A lot of liberals, I think, were quite unsettled by the Trump phenomenon, and so part of that reaction was to turn to quasi-conspiracy type thinking, where you posit that there is this huge, but largely silent mass of people with a coherent right-wing, racist, nationalist ideology.
And it’s quite ironic if that ideology is supposedly lead by a gay person who speaks about his Black boyfriends and who has a Jewish mother.
Wait, who claims that Milo Yiannopoulos is The Leader Of The Alt-Right? He’s a journalist and professional shit-stirrer who associates with the alt-right, that’s all.
Interesting. Most of those (including some with the word “leader” in) seem perfectly consistent with what I said, and the only one calling Yiannopoulos the leader of anything is the last one which is an obvious joke from start to finish—but I agree that several of them are at any rate claiming that Yiannopoulos is at least A Leader Of The Alt-Right, which is much more defensible but still rather silly.
And more importantly, he cannot stop talking all the time about how gay he is and that his boyfriends are black.
Because there are many e.g. gays who disagree with SJWs, but they can easily be reframed as e.g. “privileged white males”. If you focus the attention to their aspects that fit the narrative, it is much easier to ignore those aspects that don’t (i.e. “a gay disagrees with SJWs” is a paradox, but “a cis white male disagrees with SJWs” is a confirmation of the worldview, so the key is to make you only think about the latter). With Milo such strategy is impossible, because if you let him talk for 10 seconds, he will remind you that he is gay and that his boyfriends are black. That will be the first and the last thing he will say, and everyone in the audience will remember that. His frame is unshakeable. The only way to stop people associating him with gayness and black boyfriends is to completely prevent him from being seen and heard. Which is quite difficult considering he works for media.
And it’s quite ironic if that ideology is supposedly lead by a gay person who speaks about his Black boyfriends and who has a Jewish mother.
Wait, who claims that Milo Yiannopoulos is The Leader Of The Alt-Right? He’s a journalist and professional shit-stirrer who associates with the alt-right, that’s all.
In case anyone was curious, here is a collection of how different publishers have referred to Milo:
The New York Times: “a prominent figure in the white nationalist “alt-right.””
Bloomberg Businessweek: “the most notorious spokesman for the alt-right” and “the alt-right’s mouthpiece”
Politico: “alt-right journalist and firebrand”
USA Today: “white nationalist and alt-right poster boy” (in previous version)
news.com.au: “Alt-right star”
The Guardian: “a spokesman for the “alt-right””
BBC: “a figurehead for the alt-right”
The following publications have literally said “leader”:
Mother Jones: “Alt-Right Leader” and “alt-right lightning rod”
NPR: “a self-proclaimed leader of the movement”
ABC15 (Arizona) and also other ABC outlets: “Alt-right leader”
The Australian: “Alt-right leader”
The Hill: “alt-right leader”
CBS (Seattle): “alt-right leader” (in previous version)
You can even find the literal words “the leader of the alt-right” in that order:
Salon: “the leader of the alt-right”
I have not yet found it in titlecase (“The Leader Of The Alt-Right”) in a mainstream publication.
Interesting. Most of those (including some with the word “leader” in) seem perfectly consistent with what I said, and the only one calling Yiannopoulos the leader of anything is the last one which is an obvious joke from start to finish—but I agree that several of them are at any rate claiming that Yiannopoulos is at least A Leader Of The Alt-Right, which is much more defensible but still rather silly.
To be explicit, my primary goal was to collect empirical data on how publications introduce Milo (as opposed to contradicting you).
Milo is an agent provocateur, a professional troll, and, cough, a pain in the ass X-D
And more importantly, he cannot stop talking all the time about how gay he is and that his boyfriends are black.
Because there are many e.g. gays who disagree with SJWs, but they can easily be reframed as e.g. “privileged white males”. If you focus the attention to their aspects that fit the narrative, it is much easier to ignore those aspects that don’t (i.e. “a gay disagrees with SJWs” is a paradox, but “a cis white male disagrees with SJWs” is a confirmation of the worldview, so the key is to make you only think about the latter). With Milo such strategy is impossible, because if you let him talk for 10 seconds, he will remind you that he is gay and that his boyfriends are black. That will be the first and the last thing he will say, and everyone in the audience will remember that. His frame is unshakeable. The only way to stop people associating him with gayness and black boyfriends is to completely prevent him from being seen and heard. Which is quite difficult considering he works for media.