Talk:The Right Stuff (blog)

Best known?

I don't think it's best know for "echoes", although it may be better known now because of it. Sure that isn't original research? None of the sources back up "best known". Doug Weller talk 18:05, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I'll remove the word "best", which solves that problem. FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk) 19:24, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Coincidence detector

Why isn't Mencius Moldbug, the creator of the neo-nazi app mentioned on the section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.156.50.6 (talk) 02:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Do you have any proof that Moldbug created the app? Moldbug himself states that he is not an anti-Semite. Until you can prove he is the creator, we're not going to claim that he was. FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk) 08:01, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Mencius Moldbug is literally Jewish. 194.204.31.187 (talk) 07:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Article a target

Just reverted various antisemitic edits andBLP violations and handed out some blocks. And asked for protection. Doug Weller talk 05:46, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Notability

I have doubts this website passes Wikipedia:Notability (websites) or WP:GNG. Any thoughts on that? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:44, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

It was just reported on in the New York Times. That's pretty much the "big leagues" as far as media coverage goes. So I think it's notable. FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk) 07:12, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't see this blog named in the NYT article? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:39, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

The Trump connection

I removed this bit: "Notably, despite the fact that most of "Coincidence Detector"'s users were Trump supporters, the app's list of targets included Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who is Jewish." It´s sourced to [1], but the source don´t actually say that most users are Trump supporters, and I don´t think WP should state something like that without a stronger source. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:51, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay, fair enough. FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk) 06:51, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Has someone forgotten that TRS still exists?

Hello, TRS still exists and is still posting articles regularly. One was just posted today. We also don't know whether the Daily Shoah is continuing yet as it still isn't time for another episode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.98.164.73 (talk) 00:38, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Regarding edit by 49.213.19.145

I am 49.213.19.145 and am making an edit on this article removing redundancy that was recently introduced to the page, correcting tense in regard of false claims of the media outlet being closed as well as removing fore-mentioned claims. The blog/media outlet is still running, in fact The Daily Shoah released a new episode today and confirmed in the new episode that the main host of the show Mike will continue to host the show. It is clear that the tense used is erratic due to a barrage of recent edits and upon review of my edits you can see clearly they are made to correct said tense. The one citation I remove in my edit states that the host of The Daily Shoah has resigned from the show, which has been clearly stated by the other hosts of the show in the episode that aired today as incorrect.

The media outlet is an alt-right blog but does not directly promote antisemitism or white supremacy and such claims and associations have been removed as they are not cited. The media outlet does however promote Ethnic nationalism. These edits were made by the same user who made the edit with a false claim of the show being shut down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.213.19.145 (talk) 02:50, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Regarding edit by 49.213.19.145

The website does promote white supremacy, which has been affirmed by many media outlets and the website itself.

www.therightstuff.biz/tag/white-supremacy

The website even has a section to it. I'll correct the outdated information on the site being offline, as was assumed when I first edited it. Sorry on that front, but it appeared to be and was widely assumed to be at the time. The white supremacist, Neo-Nazi, and fascist elements of the website are unanimously supported, even by the website itself. As these are what the blog is most known for, I included those at the start. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShinySquire (talk • contribs) 03:00, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

References

Response by 49.213.19.145

Your cite of a tag on the website provides only satire of the topic and does not support claims that the site encourages white supremacy, as such this cite is inadequate. As previously stated the website promotes ethnic-nationalism, not white supremacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.213.19.145 (talk) 03:08, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Response

It is widely considered a Neo-Nazi and white supremacist site. For example,

https://mic.com/articles/165755/mike-enoch-neo-nazi-jewish-wife-mike-peinovich-echoes-the-right-stuff-daily-shoah http://www.timesofisrael.com/white-supremacist-outed-for-having-jewish-wife/ http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/16/politics/white-nationalists-trump-losing-faith/

The only disputed ones are on non-mainstream sources, but Wikipedia has a policy of NPOV, in which the universally agreed upon viewpoint is expressed in the article. Etc...

