Is the Dangerous Faggot Gone Yet?

By Robert Carter

Can we finally be finished with the Dangerous Faggot? After months of edgy display, provocation, and headline-grabbing, Milo was suddenly obliged to defend and contextualize his past statements regarding man-boy fornication. Now his campaign towards gay-Ann-Coulter status may be permanently reversed, as his apologies and defenses have failed to protect a valuable book deal, an invitation to the Conservative Political Action Conference, and his job at Breitbart.

Throughout his rise, the Alt Right's foremost promoters politely refrained from highlighting Milo's frank, indulgent degeneracy and likely mental illness. Perhaps they sensed a possible enemy-of-my-enemy alignment, and viewed Milo as an on-campus battering ram against their adversaries among the academic-media priesthood.

Milo was even frequently discussed on the Alt Right as a potential gateway drug to more substantial identitarian attitudes. In reality there was never evidence of this--to my knowledge, no new arrival to an Alt Right conference or informal gathering ever identified Milo as a prime influence or motivator. Indeed, had Milo been the rock star inspiring large numbers of young straight white men finally to take their own side and exalt their inherited civilization, we ought to have been concerned for Europa.

Milo was symptomatic, not causal. Sensing a rising, intensifying disgust with the multicultural court religion of a dysfunctional elite, Milo sought to ride the wave and cash in. Though he specifically declined to play his gay victim card, his status in a tidily-maintained victim hierarchy permitted him greater license to criticize established elements of politics and the media and remained an important aspect of his ability to gain frequent access to live broadcasts, during which he mocked feminism and bragged about his black Muslim boyfriends. When show hosts took the bait and marveled at the apparent dissonance, Milo invariably chortled and segued into more rhetorical abuse of politically-correct killjoys. He played his crafted role and image well.

Milo's used this verbal skill and effectiveness to break through stilted consensus in a noticeable way. He was helped greatly by the manic behavior of an establishment Left that, in its accelerating loss of purpose, vitality, and credibility, endlessly doubled and tripled-down in response to each of his silly challenges. This culminated in a night of attacks and terror by the Left's Antifa foot soldiers at Berkeley, who articulated their commitment to free speech by punching and pepper-spraying anyone who had come to hear Milo speak. That night may have represented Milo's chief distinct success and benefit to an emerging Alt Right, since it introduced masked Antifa violence to millions of ordinary people.

But even though the Left reacted to Milo as if he was Richard Spencer, or baby Hitler, those seeking Milo's ultimate message or philosophy wound up disappointed. Beyond frank recognition of Muslim homophobia and an assessment that feminism had gone too far, with Milo, there was no there there--only an insubstantial cultural libertarianism tied to a personal vanity project.

While I express my personal hope by writing of him in the past tense, it's not clear what his future holds or his next move will be, or what conclusions his fan base will reach. Certainly he will note, if he hasn't already, that several of the same outlets gleefully reporting on his present difficulties had previously explained to their readers, calmly and authoritatively, that pedophiles are not monsters--that "pedophila is a disorder, not a crime." Amusingly, Salon.com appears to have removed its prior pedophilia apologia from its site, where it is now relishing his demise. And maybe it will make a meaningful difference to people who buy books that Milo was voicing his personal exploits as a fourteen-year old, not justifying the single-minded predations of a step-dad or priest.

Predictably, the media will add the Milo-as-pedophile meme to its methods of attempting to discredit the alt-right. This is unlikely to work in any serious or lasting way, and is more apt to be taken as another indicator of media desperation. Answering such associational attacks may may even offer yet another opening through which the alt-right ends up introducing itself: by distinguishing its depth, seriousness, and meaningfulness from Milo's camp, instability, and, paradoxically, his ultimate political correctness.

Author image
I read and edit your shit so that it looks less shitty on our site.