The Joe Rogan Experience came out of an experimental period of Youtube and Ustream, where the streaming format and aesthetic shifted around until eventually reverting back into something closer to television. The industry standard is now fake brick-wall backgrounds normally found on late-night talk shows, but Rogan had originally drenched himself in psychedelic lights and background projections. In that period of experimentation JRE would often stretch its duration beyond three hours, which felt unconventional but worked. This initially low-fi medium would predate Netflix binge-watching with the realisation people will gluttonously consume one thing outside the constraints of TV broadcast rationing. Something ultimately borrowed from talk radio, but unlike those old-fashioned transmissions, it would be uninterrupted and not broken up by segments, breaks or music. It was stripped down to two people in a room shooting off the cuff. JRE’s record of 5 hours 19mins would be a degenerate episode centering around psychedelic drug use with a mush-brained Duncan Trussell.
But the longer format, which tends to be unbroken conversation, isn’t something one can just go and do willy-nilly. The participants need to have enough talent to make such a long and no-frills production interesting. If Rogan and his guests didn’t have a talent for this, there is no way a three or four hour show would maintain itself as the biggest podcast in the world.
Warstrike trumps Rogan
Out of the ashes of the TRS/NJP implosion (a podcast platform and political party combination whose political arm broke off during infighting), “WarStrike”, the new collaboration between Eric Striker and Warren Balogh has risen quickly to one of the significant dissident right streams on the block. An eclectic show, which can shift from geopolitics, history to art and culture. The latter sprinkling gives it that more well-rounded feeling akin to Academic Agent and his Zoom-call Southbank Shows. Clocking-in at often six-plus hours an episode and being released twice a week, on paper its success doesn’t make much sense. Even the name itself “WarStrike” reminds us of the cynical played-out comedy podcast genre on YouYube, where duos combine their names/nicknames like the different iterations of The Fighter And The Kid, with The King And The Sting etc.. Double-act branding also evokes the original “Strike And Mike”, the now broken collaboration between Eric Striker and Mike Peinovich and the associated TRS/NJP chaos in the rear mirror. But by transcending the TRS paywall plantation and embracing “superchats” (paid questions from the audience where new subjects are brought up for the duo to riff on) the lengthy format is given a second wind that helps it sprint home the Rogan-topping duration. The spectacle of superchats, something mastered by Nick Fuentes who often embraced audience trolls and in-jokes to fund his enterprise, injects the show with extra life and interaction. The WarStrike vibe doesn’t have the comedic Zoomer edge of Fuentes but the audience is quite highbrow so they are actually contributing some decent intellectual curveballs when they purchase superchats. And this really is the best Darwinian new media model there is. If your show is good enough, the audience will contribute and want that interaction. The idea that people should be restricting already obscure content with a paywall is absurd and boomerish, particularly when supposedly part of a political movement.
With Striker and Balogh you also get two very interesting speakers. Striker is a geopolitical nerd who comfortably riffs on world affairs while Balogh was born into dissident politics, a movement-child with history running through his veins. Apart from their knowledge, a talent for oration in both men makes the six hours a breeze. There really is something to be said for having an interesting voice. If you break down what an interesting voice is, its sculpting sound, using rhythm and surprise, delivered in a way that goes up and down. Sound itself is a journey, not just by the literal meaning of words but how they are spoken. With a good orator, words are emphasised and nothing is monotone. Balogh has the professional talk-radio style, with his professional sweet-sounding microphone, acoustically treated, dampened space and deep fatherly voice emphasis. His hosting grounds the show and makes it feel like a real program. While Striker acts more like a de facto guest, often sparking cigarettes, using amateur punk/DIY equipment, terrible ironic chroma-key background flickering on and off and raspy voice echoed in what sounds like the kitchen In Utero’s drums were recorded in. When combined with Striker’s often exasperated and enthusiastic diatribes, his voice tooting like a trumpet, the unprofessional setup works like a happy accident. When he’s not streaming, writing lengthy articles or reinstalling Windows, his bouffant hair makes him look like he hangs-out at rockabilly bars or Happy Days conventions. A real contrast to the buttoned-up Balogh who could be the Frank McMurray father in My Three Sons telling a young Striker to stop fraternising with greaser gangs. On some issues they differ and Striker becomes the disagreeable Fonzie, which gives us a genuine back and forth, transcending what would normally be a right-wing echo chamber. It’s an alchemy that works really well and often at six hours long isn’t missing much by not having a guest. And I think it’s at its best when it goes on tangents, discusses things beyond pure politics like art and culture because right now that’s something we are starved of.
