Is Nick Fuentes White?

In researching this age-old question, we will discover a treasure trove of knowledge!

This picture looks kind of like a FtM Transgender pregnant with her husband’s baby

Apparently, Nick Fuentes is back on Twitter and making the news lately. I am against Nick Fuentes — he encourages idiocy among his cultish followers, causes constant infighting due to his Machiavellian thuggishness, and seems recently to have gone a bit whackadoo over Israel. Now he’s collaborating with anti-white brown Muslims like Sulaiman Ahmed and Andrew Tate under the condition that they are anti-Israel, and accuses everyone who doesn’t glaze Palestinian protesters of being Jews. But, I’ll admit, Fuentes does sometimes get a laugh out of me, and without a doubt he is probably a smart person simply for how good of a speaker and entertainer he is. But today we are not talking about the personality, we’re talking about the specimen. Is Nick Fuentes, allegedly the most prominent White Nationalist in America, actually White?

Well… Is Logic White?

Let’s get down to business.

As you can see, Nick Fuentes is registered as 79.1% European. I will generously lump his MENA ancestry of 2.3% in with the European as a “Caucasian” component, as such slight MENA ancestry is not going to change very much, leaving us with 81.4% European. Otherwise he is 14.8% EANA (presumably all Native American, due to his Mexican ancestry, with the SEA and EA components being erroneous but still likely representative of Native American DNA), and 1.3% Subsaharan African. 0% South Asian, 0% Australoid. 2.6% of his ancestry is unassigned, or at least was at this time, but because Europe is the most well-sampled region it is likely that the bulk of this 2.6% is of non-European, likely Amerindian or African extract. I will assume that 0.6% of that 2.6% is European in origin, giving us an even 82% Caucasian. Also, for simplicity’s sake, let’s just call the rest (18%) Native American. This only helps Nick Fuentes’s case, as African ancestry is significantly more distant than Amerindian ancestry.

Nick Fuentes in this case is certainly a “Castizo” (>=75% European Ancestry), but falls short of the Old Spanish definition of Whiteness (7/8 European or more). As far as American definitions of Whiteness go, I’m not sure if there has ever been one concrete standard on who is “White” and who is “Amerindian”, because there just weren’t enough Amerindians to make it an issue. Some people will insist that, because America historically granted Mexicans the status of Whiteness, this implies that Americans thought Mexicans were White. This is not true. Mexicans were granted “benefit-of-the-doubt” White status as a result of the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo at the end of the Mexican-American War. Mexican citizens who ended up on this side of the border had to be given the choice between becoming an American citizen, or staying as a Mexican Citizen, and at this time only white persons were capable of naturalization by law. The average American, be it some random farmer or some anthropologist academic, recognized that many Mexicans were very heavily mixed with Amerindians and hence not White. However, back then, Mexico was not nearly as miscegenated as it is today. In fact, a quick look at the census records of Mexico, and you’ll find that Tejas was actually about as white under the Spaniards in 1793, as it is under the United States in 2024 (39.7% European vs. 39.7% NH White — I’m assuming that the number of truly White Hispanics balances out with the number of Whites on the census who are non-European). The main trend in Mexican history up until the 20th century seems to be a Criollo population which remains relatively constant around 18-20%. However, the Indian population declines heavily in favor of a growing mixed population.

However, during the 20th century, political movements started encouraging ideas of “Mestizaje” and “La raza cósmica” to the Mexican people, denying the existence of “White Mexicans” or “Indian Mexicans” and suggesting that all Mexicans should be thought of as Mestizo, until Mexico really was entirely Mestizo. One hundred years of this mindset has made Mexicans much more mixed than they were a century and a half prior.

Nonetheless, as Mexican Immigration increased around the early 20th century, people began to chafe under the notion of Mexican Whiteness, and during the 1930s Mexicans had their Whiteness status revoked, resulting in hundreds of thousands of Mexican U.S. citizens getting deported from the country.

But, I’m getting off topic. If you are a true, blue, race realist, then it shouldn’t really matter who the U.S. considered white at what time. Because race is real. Race is only socially constructed insofar as other taxonomic categories are socially constructed — for inquisitive convenience. So let’s get down to the brass tax here.

Fixation Index (Fst) is probably the most common measure of genetic differentiation between populations. To put it briefly, it measures the proportion of genetic variance within two populations that can be attributed to group differences between these populations, rather than genetic diversity present across the populations.

I handily have on me an Fst matrix which includes some European populations, and a combined Central American and North American group.

Now, before you make any other conclusions from this graph too hastily, let me clarify that Fst has some caveats. Because, Fst isn’t an *actual* distance measure, mathematically. It measures a ratio. Also, if a population is very bottlenecked or inbred or simply very small, and subsequently has less genetic variation within it, it will have elevated Fst to other populations. This is why Hunter Gatherer tribes in the rainforest tend to have unusually high Fst distances from each other. This is also why Africans (to my understanding) have lower Fst distances to each other than they should, because they have more genetic variation within. Don’t quote me on that last one, it may be more tenuous but I had a conversation about this with a trusted person years ago. Also, sometimes it varies by study for some reason or another, so you should try to only compare within the same study.

