| Revision as of 05:02, 6 February 2016 editConnor Machiavelli (talk | contribs)978 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 13:38, 15 January 2025 edit undoSimonm223 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,053 edits →Switch article to past tense.: ReplyTag: Reply |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
__FORCETOC__ |
|
== Sourcing == |
|
|
⚫ |
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
Sources are a mess, I'd appreciate if someone who knew how could clean them up. Thanks. ] (]) 00:42, 31 January 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Controversial}} |
|
|
{{Not a forum}} |
|
|
{{Old AfD multi | date = 10 May 2016 | result = '''keep''' | page = Alt-right}} |
|
|
{{afd-merged-from|Stop Normalizing Alt Right Chrome extension|Stop Normalizing Alt Right Chrome extension|23 January 2017}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low|American=Yes|American-importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WP LGBT}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Sociology|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Linguistics|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Culture|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject United States|USPresidents=yes|USPresidents-importance=Mid|importance=Low|USPE=Yes|USPE-importance=low}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=Low|terrorism=yes|terrorism-imp=low}} |
|
== Reaction == |
|
|
|
| blp=yes |
|
May I include this in the article from ] on the Alt-right? |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Contentious topics/page restriction talk notice|1RR=yes|topic=ap}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{merged-from|Alt-left|September 26 2017}} |
|
Proponents are said to use ] and memes to promote their ideas. One leading proponent records parodies of Disney songs (such as ], from '']'') "with their discussions of white supremacy and generally racist and sexist lyrics". Adherents also refer to themselves as ], and criticize '']'' and ] for "not openly espousing, among other things, white nationalism, or white identarianism" such as in the video which is titled “The National Review” and is set to the tune of “The Bells of Notre Dame.”<ref name="altright">{{cite web|url=http://fusion.net/story/223175/uncuck-the-right-alt-right-youtube/|title=A YouTube account is rewriting Disney tunes to be racist}}</ref> Supporters<ref>http://www.radixjournal.com/blog/2016/1/20/what-is-the-altright</ref> and detractors<ref>http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/how-2015-fueled-the-rise-of-the-freewheeling-white-nationali</ref> alike regularly describe the alt-right as young<ref>http://www.weeklystandard.com/article/beyond-pale/724717?nopager=1</ref><ref>http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/03/rush-limbaugh-s-favorite-new-white-power-group.html</ref> and intellectually diverse,<ref>http://www.toqonline.com/blog/richard-spencer-launches-alternative-right/</ref> |
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
| ⚫ |
{{reflist-talk}} |
|
|
|
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |
|
:These sources do not support that this is regularly describing as intellectually diverse. Neither ] nor ] (Radix) are reliable for statements of fact, nor are they independent of the movement, so labeling them "supporters" is misleading at best. The Buzzfeed source doesn't really say that the movement is diverse, merely that it's "loosely connected", and that several followers' "political projects are a little hard to pin down". Calling that intellectual diversity is absurdly flattering. Otherwise the Buzzfeed article mostly reflects what figures in the movement say about it, and very little about what detractors say. ] and the ADF said the alt-right are white supremacists. That has nothing to do with diversity, intellectual or otherwise. |
|
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 75K |
|
:Regardless, there's nothing 'regular' about a single source. It also reads like an attempt at false balance. If sources are in general agreement (which they aren't) then this should just be stated as is. Since they are not, it's not appropriate for the article to divide sources into supporters and detractors just to create the illusion of consensus. This should be removed from both this article, and the New Right one. |
|
|
|
|counter = 22 |
|
:As for the age, I don't think anyone is contesting that the alt-right skews young, but these sources are flimsy. I think the Weekly Standard one must be a mistake, as it doesn't appear to be discussing the alt-right at all, and the Daily Beast one only mentions age in relation to the Limbaugh caller, which is nothing worth mentioning. It does, however, repeatedly emphasize that this is a ] movement, not just a "]" one. ] (]) 04:57, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Alt-right/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
|
{{Top 25 Report|Nov 13 2016 (14th)|Nov 20 2016 (23rd)|Aug 13 2017 (15th)}} |
|
|
{{Refideas |
|
|
| {{cite journal |last1=Dafaure |first1=Maxime |title=The 'Great Meme War:' the Alt-Right and its Multifarious Enemies |journal=Angles |date=1 April 2020 |issue=10 |doi=10.4000/angles.369 |doi-access=free |issn=2274-2042}} |
|
|
| {{cite book |last1=Dixit |first1=Priya |title=Race, Popular Culture, and Far-right Extremism in the United States |date=2022 |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |location=Cham |isbn=978-3-031-10820-4 |pages=135–172 |doi=10.1007/978-3-031-10820-4_5 |language=en |chapter=Memeing the Far-Right: Pepe and the Deplorables |chapter-url=https://link-springer-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-10820-4_5 |chapter-url-access=registration |via=]}} |
|
|
| {{cite book |last1=Jackson |first1=Sam |title=A Schema of Right-Wing Extremism in the United States |date=October 2019 |doi=10.19165/2019.2.06 |issn=2468-0486 |jstor=resrep19625 |jstor-access=free |publisher=International Centre for Counter-Terrorism |location=The Hague |url=https://icct.nl/app/uploads/2019/11/ASchemaofRWEXSamJackson-1.pdf}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{xreadership|days=75}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2024 == |
|
I'll edit what's been inserted and we'll review it so we can reach a consensus on this. ] (]) 05:02, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit semi-protected|Alt-right|answered=yes}} |
|
|