The Return Of John Mark
Another Phoenix from the ashes was the return of John Mark, who had disappeared after an aborted 2020 launch of Propertarianism on the US national stage. Curt Doolittle is the autistic theory-cel behind this movement, who as an orator kind of dropped the bag in the failed event back in 2020, but Mark was always Propertarianism’s greatest communicator and made various videos that still rank as landmark and most succinct on their subjects (particularly regarding civil war). He now calls himself John Victor and in a gesture of good-faith is face-doxxing instead of standing behind the quasi-superhero motorcycle-helmet-wearing avatar. But for reasons I will state later on in this piece, I will still refer to him as John Mark. What Mark really achieves is the effective communication of complex ideas. He shares certain qualities with others that possess marketing skills such as Devon Stack’s acclaimed Blackpilled streams.
Mark has a jujitsu-like knack for taking something you might hear from Thomas Sewell but packaging it in a stripped-down and highly optical way. He assumes the audience knows who the “who ” and “they” are and just gets on with logical local strategies, arguing that in time such an approach will become national and ultimately change the course of our civilisation. Both Sewell and Mark are talking in terms of vanguards, organisational structures, race and Evolian caste systems for essentially the same purpose, just put in wildly different styles. Mark sites Harold Covington’s Pacific-North-West concepts, essentially ethnostates, as something to strive for. It’s one of the best examples of being “optical”, far better than the confused “No White Guilt” approach of Jason Köhne, which is an uneasy mix of both bowing down and bending over backwards at the same time.
One issue with Mark/Victor going forward is the stop-start indecision that has plagued him in the past. Previously after building a successful online presence with quality content, he nuked it all in haste and went dark, then revived it momentarily but disappeared again for several years. And wouldn’t you know it, I’m drafting this article and he’s disappeared once again after a short return. That’s right, he deleted his YouTube and Twitter for a third time. Does he not understand that the audience hates it when he does this? Frustration in coming back without the same following may be taxing, but he must make the most efficient steps forward when he does. Firstly, he should go back to the name everyone knows him by – John Mark. Whether that be tarnished (in his mind) by previously being associated with radical types doesn’t matter, if people want to tie him to such things they still can regardless, so he may as well own it and tap into his previous following. And although I think his optical approach in disseminating theory is fantastic, he must understand where the political winds are going and not fear being associated with right-wing bogeymen. The overton window is grinding right so quickly it’s causing sparks and his radical ideas are ripe for the near future. But if he doesn’t want to engage with these growing demographics, he will be yesterday’s man.
He has announced a willingness to work directly with other Christians and although there are Zionist and liberal problems plaguing establishment churches, there is a thriving counter-movement of “Christ Is King” truly on the rise as it trends on Twitter in a unified resistance against occupation. Not to mention a hunger from the public for a restoration of the natural order that the church previously helped provide. Nick Fuentes is at the core of this and the Gropyer movement continues to capitalise on public energy. This is young blood we are talking about, i.e the future, with various even edgier variations on that gaining momentum. One business model that could work for Mark is to stream like Fuentes and WarStrike and create revenue through superchats. But that requires building up that following again first and hence the return to his original name would be best to jump-start that. Consistency is the key to social media, not being a flash in the pan. Like I said with my previous article, creators are often one-man-bands and can’t always master every aspect of the business. But one truly exciting prospect for Mark is that years away from the spotlight were spent detailing his theories into a new unpublished book. Without having read it, my instinct is that the release of the book and the virtual book tour will be the most efficient way to reestablish his own digital presence and a new streaming model. Having left the game three times now, Mark only has one shot left in the chamber and I dont see any other option but to burn the boats, release the book and launch a streaming career. He is a fantastic conversationalist so it will be like a duck to water. But he can’t flinch again, he has one more shot and he can’t miss.