~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShinySquire (talk • contribs) 11:46, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Sources disagree on what to call it. I've seen white nationalist, white supremacist, nazi, neo-nazi, hate group, and a hundred other labels thrown about. There's little consistency in the sources available. The one thing that all universally agree on is alt-right. That aside, the lede is not the place to add original content. It exists to summarize the content already in the body, giving due weight to the most important elements. If you want it in the lede, please show that it would be an accurate reflection of the article's body content. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 15:02, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

That sources differ on which particular euphemism for white supremacist to use is not the same as disagreeing on the substance of what the site is. Wikipedia doesn't use euphemisms. Grayfell (talk) 23:10, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

WP:EUPHEMISM is not contemplating disagreements about when to use charged language to describe political positions. – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 23:15, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

If you can think of a non-charged way to say this is a white nationalist website, I'm all ears, but avoiding an accurate label just because it's charged is the opposite of WP:NPOV. Euphemisms are words chosen to avoid directly stating something that might be loaded or controversial. That's what "alt-right" is being used as, here. Is anybody actually denying that this is a white nationalist site? Grayfell (talk) 23:25, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Whether such-and-such term is accurate or a euphemism is what's at issue. I don't think that describing The Right Stuff as "white nationalist" in addition to "alt-right" would be very controversial. "White supremacist" or "neo-Nazi" don't add any substance to that. – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 15:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Identity of Enoch

Since the real name of Mike Enoch has been widely published in many reliable sources,[2][3][4][5][6][7][8] and has not been refuted by "Enoch" himself, is there still any reason not to include it? Grayfell (talk) 23:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

"Fascism"

I do not believe it is appropriate to tar The Right Stuff as "fascistic"; it is at most far right/alt right. Numerous episodes of the Daily Shoah have rebuked this label, with Mike Enoch saying that fascism is an ideology with specific precepts that were consigned to a specific time period, which he does not necessarily agree with or approve of. As others have said previously, the most appropriate description of The Right Stuff is that it endorses Ethnonationalism. It is also worth mentioning that just because a few heavily ideological, left-leaning sites like Vox and Mic claim The Right Stuff is all these things, does not make it true. To claim that The Right Stuff is fascistic dilutes the meaning of this term.

The use of the term "white supremacy" is also not completely appropriate to TRS. There is a wide range of ideologies and points of view expressed in TRS's various podcasts and articles, from Christian/Catholic Traditionalism, plain white nationalism, Dark Enlightenment, and fascism; with the latter being a minority view among TRS's readership, according to the Daily Shoah. It is therefore inaccurate to outright claim that TRS is wholly white supremacist or fascistic, or to include the article on the fascism series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonosbro (talk • contribs) 01:00, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Do reliable sources call it fascistic? If so, case closed. The Right Stuff isn't a reliable source, and Wikipedia doesn't use euphemisms. Calling the range of ideologies "wide" is extremely overgenerous, also, as those all very closely overlap. Grayfell (talk) 02:45, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Depends on what "reliable sources" you are referring to. There is no doubt that many authors and guests are unabashed fascists, in the legitimate meaning of the term. But The Right Stuff, as stated in its description, serves as a venue for various streams of right wing/alt right/ethnonationalist thought.

You may hold the opinion that all these ideologies overlap, but the actual, dictionary definition of the term 'fascism' refers to a particular ideology that had its' heyday in the 20th century, as well as neofascism, which continues today and adapts various precepts of the original ideology. I think it absurd and extreme to claim that everything from Christian traditionalism to ethnonationalism is fascistic; such tarring of right wing ideologies is a rhetorical device employed in op-eds that is inappropriate in any forum that seeks to explain things in an objective, detached and rational manner.

As to the source question, I linked to a primary source - the podcast itself, where the actual authors of the actual podcast explain to the listeners a future policy of the said podcast; I was updating the information accordingly. The source is primary in that it links to the information as promulgated by those concerned Jonosbro (talk) 22:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

No longer "The Daily Shoah" has not been for months

The show formally known as "The Daily Shoah" was changed months ago to "Tedious." It uses the same acronym, "TDS" for logos and such, though. This should be reflected in this page. 2601:982:4200:A6C:4993:4FD3:8B45:4FBF (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

It was never "Tedious". It's just been "TDS" since August 2018. 76.95.1.128 (talk) 22:18, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

URL

I don't think we should have the URL for a website as dangerous as this in the article. Even though it was included in good faith, we should not be helping people find this site. There is no encyclopaedic purpose for its inclusion Stephanie921 (talk) 20:31, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Please list website articles where the URL is intentionally omitted. I have requested a category be added for sites that intentionally omit URLS thank you TeeVeeed (talk) 15:35, 7 September 2022 (UTC)