Milo Yiannapoulos was attacked, and perhaps mortally wounded, by the defenders of the “conservative” establishment and their liberal allies-of-convenience. The weapons of choice were his own words, including disturbing comments about his sexual victimization by a Catholic priest and a seemingly carefree attitude towards the abuse of other young boys. Thus ended a two-year saga. Milo rose to fame channelling troll culture and being associated with—and mistaken for—the Alt-Right.

Perhaps Milo will succeed in making a comeback, but nothing can be as it was. Milo’s catch-phrases and monickers—“The Most Fabulous Super Villain on the Internet” and “The Dangerous Faggot Tour”—have taken on unsettling, indeed, criminal overtones. What’s certain is that Milo can simply no longer be a “conservative.” He might, like Jack Hunter, reboot himself as a kind of libertarian; it’s highly doubtful the Left will ever accept him after he was a traitor to his orientation. A likely outcome is that Milo will rebrand himself simply as “MILO,” as Breitbart began calling him in late 2016—a provocative gay entertainer, a pure brand, bereft of political connotations.

What’s more important for us is why Milo was assassinated. Julian Assange recently observered, “When you read a newspaper article, you are reading weaponized text that is designed to affect a person just like you.” Information, like morality, is a weapon. And both of these were deployed by a strange alliance of shitlibs and cuckservatives.

Needless to say, Milo was never Alt Right and was certainly never a leader or movement “darling.” Those insinuations were fake news.

Milo spent the last few months angrily denying he was Alt Right and giving speeches against “identity politics.” If the Alt Right is about anything, it’s identity politics. The Alt Right itself spent the last few months doing much of the same. Andrew Anglin memorably called him the “number one enemy of our movement,” among other less polite names, making my criticisms seem rather soft in comparison. Yet even with both sides openly declaring their hostilities, the Regime Press frequently declared this race-mixing homosexual Jew as the leader of European identitarianism worldwide.

And there was a deeper, Straussian motivation, which explains these misunderstandings and mendacities. Milo, along with Allum Bokhari, gave the Alt Right a sympathetic, if not particularly accurate, hearing in Breitbart. Had the piece not been authored by a sexual deviant and self-described “kebab,” it might never have been published. Despite it all, it was a major breakthrough. And like the commissars of the past, the Regime Press reacted harshly, for their role is to limit public debate and silence dissidents. Yiannopoulos—by breaking the cordon sanitaire around White identity and treating the Alt Right as comprised of rational people with real grievances and legitimate arguments—made himself an enemy.

The footage that killed Milo was not new. It had been circulated among some on the Alt Right as part of the general counter-signaling against the “Dangerous Faggot.” (I had never seen it until that fateful Sunday afternoon in February.)

Perhaps the most disturbing truth about this scandal is that Milo’s views about pederasty are fairly typical for many homosexuals. The mass media is already worried that people might start criticizing Milo in the wrong way. And our society has become such a cesspool that playing footsie with statutory rape is no longer barrier to fame and stardom, at least if you are staunchly on the left.

George Takei fondly reminisced about being criminally seduced when he was 13 (albeit by a 19-year-old boy, slightly more morally ambiguous that the relationships Milo glorified). Lena Dunham wrote about molesting her younger sister, who is now a lesbian. Roman Polanski pled guilty to the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl, and yet is the toast of Hollywood. And Bill Maher, who may rival Yiannopoulos for degeneracy and who insanely took credit for his downfall, defended Mary Kay Letourneau for having sex with a 12-year old student. He denounced her being jailed “because she won’t conform to what society feels should be the perfect American family.”

Of course, Milo is a pervert. But perversion was his shield. In previous eras, one gained respectability by converting to the state church and being discreet with one’s immoralities. Today, respectability is achieved by dressing in drag and bragging about how many black cocks one sucks. Filth was what allowed Yiannopoulos to express mild disagreement with the liberal consensus on issues like immigration, “hate speech,” and race.

It is being reported that Yiannopoulos went down for backing “pedophilia.” This is not true. He went down for backing pederasty, also terribly damaging to victims, but distinctly so. Besides showing, once again, that the mass media simply lies to us, why does this matter? Because the chattering class has been, quietly but dedicatedly, attempting to normalize pedophilia for the last few years. The smoking gun was Salon’s deleting of its “understanding pedophilia” articles in the wake of Milogate, which was noticed by a few conservatives.

