Talk:Gavin McInnes

McInnes is now an American citizen

Gavin announced on his Jan 24, 2022 episode of Get Off My Lawn that he has been granted American citizenship. Bio should be updated to label him as Canadian-American. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tummler123 (talk • contribs) 02:29, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

This is correct. Edit should be made 2600:6C60:5C00:BC04:75F7:2F93:336D:1C3B (talk) 00:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I will address and edit this in the near future. Machiavellian Gaddafi (talk) 09:43, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

New article Censored.TV has too much self-sourcing and some pov

Eg "His show covers topics such as Atheism, propaganda within mainstream media, and ethnic conflict.", courtesy of the same editor that added the comment about mainstream media here. At best we need to say something like "alleged". Doug Weller talk 13:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Gavin McInnes in 2011.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Far-right or just a bias article?

He is just a conservative republican he’s not far-right Media networks tend to take the jokes he says on his talk shows out of context and shape it in its favor 2600:387:8:F:0:0:0:AD (talk) 00:44, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Seconded. He is far-to-the-right of the American Republican Party, but that's not the same things as being objectively far-right. The purpose of describing Gavin McInnes' or others who share his views as "far-right" is to obscure the fact that the subject is a Zionist, philo-semitic, classically liberal, etc., none of which are typically associated with the "far-right," which today is mostly associated with National Socialism and racism. This is probably done intentionally, or maybe those who do it actually believe it. Harry Sibelius (talk) 00:10, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

He's founder of the Proud Boys, "American far-right, neo-fascist, and exclusively male organization that promotes and engages in political violence in the United States" and designated as a terrorist group in Canada. Doug Weller talk 13:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

If anything, adding "of the American Republican Party" to the phrase "far right" makes someone even more far-right, since that party is itself already pretty right-wing. --Hob Gadling (talk) 14:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@Doug Weller Yes, that is what the Proud Boys article says. The use of fascist is obviously another problem. McInnes is an economic liberal, and has attacked fascism, often from a liberal standpoint. He has even gone so far as to attack Pinochet, who is often incorrectly described as a fascist, but was in fact an authoritarian neoliberal, which makes McInnes more liberal than Pinochet, and much more liberal than any actual fascist. There is actually a far-better argument for referring to him as far-right than as a fascist. It's not really clear what could objectively be meant by "fascist" in this article, if anything, other than perhaps nationalism and civilian political violence, which is not enough to define someone as fascist: by this definition, the Koumintang, the Vietcong, the French resistance, and the Hong Kong independence movement are all "fascist." Also, in defense of the claim that McInnes is far-right, you cite that his organization is designated as a terrorist group in Canada. So is the Communist Party of Peru. Does that make them far-right?

@Hob GadlingI guess an important question to be asked is what is being defined as "right" v.s. "far-right." If you were to look at Wikipedia's definition of both, you would find McInnes much more easily fits into the former category. I personally do not even really agree with Wikipedia's current definition of "right", which, like the American Republican Party, places an emphasis on market economics, which is a mostly 20th-century, Anglo-American conception of "the right", but that is how Wikipedia defines it and that fits McInnes well. Harry Sibelius (talk) 10:32, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

If you were to look at Wikipedia's definition That is not how this works. Every Wikipedia article should be based on its own reliable sources: WP:RS. Editors doing their own research, for instance by comparing how words are defined and used in different articles, is forbidden: WP:OR. What I did above was just to point out a mistake in somebody else's OR. --Hob Gadling (talk) 11:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Hob GadlingI don't understand your point. I have changed nothing regarding the use of "far-right" in the article, so I don't think I need to provide sources. I am simply discussing the subject here, on the talk page, following the same example of @Doug Weller, who quoted the Proud Boys' Wikipedia page earlier in this discussion, in support of his description of them as far-right. Like him, I have not used a Wikipedia page, or original research, for any Gavin McInnes claim. I am using it for the purpose of discussion, here. Harry Sibelius (talk) 11:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Discussing it here is pointless if it has no consequence for the article, since improving the article is what this page is for: WP:TALK, WP:NOTFORUM. --Hob Gadling (talk) 11:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Harry Sibelius I was going to say what Hob Gadling wrote above. Doug Weller talk 11:27, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Doug WellerAs I have said previously, you take issue with my reference to another Wikipedia article to support my argument, but you have done the exact same thing within this exact same discussion, which is why assumed that it was allowed to do so, on a talk page. I am aware that it is not allowed in an article. I apologize if I am mistaken. Harry Sibelius (talk) 11:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I should have been more specific and suggested that you looked at the sources there Doug Weller talk 11:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. Will do. Harry Sibelius (talk) 12:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. Far-right according to Wikipedia is regarding white supremacy and the Proud Boys had an Afro-Cuban as a head, not to mention a lot of members married with children with black women.

