The Peter McCormack Show #136: Carl Benjamin – The System That Creates Nick Fuentes

Guest: Carl Benjamin (Sargon of Akkad)
Host: Peter McCormack (Pete)
Date: Dec 18, 2025
Main Theme:
A provocative exploration of the malaise affecting young men in the West, the generational divides in cultural narratives, the social and economic systems that drive the radicalization of youth (epitomized by figures like Nick Fuentes), and whether society can have an honest conversation about identity, belonging, and systemic change.

1. Episode Overview

The conversation focuses on understanding why controversial figures like Nick Fuentes resonate with today's youth, particularly young men, and how societal, political, and economic changes have created an environment ripe for disaffection and radicalization. McCormack and Benjamin, both Gen X fathers, reflect on generational contrasts, lost opportunities, and the emerging perception that the modern system actively stigmatizes and alienates young straight white men. The episode explores the limitations of liberal narratives and the risks of ignoring legitimate grievances—raising uncomfortable questions about identity, meritocracy, multiculturalism, and who the nation is "for."

2. Key Discussion Points & Insights

Generational Disconnect & The Search for Meaning

• Carl: Our generation enjoyed hope and opportunity; today’s young men see no frontier to conquer. There's a loss of heroism post-WWII (05:33).
• Pete: Watching the Nick Fuentes/Piers Morgan interview as a father and then a disaffected 19-year-old produced radically different reactions. This forced self-reflection about generational failure and the world inherited by youth (02:20-03:12).

Economic & Social Stagnation

• Hardships like rising unemployment due to AI, unaffordable housing, and inflation hit everyone but disproportionately affect the young and those without established capital (06:04–07:30).
• Not just an economic problem – there are profound social/moral issues. The youth feel alienated, and modern society lacks respect or opportunities for young men.

Cultural Shifts, Stigma, and Identity

• The stigmatization of young male identity, particularly straight white men, is viewed as both a cause and a consequence of current radicalization trends (13:20-15:00).
• Society has removed traditional heroes for this demographic; all that remains, culturally, is the "villain" (typically symbolized by Nazis/Hitler), making it an attractive symbol for the marginalized (12:00-13:20).
• Carl: “If they're all demonized, well, why don’t we just take the worst one as a ‘you’ then? … You are giving them power.” (13:07–13:34)

The Nick Fuentes Phenomenon

• Fuentes is framed as a reactionary symbol—his popularity a product of group psychology and unmet needs for meaning, belonging, and grievance (39:40–40:21).
• Piers Morgan’s outrage (about virginity, Hitler praise) reflects the brittle worldview of an older order that young people don’t relate to, making Morgan’s attacks appear out of touch.
• The liberal establishment’s focus on suppressing taboo discussions (race, sex, group interests) is contrasted with the lived experience of youth forced to confront group identities in daily life.

Media Incentives and Fear of Conversation

• Hosts and media figures often fear discussing these topics honestly due to concern about reputational risk, sponsors, or family reactions (17:47–18:28).
• The system incentivizes drama (Piers Morgan as a clickbaiter), and even negative attention is valuable (15:00–17:04).

The Problem of “Group Power” and Meritocracy

• Society lionizes group identities for other demographics but expects atomization and radical individualism from straight white men (34:26–34:54).
• Meritocracy is critiqued as a myth; group-based advancement is the norm elsewhere, and the erosion of opportunities for young men is considered both unjust and socially dangerous (32:46–33:44).
• Affirmative action and DEI programs are cited as formalizing discrimination against the native majority, fueling resentment and radicalization (69:31–71:41).

The Politics of Demographic Change & National Identity

• Carl argues British identity and rights to the nation are being diluted by rapid demographic changes that have removed the psychic assumption that “the country is for our children” (77:13–78:52).
• The subject of who truly belongs—and who should benefit from collective goods—is presented as the central question now facing society, which every other country answers with “for the children of the nation,” but the UK/West now refuses to (97:04–97:44).

Possible Futures: Reform or Revolution

• If a legitimate sense of belonging and meaning is not restored, younger generations, lacking the colorblind assumptions of Gen X/Boomers, will increasingly adopt harsher group identities, risking serious social conflict, even revolutionary outcomes (25:57–26:20, 85:07-86:44).
• Carl: “It could get so, so bad… the only way to solve this is to accept that the native people of the country have the primary claim to the country. If we’re not happy with this, then it has to just stop.” (106:23–107:57)

3. Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On Youth Alienation and Systemic Failure

• Pete: “You realize… actually, they’re screwed. We this up. I say we – the collective.” (06:07)
• Carl: “It would be suicide to not reorient your worldview. When the boomer Piers Morgan is just like ‘I can’t believe you like Adolf Hitler’, it’s just like—okay, bro. You know, that’s a world that doesn’t exist anymore.” (00:50/79:08)

