Counter-Currents
1,442 words
Last September, I wished Milo Yiannopoulos would just go away. Frankly, I found such antics as dressing in drag and bathing in pigs’ blood disgusting, and I wondered if he was repulsing more people from the Right than he was attracting. I even specifically mentioned his remarks on pedophilia:
The final straw was when Milo showed up to give a speech in drag. . . . What does Milo have to do, exactly, before his enablers will throw up their hands in disgust? His defenses of male genital mutilation and pedophilia were not, apparently, enough. Does he have to show up with a basket of fruit on his head?
Seeing Milo in drag made me wonder. His defenders point out the people he brings in. But it is impossible to count the people he is keeping away. Our movement has been so marginal for so long that we are desperate for attention. Hence we often embrace and coddle freaks. If we really believe our message, though, then we have to believe that we can change the minds of all of our people, including the best. And we have to wonder if every freak like Milo is repulsing a hundred normal people for every one that he attracts. That’s why I wish he would just go away.
But careful what you wish for. After Milo was invited to speak at the CPAC convention, his remarks on pedophilia were circulated in a deceptively edited form, setting off a storm of signaling, disavowal, and unseemly gloating. CPAC pulled its invitation, and Simon and Schuster dropped Milo’s book contract. Rumors circulated that he was in danger of being fired from Breitbart.
It really looked like Milo was finished, and to my surprise, I actually felt bad about it. Why?
After all, Milo’s remarks on pedophilia, even in their unedited version, were beyond the pale for anyone on the populist Right.
Just to be clear: Milo did not say he was a pedophile. In fact, the claimed to be the victim of one. But he laughed it off as a good experience and said things in favor of sexual relationships between teenagers and adults.
Right wingers cherish the innocence of children and are deeply disgusted by pedophiles. Pedophilia, moreover, is the vice of the establishment. Covering up epidemics of pedophile rape and trying to turn pedophiles into a protected PC victim group are crusades of the Left. An apologist for pedophiles has a very low life-expectancy in our circles. So it was only a matter of time before Milo’s comments blew up in his face. Frankly, I was surprised that it took this long.
Milo’s hair-splitting distinction between pedophiles (who only go after pre-pubescent children) and more normal predators who go after teenagers is morally obtuse. It is true that only profoundly abnormal people are attracted to prepubescent children, whereas it is perfectly normal for adults to find sexually mature teenagers to be attractive, even though they do not have the maturity to consent to sex with adults. But the fact that the number of potential offenders is so much larger in the case of teens makes age of consent laws all the more urgent.
Beyond that, Milo’s defense of what basically amounts to classical pederasty — in which teenage boys take up with adult men — is highly misleading. It might have been normal in ancient Greece, but it is certainly not the norm among homosexuals in the modern West.
To Milo’s credit, however, he did claim that he believed in age of consent laws, which would effectively render most of his cringe-inducing discussion moot from a legal point of view.
This leaves only Milo’s crack about being molested by a Catholic priest, which basically amounts to an extremely vulgar and morally idiotic dismissal of the suffering of untold thousands of victims of a vast criminal conspiracy of pedophiles and their enablers. The fact the Milo is apparently a practicing Catholic (pity his poor confessor) might well explain his glibness here, but it does not excuse it. Among the many disgusting things that Milo has said or done, for me, this is the worst, and I still wonder if there would be any net downside if he simply retired tomorrow.
Yes, I defend the Alt Light to the extent that they defend nationalism, populism, and Western civilization and attack feminism, globalization, and political correctness. It’s really the best we can expect from a half-Jewish race-mixer like Milo. The Alt Light aren’t perfect, but they are better than mainstream conservatives, and since their Trumpian civic nationalism is ultimately incoherent, we can bring the best members of their audience over to White Nationalism. But surely we can find someone to fill Milo’s niche who is less cringe-worthy.
