Milo Yiannopoulos is coming to Australia in December and people are not happy about it. To be honest, it’s surprising Yiannopoulos was even allowed into the country, considering Australia’s staunch disagreement of provocateurs and those who have been known to promote “violence against women”. Geert Wilders, a far-Right Dutch politician, received much controversy and had his visa banned when he attempted to visit the country. He was eventually granted access to visit, but not after a maelstrom of controversy, and only had his visa unblocked because then-Immigration Leader Chris Bowen said:
I have decided not to intervene to deny him a visa because I believe that our democracy is strong enough, our multiculturalism robust enough and our commitment to freedom of speech entrenched enough that our society can withstand the visit of a fringe commentator from the other side of the world
Other controversial celebrities have also been banned from visiting, such as alleged domestic abusers Chris Brown and Floyd Mayweather, prominent drug and firearm user Snoop Dogg, and pathetic pick-up artist Julien Blanc. Many feminist and other organizations have been successful in having people like Tyler the Creator banned from entering, so it’s more than surprising Milo Yiannopoulos, as of the end of the October 2017, is still set to enter the country.
Dubbed by many on the internet as everything from a “right-wing troll” and “internet supervillain” to others outwardly accusing him of displaying pro neo-Nazi sentiment, Milo Yiannopoulos is no doubt a controversial figure. Before his suspension on Twitter last year, Yiannopoulos was known for saying outrageous things for the simple purpose of offending others. His Facebook page is slightly more toned down, but basically relies on the same principle. While some of what he says may have an element of truth—while feminism may not be cancer, it is incredibly dangerous in the wrong hands; there are many problems with modern Liberalism, but it isn’t a “mental disorder” like Yiannopoulos screams from the rooftops—most of it is overgeneralizing and offending for the sake of offending. News Corp’s Andrew Bolt is very similar: he echoes similar conservative points and makes absurd generalizations in order to make politics palatable to a mainstream audience.
As ridiculous and over-the-top Milo Yiannopoulos can be, we should look at Chris Bowen’s comments about Geert Wilders when analyzing his behavior. To the nine hundred people who petitioned for Yiannopoulos to be banned from entering Australia, are your beliefs so fallible they can easily be destroyed by an overly-flamboyant internet provocateur? Are your beliefs really that sound?
Australian feminist provocateur Clementine Ford was in Yiannopoulos’s sights when he was interviewed about what he would do in Australia. Here’s what he said about Ford, after she rejected his invitation for a “debate”:
She strikes me as particularly unintelligent and misguided. I feel for her, the poor lamb. Hopefully she’ll except my invitation to debate
While it would be interesting to see Ford and Yiannopoulos have a “debate”, it is unlikely either Ford or Yiannopoulos would be able to engage in anything resembling a debate. What Yiannopoulos means is he wishes to embarrass Ford in front of an audience. It wouldn’t result in either of these looney-toons learning anything new.
It is completely understandable why she wouldn’t want to be anywhere near Yiannopoulos. However, Ford’s response to Yiannopoulos’s invitation is just as absurd.
What a load of utter bollocks—claiming she doesn’t want to debate Yiannopoulos because he’s complicit in the spread of Nazism and white supremacy. Then there’s this gem:
Let it be very clear that any media outlet that lends any space or legitimacy to Milo Yiannopoulos are complicit in the spread of Nazism. You are complicit in the normalisation of misogyny and racism. You are complicit in the degradation of actual discussion and ideas in favour of yelling, mockery and zero factual information whatsoever.
Supporting Milo Yiannopoulos does not mean you are complicit in the spread of Nazism. It means you are a person with conservative leanings who will believe any old provocateur on the internet. It happens. I mean, people believe Clementine Ford, don’t they?
It would have been nice if Ford could have just admitted she didn’t want to speak to Yiannopoulos because he’s an attention-seeking twat and just wants to humiliate her in public, but a simple explanation is too much for Clementine Ford. She has to invoke the typical intersectional feminist buzzwords in order to pretend her Twitter rant has credence. It’s absurd every second conservative figure is labeled a neo-Nazi, white supremacist or sympathizer, when this is just a bullshit derailing tactic so people like Ford can claim the high ground. How much of an argument do you really have if your way to criticize Yiannopoulos is invoke Godwin’s Law and the association fallacy? Regardless of what is reported in the Buzzfeed report, a gay man of Jewish origin would be completely moronic to identify with neo-Nazis in any way.
Let Milo Yiannopoulos into Australia. As Chris Bowen once said, our democracy and freedom of speech should be strong enough that everything won’t be shattered to a cinder block if he enters the country. It is not lending legitimacy to white supremacy or Nazism, because Yiannopoulos is just some attention-seeking dude on the internet and is neither of those things.
The more people who give attention and prominence to those like Milo Yiannopoulos, the more credence they are lending to his absurd ideas. By using all these bullshit labels, and attempting to censor those like Yiannopoulos, they are giving him and those like him more of a platform.
Instead of making such emotion-laden diatribes, ignore him. Provocateurs thrive on attention. That means both of you.