Talk:Bo French

RfC on whether to add a potentially contentious category

Should this article about Bo French be filed under Category:American white nationalists? Big Blue Gnu 00:37, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

Yes. There is evidence suggesting that French's immigration restrictionism is motivated in part or in whole by white nationalism, especially in the wake of his reaction to a photograph of University of Texas at Austin students of predominantly South Asian descent celebrating the Texas Longhorns' victory against the Ohio State Buckeyes. The Bulwark refers to him as a "blood-and-soil" extremist, the Washington Post calls him a "nativist provocateur", and the Houston Chronicle notes the candidate's history of quoting white nationalist novels. Perhaps most bluntly of them all, Robby Soave of The Hill describes French's whole political project as white nationalism. I can probably dig up more examples, but, unless someone can demonstrate that he is simply (albeit virulently) anti-immigration and not a white nationalist, the rationale for tagging the article with the category seems quite clear. Big Blue Gnu 01:08, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

And this is a guy who has lent credence to the Great Replacement conspiracy theory, stated that the United States should become like Rhodesia, and bizarrely endorsed deporting Native Americans who disagree with him politically, so there's that. Big Blue Gnu 02:58, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

As I looked further into the candidate's political positions, I came to the realization that the guy's defining traits are opposition to immigration and Islam. I also find that far more sources consider him to be simply far-right, rather than white nationalism being the one thing that makes him Bo French. On top of that, while fully aware of the overlaps between it and supremacy throughout, I am only beginning to appreciate that white nationalist has much more sinister connotations than simply meaning "someone who advocates a white national identity". With such a definition as "one of a group of militant white people who espouse white supremacy [...] and advocate enforced racial segregation", Merriam-Webster paints the term in a scary light. When I started this RfC, "militant" and "segregation" were not words that I had in mind vis-à-vis this guy. Thus, while a reasonable person might be sympathetic to the idea that French has a penchant for keeping America at least primarily European (or "white"), a reasonable person might also object to the use of white nationalism to describe his ideology, since both can agree that French is neither militant nor clearly advocating for segregation. To act otherwise would set a precedent leading to an influx of thousands of articles about individuals previously not described in Wikipedia's voice as white nationalists now treating them as such. With the bar lowered to the point of being blurred, we would have an endless cycle of discussions arguing over who counts as a white nationalist, primarily over the semantics. The only practical endgame would be to reverse the precedent and restrict the category to include articles when there is no doubt that their subjects subscribe to white nationalism as their defining feature. Hence, I can no longer support what had been requested, so I am changing my vote to no. Big Blue Gnu 03:24, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

I also find that far more sources consider him to be simply far-right, rather than white nationalism being the one thing that makes him Bo French.

Ehh, what is the difference here exactly? A vast majority of folks on the far-right are also white supremacists. ~2026-51099-11 (talk) 05:25, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Did I not type that there were "overlaps between it and supremacy"? Perhaps I should have been more forthright. As I admitted earlier, I was naïve to look at the words white nationalist and think what I thought it literally meant: "someone who advocates a white national identity"—essentially the white counterpart to black nationalism. That literalism was a fallacy, since it conveniently overlooked the fact that there are far more white nationalists who count as white supremacists than there are black nationalists who count as black supremacists, hence why white nationalism is viewed more negatively than black nationalism. The point is that I made a silly, shortsighted mistake when I opened this RfC, but at least I am reminded that language can be arbitrary, and to not take words too literally. Here's a trout. Do something with it. Big Blue Gnu 06:41, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

• No Wikipedia:BLPCAT: "Do not categorize biographies of living people under such contentious topics as..." NicoR8 (talk) 12:04, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Maybe I should have clarified that the suggested category was "potentially contentious". Clumsy self-discrediting on my part to have written simply "contentious". Anyway, I am welcome to hear why it would be too controversial to add the label. After all, to French's benefit, there are far worse models of white nationalism that I can think of. Big Blue Gnu 14:28, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

• No. Wikipedia:BLPCAT says not to classify living people as such. While he has said many statements that can easily be classified as racist, unless he gets to a David Duke level of statement/ self-affiliation this label would be far too controversial, especially for a current candidate for political office. Frosty-kilogram (talk) 21:48, 29 September 2026 (UTC)