But even if we would be better off without Milo, I don’t want to see him taken out this way. Why? Because the video and campaign against Milo originate from the Never Trump wing of the Republican Party and the evil for which they stand. The operation bears the fingerprints of Deep State dork and Bill Kristol lackey Evan McMullin.
The cucks are only attacking Milo because he is the lowest hanging fruit (no pun intended) on the Trump tree. If they take out Milo, they will turn to Anton and then Bannon and Miller. But their ultimate goal is to destroy Trump and the nationalist-populist forces he has unleashed.
The cucks want to go back to losing gracefully to the Left, cashing their checks and clipping their plaudits from the enemy press while America is destroyed. (Funny how they fight dirty only against the Right wing.) But we can’t let them win. And we might as well stop them here. So I am hoping this is not the end of Milo Yiannopoulos. Frankly, I hope he destroys them.
But this is not just a cuckservative attack on Milo as a proxy for Trump, it is an establishment attack, for the Left-wing media immediately jumped on board. Yes, that’s right, the Left-wing media that covers up and minimizes widespread pedophile rape by Muslims and Mexicans and has been working to transform pedophiles into another politically correct victim class, has turned on a dime to press the attack on Milo. Even Salon.com, the flagship for pedophile normalization, joined the attack on Milo and quietly deleted its articles by Todd Nickerson, the self-proclaimed “virtuous” non-offending pedophile. If Milo really is a pedophile apologist, you’d think that Salon would offer him a column. Clearly, Milo is not a tempting enough target to explain such blatant hypocrisy and transparently false sanctimony, which we Right-wingers will be milking for years to come. Obviously, there is a much bigger target here, namely Donald Trump. So, again, I want to see them defeated.
As of bedtime on Monday night, my position on the matter was, to paraphrase St. Augustine, “Dear Lord, please destroy Milo Yiannopoulos. But not yet.”
On Tuesday, February 21st, I awoke to find my prayers answered. Milo gave a news conference where he explained himself, apologized for and retracted his most egregious remarks, emphasized his moral denunciation of pedophiles and his agreement with age of consent laws, announced his resignation from Breitbart, and vowed that he is not going anywhere. Pedophilia is indefensible, and he simply decided not to defend it. He really had to do it, because nobody on the Right will defend a pedophile or a pedophile apologist.
I thought that it was a very plausible and effective performance. It might even be sincere. Americans love apologies and comebacks almost as much as they love moral signaling and denunciations. In the end, pedogate may have no more lasting an effect than pussygate. Since the establishment clearly wished to use Milo to harm Breitbart, resigning was the classy thing to do.
Is Milo finished? I think it is premature to count him out. As I expected, other publishers will bring out Milo’s book. He will find or create new platforms. He will keep on writing, touring campuses, courting media, and triggering the Left. And I will go back to ignoring him and working on making a case for White Nationalism.
From a White Nationalist point of view, there are a lot of bad things about Milo. But the establishment is not united to attack him because of his flaws. They are attacking him because of his virtues. For what he gets right, not what he gets wrong. Above all, they are attacking him because they think it will hurt Trump. A victory over Milo would only have emboldened them. So thank you, Milo, for standing your ground, but please try not to embarrass us again in the future.
28 comments
On one of the Facebook pages I follow, the admin posted something to the effect of, “First they came for Milo, and next they’ll be coming for Bannon, Coulter, etc.” Well, I don’t see this as being a part of a larger effective strategy of picking off the Right’s representatives one by one. For one thing, Yiannopoulos is *not* part of the Right. He’s a flaming self-promoter. I doubt that someone who flutters his eyelashes, wears pearls, and brags about loving Black guys would ultimately have done much good for Whites when all was said and done.
If they come after Bannon, I’ll expend every effort on social media to defend him and attack them. But Milo? I’m not perturbed.
Perhaps, but they don’t see Milo as not part of the Right. To be honest, I have seen multiple normie “friends” on Facebook sharing Milo’s stuff and/or laughing at the Left’s response to him and even my cousin recently was asking me about Milo. So, to some extent he was a very safe, normie-friendly alt-lite figure who undoubtedly brought *some* people all the way to us.
