Perspective

Milo and His Enemies

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.

Richard Spencer
the authorRichard Spencer
Richard Spencer is American Editor of AltRight.com; he's President of The National Policy Institute and founder of RadixJournal.com.