With the way it stands now, I think it should say “Considered by the left as far-right” because that’s the only ties to the far-right it ACTUALLY has. It’s a biased Wikipedia page and frankly is incorrect factually. 2603:6000:D801:8B8A:C98F:9485:81AE:1F0D (talk) 15:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

It isn't "far-right according to Wikipedia", it's far-right per multiple independent reliable sources. We report what the sources say. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:06, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

"Far-right" according to left leaning sources. The Proud Boys are a boy's club, more akin to "Animal House" that makes rules for each other like not jerking off. Any heritage is welcomed and when they attacked they sometimes fight back. Some acted as bodyguards for some conservatives threatened by Antifa, and that got them into the political sphere.

I could find a million biased right-wing sources that would prove Joe Biden shared a bank account with Hunter Biden, but it wouldn't float in water, but biased left-wing sources that claim Gavin McInnes is "far-right" when he doesn't consider himself as that, other than a joke.

People ruined this man's life, and his family's lives, with lies because of their biased ideologies. He's had many death threats, almost daily. If you want a true wiki of what Gavin McInnes stands for, it would be making a family. He says that in his show almost every weekday. It's extremely clear there is a bias here. If you want to make the world a better place, it's better to tell the truth. I 100% agree this is a biased article, and whoever did it should be ashamed of themselves. 65.30.167.46 (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Judaism

In the "Judaism" section of the article, the following line appears: "In March 2017, during a trip to Israel with The Rebel Media, McInnes was accused of defending Holocaust deniers, holding Jews as being responsible for the Holodomor and the Treaty of Versailles, saying he was "becoming anti-Semitic". He later said his comments were taken out of context."

The Youtube video used a source does not feature McInnes accusing the Jews of committing the Holodomor or of orchestrating the treaty of Versailles, nor does it depict any accusation towards McInnes that he believes such. Rather, the video depicts McInnes himself, stating that he believes the Holodomor and the Treaty of Versailles were not orchestrated by Jews. Therefore, I suggest removing all reference to Versailles and the Holodomor, as I do not think it is relevant that McInnes does not believe that the Jews were responsible for the Holodomor.

Furthermore, I find it misleading that the section on "Judaism" begins with allegations of antisemitism, when in fact McInnes is a vocal Zionist and philo-semite, and was employed by a pro-Israel media-organization, headed by a Jewish man (Ezra Levant) when he made these comments (the video used as a source for the Versailles/Holodomor claim were produced by this company.) In the video that is used as a source for the "becoming antisemitic" comment, McInnes also makes the claim that he was not paid by the state of Israel to visit the country, or to make positive comments about it, which is also a common accusation levelled at McInnes. I find this just as relevant a detail regarding McInnes' position on "Judaism" as the many accusations and denials of antisemitism.

Furthermore, I think the entire section title, "Judaism", is somewhat inappropriate, as it suggests that the section pertains to the religion, while it mainly refers to McInnes' remarks on Zionism and Jews as a people. I would suggest changing the title of the section to something along the lines of "Jews and Zionism". Harry Sibelius (talk) 10:07, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

The Youtube video is a primary source at best and unreliable because it's user-submitted. It shouldn't be used as a source at all. Instead, a reliable secondary source should be used. I agree with you that "Judaism" is the wrong title for the section, but I'm not sure "Jews and Zionism" is the right header either. Probably "Allegations of antisemitism." Also, we don't decide ourselves whether the allegations are true or not. If RS describe them in volume as true will do so as well, even if that is not the case according to your read. And being "philo-semitic" or working for a Jewish man does not prevent antisemitism or show that it is not present at all. There are quite a few philo-semitic antisemites who think Jewish people are magical chosen beings from god who run the world economy, that is a form of antisemitism as well. Andre🚐 21:47, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 May 2023

Why is there no citation for the 2 times you are claiming he concerted to catholicism and is a member of the knights of Columbus? I get that it fits a particular narrative that wikipedia promotes, but it seems weird to make such a specific claim and then not be able to substantiate it. 96.8.248.37 (talk) 01:01, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done Going to gloss over the whole narrative promoting conspiracy nonsense, but have removed the section due to lack of sources in a BLP. Best I can tell, the lines were added here by a now indeffed user who cited the WP:DAILYCALLER (here)and another non-RS that itself cited the caller. Neither source ever mentioned the Knight of Columbus. A short google search for ' "catholic" Gavin McInnes ' does not return many hits and I did not see any that confirmed that he said he was catholic. Removing for now unless a source is found. Cannolis (talk) 01:29, 23 May 2023 (UTC)