When my cousin asked about Milo I sent him to TRS (he likes podcasts). So, in some respect attacking Milo might have less to do with Milo and what he says than the slippery slope to White Nationalism.
If Milo wasn’t Milo he’d be a posterboy for all SJWs – a jewish-homo-miseginator. I really think Milo is a Trojan Horse, where did he come from, who sponsored him, why does he even do what he does? If we got honest answers to these questions we might want to burn him at the stake our selves.
Civic Nationalism is just a d-tour to White Genocide. I think (((they))) put it there to keep the frog(kek) from jumping out of the water too soon.
This is the first and only piece I’ve ever read about or by this buffoon Milo. The only reason I know who he is derives from incessant Breitbart headlines, so many that I considered dropping them as an aggregator; well, that and the fact that they actually run pieces by Jackie Mason (!), a has-been, geriatric (I’m 70 and remember him from childhood) Borscht Belt hack comic.
Trust me, if you want to build an “alt-right” and include in it older folks from paleo-world, best avoid including prancing poofs like the subject of this piece.
If it’s true that “right wingers cherish the innocence of children…” then more people need to read Ludovici’s ‘Child: An Adult’s Problem’.
The fact that ‘conservatives’ and civil nationalists endorsed Milo with his crossdressing, his vulgarity, his boasting about interracial sex and his bathing in pigs blood shows that those people do not care at all about ideas and ideals. Or rather: they are driven by only one idea: NEVER white nationalism. Everything else does not matter.
“Dear Lord, please destroy Milo Yiannopolous. But not yet.”
The Christians among us might say: “Dear Lord, please redeem Milo Yinaaopolous.”
Milo used his flamboyancy, his gay privilege, as a shield to get away with saying things that would otherwise have been ignored. It was an alinskian strategy, even if it he just fell into it unintentionally, and it worked well. I know for a fact that he was a gateway drug for many civic nationalists now moving into outright nationalism, and I think he has done far more good than harm. The clownishness might be hard for a traditionalist to stomach, I know I vomit a little in my mouth every time I see him in drag, but facts are facts: he was engaging the enemy behind their own lines.
The best response from the new right is bemused indifference and using the irony of the situation to attack the left.
None of this excuses his behavior or the pederasty that is more common than is comfortable to admit in the gay community.
Thank you for a balanced look at a complex issue. I’ve read numerous posts at numerous sites with wildly divergent viewpoints regarding Milo, and while I hate to sound like a mushy moderate, I could see and agree with points from all of them. Milo has always been a deeply flawed figure, yet skillfully handled the press and provoked outrage from the usual SJWs. Your conclusion, that the TruCons are attacking him because of what he got right, not what he got wrong, is one I can agree with and thus wholeheartedly support your hope that Milo will destroy his attackers.
Your strategic view is laudable and your analysis of the dynamics of this attack is coherent and accurate.
I do want to note that I have a more lenient general view of Milo. Despite his antics and deficiencies, I think he is a net plus. He’s extremely smart and skewers much leftist nonsense. Anyone doing that is a positive. I don’t think that one who might be attracted to White nationalism is going to be dissuaded because Milo is circulating on the periphery. He attacks from an uncomfortable angle, presenting a more elusive target for the anti-white left than do clean-cut, traditional white men like Taylor and Spencer. The hysterical, violent protests Milo causes is reason enough to have him on our team. Consider how many Joe Sportsballs saw reports of the violence at Berkeley.
I was remiss to elaborate on my last point: Trump’s support among Joe Sportsballs increases with each violent, property-destroying leftist outburst.
Very well said Greg, and covers all the angles of this affair.
“Dear Lord, please destroy Milo Yiannopolous. But not yet.”
