>>28740I kneel to the explanation, seems to hit on some good points. Nick is drenched in half-hearted irony and surface level /pol/ thought that's only "based" because he's brash with his views rather than witty. he takes the current opinion, /pol/ify it (or reads what the /pol/ consensus is), and sells it back to viewers. I think some of his pro-russia stuff is a great example of this.
I think to add, some of my personal problems with nick and his show lies in the fact he's a demagogue without any of the charm. I'm pretty chuddy, arguably in the same camp as him, but Nick is just a loser. he's got none of the smarts of any proper reactionary thinker and theory crafter, none of the wit and pragmatics of a good digital missionary to the young, none of the swagger of a big name reactionary or diet-reactionary to appeal to the masses, and none of the baron status to throw cash at what he believes in. All he has is /pol/tards enamored with his work. He can't even pull a Trump and win over the masses through his rhetoric, he's just a niche loser tapping into justified rage for impotent purposes that could otherwise be directed at something useful to his cause.