The Regime Press is crowing that a 16-year-old girl “took down” Yiannopoulos by finding the footage. But as the footage wasn’t new or unknown, this isn’t true. What “took down” Milo was a mysterious and unknown media operation—coming from what we’ll call “Deep Cuck”—and which might have been orchestrated by well funded and well connected groups, each of which was motivated to police discourse.

“Milogate” was simply the latest example of what has become one of the most important coalitions in American politics—the Cuck-Left Alliance. Both groups have a vested interested in making sure “The Narrative” stays within carefully controlled boundaries. And both had a specific reason to call in a hit on Milo.

For leftists, the casus belli was his appearance on Bill Maher’s show. Because Yiannopoulos once gave a fair hearing to the Alt Right, he was deemed worthy of being “no platformed.” Milo’s book deal with Simon & Schuster and mainstream media appearances suggested he was on the brink of a breakout; “MILO” qua brand might become Too Big To Fail. The hit had to be done right away.

The cucks had their own reason. Whatever else one can say of him, Yiannopoulos was one of the most prominent Trump supporters during the last primary and was also becoming one of the most in-demand speakers on college campuses. Add to this the fact that he . . . kinda, sorta . . . broached topics of racial realism and Jewish control of the media.

Yiannopoulos’s own political philosophy (if he ever had a coherent one) is not important. What’s important is that Yiannopoulos was creating the potential for young conservatives to go down forbidden ideological paths. And once that happens, the Beltway Right’s days are numbered. So instead of Milo (or “MILO”) giving an address at CPAC in 2017, we got Michael Reagan, who opposed Donald Trump and took the opportunity to do some Cold War LARPing and Russia bashing for all the Boomer-cucks in attendance.

Indeed, with the exception of Steve Bannon and Nigel Farage, CPAC 2017 was practically identical to what we would have seen if we had President Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz. Trump’s decapitation of the Beltway Right has not fundamentally changed the balance of power within “Conservatism, Inc.” CPAC still featured people like Dana Loesch, who fanatically opposed Trump, presuming to instruct us on “why the Democrats lost.” While conservatives are going to go along with Trump for now, the obvious strategy is to take credit for the victory of the man they opposed and attempted to undermine and then reinstitute the Ancien Régime the first chance they get.

Though the cucks are down, they are not out. McMullincost Trump Minnesota in the 2016 election, and that state is critical to building the Rust-Belt coalition a Trumpian GOP will need to keep the Electoral College for any length of time. More importantly, the cucks and their leaders in the Senate, like John McCain and Lindsey Graham, are running with the narrative of “Trump as Putin’s Manchurian Candidate,” which will be used to keep constant pressure on Trump . . . and could even fuel an impeachment drive if the Democrats retake Congress or the Republicans turn on their president (both of which are certainly in the realm of possibilities).

The average leftist believes Trump is insane, corrupt, possibly syphilitic, and mentally incapacitated. And yet, this man, in the teeth of unhinged madness, managed to conquer both political parties simply by hinting at a nationalist message. They are frightened. Trump succeeded because over the decades, he had built a brand and acquired a microphone too large for the leftists to nuke from orbit, though they certainly tried.

Thus, the Cuck-Left Coalition is there to ensure there will never be another Trump. The Left demands celebrities announce their adherence to far left politics, ensures pro-White views are dismissed with the usual clichés, and works to choke off funding and accessibility to alternative outlets.

Breitbart has already blinked in response to corporate pressure. If the Democrats ever retake the White House, can we be confident that pro-White organizations, personalities, and writers won’t get “no platformed” or even hassled by the government? Buzzfeed’s Joe Bernstein, having gotten Sam Hyde taken off the air, is now trying to get YouTube to ban the Alt Right and even “Alt Lite” figures like Paul Joseph Watson. There’s no reason to doubt that he and other journalists (who act much like commissars) may well succeed, especially because it will be the “true conservatives” who will give them cover. (After all, a private company can ban whomever it wants, right? Now bake that cake, bigot!)

Meanwhile, cuckservatives will use “muh moral principles” against perceived threats, with opportunistic concern trolling about homosexuality. It shouldn’t be taken too seriously.

