GROYPERISM IS BASICALLY CHRISTIANISED BEN SHAPIRO-ISM

by Duns Scotus

The Alt-Right is dead but the forces that created it are stronger than ever. This is why we are now seeing the Groyper Revolution, but what are the differences between the Alt-Right and Groyperism? 

An apparent difference is that the Alt-Right, under the control of TRS, The Daily Stormer, Greg Johnson, Richard Spencer, and even RamZPaul, became a Jew-obsessed movement responsible for the kind of toxic anti-Semitism that damned the movement to irrelevance.

But this is mainly a difference of degree, as the Groyper movement also has some anti-Semitic sentiment. However, Anti-Semitism, like any negative feeling against another group, is only a problem to the degree that it is irrational and disproportionate. The Alt-Right's anti-Semitism clearly crossed that line then kept on going. Whether that of the Groypers does remains to be seen. So far they have merely been trolling Conservatism Inc. with a few questions about dancing Israelis and the fate of a US warship 52 years ago, while also critiquing the US's unexplained and apparently Israel-o-centric foreign policy, quite legitimate points, even in the eyes of the Left.

Also, and this shouldn't be shirked, there is the rather complex question of whether Jews are just another White ethnicity, or whether they are have an entirely separate character. The intermarriage statistics suggest the former, but there are points that could be put to support the latter position.

Anyway, anti- or counter- Semitism—despite the enormous gulf in nuance—is not an essential difference between the between the Jew-obsessed Alt-Right of 2016-2018 and the polite, well-spoken young men of the Fuentes-led Groyper movement. So, what is?

Controversially, I would say that the real difference between the two is Ben Shapiro. Yes, the incarnation of Conservatism Inc. itself is what distinguishes these two movements. Let me explain this deeply counter-intuitive point, which probably has your head spinning right now.

Ben Shapiro is a highly intelligent but diminutive man who claims to be a sincere and practising religious Jew. Really! Of course this highly unlikely narrative could be true, but I am simply not buying it, especially as Shapiro is from Hollywood, basically Ground Zero of America's moral nihilism.

Here is the Wikipedia entry on Shapiro:

Shapiro grew up in a Jewish family in Los Angeles, California. He developed a talent for violin at a young age, having performed at the Israel Bonds Banquet in 1996 at twelve years of age. Shapiro's parents both worked in Hollywood. His mother worked as an executive of a TV company and his father as a composer. Shapiro's cousin is writer and former child actress Mara Wilson. Skipping two grades (third and ninth), Shapiro went from Walter Reed Middle School to Yeshiva University High School of Los Angeles where he graduated in 2000 at age 16. He graduated summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from the University of California, Los Angeles in 2004, at age 20, with a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science and then cum laude from Harvard Law School in 2007. He then practiced law at Goodwin Procter. As of March 2012 he ran an independent legal consultancy firm, Benjamin Shapiro Legal Consulting, in Los Angeles.

Of course I could be wrong, in which case I apologise, but this simply doesn't sound like the background of any orthodox religious Jew I ever heard of. Also check out his sister, I dare you. Just search "Ben Shapiro sister nude." None of this signals sincere religious people to me.

How could anyone this short believe in a benign God?

I basically have a problem believing that any highly intelligent person can believe in a medieval Abrahamic faith in our godless age. It's not impossible but the burden of proof is on someone like Ben Shapiro to convince me otherwise. Wearing a cute little skullcap isn't going to do it. I need more substantial evidence than that before I suspend my scepticism, a lot more.

So, why does Shapiro (a) claim to be a religious Jew and (b) make it such a central plank of his public "Jewish" identity? The answer, I believe, is quite simple and obvious. Namely that it is extremely convenient.

As we know, basing your identity directly on your ethnic or racial group is simply not allowed in modern day America, especially if you want to pull in the big donor bucks, which Shapiro so clearly does.

Imagine if Shapiro said he loved Jews and Israel based purely on the fact that he was an ethnic Jew and felt a tie of blood. Also imagine if he said "conservative values" and a "love of democracy" had jack shit to do with it, and that, yeh, "fuck all White people who were not ethnic Jews or allies of ethnic Jews."

In such a case, he would be in almost as bad a place as Richard Spencer is now.

So, you see how convenient religion is as a cover for ethnicity in the case of super intelligent Hollywood Jew Ben Shapiro, who nevertheless and quite surprisingly believes in a religion that to any modern man reads like a crock of medievalistic bullshit.

Now, this is where we take things back to the Groypers. One of the things that Nick Fuentes continually stresses—and which makes him much more powerful and potent than a rootless Nazi-inflected Nietzschean like Richard Spencer—is his movement's Christian identity.

Fuentes is also extremely bright, so maybe he doesn't believe in his particular "crock of medievalistic bullshit" either. Although, because Christianity is in fact a more intellectually respectable religion than Judaism, the credibility gap here is shorter than the yawning chasm I see in the case of Shapiro.

There are also problems with Christian universalism and its cucked establishment, but it has two main advantages to the Groypers:

1. It supports a traditionalist and conservative outlook that can be spun in a nuanced nationalist direction. See Franco and other trad-Christian rulers.
2. It aligns the Groyper movement with the great mass of Christian and post-Christian Americans, making it harder to isolate or attack them. Compare with how easy it was to isolate a rootless Nazi-inflected Nietzschean like Richard Spencer, someone who is now forced to seek cover by glomming onto Leftist talking points now.

Through their Christian identitarianism the Groypers can support their racial interests without having to fight and die on the awkward hill of overt racial identity, made toxic by decades of Jew and Octoroon haters like Spencer. In exactly the same way, Ben Shapiro can be proudly Jewish without drawing too much attention to his ethnic interest and racial conceit.

During the old days of the Alt-Right, other visionary thinkers saw the possibilities of using religion as a convenient cover or carrier for ethnic interests. We should not forget here Matt Parrott and even Matt Heimbach, who emphasised a LARPy form of Orthodox Christianity in their Trad Worker project, but unfortunately left in too much of the old Nazi LARPing as well. Fuentes by contrast, seems much more alive to the possibilities of shaping religion into an effective carapace of ethnic interests, but here his debt seems to be much more to that mercurial merchant of Middle Eastern interests, Ben Shapiro.

Thank you, Ben, for showing us the way.