“Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell in unity.”
Psalm 132:1
Yes, it is always a cause for rejoicing whenever the Church blossoms with holy unity, doctrinal purity, and social harmony. This was how Jesus Christ intended it before the Christian community was beset with heresies and cleavages like Arianism, Lutheranism, and, of course, the Modernist scourge. Sadly, unity is not an appropriate descriptor for the current “State of the Union” among self-described traditionalists.
I saw a poll the other day asking participants which traditionalist camp they find most appealing. It included options like the SSPX, SSPX Resistance, conservative Novus Ordo (blech!), CMRI, SSPV, and “cannot decide.” The results, as you might suspect, were mixed, leaving many respondents in the uncertain category.
This is to be expected during such perplexing times when Catholics cannot agree on when we last had a valid pope, that essential Churchman who would represent the splendid unifying “oil on the beard of Aaron.”
Of course, this problem worsens much further when we consider how disingenuous, swindling, manipulative, and myopic certain Catholic media figures have become. Here, if we limit the scope to traditional influencers (a term with a low barrier for entry nowadays), then we must discuss the prevalence of this odious “Trad Inc” phenomenon.
What is Trad Inc? How is it changing? Is it a useful distinction at all? How do I know who is who, in order to avoid the shysters?
I’ll address these questions by describing and diagramming who I have identified as . . .
1) Trad Inc
2) Trad Inc 2.0
3) Potentially Reliable Influencers, and
4) Wildcards
Bear in mind, the specific positioning of folks is bound to change whenever certain figures either come to their senses or depart from them. Also, remember that I, Chris Munier, the sole proprietor of Catholics Aren’t Zombies, am NOT the president of the Catholic web-o-sphere. Therefore, it may be out of place for me to deliver a “State of the Union Address” on behalf of it.
Nevertheless, if you’ll permit a humble, armchair analysis, I shall outline the landscape and attempt to direct folks away from dubious sources in so-called Catholic media.
Trad Inc Versus Trad Inc 2.0
If you wish to be “wise as serpents but simple as doves,” then it behooves you to know about those who produce Catholic web content. This includes knowing their motivations, biases, incentives, and shortcomings. Otherwise, you risk being devoured by wolves or scandalization at the hands of so many imitation leaders (lay mercenaries). With that in mind, let’s examine what I mean by Trad Inc 1.0 and Trad Inc 2.0.
Trad Inc 1.0
I wish this were a more useful and precise term, but it has deteriorated into a catch-all for almost every “successful” public traditionalist. Trad Inc has become a code word for “somewhat traditional, but someone I find wrong, irascible, or effeminate.” This is a bit limited, so let’s sharpen this concept some more.
Several Catholic pundits come across as vaguely traditional, but foul up their analysis on at least one critical topic (secular politics, Church politics, Vatican II, etc.), including through deliberate means. Most Trad Inc figures are in cahoots together and reinforce one another in their errors. Hence, an incorporation of semi-traditionalists who deliver an incomplete message to their audiences, perhaps as a means to cover for whomever pays their salaries or funds their apostolates.
Here, we might recall prominent academics like T.S. Flanders, Peter Kwasniewski, and Eric Sammons. These are all men who most certainly would not possess the same audience were they forced to operate as solo entrepreneurs without the aid of established Catholic media outlets. These types are also well known for using passive-aggressive (gaslighting) techniques to impose upon naïve readers/listeners, often trying to establish themselves as experts via their intelligence and/or academic qualifications.
If, for example, enough Catholics question the validity of Vatican II or the conciliar pontiffs, then these men rush to produce long-winded polemics explaining why such an activity automatically positions one in the dreaded SCHISM category. There’s a term, if ever there was one, which has morphed into a comical boogeyman, despite its important denotations and ecclesiastical nuances.
Nonetheless, this is what you face if you listen to Trad Inc for any length of time.
While I don’t receive any particular joy from citing these individuals for their manipulation, I find it my duty to alert others to just how bad things have gotten. Many of them possess redeeming qualities (at least when they stick to apologetics) but long ago resorted to saying whatever their subscribers wanted to hear (i.e., Taylor Marshall).