But, that being said, I don’t… Think this applies to Amerindians? Especially when they’re being coagulated into these larger groups encompassing entire continents… Maybe on the smaller tribal scale, but not on this scale. The fact that Uralics (presumably some Siberian Uralic group) are around the same distance, suggests to me that this is not some sort of fluke, and also it’s kind of intuitively obvious when you look at the other distances with East Eurasian populations. Yes, Amerindians do have a significant amount of very early West Eurasian DNA from Ancient North Eurasians, but first of all that is heavily drifted even from the ANE component in West Eurasians, secondly we can tack on an extra 10,000-20,000 years of isolation after one (maybe three?) likely bottlenecked migrations across the Bering Sea. If you guys want to learn more about Native American DNA, check out my post questioning the indigeneity of Native Americans:

Anyways, as we can see, the Fst of Europeans to Native Americans ranges from 0.09—0.13. Let’s be lax and put it at an even 0.1. Variation in Europe, excluding groups who are highly drifted like Finns, Sardinians, Basques, and admixed populations like Finns, Adygei, Jews, and Lapps, maxes out around maybe .011—.015, depending on the study.

And keep in mind, this differentiation is largely not due to “differences in whiteness”. Like, I wouldn’t consider Swedes or Irishmen “less white” or significantly “less northerly” than Latvians or Russians, but Southern Italians are significantly closer to Swedes and Irishman than Latvians and Russians due to Balto-Slavic Drift. I guess there is an argument that could be made, that because BS Drift is partially due to excess Hunter-Gatherer ancestry and HGs are the “most European”, but… We’re not going to get into that.

Because we’re dealing only with Western European populations here, we should only be concerned with the distances between Western Europeans, or else things are going to get weird. For convenience, we’ll use British Islanders as our standard “locus of whiteness” for a few reasons. Firstly, they’re present in all three matrices I’ve presented as English, CEU (CEU is essentially English, it’s White Utahns), and Irish. Secondly, we won’t have to worry about more recent drift as much, since we are dealing with Western European ancestry only. Thirdly, Fuentes himself is part Irish, so we can sort of just assume that as “0 distance”, which is nice. And fourthly, Britishers are actually very northerly. Some people might imagine British Islanders as “less northerly” than Germans — this is false.

So… Again, this is not an actual Fst distance I’m creating here — Fst is not exactly a true distance and it is not able to be measured between individuals due to the group differences needed to generate it, but we’re going to roughly consider it as we would a typical distance between two points, because there’s no “Nation of Nicks” to derive actual Fst from. Even Latin American populations can’t really be considered because they haven’t really undergone full ethnogenesis yet. Anyways.

Oh, wow… 8.5% Balkan? There’s no way he is, probably 23AndMe being retarded and adding something Greek to his Italian. Uhh. Ok this is annoying. Let’s just say he is 13% Irish, and 69% Italian. It really won’t make a huge difference.

So we get: 0.69(0.0067) + 0.18(0.1) = 0.023~

Yeah, quite a big distance. Hence why I claim, Arabs might have a better claim of being White than Spick Fuentes.

But, you know, I’ll try and demonstrate that this is true with other distance measures. f2 and statistics are popular in archaeogenetics because they don’t require large sample groups. f2 is basically measuring the total difference in allele frequencies between two samples, it is much more what you might typically think when you think “distance”. And unsurprisingly, we get a similar trend. Someone of 18% Indigenous Mexican ancestry would roughly be as distant (0.00977~) as MENA types. Not even bothering to account for the distance between Northern and Southern Euros at this point because I’m lazy and it’s not even important.

So uhh, it’s not looking good for the Nicker Nation. If you want to compare NJF to actual historical populations in Europe… Hmm… Well, Volga Tatars have a sort of similar ratio of Mongoloid ancestry, I think it’s around 15%. Scythians and Sarmatians in my experience are usually around 10% (at least when I model them). Lapps vary heavily, some of them I think are around 20% but some are quite low. Finns and Russians tend to be more around 5% except in the very far North of Russia, where I have gotten 10-percenters on G25. But I’ve always been skeptical of this. By the way, G25 is not a very reliable estimator of genetic distance on the global scale. So, stop. I like G25 but people don’t understand that it is just a 25-dimensional PCA. I was supposed to actually learn about PCAs in one of my classes this year, but we spent like 5 minutes on it and he said it wasn’t gonna be on the test so I was like, ehh. I get the jist of it. Plus, he was doing PCAs for when your dimensions are way less than your samples, but for DNA it’s the opposite. So that’s kind of a bummer.

Also, people will say he “looks white enough” or “he would be seen as white” which is a very libtarded way to view race. It tells me that you don’t really believe race should be taken seriously, when to me it should be taken very seriously. Maybe this makes sense, considering that many of NJF’s fans are dark foreigners.