Milo is the tip of the iceberg.
Milo is not doing very well these days. See here as well. Unfortunately, as the Alt Right has so closely associated themselves with the Alt Lite (and Alt Wrong) as part of their “big tent” approach – based on a “gateway hypothesis” that has NEVER been subjected to rigorous evaluation – then the problems of Milo are also the problems of the Alt Right, since Alt Lite and Alt Right/Alt Wrong are equated in the public mind. And you have no one to blame for that but yourselves. It’s not like non-Alt Right activists didn’t warn you, repeatedly, for months on end, about this.
Some of the arguments there are reasonable, in the sense that, yes, this is a first step in an anti-Trump attack. Where I differ is that WNs should never have had anything to do with Milo, specifically, and the Alt Lite in general, to begin with. Having tied your cart to tired horses like them, now you’re stuck (as is Trump/Bannon). This is all poor judgement, for whatever you may say, in the public mind Milo=Bannon=Alt Right=WN. They don’t make any fine distinctions and that’s in large part because of the error made in associating with these people to begin with, for the sake of expediency. Compromise on core essentials for the sake of expediency always backfires. There’s a difference between voting for a beta race cuck like Trump and supporting the Alt Lite. Trump is a mainstream political figure who ran (an won) elected office, he was and is never an activist directly associated with dissident sociopolitical movements; the Alt Lite on the other hand are activists promoting a particular memetic structure and a particular worldview.
To clarify my position so there is no misunderstanding:
1. I have repeatedly written that it is a mistake to so closely associate (American) White racial activism with the Alt Right.
2. I have also repeatedly written that is a mistake to in any way have the Alt Right proper associated with either the Alt Lite or the Alt Wrong.
3. Having made (typically) both of the aforementioned mistakes, the American “movement” now finds itself affected by the trials and tribulations of Milo. Attacks on Milo are not only (and perceived as such) attacks on the Alt Lite (as well as on Bannon/Trump) but on the Alt Right (Alt Right proper and Alt Wrong) as well. Worse, since in the public mind American WN is tied into the Alt Right, then non-Alt Right WNs (such as myself, for example) are indirectly affected by this whole mess (hence, our understandable resentment toward the Alt Right and Alt Right pretensions to “movement” supremacy).
Given all of this, I have to agree with Greg Johnson’s basic conclusion that while I wish Milo would go away I do not want it to happen like this. Preferable that he simply be ignored by a Right that has grown away from him. Where I disagree with Johnson is that there should never have been any connection, direct or indirect, between Milo and the (more hardcore) “movement.” Errors 1 and 2 above should have been avoided.
More evidence of the deep inherent flaws in the Alt Right can be found in this “hit job” article.
This article well represents why I distrust the Alt Right and have zero confidence in their judgement and long-term potential. Why talk to a scumbag like this? To make it easier to write hit pieces about you? To satisfy your ego? Or do you think you’re going to get lots of new recruits from Huffington Post articles like this? The Alt Right is more “same old, same old – the same types of quota queens repackaging the tired old nonsense in millennial snarl undercut packages, making mistake after mistake. Further, I am frankly mystified that someone who wishes to maintain pseudonymity would agree to a public face-to-face meeting with a hostile reporter. The mind boggles. What was he thinking? Assuming this is a sincere and serious activist, and not a LARPER doing it for “shits and giggles,” then this displays a quite advanced state of extreme naiveté and absolute bad judgment. These are not the type of folks you want in the trenches or foxhole with you, not the fellows you want leading you into battle.
To compare the mindset activists should have to that which unfortunately exists today, I suggest that you read the book Angels in Iron and then read the comments thread on atypical blog post at Chateau Heartiste, AltRight.com, the various The Right Stuff shows, etc. Then reflect upon which of these comparisons is the appropriate mindset for political soldiers fighting a battle against overwhelming odds.
Is this just criticism for the sake of criticism? No it is not. There is a definitive purpose.
Let’s consider the “Pareto Principle.” A small fraction of activists are the ones producing the majority of the good work. For the sake of argument, we can say 20% of activists produce 80% of all of “good stuff.” That 20% is buried under the 80% nitwit morass that makes up the bulk of the “movement.” If a healthy portion of that 20% can be convinced to free themselves from the fever swamp of Der Movement, and coalesce with each other in a New Movement (which itself of course can be ideologically diverse to a point and be composed of several groups/groupuscules), then efficiency would be thereby augmented. If that New Movement would be committed to quality over quantity, and be stringent about weeding out defectives, then it could quickly supplant the moribund remains of the 80% left-over detritus of the Old Movement. My objective is to stimulate such a scenario. Do I believe it has a good chance of happening? No, I do not. Most likely, the attempt will fail, but it needs to be attempted nevertheless, because it is the only hope for moving forward. A quixotic attempt, a long shot, is better than no attempt at all.
With respect to the Alt Right, let’s be fair – there is still time for them to “right the ship” and correct their major problems. They can streamline their operation, have all their best people coalesce around sane policies, and be more serious and professional. However, I do not believe they have it in them; I do not believe they have the critical mass of quality human material to do the right thing; in fact, I doubt they know what the right thing is, or even if they understand what their problems are or if they acknowledge they even have problems.