Yes, what Milo said was beyond the pale, but the self-righteous Beltway Right is as riddled with closeted homosexuals as the Catholic Church. As I suggested in my notoriously misunderstood tweet about opposition to homosexuality as a kind of “last stand of implicit White identity,” the conservative movement and the American Church has used a limp resistance to degeneracy as cover for its larger cowardice. The Religious Right has often been drafted to provide air cover for efforts to allow more non-White immigration. Major conservative opponents of Donald Trump during the primary included the likes of Steve Deace, Erick Erickson, and Glenn Beck, all of whom mutter criticisms of gay marriage but are far more energetic about attacking any attempt by Euro-America to defend itself. And though it is “not an argument,” as Stefan Molyneux would say, it is nonetheless a truth that many within the GOP and Religious Right who define their raison d’être as opposing homosexuality turn out to be gay themselves.

Is acknowledging this an attempt to excuse degeneracy? Those who would argue yes should ask what self-appointed religious crusaders have actually been able to achieve when it comes to reversing moral decline. After all, it’s not like George W. Bush, returned to office by a massive evangelical turnout, lifted a finger to push through the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage that he promised. Today his daughter raises money for abortion.

And Mike Pence—memes notwithstanding—was also easily defeated by the homosexual lobby. When his rather lame attempt to protect “religious freedom” in Indiana was opposed by corporate America, he quickly caved. It’s worth remembering that before Donald Trump picked him to be Vice President, his political trajectory was decidedly downward.

Opposing degeneracy without linking it to a broader vision of race and society is doomed to failure. It’s as flawed as viewing tax cuts as the solution to demographic decline, or suggesting that sending the Constitution to Haiti would promote family values in Saint-Domingue.

Furthermore, refusing to acknowledge that everyone involved in this movement is prying themselves out of a culture of filth is operating in bad faith. Trump is memed as God-Emperor, but his past statements and actions on homosexuality and race would have been regarded as unacceptable and subversive by the vast majority of Americans throughout history. What’s worse, had Trump not done and said these things, it’s doubtful he would have ever achieved the platform that allowed him to run for president. Would we better off if the Cuck-Left Coalition had prevented Trump’s ascension?

In a normal society—not “average” or “mediocre” but adhering to a norm—we wouldn’t even be discussing these things. The reason we are is because degeneracy is used as a weapon against us, as part of a larger attack on our race and civilization. And the fact that so many leading this attack are Jewish simply can’t be ignored. If what is happening is not defined in these terms, any resistance to it will be as as impotent and feckless as the various efforts—genuine yet utterly naïve—to restore “Christian America.” Morality, spirituality and will are factors of battle as much as ammunition.

Yiannopoulos was never part of the Alt Right and whatever purpose he once served, he has outlived his usefulness. But we shouldn’t be deceived that the attack on him was a triumph of Christian virtue. It was a successful attempt to police thought by an elite struggling to regain control.

It will not be the last.

Share:
  • Well written piece Richard… I go by my gut and my gut never felt ‘right’ about Milo; nor his admissions of a previous involvement working in a United Nations’ capacity… to me its the little things that people say.. the smallest comments that tip me off as to their orientation.

    • Lucy Lipinska

      A good riddance indeed.

    • Oh hey, it’s you… that shill from YouTube named ”
      Indie Media Eastcoast” that left so many comments in support of Milo all over Alt-Right videos…

  • Rascal

    *slow clap*. Right to the heart of the matter.

  • Laguna Beach Fogey

    That was very good. Well said.

    Now can we all move on?

    • Y Finkelstein

      Yes, let’s throw Milo down the memory hole. Sorry, I meant glory hole.

    • SM Kovalinsky

      Worse will come to members of the Alt Right. Moving on isn’t much of an option.

  • James OMeara

    “his past statements and actions on homosexuality and race would have been regarded as unacceptable and subversive by the vast majority of Americans throughout history. ”

    You mean, the unwashed masses?

    “Washington’s pattern of ignoring same-sex relationships at Valley Forge was both indicative of his pragmatic nature (without von Steuben, Hamilton, Lafayette and others, America might still be a colony of the British) and of his seeming lack of concern over homosexuality.”

    http://gayhistoryproject.epgn.com/historical-profiles/george-washington-gay-friendly-father-of-our-country/

    • Alex Harris

      There’s the good kind of historical revisionism, and then there’s this…

      • James OMeara

        What part of “as his extant letters reveal” don’t you grasp?

