Politics: right on right?
By Richard North - September 13, 2025
As part of my daily reminder not to pontificate over matters of which I know little (or next to nothing), I am directed via a comment in yesterday’s blogpost to a dimension of the Charlie Kirk story which could, if substantiated, completely transform the current narrative and take it into previously untouched areas – with entirely unpredictable results.
The potential volte face starts with the capture and identification of the shooter, now known as 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, arrested after he had confessed to his father, resident in Washington County, southern Utah, several hours’ drive from the campus where young Tyler murdered Kirk.
Details about Robinson are spread across the media but details are still emerging as journalists scramble to put together a picture of the self-confessed assassin and his motivation. However, the Telegraph does a pretty comprehensive job under the banner headline of: “The scholarship student with an all-American upbringing accused of killing Charlie Kirk”, with the sub-head telling us Robinson grew up in a middle-class family in Utah, with both parents registered Republicans.
He is said to have been a bright student who graduated from high school with flying colours and gained a $32,000 scholarship to Utah State University. The degree route, however, does not seem to have been to Robinson’s liking and he only ever attended one semester, in 2021, before going on to attend Dixie Technical College, enrolling in the electrical apprenticeship programme.
Records, according to the Guardian, show that Tyler was unaffiliated with a political party before the 2024 election, although he is said by high school friends to have expressed sentiments that were critical of Donald Trump several years ago, despite the rest of his family being broadly conservative.
A family member asserts that Tyler had grown “increasingly political” of late, without stating which direction that had taken him. However, he had expressed a dislike for Kirk in the days before murdering him, apparently saying that he was “spreading hate”. He also mentioned that Kirk would soon be coming to town to give a talk at Utah Valley University, having talked previously about not liking Kirk and his viewpoints.
Not so much is being made of the weapon used, although I am now pretty sure that it was a Mauser M03, this model having detatchable barrel, removable with no more than a simple screwdriver (said to be found with the weapon), enabling it to be concealed in a bag during transport.
Far more interest has been shown in the three unused rounds found with the weapon, which are said to have had what have been described as “anti-fascist” and “transgender” messages engraved on them.
One engraving read: “Hey Fascists, Catch!” – next to an up-arrow symbol, right arrow symbol and three down arrow symbols. Another read “Notices bulges OWO what’s this?”, and a third read “If You Read This You Are Gay LMAO”. One cartridge also carried the words “Oh, Bella ciao”, lyrics referencing the Second World War Italian anti-fascist song Bella Ciao.
It is here, though, that the “Lefty shooter” narrative potentially begins to unravel with an article in the blog, “Lawyers, Guns, Money”, which starts off with the bold assertion that:
It’s very likely that Tyler Robinson, whatever his very probably completely confused and incoherent political beliefs might have been, was engaging in stochastic violence for the purposes of gaining internet fame, like so many other young men who have grown up on the internet. The fact that he confessed his crime strongly suggests this, given that a bumbling hollowed out FBI run by social media influencers as opposed to professionals might very well have never caught him if he hadn’t been able to resist advertising his achievement.
The piece then goes on to quote a hotly disputed but widely shared tweet suggesting (via Grok) that the “Oh, Bella ciao” reference and the other engravings have been misinterpreted. Rather than left-leaning signals, these trace young Tyler’s political beliefs “squarely to the fringes of the alt-right, specifically the ‘Groyper movement’ led by such figures as Nick Fuentes”.
This crowd, we are told, positions itself as hyper-patriotic, pro-Trump conservatives who see mainstream Republicans like Charlie Kirk as sellouts or “fake conservatives” infected by globalism, liberalism, or even fascism-lite.
The “bulges OWO” engraving is thus redefined as a crude, mocking nod to transphobic memes that originated on Tumblr but got co-opted by right-wing trolls to “spot” trans people in crowds – described as “pure Groyper-style bigotry”.
The use if “Bella Ciao” flips an anti-fascist WWII partisan song into ironic ammo for ridiculing leftists, while tying into their beef with “fascist” establishment figures like Kirk (whom Fuentes has repeatedly trashed).
The “gay” taunt is said to be straight-up homophobic bait, emblematic of the group’s anti-LGBTQ venom. And “Catch this fascist”? That’s a direct shot at Kirk, framing the attack as purging a traitor from the right.
I am now totally out of my depth, but Newsweek picks up the story (as do others), telling us that the killing of Charlie Kirk “has reignited attention on a long-simmering feud within elements of the far right, particularly between Kirk and the so-called ‘Groyper movement’ led by white nationalist Nick Fuentes”.
Thus, says the magazine, social media users have been questioning whether early claims by officials that the suspect was tied to left-wing extremism were premature, the evidence pointing instead to possible links to the far-right.
Up to press, it is acknowledged that Tyler Robinson’s motivations remain unclear, as does his political ideology, but he is said to have become steeped in online meme culture in recent years.
Newsweek takes us further into the bowels of the beast, describing the Groyper Army as a far-right, online-based movement organised around white nationalist and “America First” advocate Nick Fuentes.
It cites the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) which asserts that the group consists of “alt-right, white nationalist, and Christian nationalist activists” who hold virulently antisemitic, racist, and homophobic views, often cloaked in rhetoric about traditional values and family. Their mascot is a cartoon frog called “Groyper”, a variant of the “Pepe” meme used widely among extremist groups, from which the group takes its name.
The term “Groyper”, we are told, began circulating widely in 2019 during a public feud inside the conservative movement. That year, followers of Nick Fuentes disrupted college events hosted by Charlie Kirk and his group, Turning Point USA, accusing Kirk of watering down Donald Trump’s message. The clash, later referred to as the “Groyper Wars”, drew national attention for its confrontational tactics and for pushing white nationalist ideas into more mainstream conservative circles.
Kirk responded by calling the “Groypers” extremists. He defended his approach to conservatism as inclusive, saying the movement should be open to people of all backgrounds and reject racism and homophobia.
Thus, there is a plausible, but highly contentious possibility that the slaying of Charlie Kirk is not a “left on right” hate crime but the perpetuation of a “right on right” dispute which has erupted into fatal violence at the hands of a confused and incoherent young man who is barely out of his teens.
Even if this stands up, though, it doesn’t give the left a free pass. Over the last few days, the mask has slipped to reveal the hatred and intolerance of the breed, as so many have revelled in the killing, crowing that Kirk deserved what he got.
But that also leaves the disturbing (if tentative) possibility – which has some considerable relevance to the UK – that the most powerful enemy of the right is the right, and it is amongst our own that the most vicious battles are being fought.
In revolutionary terms, it might have always been thus, as revolutions are often said to devour their children, but it does give pause for thought as to where we are all going and what we wish to achieve.