Precisely. Milo is a skilled agitator and public speaker. He makes our enemies mad. We want them to be mad. We want to push them to their breaking point. Anyone who does this at this particular moment in history is helping us. He is not us, he will never be us. We all know that. But I hope he manages to use this to his advantage and piss these people off even more. I want these people either in tears or out smashing windows right now. I want them kicking the hornet’s nest as hard as possible, as often as possible. And if Milo helps do that then so be it. Once we swarm it won’t be long before Milo is deported and out of our hair for good.
Teenagers dont have the maturity to consent to sex eh? Does that mean that they should be held responsible for the crimes they commit? How come in right wing circles Teens should be treated as adults when it comes to crime but when it comes to consenting to sex…oh they are to young to know what they a re doing. Nauseating Hypocrisy.
James, as you well know, the subject of discussion here is sex between a barely-legal teen and a significantly-older adult. At the very least, such liasons should be discouraged as they have the potential to involve dangerous power imbalances.
Great article, as usual, Greg.
You know, if you look into Milo’s history, it seems he has really struggled with his Jewish half (also variously described as 1/4, although half sounds more likely given that he openly identifies as “Jewish” despite his “Catholic” religion). He had a poor relationship with his mother (the Jewish, or half-Jewish, one, depending on whom you ask), who presumably gave him his MGM (not his Greek father), doubly so when he came out as gay. He used to write under the pen name of Milo Andreas Wagner–sounds a bit fashy! And he once wore an Iron Cross (albeit not the Nazi version, as near as I can tell from the pictures).
So I agree that he seems to be more of a genuinely-troubled (and self-promoting) guy than an infiltrator.
One thing that struck me in Milo’s comments about underage sex is his admission that he was the predator and was intentionally going after older men.
I find that to be an important statement and I wish more attention was paid to that aspect of sexual relationships with minors.
I’m not condoning sex with minors, but I’ve been aggressively hit on by teenaged girls several times in the past which is a burden in many ways. It’s not just the obvious enticement a 16 year old girl has because that can be easily nullified (they may be attractive and willing, but they’re also very immature which is a turn off.)
The problem I’ve always had is that they become resentful when they’re rebuffed which, in a time when the mere word of a female is enough to ruin a man’s life, is very scary.
When you have these situations occurring with family friends it puts you in a very awkward position because you have to weigh many different “threats” to your own future, and it’s all based on the whim of a sexually aggressive girl.
Add to that that those types of girls don’t seem to take rejection well and it adds to the stress. Then there’s the fact that you don’t want to have a negative impact on their growth so you have to be delicate, but being delicate makes you come across as “nice” which makes them think they still have a shot.
I basically just stay away from girls now, or make sure I’m never alone with them.
I realize it’s a little different when it comes to gay relationships, but I thought it was honorable of Milo to mention his own predatory behaviors.
I’m basically neutral about what has happened to him because he’s had both a positive and negative impact on issues that are important to me. It is what it is, but he does seem as though he’ll bounce back from a situation he created himself.
On the whole I think he’s a very manipulative and opportunistic person which I find difficult to respect. He’s actually always reminded me of Madonna in that sense, and I distrust her for the same reason I distrust him.
I’m planning to write something on my own blog about this latest fiasco, but until I find the time, I’ll say the following.
Given the current situation of:
(1) The Alt Right is currently the major force in American White racial activism today, and
(2) The Alt Right has allowed itself to become linked to Milo and the Alt Lite, then –
I must agree with Greg Johnson that “Dear Lord, please destroy Milo Yiannopolous. But not yet.”
This is the situation we find ourselves in, including non-Alt Right activists like myself, due to the public perception that the American racialist scene today is all Alt Right, all the time.
Where I differ is my opinion that both 1 and 2 listed above are grave errors. Let’s put aside #1 for now and look at #2. The “gateway hypothesis” is one major rationale for accepting the costs incurred by any support or, or association with, the Alt Lite (or Alt Wrong) whatsoever.