        • Alex Harris

          Ugh. It strains belief that the Founders of America would have had anything resembling “tolerance” for homosexuality. We know homosexuality has been around forever, and at certain times throughout history it was more visible than others. But the founding of America was definitely NOT one of those times. Even if some of the Founders were Deists, the entire cultural milieu of Europe and the New World at that time was deeply, devoutly Christian. REAL Christianity, not the abomination we are suffering through today.

          Additionally, a homosexual publication is not exactly my idea of an impartial, objective, trustworthy source of information. The bias could range anywhere from wishful thinking to outright Cultural Marxist black propaganda.

          Let’s go through the dreary exercise of reading this, just for the heck of it…

          …Ok, so I read it. No citations or quotations from said “extant letters”. Can I have a link to the original documents? And while you’re at it, I’d like to talk to an impartial expert to make sure that the Washington Fag Papers are authentic. You know, quill ink consistent with the time period, parchment paper, handwriting analysis and so on. Forgery is an ancient art.

          What is your problem, anyway? I am under the impression that Greg Johnson is homosexual, and yet he seems to be able to focus on the pressing issue of saving the White race. Are you white, or what? Why do you frequent White Nationalist websites? To push your filthy habit in people’s faces? I haven’t followed your activity personally, but whenever I have heard your name come up it is in relation to the overt promotion of your “lifestyle”, and NOT in relation to constructive efforts to save our people. If I were jumping to conclusions, I would guess your function is to prevent cohesion and cooperation within White Nationalist circles. Well, when the efforts of white men to unify for a common purpose have been stymied once and for all, and the clock has run out on the West, your new Arab, African, and Chinese overlords will likely give you your just reward. Or maybe you expect to continue to be the pampered pet of the jews? Don’t give a damn, since you don’t intend to reproduce?

          “Washington’s letters state that he was less than thrilled with marital life (“not much fire between the sheets”) and preferred the company of men — particularly the young Alexander Hamilton, whom he made his personal secretary — to that of women.”

          And there it is, folks. “I’m not saying George Washington was a closet homo… *Nudge, nudge, wink wink* …But George Washington was a closet homo.”

          Kindly fu** off, James.

    • The Real McGoy

      lolwut! A shameless homosexual hints that we must stop noticing faggotry!

      You’re a known transvestite (easily confirmed with a quick Google Image) that has a blog about “wild boys” (named after a novel by W.S. Burroughs; a heroin-addicted faggot who fucked 13 year old arab kids and murdered his wife).

      I’m not even going to ask you whether you support pederasty or not; you’re a faggot and have your own in-group to shill for. And I doubt the answer would be honest. But hey, that’s exactly why we need faggots thrown the fuck out of the Alt-Right in the first place.

      • James OMeara

        Once again, words fail you.

        • The Real McGoy

          Clever reference. And not inappropriate either, considering the pummeling you just received. Your idol, Mr. Vidal– a known pederast– would appreciate it.

  • Rutger3

    Wow!

  • Lucy Lipinska

    A truly impressing analysis, Richard Spencer. Surprisingly (?) many of the figures at the forefront of those attacks on our Western civilization do have a special loyalty either due their own (((ethnicity))) or an erroneous concept of Christianity.

    • Adolphin ++

      “WE SHALL DESTROY GOD

      But even freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy without injury to the well-being of the peoples if it rested upon the foundation of faith in God, upon the brotherhood of humanity, unconnected with the conception of equality, which is negatived by the very laws of creation, for they have established subordination. With such a faith as this a people might be governed by a wardship of parishes, and would walk contentedly and humbly under the guiding hand of its spiritual pastor submitting to the dispositions of God upon earth. This is the reason why IT IS INDISPENSABLE FOR US TO UNDERMINE ALL FAITH, TO TEAR OUT OF THE MIND OF THE “GOYIM” THE VERY PRINCIPLE OF GOD-HEAD AND THE SPIRIT, AND TO PUT IN ITS PLACE ARITHMETICAL CALCULATIONS AND MATERIAL NEEDS.”

  • Abcdedcba

    Get off Milo’s dick, Dick. This is… what… the fifth article/video you’ve dedicated to Milo since the “scandal” broke? Yes, it was very offensive for him to compare you to Jesse Jackson but dude get over it.

    • Can’t you just ignore it and not read it if it bothers you?

    • Mr. P

      The amount of Milo talk is strange considering Spencer was relatively one of the most pro-Milo people around.

      I’m not a Milo fan like most of us around here but I think he’s the type of person that drove the masses in our direction.

    • You should get off of Richard’s. Why are you even here?

