Welcome to political legitimacy, enjoy the entryism.
The topic of today’s article is the MQ, short for “the Milo question”. Brace yourself, because we’re going to cover a lot of ground. What do we do about Milo? I have a suggestion, but before I go down any road I need to substantiate two things. First, with regards to Milo, understand that I can only speculate on his motives. Milo is curiously mum on the subject, and I would be wildly mistaken to adamantly claim one thing or another. Is Milo co-opting us? Is Milo trying to help us? I honestly don’t know. I suspect certain things. For instance, I suspect that Milo isn’t gay and doesn’t actually gurgle black cocks, because Milo knows that he can slip past the Leftist identity radar by identifying with an oppressed class. He has also, allegedly, said that being straight would ruin his brand, although you can take that with a grain of salt, one way or the other. I also suspect that Milo views himself as the Oscar Wilde of the current year, and is essentially piggybacking off of the Alt-Right’s notoriety. I do not think it is particularly far-fetched to argue that Milo is an attention whore.
But I cannot substantiate these things. I would hazard some guesses, but to be perfectly honest with you, it doesn’t matter one way or another.
The second point I must substantiate is actually a character assessment of the Alt-Right. There is a particular characteristic that the Alt-Right demonstrates that is curiously lacking in other political movements: We are self-aware. I do not mean to say that the Alt-Right views itself with a completely, 100% objective eye for self-criticism, but that we are self-deprecating in some of our humor I view as a good thing. To a degree, it allows self-correction, and to some extent to police ourselves. The ability to view ourselves with a degree of self-criticism will be a boon, and the real time effects of zero self-criticism can be viewed across various political disciplines. Social Justice Warriors are famous for being humorless twats. To some extent, you might argue that the increasingly histrionic nature of post-modernism is a function of the fact that they do not make fun of themselves. There is no barrier to signaling, there is no self-awareness, and thus they reach ever higher levels of absurdity. You can, of course, also argue that post-modernism was also crafted with an eye for running wild. Esoterically, the Left is Chaos and the Right is Order, etc. etc. Too much self-criticism leads to purity spiraling, but unlike Vox Day, I do not believe that we are necessarily in danger of “political irrelevancy” or however he’s characterizing us. Not yet.
I simply want you to be aware of these things, or at least have them in mind before I dive in:
From the Hill: Clinton air war fails to sink Trump
I’m not particularly interested in the spending disparity between Clinton and Trump. While the spending gap between Clinton and Trump, and the curious lack of a gap in polling, is both deliciously ironic and vaguely amusing, we’ll be able to paint a more concrete picture of what actually happened once the election is over.
The above link was featured on Drudge, and I clicked on it while I sat in my department’s lounge, whiling away the hours between classes. What was particularly and concretely curious, and thus worth commenting on, was the inclusion of my favorite GOP consultant in the article’s explanation for the discrepancy between money spent and polling numbers. According to Rick Wilson:
“She’s not up more because she’s disliked and distrusted. With any other candidate than [Clinton], Trump would be down by 25 percent.” This is a curious thing I have also encountered in the Wall Street Journal. The first premise, that Clinton’s numbers are dragging because she is generally viewed with suspicion, is something we can substantiate. While millennials, my generation, seem to associate Clinton corruption with “blowjobs from intern”, the public generally understands that there is quite a bit more to whatever power game she’s playing. The fact that the private server fiasco increasingly resembles a plane crash that hasn’t hit the ground certainly adds some oomph to Clinton’s worsening numbers, especially now that the Clinton Foundation’s unscrupulous behavior is public knowledge.
But the second statement, that Trump is only doing well is… dubious. The Wall Street Journal formats that argument a little differently. I don’t see it every day (although the only column I read every day is James Taranto’s Best of the Web Today), but the argument looks like this:
Once or twice a year Gideons appear on campus. They stand at the intersections of various pathways and offer Bibles to passers-by. Students generally react in one of three fashions: Either they accept the Bible, politely decline, or give them a wide enough berth that interaction is safely avoided. I have seldom seen anyone become confrontational with them, although to listen to some of the usual, histrionic voices, these people are an existential threat because they are implicitly hostile to the LGBT community.
