Milo calls himself the “Dangerous Faggot.” While it is true that he is indeed homosexual, what exactly is dangerous about him?
Milo has stated that homosexuals are the creatives of society, the risk takers. How is that dangerous? Society worships the homosexual. The mainstream narrative glorifies sodomites in all forms of media, from the news to Hollywood productions and primetime television. Society says homosexual behavior is good, Milo agrees.
The mainstream narrative is that racists are bad people. Milo also derides racists. Where is the “dangerous” in that?
All across society, a constant message of “be who you are” is broadcast 24/7. Gay pride, transsexualism, and miscegenation are nonstop themes everywhere you look. Milo is a homosexual, extols the virtues of race mixing (homosexual, yet race mixing nonetheless), and recently dressed in drag. Is that counter culture?
Milo’s entire persona is one of excess, from his flamboyant nature to his theatrical bent. The world around us can only be described as sickeningly consumerist. Imbibe, acquire, experiment. There is no contrast to be found in the entirety of Milo’s shtick.
Cultural libertarianism is currently Milo’s political ideology, if you can call it that. At its core is the wish to be left alone to do whatever you want, free from impediment. There’s not much else to it. How is that dangerous? Freedom is not a controversial idea. Its vague, alluring, and pleasant sounding. Not exactly the stuff that causes parents to shield a young child’s eyes and ears.
Milo won’t even go on the most popular Alt-Right podcast, The Daily Shoah, because he fears being confronted by the actual alt-right.
Milo has called the core of the alt-right (TheRightStuff, Daily Stormer, etc.) fringe elements, not representative of the alt-right. Milo has also stated that he’s not a part of the alt-right. If the entirety of Milo is nothing more than a sparkling façade, why should anybody trust him to define a group of people he’s not a part of, whose very actions contradict his claims? Milo isn’t brave or dangerous. He won’t even go on the most popular Alt-Right podcast, The Daily Shoah, because he fears being confronted by the actual alt-right. Instead, he visits pot heads like Joe Rogan, knowing that he’ll just barely be the smartest in the room.
Where is the danger in Milo? Not in his ideology, he has none. Not in his social stances, he stands with modernity. Not in his economic policy, nobody knows what his is. The only “danger” that Milo poses is the possibility that he will continue to misrepresent the alt-right as a soulless movement of social libertines without any long-term goals or aspirations. The alt-right (what is the alt-right?) is not a hollow vehicle for Milo, as much as he may wish that to be the case.
Milo is not dangerous in any meaningful sense. He rose to prominence on the back of controversy around video games. He apes the posture of that which is actually dangerous: the alt-right. All flash and no substance, the only danger he poses is his function as yet another contact vector for grids.