from this link.

Read more

He came close to winning the small number of precincts where voters under 35 were the largest demographic. He won the vote at a number of college campuses (but this vote count only amounted to 30 people in most places).

This has led a number of people to predict Fishback may be the future of GOP politics. Politico pondered right before the election that while Fishback may lose, his politics might win. The outlet thought his online antics, youth support, and policy agenda could be a blueprint for more successful candidates to follow. These predictions fixate on the notion that young people, particularly young men, are poised to take over the Republican Party. Fishback may only have gotten 10 percent, but his youth support predicts the future.

That’s a dubious prediction. Voters under 40 make up a very small percentage of voters in GOP primaries. Young people can change who they vote for over time. How millennials voted ten or twenty years ago in one Republican primary doesn’t tell us much about how they vote now. The same is true for Zoomers. Boomers and Gen Xers are still going to be the vast majority of GOP voters for the foreseeable future. There’s not going to be a mass die-off in the next five or ten years.

Most importantly, it overlooks Zoomers’ actual politics. Young voters are the core demographic behind the DSA surge across the country. Elections and polls since 2024 have shown Gen Z, even the men, veering to the Left. Conservatives are pinning their hopes on the generation most opposed to deportations and America itself to save the country.

While most of the Right will acknowledge that young women are increasingly liberal, they insist the young men are extreme right-wingers. While data demonstrates Zoomer men are more right-leaning than millennial men were a decade ago, that doesn’t mean a substantial number of them share the same agenda as the Online Right. The majority of young men are also queasy about the ICE raids and will likely vote Democrat in the midterms.

The young men involved in conservative politics are very right-wing. But we shouldn’t extrapolate from that that the entire generation is like that. And if you want right-wing candidates to win GOP primaries, you’re going to need to focus on older voters rather than relying on young people. There’s nowhere near enough of them involved in Republican primaries to decide who’s the nominee.

Conventional wisdom on the Right imagines that the only way to win young men is to offer a far-right agenda. Pastor Dale Partridge recently posted: “Immigration and deportations is all that matter to anyone under 40.” Conservative operative Mike Howell declared at a conference this month that young men will leave the GOP in droves if mass deportations don’t happen.

These opinions are the product of a RW bubble. You can only believe them if you think the opinions of RW Twitter and Republican staffers are the majority position of Gen Z. Actual Zoomers think very differently.

No generation is more hostile to Trump’s deportations than Zoomers. Sixty percent of Gen Zers say the Trump admin is deporting too many people. Seventy-five percent say the raids make America much less safe. And it’s not just the women saying this. A Third Way poll found that 60 percent of young men are concerned with the “expansion of immigration raids to target anyone who looks or sounds foreign.” Even among Republican Zoomers, support for mass deportations isn’t as strong as one might think. A 2025 NBC poll found that 56 percent of Republican young men support Trump’s deportations. That same poll found only 30 percent of young men backed them.

One could argue these figures are driven by Gen Z’s diversity. The generation is barely majority white after all. (That does beg the question as to why the Right sees this generation as its salvation when its demographics are grim, but we’ll leave that aside.) Those who still see Zoomers as the BASED generation will argue white Gen Zers get these issues more than their elders.

That’s not true either. Pew Research found that white Zoomers are the least bothered by demographic change among all generations. The much-despised Boomers are far more likely to be upset by it than Gen Zers.

It’s true that Zoomers who are involved in conservative politics are more right-wing than their elder peers. That’s an important development and can have a political impact. But that is only a tiny fraction of the generation and doesn’t indicate Zoomers will vote for a far-right agenda.

The Fishback example is hard to make much of a big deal about. He got decent youth support because he was very entertaining. If he had done a more “serious” campaign with fewer hijinks and jokes, he would’ve done poorly among the young. But his ability to create viral content about taxing OnlyFans thots and giving funny nicknames to Byron Donalds is what got him attention. While he did talk about immigration and criticize Israel, much of his campaign was dedicated to random issues that would get him attention. He offered a whole range of proposals that hardly made for a coherent platform.

It did attract young people, but at the end of the day, it only got him 10 percent in a primary against weak candidates.

Young people can have a major impact on right-wing politics in America. These are the people who have the time and energy to work on campaigns. They’re the ones who can door knock and phone bank for insurgent right-wing candidates. Older people don’t have the time for that. Young people do.