When I first encountered them, I accepted the Bible out of curiosity, and as a secondary benefit I discovered that I could forever after decline the offered Bible by telling the Gideon in all honesty that I already received one. These people do not particularly bother me, but for reasons that are probably very obvious to anyone who is already on the Alt-Right, there is a substantial portion of the student body that is quite upset that the Gideons are around, handing out free Bibles.
Today was the day the Gideons showed up, and the usual suspects did not appreciate their presence. It is a remarkable thing, really. I am no Christian. Or not a particularly good one by any stretch of the imagination. Once upon a time I was ferociously hostile to Christians. I “renounced” the Catholic Church (curiously, because I had a nasty and prolonged encounter with Evangelical Christians, and not because of any particular grievance I had with Catholicism), and became, to my eternal shame, an Angry Atheist. Even the watered down, feel good socialism-lite of my late teens and early twenties is less embarrassing than how angry I was as an Atheist. I rue that particular philosophical leap to this very day. I was a trope, a walking talking stereotype. It is ironic that I viciously castigated Christians for lacking self-awareness, among other ignoble things, because in my anger I had lost my own sense of balance and self-awareness. I simply responded in a reflexive and visceral way to any encounter I had with anything Christian whatsoever. Of course, my hostility to religion was not universal: I had nothing bad to say about Muslims or Jews or Hindus, although I did hate Wiccans because I saw through their special snowflake bullshit.
I still hate Wicca for the special snowflake bullshit. That’s neither here nor there.
We are beginning a new book: The Autobiography of Alice B. Tolkas, by Gertrude Stein. I had little idea what this book would be about prior to the professor’s brief introduction. Apparently, Gertrude Stein was an American expatriate who lived in Paris with her lesbian lover. The professor pauses on that point to digress, and I suspect I already know what is coming.
To my satisfaction, I am quite wrong.
In gentle terms, the professor laments that writers with “unorthodox” or minority identities are not renowned for their literature per se, but rather for their identitarian qualities. He brings up Oscar Wilde:
“The Importance of Being Earnest is one of the most hilarious plays ever written,” he opines. However, he points out that if you peruse literary criticism of Oscar Wilde, the subject matter critics hone in on is not the quality of his work or the particular characteristics, themes, or motifs he employs. Rather, almost every secondary literary and critical piece on Oscar Wilde that anyone has written in the past few decades is solely concerned with his sexual orientation. The same is true for minority-race writers. If an author is black, we are only concerned with his blackness. The professor is gentle with us, perhaps because he has experience with the rabid tyrant children of the modern educational system. Or perhaps he is only peripherally aware of social justice “activists”. Or perhaps again, he is simply a learned man concerned with his duty to teach actual literature to his students. I cannot say for sure, and I have no desire to probe his mind for what he subscribes to politically. Whatever the case, it is simply interesting that he points out the uniform obsession of post-modern academia.
From the Daily Caller, 11 August 2016: Joint FBI-US Attorney Probe of Clinton Foundation is Underway
"Multiple FBI investigations are underway involving potential corruption charges against the Clinton Foundation, according to a former senior law enforcement official. The investigation centers on New York City where the Clinton Foundation has its main offices, according to the former official who has direct knowledge of the activities. Prosecutorial support will come from various U.S. Attorneys Offices - a major departure from other centralized FBI investigations. The New York-based probe is being led by Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Bharara's prosecutorial aggressiveness has resulted in a large number of convictions of banks, hedge funds and Wall Street insiders."
But wait, there's more.
From the Washington Post, 22 August 2016: FBI uncovers 14,900 more documents in Clinton email probe. Turns out Madame Former Secretary wasn't particularly interested in yoga.
This adds a certain je ne sais quois to the election that even watching the #NeverTrump retards opt to die on a hill shaped like a bald former CIA/Goldman Sachs employee doesn't quite muster. There's something more that you should keep in mind as the Clinton drama unfolds, however.
Hannibal Bateman's "Generation Alt-Right" article at Radix
I have some thoughts I'd like to include to Bateman's article.
