Why Do People Love Milo?

I recently read an article about Milo Yiannopoulos, the outspoken Breitbart editor.

The article brings to light a tendency for some to sympathize with Milo and his contemporaries. Perhaps it’s because they have disguised their racism and xenophobia in a veil of conservatism. Make no mistake, it’s only a trick.

The article doesn’t address Milo’s controversial approach to social justice issues, especially those upon which Milo capitalizes because they are hot issues in mainstream media. Before we get too far, let me take a step back and caution against the author of the blog post, Fencing Bear at Prayer. She’s good at pulling the wool over your eyes. She masks misogyny and racism by praising the compliance of those the afflicted are standing up against. For instance, in another article she wrote, she praises white men for being good to women. She says women “invented feminism” and marriage so that they wouldn’t be raped or enslaved, and praises the men for supporting the female causes. It goes without saying that the men don’t deserve any praise. The women who fought for their equality do. If we praise the men, it discounts the efforts of those women who stood up against the tyranny of a fiercely patriarchal system, and it forgives the atrocities inflicted upon women by those men. Further, it excuses the men from taking responsibility for their terrible actions.

Anyway, back to Milo.

Milo routinely eschews balanced reporting. He expresses his opinion (which, to be clear, he has every right to do) that aligns more closely with the far-right, conservative base. It’s probably safe to say, since our political machine is comprised of two teams with an ever-growing chasm between them, Milo helps champion the extreme right-wing faction (aka those that consume Breitbart like it’s actually good news). Here’s an example of what he says about Black Lives Matter.

In this article , he uses racist epithets to reference activists in the Black Lives Matter movement. How can anyone not clearly see his racism?

He isn’t helping, and his facts aren’t accurate (for instance, a quick search will show that each year, more than 400 people die in police shootings, as he claims). He’s trying to prove a point, as illustrated in his Black Lives Matter speech introduction. Addressing the crowd gathered to hear him speak, he says, “Most importantly, you have the right to worship the dangerous faggot,” a descriptor he gives to himself. He spreads his message even if it means he has to veil his racism in bogus statistics gathered from obscurity. Look at the room he’s talking to. It’s a lot of white people who are masturbating to his self-congratulatory remarks. Frankly, Milo is hurting lots more than he is helping.

Here’s a much more balanced picture of what is happening. Police violence is real.

I could go on. For instance, Milo’s banishment from Twitter is a pertinent example of his racism. Here’s what The New Yorker says about it , contrasted by what Breitbart says . You decide.

He talks about Muslims, women, gay people, feminism, conservatism, and a mountain of other topics that desperately need broader discussion. But, he talks about them in a way that’s polarizing, not progressive. He talks about them in a way that’s divisive, not effective.

I would challenge all of us to look at the articles Milo writes and edits for Breitbart. I would challenge us to look at the overarching message of Breitbart and the Dangerous Faggot Tour (interesting that he chose “faggot,” a word that is just as controversial as his messages). It’s designed to divide, not to unite.

In short, I don’t know why people love Milo. It’s clear to me that he isn’t trying to help, he’s trying to prove that he’s right. That’s really, really dangerous.