Please remove the phrase "has been declining since 2017". This is false, with people like Andrew Tate and the Identitarian movement becoming more prevalent. This claim has no source. ] (]) 00:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done for now:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> I'm closing this request for now because this phrase is part of a much larger issue of this article that needs a lot more work and information to tackle. The reason that the claim has no source is because it's a lead section summary of the section ], but that section is now outdated, and is tagged as so. Nevertheless, you still need to provide a ] that states the movement is ''not'' in decline (or alternatively, reopen this request once editors have finished updating the section). ] (]) 00:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Well, it is particularly hard to find sources that are reliable due to how the political climate around such things are ''well what's the word...'' charged so couldn't the question really be is what sources could be appropriate to update the article to date while keeping up with Misplaced Pages standards? ] (]) 00:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Is claiming that it ''is'' in decline without valid proof not misinformation? ] (]) 10:41, 12 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== 2017 Jewish Community Center Bomb Threats == |
|
|
|
|
|
The penultimate paragraph in the Tactics section contains the following passage: |
|
|
|
|
|
” In 2017, a wave of threats began being made to Jewish Community Centerswhich some press sources attributed to the alt-right. Another Jewish target was the conservative commentator Ben Shapiro, who was sent messages stating that he and his children "will go to the ovens". “ |
|
|
|
|
|
This use of the passive voice, (“a wave of threats began to be made” who made the threats?) coupled with the immediately following sentence starting with “another Jewish target” strongly implies that the alt right was behind the community center bomb threats. |
|
|
|
|
|
However, if I actually click on the hyperlinked article about the 2017 Jewish Community Center bomb threats, I discover that they had nothing to do with the alt right. Instead, they were perpetrated by an Israeli Jew and a leftwing black journalist. |
|
|
|
|
|
I propose the following edit: |
|
|
|
|
|
“In 2017, a wave of threats began being made to Jewish Community Centers which some press sources *wrongly* attributed to the alt-right; *these threats were actually perpetrated by an Israeli Jew and a leftwing black journalist, neither of which had any connection to the alt right*.” ] (]) 11:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:If this edit or an edit like it cannot be made, I would suggest removing the hyperlink to the 2017 Jewish Community Center bomb threats so at least no Misplaced Pages reader will realize that this article and that article directly contradict each other. ] (]) 11:38, 13 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Switch article to past tense. == |
|
|
|
|
|
As a movement and especially as a coalition, the alt-right is largely dead as of 2025. Websites like the , quoting many of its prominent former members, have referred to it in the past tense since at least 2022. It's undeniable that many of its ideas have been incorporated into modern right-wing politics, but after the 2010s, the movement as a cohesive whole has largely splintered into various ideological offshoots, such as neo-reactionaryism, Christian Nationalism, Trumpism, etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
Given that the movement no longer exists, I feel the tense of the article should be updated to reflect this. ] (]) 18:39, 11 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
|
:I vote '''No'''. Because, what do you mean? Articles all over the internet as well as recent years' geopolitical landscapes, even with the recent victory of Trump, indicate clearly that it is still on the rise and very much an active movement. Your statements here are just blatantly false. Here is one such source from just two days ago: https://m.thewire.in/article/world/elon-musk-x-alt-right-propaganda Here is another: https://thelogic.co/news/pickering-city-council-mayor-alt-right/ Another: https://globalnews.ca/news/10940453/pickering-council-virtual-meetings-announcement/ |
|
|
|
|
|
:Are you just going to ignore these facts? Or do you suppose it shouldn't called alt-right but just far-right...? Or are you downplaying them in order to further their interests? It is the purpose of Misplaced Pages to be as biased as possible, and this is not how you do that. ] (]) 10:28, 15 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
|
::OK let's calm down. I also agree that this doesn't seem appropriate at this juncture as reliable sources as recent as 2024 exist that make reference to the alt-right in present tense. However I would suggest we ] here. ] (]) 13:38, 15 January 2025 (UTC) |
The penultimate paragraph in the Tactics section contains the following passage:
” In 2017, a wave of threats began being made to Jewish Community Centerswhich some press sources attributed to the alt-right. Another Jewish target was the conservative commentator Ben Shapiro, who was sent messages stating that he and his children "will go to the ovens". “
This use of the passive voice, (“a wave of threats began to be made” who made the threats?) coupled with the immediately following sentence starting with “another Jewish target” strongly implies that the alt right was behind the community center bomb threats.
However, if I actually click on the hyperlinked article about the 2017 Jewish Community Center bomb threats, I discover that they had nothing to do with the alt right. Instead, they were perpetrated by an Israeli Jew and a leftwing black journalist.
“In 2017, a wave of threats began being made to Jewish Community Centers which some press sources *wrongly* attributed to the alt-right; *these threats were actually perpetrated by an Israeli Jew and a leftwing black journalist, neither of which had any connection to the alt right*.” Hoax Tree (talk) 11:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
As a movement and especially as a coalition, the alt-right is largely dead as of 2025. Websites like the Southern Poverty Law Center, quoting many of its prominent former members, have referred to it in the past tense since at least 2022. It's undeniable that many of its ideas have been incorporated into modern right-wing politics, but after the 2010s, the movement as a cohesive whole has largely splintered into various ideological offshoots, such as neo-reactionaryism, Christian Nationalism, Trumpism, etc.
Not done for now: I'm closing this request for now because this phrase is part of a much larger issue of this article that needs a lot more work and information to tackle. The reason that the claim has no source is because it's a lead section summary of the section Alt-right#2017–present: Decline, but that section is now outdated, and is tagged as so. Nevertheless, you still need to provide a reliable source that states the movement is not in decline (or alternatively, reopen this request once editors have finished updating the section). Liu1126 (talk) 00:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)