      • Abcdedcba

        Lol. Know your place, woman.

        • My place is here… calling out your hypocrisy,

          • Abcdedcba

            How am I hypocritical?

            I respect Richard a lot but it is really annoying how he won’t STFU about Milo. And I have no doubt it’s because Milo compared him to Jesse Jackson.

            Milo has been useful to us by taking fire from the anti-white left. That Milo has occasionally punched right doesn’t detract from his usefulness, nor does this absurd scandal. Milo will continue to carve out his libertine, anti-IDpol niche, and the SJW left will continue to lump him in with us. Let him take all the heat he can.

          • I can’t support Milo in any way. But you did a good job clarifying your views. 👌

          • At first you came off as one of those damn Milo fanatics.

          • Abcdedcba

            K.

  • Only the idiots think Milo was a problem for pro-Whites as opposed to a problem for the anti-whites. He and the rest of the “Alt Lite” were nothing but a benefit to White Nationalists, as they drew the major heat away from us and kept the anti-whites fighting among themselves. Gavin McInnes is another one, even when he is counter-signaling against the Nazi cosplayers, it doesn’t harm pro-Whites because he spends most of his time attacking anti-whites.

    The Cuck-Left Alliance is a good and descriptive term. We are seeing that alliance in action yet again, as Jeff Sessions is being attacked by a coalition of the Democrats and GOP Israeli shills Marco Rubio and Lindsey Graham.

    We witnessed this tactic during the George W. Bush administration, as the Democrats would attack the “goy” members of the Bush administration, like Rove, Rumsfeld, and Alberto Gonzales while rarely mentioning the Jewish neo-conservatives such as Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfwowitz, and Richard Pearle. The same thing is happening now – Whites like Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions, and Michael Flynn bear the brunt of the Democratic attacks while the Jew Zionists like Jared Kushner and Stephen Miller are essentially ignored.

    We also see Trump’s supposed connections to Russia turned into a scandal while his extremely close and scandalous ties to Israel are simply not remarked upon.

    Milo was all for show anyway. His earliest media appearances in the UK showed someone not at all flamboyant and queer-acting but a normal seeming white man. He claims to have a Jewish mother but was raised Catholic and his very vocal posturing about his many black sexual partners was likely as fictional as much of the rest of his persona.

    At the end of the day, he wasn’t that much of an asset and isn’t that much of a loss. Hopefully we will have other disposable figures that can take the heat for the real pro-White movement – here’s hoping a Biracial Lesbian Hindu becomes the next anti-SJW pro-Trump campus-speaking lightning rod.

    • Mr. P

      ” here’s hoping a Biracial Lesbian Hindu becomes the next anti-SJW pro-Trump campus-speaking lightning rod.”

      It’s time to deploy Kathy Zhu! I think the alt-lite and Gavin/Zhu are marching on Berkeley this weekend which should be good stuff. I wouldn’t be surprised if that group is attacked.

      Leftist violence against figures like Milo/Gavin/etc drives more people in our direction. The smart leftists know this. Fortunately, the left has a large number of vile, violent, arrogant thugs filled with faux virtue that will do our work for us.

  • It’s because of these types of articles and this precise style of lateral thinking that assures me Nationalism is the platform of the future, and Racialism the binding force that keeps it moving forward. Nicely done, Mr. Spencer.

    • Nothing_Much

      *Ethnic nationalism, but yeah.

      • Race > Ethnicity

        “Ethnic Nationalism” without Racialism is just different recipe for a multiracial nation. I feel less of a kinship with black or brown people, even though we might share the same zip code, language and local and/or regional culture, than I do with the White man or woman who lives on another continent, speaks a different language, and doesn’t have the same culture as I do.

        • Nothing_Much

          Good point, edited.

  • MylesStandish

    I can’t imagine why anyone under 60 years of age would support Trump. Old people are notoriously dumb and fall for even the most obvious scams, but the younger Trumpfags have no excuse. I’ve been following this mess for over a year, and still there has been no clear explanation; something about Mexicans, “the Iran deal”? It’s absolutely bizarre.

    The foreigners who showed up to support the Trump abomination are truly despicable – this Milo, Piers Morgan, nasty Sheldon Adelson – foreigners out! What makes these freaks think they are wanted here or that we care for their outlandish opinions?

    To think that people are actually out there taking eggs and punches to the face…. for Trump? Sad.