Right-wing youth also punches above their weight in the new media environment. Their memes, streams, and viral posts shape conservative discourse now. They can get politicians to talk about certain issues simply through online influence. You wouldn’t have Republican congressmen talking about repealing the Hart-Celler Act without the youthful Online Right. (You can read Whitepill to learn more about this story.) You would also not have mainstream conservative commentators debating Israel without this influence. Many of these anons will be the federal judges, politicians, and conservative operators of tomorrow. That’s a big development.

But it’s hard to translate this online movement into a real-world grassroots movement. Influencers have an audience, not a constituency. We’ve seen several extremely online candidates who built their campaigns around the youth vote get blown out in primaries this year. Thomas Massie, the most serious of all these candidates, was able to win the youth vote in his primary. He still lost by 10 points because the olds turned on him.

Some argue that this is a reason to leave the GOP. But if you can’t win Republican primaries, raise money, or organize effectively in the real-world, how do you expect to take down the two-party system? It’s particularly foolish when the youth vote is veering to the Left rather than to the Right.

We’re potentially decades away from Zoomers being the deciding vote in GOP primaries, and it’s unknown how they might vote in 10 or 20 years. It’s fun to run an entertaining meme campaign, but it can only translate into a victory if it wins over old people. Trump did this in his election victories.

Gen Z does offer some hope for the future. But one can’t build a campaign entirely around the Zoomers. There’s not enough right-wing ones to win elections.

Order Scott Greer’s new book, “Whitepill: The Online Right and the Making of Trump’s America,” from this link.

Read more

Read more

It’s something I’ve talked about for years, but others are beginning to notice as well. “There’s an emerging barstool-SEC-morgan wallen-ella langely white culture that’s no longer geographically rooted,” journalist Matthew Zeitlin wrote last week. The comment was meant to explain the allegedly annoying middle American transplants to New York City. It underscores how this new culture is now the identity for generic Americans and can be found anywhere. If you’re a middle-class white person, this is your culture now. You don’t even have to be Southern.

I’ve often called this the New South, but a better term is needed. Plenty of non-Southerners express it, even if it’s primarily associated with the land below the Mason-Dixon line. The best way to think of it is “Sunbeltism.” The Sunbelt is sometimes used as a synonym for the South, even though it extends all the way to California. The Sunbelt’s exact boundaries is a topic to be debated elsewhere. But it’s fitting for what it represents. “The South” evokes strong connotations. This term ditches those in favor of a marketing label. Instead of evoking the Lost Cause and plantations, it calls to mind sunshine, suburbs, and strip malls. Many now don’t even need to physically move to the Sunbelt to be part of it. They can just adopt its culture and remain in the Midwest.

It’s not just about certain music tastes and dress styles. It’s a mentality. Sunbeltism is optimistic, conservative with a small c, and present-oriented. “Life is good” is its defining motto. (There’s a good reason southern suburbs were filled with Life is Good apparel in the 2000s). It’s not given to sympathize with woke. Don’t expect its adherents to state their pronouns or check their white privilege. They’re too busy having fun and making money for all that.

The South has largely adapted to its new Sunbelt identity. It lost some of its distinctive qualities, but in the process, it made itself the new standard for Americaness.

Zeitlin offered a good summary of its characteristics. Pop country, college football, cowboy boots, and general broishiness are all part of it. Certain corporate brands such as Buc-ee’s and Zaxby’s are tied to it, as well as the general popularity of southern cuisine.

There is a southern edge to it, with the country music, cowboy boots, and SEC football. But it’s not the old South. There are no rebel flags here, no paeans to the Lost Cause, and no memorials to Robert E. Lee. The region’s fervent Christian faith is also set aside to be more welcoming. The bad old South is in the past. This version of the South is about the present and a bright future.

That gives its universal appeal. You don’t need roots in the South to assimilate to it. Authentic Southerners, transplants, and even people who don’t live in the region can all get into it. The positive Sunbelt vibe is inclusive.

The culture isn’t a political phenomenon. Liberals can be into it as much as any conservative. But it is definitely not woke. It is small-c conservatism after all. Men are men and women are women here. Sunbelters stand for the Anthem and think America is the greatest country on Earth. They aren’t interested in hearing different opinions on the matter. They love the free market and aren’t ashamed of consumerism. They religiously follow social norms and respect authority. The worst thing to be for a Sunbelter is “weird.” Blue hair, odd hobbies, and strange clothing are frowned upon here.

This is their conservatism. It’s more about how they live their lives than how they vote, even though they mostly vote Republican. Some Sunbelters can be Trump worshippers, some can be Trump haters. Politics is ultimately secondary to business. What’s most important is getting the government, woke scolds, and anyone else who would interfere with the pursuit of happiness out of the way.