But evidence supporting that hypothesis seems thin to me. While I have no doubt that *some* people have come into hardcore racialism through those other “Alts” one wonders how many there have actually been. Anecdotal evidence suggests that most younger activists are ex-libertarians and the older ones are mostly ex-Paleocons. Are there really many people who start off as civic nationalists Western culturalists then become HBD race realists and then move on to full-fledged hardcore WN? If you go, for example, to Amren comments threads, you’ll find many of the same people there month after month, year after year. Where’s the migration to Counter Currents? How many Alt Liters are becoming WN? Or are the Alt Lite and Alt Wrong dead end cul-de-sacs that prevent further progress.
I really do not know. I do wonder though if someone like Milo is repulsing as many people as he attracts.
“But we can’t let them win. And we might as well stop them here.” I have to disagree.
Yes, it’s unfortunate that Milo had to fall under a political attack from our Never Trump enemies and the Media, but Milo is not somebody worth defending. Instead of hoping Milo survives, we should use his fall to remind people why such degenerates have no place among the right-wing.
I believe Milo will only do more harm to our cause if he manages to remain a prominent voice for nationalist ideas. This was your original position, and I don’t think the situation has changed. If anything, now it’s even more true with Milo’s brand carrying the label of a pederast. Trump, Bannon, and the Right are better off not being associated with a jewish homosexual who dresses in drag, bathes in pigs blood, brags about interracial sodomy, praises pederasty, and makes light of sexual abuse by Priests. The circumstances of Milo’s demise does not change this.
The Media/Never Trumpers are going to keep attacking Trump and his allies no matter what, except this time it worked because Milo truly is a reprobate worthy of public scorn.
Why do people keep talking about this faggot? Any person with an historic knowledge of the tribe and their predilection for undermining any opponent by means of infiltration has to KNOW that this perverted creature is merely a plant on their part to subvert the alt right movement. The sooner he is made totally irrelevant or dies of a much-deserved case of AIDS, the better.
Greg is 100% right: However much you may dislike Milo, the establishment want to take him down for what he gets right, not for what he gets wrong. It is a damn good reason to hope they don’t succeed.
I am relieved that Milo has lost status and prestige, because of this (great job by Red Ice, by the way):
Margaret Sanger Never Said She Wanted to “Exterminate Blacks”
Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jswvL36w2-M
This might be controversial to some, but I truly believe, that the Alt Right’s “true” allies are more on the left of the political spectrum than on the right; however paradoxical and contradictory this might sound and appears to be. Trying to convert conservatives is a waste of time, in my opinion. They will either voluntarily join the cause, or not. The majority of (secret/clandestine) missionary work and efforts should be focused on the Left, in my opinion.
”Different movements on the center Left and far Left that overlap with White Nationalist interests […] Third World Eugenics viewed by the Cognitive Elite and the Fair Trade Movement[…] The role of deception in entryism (secret agents)” – https://counter-currents.com/2014/10/counter-currents-radiogreg-johnson-interviews-patrick-lebrun-on-entryism/
I also believe that “Entryism” is still the best way forward and our best bet in the long run. We should not abandon the most powerful tactic and tool at our disposal, just because Trump is president at the moment and the UK is leaving the EU, etc. We need to keep thinking long-term and not let down our guard to soon and become careless or complacent.
If Trump joins the cuckservatives in going after Planned Parenthood’s federal funding I will oppose him. If we are lucky Ivanka Trump will persuade her father not to touch Planned Parenthood funding.