    • Alex Harris

      “I can’t imagine why anyone under 60 years of age would support Trump.”

      -“Build a wall”
      -“Deport illegal aliens”
      -“temporary ban on entry of people who come from terror prone countries”
      -“We will no longer surrender this country or its people to the false song of globalism”
      -“If we don’t have a border, we don’t have a country”
      -“America First”
      -“I will punish companies that attempt to leave the US”
      -“the forgotten Americans will be forgotten no more”
      -“Angela Merkel is destroying her country”
      -“Paris isn’t Paris anymore”

      By the way, how is Cass Sunstein doing?

    • I can’t imagine why anyone under 60 years of age would support Trump.

      Because we’re heterosexual, you faggot.

    • Bantz Henriksen

      You hate the evil pro-Trump foreigners– But all the illegal spics and refugees and shit, that’s fine!

      Lol, you tryhard WASP twat. Gtfo.

      • MylesStandish

        Stay salty, dummy, and keep kissing jew ass.

        • Bantz Henriksen

          Gtfo, faggot. We gas ’em ’round these parts.

  • Jarod

    Preaching to the choir Spencer.

  • JosephtheGreat

    I’m not so convinced that the left is trying to “normalize” pedophilia. There are multiple ways one can look at it. The guy who wrote the Salon article was promoting chastity which is actually very different from what Milo was promoting which is that not all sexual relationships between adults and minors are harmful. I don’t think the Salon article was as extreme as many in the right made it out to be. In the 60’s and early 70’s it was not unusual to see NAMBLA members in the gay pride parades. These were people who would argue very strongly against age of consent laws. The push to normalize pedophilia was much stronger back then. Today we have much tougher laws, we have the sex offender registry, the age of consent has gone up in many parts of the world rather than down, NAMBLA is basically just a website now whereas back than they had thousands of members and it got support from prominent members of the gay community. If the left is trying to normalize pedophilia, they have been failing on that front very badly. There was a time in the 70’s where you could buy softcore child porn in the stores. Today that store would be raided and shut down very quickly. Today you can be arrested for simply possessing cartoons that depict minors. In Canada, a very liberal country by the way, you can be arrested for simply writing fictional stories involving sex with kids.

  • “Mortally wounded”…”assassinated”…

    Seems the more accurate metaphor is suicide.

    After all, it was his own words that proved a problem for him.

  • Fred

    Flynn, Milo, Compromise on illegals, now recuse have all been our recent losses. Let’s honestly look in the mirror. All eyes on Trump whether he will keep his campaign promises re immigration or further cuck under the pressure of Deep State.

  • Gubbler Chechenova

    The problem of American Discourse is so much is conveyed without being spelled out.

    Those with the cultural antennas pick up the signals. Those without don’t get it.

    It’s like Matt Groenig(I hate him) said adults and kids pick up different things from TV shows. Kids just see funny stuff, but adults pick up the references and allusions.

    Consider Jewish NYT columnist David Brooks.
    Brooks seems to be saying one thing to ALL AMERICANS but signaling something else to members of his circle, his tribe, and etc.

    This is easier to pull off in the academia where the audience is limited. Also, academics can resort to esoterica. But when people like Brooks write for millions of readers all across the US(and the world), they have to convincingly sound as they have the interests of all Americans(or even all the world) in mind. It’s harder to play mind-tricks. But their advice to humanity increasingly sounds more loopy given all that is going on.
    And it goes for Thomas Friedman too. I mean do people like him really think Hungary will do better to follow in the footsteps of Sweden? Is Londonistan really a wonder of wonders?

    There is the power fought with naked struggle and hardware, but there is another power that is specific to a culture. If you’re not part of that culture, some of the power dynamics make little or no sense. And it’s not rational or logical. It is emotional, cultural, atavistic. But it’s powerful, possibly more powerful than any rational or material factor.

    Consider the scene in THE GODFATHER PART 2. Pentangeli has the goods on the Corleones, and he’s gonna spill the beans. He is well-protected, and the Corleone’s cannot get to him. He is convinced that Michael tried to have him killed. And he has the entire US government on his side. All he has to do is spill the beans. And the Corleones have NOTHING to stop him with… except one card up their sleeve. Sicilian honor. Corleones shame Pentangeli by having his older brother show up at the hearing. Sicilians have this honor thing, and they are not supposed to spill the beans on other Sicilians to outsiders. That’d be an infirmia. The effect is emotional and psychological but all too real. People at the hearing have no idea what is going on. Later, Kaye has no idea what happened either. Michael says, “It was between the brothers.” Yet, those inside the culture understand the signals and feelings. It’s more dear to them than life, this honor.