Sunbelters may have some socially conservative tendencies, but the culture is fine with the vice economy. It’s hard to imagine Sunbeltism without sports betting. The corrupt state of modern college football is supported by the culture. This mentality doesn’t let moral qualms get in the way of profits and sports.

If one wants a good representative of Sunbeltism, there’s no better choice than LSU coach Lane Kiffin. He’s a Trump supporter who will cynically complain about the alleged racism of Ole Miss and is a notorious womanizer. But he does it all with a big smile and a good sense of humor. He’s a winner, and that’s what counts the most.

Sunbeltism is a pretty white affair. Outside of SEC Greek Life, this isn’t necessarily intentional. Sunbeltism is just what many white Americans like. It’s not a secret white nationalist project. But just by being white and not checking their privilege, Sunbelters draw the ire of the Left. It’s why Zeitlin and his peers are annoyed that the culture pops up in New York. They want it to stay below the Mason-Dixon line. But it’s broken containment.

While it is very white, other groups can assimilate to it–to an extent. It also embraces some “multicultural” elements. While country is favored, rap is still popular. Sorority rush toks, a crucial element of the culture, often feature white women gyrating to rap music. On top of all this, Sunbelters love cheering on black athletes playing for their alma mater. They’re not bothered by their favorite teams being majority black. They think that’s what it takes to win.

The music of the Sunbelt also reflects this “diversity.” Many country hits incorporate rap influences, as well as elements from rock and pop. Critics have lamented how pop-country has become a cosmopolitan “monogenre,” but Sunbelters like it just fine.

The black elements of the South aren’t really part of Sunbeltism. In fact, these elements can be a turn off to its appeal. FreddyLA7, the German World Cup tourist who became a national sensation, couldn’t get enough of Sunbelt culture in his American travels. He fell in love with Ella Langley’s music, college football stadiums, chain restaurants, and southern landscapes. But he did manage to have one unpleasant experience in the Sunbelt. That’s when he boarded Atlanta’s train system and experienced a bit too much Magic. Blackness wasn’t part of his Sunbelt affair.

Few would openly admit that Sunbelt’s whiteness is critical to its appeal, but it is. The ghetto culture of the urban South is only acknowledged for its old pop-rap classics.

Sunbeltism is whiteness, but like pop-country, it’s open to other influences–so long as they’re not weird.

The South’s increasing prestige and wealth drives Sunbeltism’s appeal. It’s arguably the heart of the nation now. That’s a reversal from how Southern identity developed after the Civil War.

It was a backwater thanks to the devastation of the Civil War. The South clung to older ways while the rest of the country modernized. The South took this distinctiveness as a point of pride and doubled-down on its unique identity through its traditions and customs. The Lost Cause stood at the center of white Southern identity and defined the region. It was happy to be unlike the rest of America. But things began to change with the New Deal and the Civil Rights Revolution.

Now we’ve got the Sunbelt, and most Southerners seem pretty happy about it.The South ditched its historic culture in favor of a more marketable one.

Aaron Renn recently noted this as why Sunbeltism appeals to the rest of the country.:

People think that the South is the last region of the country that still has a historic, authentic culture, or that it is steeped in Lost Cause-ism or clinging to its past in other ways. In my observation, it’s basically the opposite. No region is more ready to jettison its past in order to make more money (or win football games). Try getting people to change something in New England or the Midwest and you can really see the difference. The extreme generic sprawl of Southern cities shows how unsentimental they are when it comes to this. The battles over Confederate monuments and the like show this dumping of history in progress - and the preservationist arguments usually seem to turn out to be a minority position.

The old, particularist elements of the South can still be found in the region. But the old elements are no longer at the forefront. Sunbeltism defines the region now.

Sunbeltism isn’t exactly the ideal right-wing culture. It doesn’t care much for the past or traditions. It isn’t concerned with “cultural revival” or the great achievements of Western civilizations. It can be crassly materialistic and a bit boorish.

But it’s white, it’s relatively conservative, and it’s vastly superior to wokeness and black chic. Its national appeal indicates that America isn’t eager to return to the peak woke era, regardless of whoever the next president is. They want to have fun and listen to country instead.

There are a lot worse things than Americans choosin’ the Sunbelt as its cultural lodestar.

Order Scott Greer’s new book, “Whitepill: The Online Right and the Making of Trump’s America,” from this link.

Read more