Or does he support a Personhood Amendment to the Constitution?

He endorsed the 2022 Life at Conception Act (a federal Personhood bill) on both the 12 Jan 2022 and 29 Jan 2023 shows.  When the constitutional route is raised, he answers yes—“it would be ideal to have an Amendment enshrining personhood from conception nationwide. That is the end goal.”

Getting married in an judaized society in no way saves the innocents from being slaughtered.

He is really nothing like Milo who is a fed and a narcissistic flamboyant gαy ( who BTW has a scary understanding of Traditional Catholicism although he is a jew)

Nick is an avowed virgin until marriage and that is so difficult for most normies to wrap their heads around that they have to attribute some perversion to it.

He is a NO Papist ( oh well) but he appears to have a deep understanding of Catholicism as a 26 year old.
I think he is brilliant and a force of nature at this point and has had 10 years of mocking censoring and marginalizing to hone his wit, courage and perseverance.
Nick is the man to watch.

Relatively speaking.
Please.

How many popular pundits are proudly and unashamedly promoting Catholic Monarchy?
I don't think in this instance we should make perfect the enemy of good.
He is still very young but amazingly on target.

I've been listening to Fuentes since last September, during the election. I've been supporting and defending him this year. But after some things were brought to my attention last week, I had to change my tune. I cannot support him anymore, though I'm certain his news analysis will remain very interesting.

https://theweltgeist.substack.com/p/my-opinion-about-nick-fuentes-as

I've actually lost a few subscribers after posting this.

I've been listening to Fuentes since last September, during the election. I've been supporting and defending him this year. But after some things were brought to my attention last week, I had to change my tune. I cannot support him anymore, though I'm certain his news analysis will remain very interesting.

https://theweltgeist.substack.com/p/my-opinion-about-nick-fuentes-as

As regards the stone throwing of Day Vox and Owen Benjamin in the above link, it should be noted that they live in their own glass houses with their own baggage and agendas.

• Rash judgment & detraction  Publicly imputing grave sins without competent proof, venue, or jurisdiction is classic rash judgment; broadcasting a person’s alleged private sins is detraction—even if true—when there’s no proportionate good. Accusation-as-content violates the Eighth Commandment. A Catholic critique writes itself: “This is not how Catholics pursue justice; this is how we farm outrage.”
• No due process, no witnesses, no forum of correction. Matthew 18 gives a graduated path; Canon law reserves crimes of sɛҳuąƖ abuse to competent ecclesial or civil authority. Turning suspicions into monetized streams/blogs is the opposite of fraternal correction.
• Scandal and spiritual harm. Milking lurid insinuations (“pervy,” “honey pot,” “underage”) creates scandal—driving the weak to contempt or cynicism—without actually protecting anyone. If there’s truly a crime: report it; if not, stop smearing.
• Incoherence with claimed goals. If the stated aim is defending Christian civilization, then calumny, mockery, and innuendo are self-refuting tools. Catholics can say: “You don’t defend Logos by bearing false witness.”
• Pride & profiteering. Personality-cult feuds (refusal to debate, purity tests, victory laps when platforms ban rivals) reek of vainglory. A traditional Catholic response: “Less YouTube court, more confession.”