The failure of Conservatism Inc. seems to be lost on many of it's shareholders. I know most of you probably do not have a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, so the link I just provided is effectively worthless to you. I'll quote the salient points with my own rejoinders before moving on to my main topic:
My father introduced me to the Wall Street Journal many years ago. That I continue, sometimes, to read it is a relict of my days as an uninitiated right-libertarian. I've never gone full neo-conservative, and the earliest and coincidentally most naive political position I can chart on my philosophical evolution is a warmed over Socialism Lite. I was eighteen then, and in less than a decade, here I am, a dyed-in-the-wool Reactionary. What a strange path we've trod!
Anyways, I used to enjoy the Wall Street Journal. Once I abandoned the glitzy emptiness of libertarianism, I stopped enjoying many of the things I used to. Movies, television, college tier parties, many of my friends - because, as they say, "what has been seen cannot be unseen". We're all on the outside looking in now, even when we secretly haunt the heart of the dildo-Left. If only the screeching activists on campus knew that an actual Fascist walked among them, instead of the spooky and vague abstractions they wail about in the safety of the Academic Fortress of Goodthinkful Opinions™. Worse still, what if said screeching activists came to understand that this particular manifestation of Emmanuel Goldstein was not born but created by their insufferable moral preening, virtue signalling and outright hostility to "cis-het white males"? But I'm getting ahead of myself.
Milo article on Paul Ryan
I wonder how much longer the establishment can hold the line. The Alt-Right Insurgency will someday be recorded by historians as a quintessential example of "politics as warfare". Probably, assuming a Trump loss at least, "politics as warfare" will metastasize into actual warfare. That's neither here nor there, thankfully.
Let's leave aside the glaring inaccuracies in Milo's article. I'm not about to hop on Brietbart and pull an "ACKTCHUALLY, the alt-right is...", because I don't fucking care. Yes, by Alt-Right standards, Milo is an obnoxious and flamboyant little poofter, and also a bit of an entryist. Personally, I don't care that Milo is (or at least claims to be) gay, because my only real gripe with homosexuality is that the Left uses homosexuals as a cudgel against the Wrong Type of White People™. Whatever qualms I have against the rest of the LGBTBBQ community, I generally get along well with homosexual men. I know that there are people on the Alt-Right who genuinely despise Milo, both for being an unabashed degenerate and an entryist attention whore, and I would encourage you to remember something before we begin our next round of purity spiraling:
What Milo is doing is something we absolutely, positively need done, and now. We're close to a mainstream breakout, but before we reach that point we have to effectively deal with our nearest enemies: The GOP establishment.
Aspirational, urbanite, goodthinkful people with opinions that matter all agree: Donald Trump is having the worst. week. EVERRR.
Well, it certainly seems that way. I have to admit, I've been at a bit of a loss lately with regards to Mr. Trump. What in God's name is he doing? There are times where I feel Trump is more haphazardly stumbling from gaffe to victory. Then again, there are times where I am absolutely certain that Trump is playing 8 dimensional chess against a group of rubes who can't even figure out checkers. Let's peel back some layers (and disseminate some useful information) before I move on to how this relates to the burgeoning Alt-Right.
Let's set the stage: Coming off the heels of the Republican National Convention where Ted Cruz committed political hara-kiri, Donald Trump delivered an acceptance speech that terrified establishmentarian blowhards, but was so well received that 56% of viewers signaled they were more likely to vote Trump post-speech (with a 75% approval rating). CNN was so butthurt about the results of the poll that they conducted that they attempted to hide the results from viewers. A week later, at the DNC, a Wikileaks e-mail dump rained on Hillary Clinton's coronation, dethroning DNC Chair... person (((Debbie Waasssserman Schultz))), enraging Bernie Sanders delegates enough to stage a walk out (watch the video. seriously), and allegedly prompting the DNC to fill the void with paid actors (or perhaps interns). Consequent to this series of wild events, Donald Trump shot up above Clinton in the RCP polling average.
From the perspective of the aspirational, urbanite, goodthinkful establishmentarians, it was a really, really bad news cycle. What to do?