- Richard Spencer: evil. Created 'alt right' movement.

- Ben Shapiro: called 'alt right' because he's right wing

- Joe Rogan: called 'alt right' because he talked to Ben

- Bernie Sanders supporters: called 'alt right' because Joe endorsed Bernie.

Ergo: by this logic Karl Marx could be considered 'alt right'

Molyneaux might be awful, he might be fine. But the argument one way or the other must be made on his own merits, not those around him.

----

Edit: Replying to dralley due to rate limit:"

I have included an example where there are four links. But 'adjacent' is a plainly silly idea if there is only one link.

If 'adjacent' being silly isn't already obvious, you may be very left wing (since 'adjacent' seems to be a popular argument on the left).

So consider: former KKK member Robert Byrd is in a photo being friendly with Hillary Clinton [1].

Is Hillary Clinton alt-right adjacent? Plainly Hillary Clinton is not alt-right adjacent. That argument would be absurd to make. Guilt by association is evil.

To determine whether Stefan Molyneux's ideas are good or bad, we should consider Stefan Molyneux's ideas. Not anyone else's.

You've included a video of Stefan Molyneux speaking. That's good - we can find out what he has to say for himself. What someone else has to say is irrelevant.

[1] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/clinton-byrd-photo-klan/