Among these men, you’ll discover one unifying theme: they will never consider the possibility that the Church has been usurped by an Antipope or that it faces opposition by a dangerous Synodal Church.
Taylor Marshall occasionally addresses these topics, but often through flimsy, click-baited analysis. At the end of the day, Trad Inc members cower into a position of reluctant pope-splainers, that is, at least reluctant compared to less traditional pope-splainers like Trent Horn or Jimmy Akin.
To their credit, however, the Trad Inc crowd has generally awoken to the severity of the Trump Deception (at least as of the Iranian invasion). Even the Marshalls of the world can no longer color a Christian spin on Trump’s civilizational elimination ambitions.
It is that exact issue that brings us to what I think represents the latest divergence within the world of Big Traditional Catholic Commentary. Behold Trad Inc 2.0, which does not commit the same errors as Trad Inc 1.0, but has incorporated together in a concerted effort to convince traditional Catholics that Donald Trump is still an ally for true Catholics.
Trad Inc 2.0
The frustrating part about Trad Inc 2.0 is that they tend to be astute on many of today’s prescient issues, like Modernism infecting the Church (Chris Jackson comes to mind). However, these influencers, who cannot resist secular politics despite its idiocy, keep their sizable audiences confused by adhering to the miserable “left-wing versus right-wing” false dichotomy.
I’d imagine that if this were 2003 all over again, these same familiar faces would devise a way to support George W. Bush once more. After all, by their reasoning, nothing is worse than leftism. They view it as the solitary evil threatening humanity, which is an over-simplification, AND leaves their followers vulnerable to every manner of right-wing chicanery.
Also, it is my observation that the Trad Inc 2.0 cohort are the ones who most often accuse others of a Trad Inc bias. You would almost think, after hearing it so often from them, that “Trad Inc” was the Catholic right’s version of “you’re a racist.” This carries the predictable consequence of diluting the term’s value entirely.
For now, this is a smaller sub-sect of the complex Trad Inc problem, featuring noteworthy figures: Chris Jackson, Frank Walker, Anthony Stine, and Stephen Kokx. Again, these men have talent, education, and audiences, but mislead them on at least the topic of the Trump Deception.
We should pray for this to change, but as I mentioned in the last article, this cohort of online personalities (particularly Jackson and Walker) refuse to recognize what the rest of us have: that Donald Trump is either a maniac and/or a sock-puppet controlled by Jewish eugenicists. They call us “Never Trumpers,” whereas we must retaliate by recognizing them as “Forever Trumpers” since nothing seems to shake their imperturbable faith in “Trumpal Infallibility.”
According to Trad Inc 2.0, Donald Trump, Emperor of the Western Hemisphere, cannot go wrong. Yet, if ever he does, or appears to do so by any reasonable standard, his defenders utilize the ancient Art of the Jew, and, as Masters of Deflection, blame someone else for Trump’s innumerable misgivings.
Besides the Forever-Trumper allegiance, Trad Inc 2.0 has carved out a niche market servicing all neurotic Catholics who require a daily fill of “Leo bad” content. If you’ve glanced at any random 10 or 20 headlines from Canon212.com, then you know what I mean. Poor Frank can’t last two hours without digging up something mundane and repetitive regarding the banal mis-exploits of Antipope Prevost.
However, by this point in the game, I can’t comprehend why anyone needs everyday news on how/why Robert Prevost is ruining Catholicism (as if he could). Everything you needed to know about Antipope Prevost became crystal clear within the first three or four months of his regime.
Plus, we’ve experienced a firehose deluge of this nonsense for about 15 years, and, frankly, Prevost is nothing more than a flavorless, boring, and unsalted carbon copy of Bergoglio. He’s a caretaker and torchbearer for the Vatican II, Jewish-freemasonic takeover of the Church (though you’ll seldom hear about the Jewish Question from the likes of Walker, Jackson, et al.).
Instead, Frank Walker writes jokes, rephrasing people’s comments into German Nazi parlance, making them appear deranged if they dare mention “Ze Joos.”