    Jews don’t have an honor culture, but they do have a sense of tribal justice, which means the interests of the tribe must come first. In some ways, Brooks seems like a well-meaning guy who wants good things for everyone. I don’t see him as a nasty person like some like Jennifer Rubin and Victoria Nuland who really are vicious. But he is still part of the community, the signals of which are often missed by outsiders. But if one learns of how his community operates, we can sort of decode it.

    Gentiles need an Enigma Decoder machine.

  • Gubbler Chechenova

    Milo is proof that the problem is not sexual repression but ‘sexual excession’.

  • Gubbler Chechenova

    “If the Alt Right is about anything, it’s identity politics.”

    More like Inheritance Politics.

    ‘Identity’ implies personal choice, like one of 50 genders. There’s an arbitrariness to it.

    In contrast, Alt Right is about accepting what you are. It is about inheriting, gratefully and graciously, the racial, cultural, historical, and territorial integrity of your people. It’s not a matter of choice. The decision has been made for you by the line of your people.
    Of course, one may choose to reject such inheritance. Or one may forget it. Or one may not have been taught it, in which case one must rediscover it, like Moses discovered he is really a Jew and not an Egyptian.

    Alt Right is different from prog identity politics is that its identity is really an inheritance, an obligation than an option. In contrast, Identity Politics is a fashion, a game.

    Inheritance is like Kaddish. Identity Politics is faddish.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaddish#Mourner.27s_Kaddish

  • Gubbler Chechenova

    “Cuck-Left Coalition”

    Political Cuckleftness is the new Political Correctness.

  • Einar von Vielen

    How does this work with Trump?

  • Sam

    Milo was referenced in a recent article wherein shitlib “scientists” are attacking Razib Khan for esposing HBD and being linked to the Alt-Right:
    https://undark.org/article/race-science-razib-khan-racism/

    “Still, Khan’s career exemplifies the sometimes-murky line between mainstream science and scientific racism, and it illustrates how difficult it can be to define the boundaries between acceptable and
    unacceptable speech about race — and to understand what, if anything, science has to do with it.

    “This issue isn’t going away. Researchers are getting better at quantifying minute differences among
    individuals and among groups, and their findings will almost certainly be used, as they have long been, by people willing to ascribe a sort of racial destiny to all manner of human virtues and faults. Most
    scientists will object to this application of their work, but the illiberal challenges to scientific scholarship, perhaps now more than ever, seem destined to come not just from creationists and neo-skinheads, but from self-styled hyper-rationalists, too — from people who adhere to what they consider a“science-first” worldview, who often ignore history and social context,and who are predisposed to drawing troubling, and sometimes patently racist conclusions based on otherwise dispassionate science.”

  • Vautrin

    Very good Richard! Way better than the last statement from you on this case. He is a pervert like most fags. He was litarally talking out of his private gay pockets. I know some gays. They all talking shit like that. Thats the reality of most gay people. I was not surprised by his statements.

  • Jason R.

    Excellent analysis, Richard. I agree with some of the views below, however, that we can leave the Milo stuff behind and move on now.

  • DissidentRight

    The only interesting piece of information to come out of Milogate is this: Richard Spencer will viciously attack the enemies of his enemies, specifically, people who ‘break the cordon sanitary around White identity and treat the Alt-Right as comprised of rational people with real grievances and legitimate arguments’ when they are at their weakest.

    • A hymn to Hermes

      Milo has been attacking us for the past 18 months, said violence against us is justified, and never said we were rational people with real grievances. He said his cohort of left-libertarians were the alt-right and that is who he is talking about.

      • DissidentRight

        Milo has been attacking us for the past 18 months

        Like when he defended Nazi memes on Dave Rubin?

        said violence against us is justified

        That’s a lie.

        and never said we were rational people with real grievances

        Are you calling Spencer a liar? Milo has said, many times, that whites have real grievances. Are you not white?

        He said his cohort of left-libertarians were the alt-right

        Really? When?

        • A hymn to Hermes

          He has defined Alt-Right as “Cultural Libertarians” continuously since late 2015, which is a slander against us and directing his fan base to attack our ideas. The entire struggle over defining the label was provoked by Milo trying to Eternal September us.