We nationalists are the true lovers of our people pic.twitter.com/NWz0aE23rC
— Masked Hersant (@maskedhersant) February 5, 2024
Drew Pavlou grapples with the Australian far-right
Some agitprop from Australian nationalist Jacob Hersant has been making waves on Twitter and quickly becoming iconic. This was achieved by style and concept – speaking directly down the barrel, maintaining eye-contact with the audience and wearing the big black jacket, a de facto urban guerilla uniform. Short punchy national socialist diatribes projecting strength and instilling purpose for the Zoomer everyman. But it’s delivered almost like a speech to a group in terms of projecting his voice, giving it a certain gravitas. The shallow focus DSLR being vertical maximises the figure in the frame and makes it TikTok ready. No dead space in the upright aspect-ratio, it’s all jacket and jaw. And the audio is generally very good too, utilising shotgun and lapel mics for crisp dialogue. The use of interchangeable DSLR lenses gives these videos a professional edge not usually seen in Australian nationalist content. And the fact that the current lens is only being used because his other one was confiscated in a police raid gives it another layer of anti-establishment edge.
But the other thing is consistency. Like I said about John Mark, being consistent is the key to social media. Posting at regular intervals with content and style that people become accustomed to. You can apply this to anything on social media or TV. You build habits in the audience with consistency, which creates constant growth. And Hersant is now consistently breaking the spirit of establishment Twitter characters like regime-asset Drew Pavlou, who has been kvetching about the audacious presentation of these videos. This caused Pavlou to record his own unhinged parody of Hersant’s large jacket wearing, only to expose that despite having a very bloated face, Pavlou’s nerdy physique doesn’t have the shoulders to fill such a jacket. Backfiring in true “the left can’t meme” fashion, “progressive” body-positive ambivalence to physiognomy lacks self-awareness when communicating outside their safe spaces. This exposes bio-leninism and the acceptance of cuckoldry on the left as these weak characters require stronger men in the bedroom to service their wives.
For some reason the Australian National Socialist Network spokesman must wear at least 3 Northface jackets in the subtropical Australian heat and speak with the same cadence as Simple Jack in Tropic Thunder 😂😂😂😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/BgjZB6By08
— Drew Pavlou 🇦🇺🇺🇦🇹🇼🇨🇾 (@DrewPavlou) March 27, 2024
This dialogue between Pavlou and the dissident right reached a crescendo during a debate he had last week with Joel Davis on Elijah Schaffer’s show. I haven’t seen an argument that separated the men from the boys so quickly since Jared Taylor mercilessly schooled Tariq Nasheed. Davis’s beard and rude, matter of fact demeanour was the “yes” meme to a screeching, low impulse control uni-student in Pavlou. The structured debate format was broken early on by Pavlou, who either didn’t understand the concept of one person speaking at a time or knew that because of lacking a strong argument – sabotaging the event was his only option. It was quite shocking to see someone with a strong academic background offer nothing intellectually. But despite the Cypriot chimp-out, Davis weathered the interruptions, ran rings around Pavlou’s platitudes and calmly put forth his philosophy in a scientific and methodical way.
Clips are now reaching hundreds of thousands of people on Twitter. It was a debate between supreme confidence and great insecurity, which I think reveals more than just individual conduct but concreteness of the ideas themselves. Liberalism was exposed for what it is, a bunch of platitudes that go against the natural order, which must censor all opposition to survive. Hence the left’s tantrums ever since Elon Musk’s Twitter Glasnost. Shortly after the debate Pavlou was subtly calling for Twitter censorship after the audience backlash and apologetically ran from his self-described “centrism” to the far-left for reassurance.
It has been quite the meltdown, may the Aussie Internet Bloodsports era begin!