At any rate, who are the Catholics who have so little to do that they must indulge in nonstop tabloid-style coverage of Robert Prevost? Why not, instead of wasting the day, devote it to learning about how all this Anti-Church business corresponds with Catholic prophecy?
Why not research the numerous ways we can connect the Anti-Church with the Kabbalistic Deep State? If done well, you can obtain much more peace of mind compared to what you receive from all the AI-generated, “Leo bad” journo-porn.
The once outstanding Canon212 website has tumbled down largely the same sewer as Breitbart, Drudge Report, and other mediocre, co-opted news aggregators. All of them get old after a while. They either possess massive blind spots or get captured by Zionists (Ben Shapiro, for instance).
I bear no personal vendetta against Frank Walker (who has been kind enough to post my articles in the past). However, I must warn his readers of the absurdity of his pro-Trump fixation, given the risk of reading his material and failing to understand the grave danger of supporting a madman and blasphemer, piloted by the evil Israeli regime.
Finally, my sources tell me Frank’s website traffic has taken a dive lately, indicating that Catholics are waking up to the Trump sycophancy. Time will tell if he and the others ever take the hint and abandon this revived neocon garbage.
Wildcard Influencers
Next, I’ll discuss some other popular figures who do not figure neatly into the Trad Inc 1.0/2.0 dichotomy. In this section, I include Michael Matt, Fr. Dave Nix, and E. Michael Jones. Each man has a part of the puzzle correct, and may show signs of improvement over previous errors, but not enough for me to offer a full endorsement of their work for various reasons.
Michael Matt and Fr. Nix may have “snapped out of it” in terms of supporting Donald Trump, but this is too new a development for us to possess certainty of it. I suspect folks who have made grievous commentary errors in the past (such as insisting that we vote for “a lesser of two evils”) should spend some time in the intellectual penalty box.
Furthermore, I’m still not a fan of Michael Matt’s ridiculous “unite the clans” (unite the clones?) branding strategy. Absent a lawful pope, one cannot have genuine Catholic unity (making this a squishy topic for Matt, who thinks Bergoglio and Prevost were true popes, somehow).
Wild-carders, like these men, should go into your “maybe” pile for online content consumption.
I also put E. Michael Jones into this camp, as someone you could listen to sparingly, because he understands most of the JQ and Trump Deception, but fails miserably on anything related to Vatican II. I couldn’t call him a Trad Inc member either, given his lack of adherence to tradition (he’s a Novus Ordo guy). Then, you have the Dimond Brothers (Michael and Peter), devoted Feenyists, who resemble the inverse of Jones, and are equally dubious.
Below is a quick diagram of popular Catholic pundits, with links to their work, categorizing them under the nomenclature I have outlined above.
Good Influencers?
Of course, the designation of “reliable influencer” is a subjective assessment, absent any reliable hierarchy to confirm these matters. Both I and others have documented the many difficulties we face as we try to distinguish God’s True Church versus the crude imitation (AKA Anti-Church). In the old days, Catholics could count on institutions, like the League of Decency, to clarify what qualified as good/bad in Catholic or secular media.
Nowadays, because of the confusion and Anti-Church tyranny, there is a dearth of legitimate oversight for these matters. We, instead, must fend for ourselves in almost everything. Nevertheless, as a rule of thumb, I evaluate all thinkers, writers, podcasters, and various other intelligentsia by submitting their views to three important criteria:
- Whether they fully reject the wicked Vatican II paradigm,
- Whether they fall for the Trump Deception, and
- Whether they acknowledge an undue influence (domination) of Jewish hegemony in modern global politics.
As a bonus, it helps if a Catholic pundit comprehends the possibility that two or more of the post-conciliar pontiffs have been imposters (particularly the two most recent claimants). Here, I do not distinguish between 2022 Sedes and 1958 Sedes. The above diagram lists commentators from both camps who submit worthwhile contributions (in my opinion).
These include writers and podcasters, such as Louie Verrecchio, Dr. Peter Chojnowski, John Henry Westen, Dr. Deep State, Fr. Paul Kramer, Ann Barnhardt, Dr. Edmund Mazza, and part-time contributors like Laramie Hirsch. I’d also certainly consider the Catholic Esquire a solid commentator, albeit a little drawn into the endless Leo and Vatican II analysis.