          He absolutely memed on “Punching a Nazi” going along with the Leftist narrative at a speech. Not doing your research for you. If he wants to say that violence against “Nazis” isn’t justified he’ll have to say so explicitly at this point. His spiel about “whites having real grievances” is something from early 2015 and he’s been DR3 cucking hard for a long fucking time now. Which is why he dragged his feet on the white scholarship, which never would be happening if we had not turned it into a scandal. He wanted to forget this previous incarnation of his character and move on to more mainstream bullshit.

          Our “grievances” which he validates are simply pushing unilateral disarmament on whites. He’s not validating our identity but attacking it with his DR3 mantra and telling whites to not rally around identity but simply attack the Left for being “racist”. That’s actively harming us.

          You are just a Red Team/Blue Team idiot who doesn’t understand metapolitics and thinks anything that pisses a progressive off (which is everything) is good and for your cause. Milo is absolutely directing his energy against us specifically.

          Like when he defended Nazi memes on Dave Rubin?

          I’m sorry, don’t you mean “cultural libertarian” memes? Those are the auspices of Milo’s “defense”. Dave Rubin should at best be deported to Israel along with Milo. Our memes are meant for humor, but they aren’t jokes. Milo absolutely isn’t defending us and you are delusional if you think so.

  • Dillon Francis

    Great read!

  • jaye VBellis

    I see Milo as a very bright, British comedian, who puts on an entertaining act and opposes lots of very bad things in politics, academia and popular culture.

    Britain has always had lots of very talented “gay” artists – writers, singers, actors – Brits like Oscar Wilde and Freddy Mercury.

    I have certain “issues”, boundaries with homosexuals/bi sexuals etc. I prefer the Victorian world on the American world of the 1950s where this stuff was not allowed in public.

    That said – Milo was silenced and basically banned from public life for something he said, not something he did.

    Milo committed politically incorrect speech and thought crime. It’s reality that the Anti White, Anti West Left doesn’t allow gays, artists, actors to ever take our side. The Left demands conformity and looks at Hollywood, academia, “the arts” as

    “Their Turf”.

    This has to change. We need to challenge “their turf” and increase “our turf”.

    I admire Milo for having great courage to go to places like U Cal Berkeley and dare speak the truth to power.

    I note another Gay Western man that gave his life for our Western Freedoms:

    Dutch leader Pym Fortyn – who was murdered/martyred for speaking out against mass Islamic immigration to Europe/the West.

  • SM Kovalinsky

    “Yiannoplos was never part of the Alt Right and whatever purpose he once served, he has outlived his usefulness. But we shouldn’t be deceived that the attack on him was a triumph of Christian virtue. It was a successful attempt to police thought by an elite struggling to regain control.

    It will not be the last.”

    This is the crux of it. It says more in a paragraph than the rest of the well written piece altogether. It is an ominous closing, and it’s prophesy is inevitable, and will be fulfilled.

    Neither CPAC, nor Breitbart, nor Simon and Schuster ever had to feign moral shock and throw Milo under the bus. In so doing, they’ve opened the door to much, much worse coming down the pike.

  • unpaidpundit

    “Opposing degeneracy without linking it to a broader vision of race and society is doomed to failure.”

    Richard Spencer is limiting the appeal of the altright by linking opposition to homosexuality between consenting adults to a pro-white agenda. I realize that an anti-gay feeling is very popular among people who consider themselves to be altright. This anti-gay emotion is also illogical, irrational, and unscientific. There are cracked pots in every field, but the vast majority of psychologists and psychiatrists are not going to agree that homosexuality is “degeneracy,” “abnormal” or a mental illness. If Spencer hopes to win more support among college educated whites, (which he needs) pushing an anti-gay agenda is not going to help him. The anti-homosexual agenda in the West is rooted in the Old Testament, so it is odd that an atheist like Spencer has embraced it. In a Western world where atheism is growing, and adherence to organized religion is in decline, getting many whites to take the word of clerics over that of scientists is just not going to happen. An anti-homosexual stance may prove to be as limiting as making Nazi salutes.

    A pro-white agenda, on the other hand, does have support in science. Infants can tell the difference between people of different races. Evolutionary psychologists say that a distrust of other races may be innate. In prehistory, when one tribe met another who looked different, they had to be wary of each other. Hostilities breaking out between the tribes was always a possibility.