A Trump Attack On Planned Parenthood Would Be Strategic Madness
”Trump’s perspicacity in embracing the immigration issue was a huge factor in his winning the election. Trying to take women back to the back allies to dangerous abortion providers by upsetting what Justice Breyer deemed settled law would be an unwise decision which would needlessly alienate millions of moderate Americans. Please take a moment to check out my point with your daughters, Mr. President Elect.” – http://churchandstate.org.uk/2016/12/a-trump-attack-on-planned-parenthood-would-be-strategic-madness/
Correction: …and not let down our guard *too* soon…
I always was unhappy about Milo’s participation in the Alt-Right, but…when I’d see or hear about the various battles raging between him and the SJWs, part of me was annoyed that we were being associated in the public mind with such a degenerate, but part of me was amused and sort of relieved to watch the ridiculous spectacle play out. Instead of devoting their time and energy to trying (in vain) to discredit us, the hysterical left is pouring its energy and time into attacking a faux-right classical liberal race-mixing faggot as if he were a new Hitler, and losing miserably, meanwhile we’re continuing to consolidate our victory in the battle of ideas, writing good introductions to various red-pill topics, and giving great interviews, like the one Mike Enoch did with that cuckservative professor on TRS. The left is focusing on attacking Milo, a battle they can never win, since he’s pretty much the polar opposite of everything they claim him to be (in terms of right-wingery, I don’t know about the pedo stuff). Meanwhile, normies are seeing this and scratching their heads at what the MSM is doing and many of them will no doubt be curious about what this Alt-Right thing is actually about that Milo’s SJW opponents are freaking out about.
I don’t know, perhaps Mr. Johnson is right and pushes more people away. Anyhow, we certainly don’t NEED him on the Alt-Right, but I think there was a slight benefit of his being around to draw clueless SJW fire.
I not trying to defend Milo but here’s an interesting article on Jerry Lee Lewis’s experience in 1958:
“I never lost the first name “13-year-old-child-bride-Myra”—I think that’s on my birth certificate now! I don’t think I ever resented it for me, though, I always resented it for what they did to Jerry. It wasn’t harming me, it was harming somebody I loved, that was the pain of it. I was seeing someone punished because of my age, my existence, and I always wanted to just stand up and defend him.”
https://medium.com/cuepoint/ballad-of-the-13-year-old-bride-f909cbe1c6b4#.fi23m7yu7
Me personally, I believe we ought to consider homosexuality as an affliction, similar to alcoholism or drug addiction, but “normal” to the individual, like Milo.
“the Left-wing media that covers up and minimizes widespread pedophile rape by Muslims and Mexicans and has been working to transform pedophiles into another politically correct victim class,”
Think about how the media and Democrats handled Orlando. The jihadi’s father was on stage with Clinton within a week or so. This is a man who published online a statement that homosexuals are evil. I guess Muslims are above gays in the victim hierarchy? Weird.
I never paid much attention to M.Y. Now that you tell us he wrote a bizarre article defending baby torture, I think he could use a little dose of my opinion.
…why shouldn’t it include making the best of yourself through a tiny surgical procedure? You lift so your sexual market value goes up, right? You cut your hair for the same reason? Well, getting trimmed down there is just good game, bros..
1. Infant circ re a haircut: It hurts, it bleeds and it doesn’t grow back.
2. There’s the little matter of lack of consent to a cosmetic procedure.
3. A cut man does not achieve sexual pleasure as nature intended, which he deserves as much as any sick-in-the-head woman who claims to prefer the clipped organ; he merely obtains relief.
4. You don’t want to have it done to yourself because you are a “coward”? Why would it be cowardly, unless it were painful as hell? Is there a word for people who advise the inflicting on babies of pain they themselves want to avoid? Yes there is. It’s called “psychopath”.
You are dumb beyond comprehension, Milo. Handsome and preternaturally stupid. F.O.
Ironically his remarks about pederasty is probably the most politically incorrect thing he has ever said. All the shit he said about islam and feminism and anything else never created the amount of blowback he got from this.
I think when Milo made these remarks he had a very libertarian audience in mind. Milo was never a true conservative (or even a neocon) and I don’t think he really ever thought of himself as one. His fanbase has always been primarily libertarians who tend to be more “open-minded” about questioning laws and common morality (remember these are the same people that had a porn star as a representing leader during gamergate.) This is probably why he didn’t anticipate the amount of blowback he was going to get. In fact, it wasn’t until he was invited to CPAC and was moving into the mainstream conservative movement that this was blown up in the media and became a big deal.
Even now most of the people defending him are more libertarian than conservative.
The pig’s blood thing was genius. He did it to draw attention to the Lefts insanity.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.