Jump to content

Talk:Lauren Southern

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Lauren Southern isn't part of the Alt-right, she's part of the dissident right

    [edit]

    Dissident right is a range of people on the right unsatisfied with the neocon status quo that covers more populist views all the way to the alt-right, alt-right is a fringe idea within the dissident right. Lauren has criticized capitalism on numerous occasions. She's actually more of a socially conservative libertarian social democrat. Lauren supports Russia and is a fan of Alexander Dugin, someone who many American communists (Caleb Maupin, Jackson Hinkle, Haz al-Din) are fans of. She was friends with some people who were friends with Nazis (like Brittany Pettibone, not a Nazi herself but chummy with some of the more "moderate" ones like Lana Lokteff who for some reason affiliates with Nazi scumbag David Duke). If we run through the transitive property, then isn't most of BreadTube part of the alt-right because after all, shoe0nhead, a BreadTuber, is friends with Lauren Southern. 72.72.201.226 (talk) 13:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Excellent. Please reference some credible sources that identify her as part of the "dissident right", we'll be able to make the change. Robincantin (talk) 23:59, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    russia pays her money

    [edit]

    see above 2604:3D08:267B:670:8932:48F5:C7D9:3867 (talk) 15:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Conspiracy theory wording

    [edit]

    I believe that the words "conspiracy theory" used "in passing" violate NPOV. If we want to make the observation that certain things are conspiracy theories, we should make it explicit, say who said so and source it. Otherwise we are injecting a claim (or worse, an opinion) without evidence.

    Nothing is lost in this article if we only say "Great Replacement theory".

    For what it's worth, I think there are plenty of awful and implausible theories out there. But I don't think it ever serves the cause of a rational argument to label something a conspiracy theory in passing. There are other ways to talk about the epistemic status of a theory that are more precise and less condescending. Olivergoodman (talk) 13:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Both of those terms are defined in the wikipedia article about them as conspiracy theories (in the lead, with multiple solid references), so there's no need to source it again here. Mentioning that both of these elements are conspiracy theories in this article provides useful context, especially since several sources use the term to refer to Southern's work.
    There are certainly other ways to designate them, but the discussion should take place on the discussion page of those articles, not this one. If it's changed there, we should change it here. Meanwhile, I think we're good. Cheers. Robincantin (talk) 00:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    "Propagandist"

    [edit]

    Really? We're stooping that low to smear her character when she didn't even make a single video on Tenet having to do with Russia? She is a victim in the scheme and had no idea what was going on. And if you believe the contrary you would need proof. It's not on me to prove she didn't know. Using that heavily loaded term should have a credible source next to it. 142.120.85.124 (talk) 21:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I agree "propagandist" is unsourced, removing it was correct.Robincantin (talk) 00:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not arguing it should go back, but The Atlantic used the term- it was the article title at one point, and is still in the body: "Southern was among YouTube’s most effective and sophisticated extremists—an alt-right propagandist who masqueraded as a run-of-the-mill influencer." And NBC News, talking about Tenet Media: "Lauren Southern, once known as the alt-right’s most notable female propagandist". tedder (talk) 01:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Point taken. Still, can we agree it's bad form to string a succession of loaded epithets in the lead, even if each is actually sourced? Also, looking at the article on propaganda, that designation could be applied to a surprisingly large number of people. Robincantin (talk) 00:37, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]