Talk:Richard B. Spencer

I´ve tried to create new categories for people deported from Iceland and Hungary

so please don´t delete them, even though they´re currently highlighted in red I think an administrator needs to approve them. StrongALPHA (talk) 09:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

It is my opinion that the Antisemitism sidebar should be removed

Not because he hasn´t said a number of Antisemitic thing, but because it is not even a prominent element within a his writtings or ideology from what I can tell. StrongALPHA (talk) 10:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

This is partly because i do not view him as neo nazi (to addres @TrickshotsBSYT point at the top), someone who is inspired by the German Conservative Revolution and various strands of fascism, but Neonazi is a far too narrow way of framing his ideological outlook. StrongALPHA (talk) 10:11, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with this suggestion. The man is an openly anti-Semitic white supremacist and, contrary to the personal opinion of StrongALPHA there are reliable sources that describe him as a neo-nazi. Regardless being a neo-nazi is not the only way in which a conservative ethno-nationalist might be an active force of antisemitism. Simonm223 (talk) 12:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Simonm223 is absolutely right here. The attempt at the BLP noticeboard to sanitize Spencer's image largely ignored the fact that Spencer himself (and maybe a few other white supremacists) is the only one saying "I'm not a Nazi/white supremacist" et al., and reliable sources do say that he is, as recently as an article from October 2023 (I added that one as a source). Fred Zepelin (talk) 00:36, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Citation 18 doesn't support claim

citation 18 doesn't support the claim that Spencer voted for Biden. 73.26.189.174 (talk) 03:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

we do not say he did. Slatersteven (talk) 12:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

It also does not support the claim that he "supports" biden and is against the "alt-right" now. The quoted source is a random right-wing opinion/blog article. PhDaemon (talk) 08:12, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I assume you mean this source, which is published by Tablet (magazine) in their 'News & Politics' section. This doesn't appear to be a opinion piece, and the author, Joshua Tait, is a PhD historian who has contributed to published academic work specifically on far-right politics in the US (ISBN 9780190877590). Here's the specific relevant quote from the source: In that respect, [Richard Hanania's] evolution has mirrored the strange career of Spencer who, in the wake of Charlottesville, has attempted to distance himself from his leadership of the alt-right, rebranding himself with public statements attacking Trump, and voicing support for NATO and the Biden White House. The current wording in the article seems like a reasonable summary of this source. Grayfell (talk) 23:14, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

@Grayfell:, you make some good points, but I do feel some recent edits (not yours) misrepresent what Tait is actually saying in that piece. He's saying the alt-right collapsed after Charlottesville (one could debate that, I guess, but I personally feel that's Tait's opinion alone) and so it's not so much that Spencer is no longer a leader of the alt-right - it's that there is no alt-right to lead anymore. At least, that's what Tait is saying. It's easy for Spencer to disavow a "movement" that largely lost all of its support and momentum. The adherents simply "reinvented themselves as centrists", which are Tait's words. It was a rebranding because the alt-right branding, in their view, had become toxic. Fred Zepelin (talk) 00:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Update tag

@CzarJobKhaya: Hello. Per #Lead section is seriously outdated above, we can only update the article with reliable sources. If you know of such sources, or wish to suggest other actionable changes, please do so, otherwise this tag is not helpful and is unlikely to lead to improvements to the article. Grayfell (talk) 23:33, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't know of any reliable sources that could be used to update the article, but it still feels outdated to me. My only intention with the tag was informing the reader rather than spurring potential edits. Thanks. CzarJobKhaya (talk) 23:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

The thing is, we're only permitted to inform the reader about what is published in reliable sources. Anything else violates our core policy of no original research. I hope that makes sense. Generalrelative (talk) Generalrelative (talk) 00:01, 16 November 2023 (UTC)