On the Cultural Vacuum

• Carl: "Who are the heroes of the straight white men? It used to be people like George Washington or Nelson, but we've been tearing their statues down... So, okay, who’s statue can’t you tear down? Hitler’s.” (12:00–13:07)
• Carl: “The reality is, okay, we don’t have a group power, so what do we do? … The only way to solve this is to accept that the native people of the country have the primary claim…” (106:23–107:57)

On Media and Framing

• Carl: “Piers Morgan is publicly humiliated every day and he knows he's publicly humiliated every day and he doesn't care.” (15:48)

On Institutional Failure and Revolution

• Pete: “I don’t want the country to have to collapse into absolute chaos and anarchy for us to go, ‘yeah, there’s a constitutional crisis.’ I want it now.” (57:47)

On Difference Between Conceptual and Procedural Belonging

• Carl: “If you ask Zach Polanski [Green Party], to whom does England belong? ‘Everyone’—which effectively means no one. … England is the collective property of the English.” (81:54–82:07)

4. Segmented Timeline & Highlights

| Time | Segment/Topic | |----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 00:12–01:16| Opening remarks: Stigmatizing young men; preview of Nick Fuentes discussion | | 01:17–05:54| Generational divide; interaction with Fuentes/Morgan interview | | 05:54–08:56| Economic/social challenges facing youth; generational empathy | | 08:56–13:34| Media narrative, Nazi label; lack of positive identity for white men | | 13:34–15:48| Media opportunism; popularity of “controversial” guests | | 15:48–18:28| Media incentives and honest conversations | | 18:28–20:17| Parental duty; failing to leave a better world | | 20:18–23:49| Collapse of progress narrative; history as monstrous | | 23:49–26:20| Demographic/identity politics; reaction to societal messages | | 26:20–29:04| Diffusing the issue; focusing on straight white young men | | 29:04–34:26| 90s nostalgia; hope and opportunity disappearing | | 34:26–39:49| Groupishness, meritocracy, societal obligations | | 39:49–42:01| Nick Fuentes’ appeal, group power, and identification of group influence | | 42:01–47:03| Racial violence, institutional failure, loss of faith in justice | | 47:03–54:19| Constitutional crisis: lack of accountability in UK's political system | | 54:19–62:36| On political parties, revolution, peaceful withdrawal of consent | | 62:36–66:38| Protesting, mass movements, comparisons to historical revolutions | | 66:38–69:31| System critique: left and right grievances mirroring each other | | 69:31–74:46| DEI, affirmative action, group disparities: critical analysis | | 74:46–77:13| Demographic change, group responsibility, generational transitions | | 77:13–83:20| English identity, group claims, who is the country for? | | 83:20–89:08| Historical expulsions, plausibility of future radical action | | 89:08–93:39| How to avert conflict: policy reversals, recognizing legitimate grievances | | 93:39–101:10| Difficult conversations, facing social discomfort, psychic map vs categories| | 101:10–107:57| Generational challenges; how to avoid hardline solutions |

5. Tone and Language

• Reasoned but urgent; both host and guest grapple openly with discomfort, sometimes using humor, historical analogy, or blunt realism.
• The episode does not shy from controversial or “uncomfortable” ideas. Carl Benjamin presents arguments in group-relational rather than strictly racial terms, but expresses clear skepticism toward liberal universalism and meritocracy.
• McCormack maintains a tone of critical engagement, sometimes acting as a foil — the “Piers Morgan” in the conversation (75:25).

6. Takeaways for Uninitiated Listeners

• The appeal of radical/controversial figures for young men is a symptom of systemic alienation, not simple bigotry.
• The podcast explores the collapse of a post-WWII consensus and the rise of group identity awareness among youth.
• Generational divides shape perceptions: Gen X/Boomers largely grew up “colorblind,” but today’s youth live in an environment defined by group competition and affirmative action.
• Both left and right are disillusioned with current systems, but fail to recognize their complaints are structurally similar.
• The solution, for Benjamin, is a clear reclamation of national identity and prioritizing the native majority—a route that risks further marginalizing others unless handled with great care, and which raises profound moral and practical dilemmas.

7. Final Thoughts

Carl Benjamin’s diagnosis is stark: without recognition and restoration of a sense of belonging and meaning for young (primarily white) men, the system will breed further radicalization and conflict. McCormack pushes back, searching for a more universalist resolution, but acknowledges the emotional power and growing urgency of the narrative. The episode, deeply uncomfortable by design, serves as a microcosm of Western grappling with multiculturalism, lost opportunity, and political legitimacy.

For further engagement, listeners are encouraged to reflect on these questions:

• Who should a country primarily serve, and on what basis?
• Can deeply group-based grievances be addressed within a liberal order?
• How can society foster a healthy identity for all without creating new underclasses or preparing the ground for future conflict?
• What conversations are worth having, even if they risk discomfort or backlash?