61% Fake: The Foreign Bots Manufacturing America's Anti-Indian Hate
Inside the algorithmic machine turning a fringe racist into a "movement"
61% of Nick Fuentes’ online engagement is fake. The hatred he’s generating against Indians is not.
If you’ve never heard of Fuentes, that’s by design. He’s a 26-year-old white nationalist streamer, the kind of figure mainstream America prefers to treat as a fringe curiosity rather than a symptom. He rose through the post-Charlottesville far-right, built a following called the “Groypers,” and spent years being too toxic to platform but too loud to ignore. He was a professional disturbance, a racist who performed his racism with the confidence of someone who’d never faced real consequences for it.
That era is over. Fuentes has found a new target, and the infrastructure behind him has industrialised.
..
Here’s what the Network Contagion Research Institute found when they analysed his X account: 61% of the engagement driving his visibility comes from foreign bot farms. The traffic traces back to Pakistan, Indonesia, and Russia. These aren’t organic followers sharing content they believe in. They’re coordinated swarms hitting his posts within the first 30 minutes, gaming the algorithm to force his content into millions of “For You” feeds.
The Centre for the Study of Hate and Extremism ran parallel research on anti-Indian content during the same period. Between July and September 2024, posts framing Indians as “invaders” and “job thieves” generated over 111.8 million views. Nearly 70% of high-engagement racist posts used Great Replacement rhetoric applied to the labour market—the idea that a “hostile elite” is replacing American workers with cheaper, compliant Indian labour. The H-1B visa isn’t an economic tool in this narrative. It’s a weapon of demographic warfare.
..
Now follow the money. Bot networks don’t emerge from admiration. Coordinated engagement farms don’t donate labour out of belief. Someone benefits from this infrastructure existing, and the benefit isn’t ideological—it’s economic and geopolitical.
Hate monetises. Outrage sells. Platforms reward what destabilises public space because the algorithm doesn’t care whether content is factual or morally defensible. It cares whether content retains attention. Fuentes understood this early: a tweet doesn’t need to be meaningful, it needs to be early-viral. Pushed into visibility until mainstream attention collapses around it.
Then legacy media, desperate never to be late to a narrative, retrofits legitimacy onto noise. They mistake momentum for relevance, volume for constituency. The media didn’t platform Fuentes. The media authenticated him.
..
This matters because hatred that looks organic gets treated differently than hatred that’s manufactured. Organic hate suggests a constituency you need to understand. Manufactured hate is a product someone is selling.
Fuentes is selling. Foreign actors are buying the amplification. Platforms are profiting from the engagement. And Indians—specifically Hindu Indians, Indian-Americans, the civic space they inhabit—are paying the cost.
An Indian teenager growing up in America doesn’t experience this as a debate about immigration policy. They experience it as weather. Background hostility. A constant reminder that their belonging is contested.
Once a community is framed as illegitimate, political attacks become morally justified. Exclusion becomes “defence.” Rhetorical violence prepares the ground for the real thing. We’ve watched this happen to Jews and to Asian-Americans. Pretending Indians are somehow immune is historical ignorance dressed as confidence.
The question isn’t what Fuentes believes. The question is who profits when Indians become the enemy—and why America keeps buying.
Anti India hate is not because many of us are there, it is because we are better. It is truly jealousy motivated. The Europeans can’t compete, and they can’t cut our thumbs off like the British did to replace our textiles industry centuries ago.
What do you expect from Europe’s filth? It was their prison colony.
The Abrahamic belief systems are created by the uneducated. Be it Mosses (a goat herder), Jesus (an uneducated carpenter) and Mohammed (the take pride in his uneducated illiterate state). Their Adam and Eve story, essentially, regards the acquisition of knowledge as the original sin of humanity.
Dharmic religions admire the educated, we should refer to Brahmins as the educated, scholars and philosophers. They have tried to smear Brahmins as priestly when it is more likely to do with traditionally educated and intelligent people.
Abrahamic religions are adopted by the underclass of uneducated, and whatever equality we believe in, the lower classes are more likely to have lower morals and ethics. Education brakes this, but economic pressures still persist until the cycle of poverty is broken. Abrahamic religions were created and adopted by desert/tundra dwellers, whilst Dharmic religions come from rich fruitful lands which have the surpluses needed to invest in education, knowledge and philosophy - places where higher ideals can be pursued beyond mere survival in deserts and tundras.
Abrahamic religions are adopted by the uneducated who do not like consequences for their actions, therefore they don’t want the rules of Karma to apply, they just want to be forgiven. Dharmic people believe in accountability.
Western societies have adopted the Caste system covertly, they too are run by the educated and they are the ones who are respected and given power. They are such hypocrites.
We need to change the language we use, Brahmins are the scholars and educated and not just priestly. We need to change the way we debate the issue. We have been propagandised into hating ourselves and we don’t even realise it.
We need to systematically deconstruct their arguments against us and our history, undermine them and point out what they are!
Just a thought!