To the best of my knowledge, none of these folks fail the smell test as it pertains to the variables I’ve outlined. Fortunately, I offer you a solid list of reliable folks, but please evaluate them carefully for yourself (follow the links provided).
Finally, I do not insist that said influencers agree with me on every last issue (which would be unreasonable), just that they do not exhibit any obvious blind spots or evidence of willful antagonism to the authentic traditional Catholic movement. We do not have to fall victim to the machinations of gaslighters, Zionists, and pope-splainers.
Choose your commentators with care. Whatever you do, don’t let any of them turn you into the poor fellow below . . .
What about the uber-popular commentators, ones with millions of followers, like Nick Fuentes or Candace Owens?
I believe by this point we must recognize enough inconsistencies in their messages to disavow most/all of their productions. Fuentes, who claims to be Catholic, is a more obnoxious version of the shock-jock, Stu Peters, and has flip-flopped on the MAGA garbage without explanation, choosing to align with Trump now that he’s at his worst.
Candace is a substantial improvement over Fuentes, but also vacillates on topics. She’s also one of those big-name podcasters who won’t permit you to hear their “big story” until you’ve digested that all-important, earth-shattering “word from our sponsors.” Her entire production (like Daily Wire, Tucker, and the other big shots) utilizes all the same aggressive marketing and click-bait tricks as mainstream media sources, sufficient to convince me they’re all either shysters and/or controlled opposition.
At this stage in the game, I can’t imagine why anybody trusts any media figure with over 100,000 followers. Can one truly suggest, with a straight face, that any of them built/earned their following through organic efforts? The suggestion is obtuse and laughable.
If you would like to learn more about popular alternative commentators, then I recommend this excellent two-hour program (below), titled the “Psy-op is the Psy-op.” The host interviews author Augustine Virgil on why almost everything in mainstream/alternative media is a giant psy-op of psy-ops. Virgil, a solid commentator in his own right, just published a comedic book on the topic, complete with fictional accounts of the exploits of the beloved “Queen Candace.”
What about left-wing Catholic commentators?
I believe this question answers itself since the premise of this article was to explore “traditional” influencers, something one cannot find among leftists, who do not adhere to Catholic tradition in any meaningful way. If you still follow any such thinkers, I would advise you to retire to a cave somewhere for extensive penance, meditation, and introspection.
Have I left out anyone you believe is important? Although I cannot cover every possible Catholic personality, I welcome you to comment below if you’d like me to address anyone specific.
Conclusion
It should go without saying that Catholics, by virtue of the dignity of their baptisms, should never stoop to the level of ridiculous infighting (ala the various Trad Inc fragments), especially given how inorganic and absurd the whole mess has become. Moreover, no Catholic has any business demeaning themselves by aligning with the various Jewish-created social-political scams: Zionism, Marxism, Trans-humanism, and so forth.
The practical means for avoiding these and other mind-control traps is to exercise discretion over how you obtain news and information. If you insist on hanging on every word of Nick Fuentes or Chris Jackson, then you can expect to start thinking like them. This involves acquiring all of their blind spots, and eventually falling for all of their shenanigans, including complicity with schemes like the Trump Deception.
The spiritual means to avoid Catholic-media chicanery is to adopt the habit of praying the Rosary fervently every day (all 15 mysteries). Our Lady’s Psalter is perhaps the most effective way to imbibe the chief points of Our Lord’s Gospel. It is also a splendid opportunity to offer intercessory prayers, beseeching heaven for the grace to avoid being duped by a myriad of deceivers.
While I always try to end on a positive note (as I have here), I am obliged to remind the reader that Jesus Christ will hold us accountable for our associations and from whom we receive our news and commentary. Beg the Holy Ghost for guidance to prepare us for the next impending psy-op, the next fast-talking shock-jock podcaster, any surreptitious wordsmiths, or the mother of all deceptions, involving Antichrist and the ominous Beast System.
Catholics Aren't Zombies! 