The Anti-PC Revolt and the Milo Problem
Cathy Young
16627

I’m going to reverse the author’s pattern. When I first heard from Mr. Y I was furious that conservatives were giving this poser credibility he clearly didn’t deserve — parroting with Hollywood flash the very real arguments good people had been making without the hair dye and affectation for decades, and burying drek that contradicted and corrupted those arguments within the parroting.

But I’ll extend some sympathy now.

Modern America considers free speech to be some kind of genetically derived right, or right determined by social contract, that protects free personal expression for its own sake.

Traditional American ideology believes free speech is a God given right, unalienable, and that its purpose in society is to protect our ability to speak and hear points of view without fear of government reprisal in the common pursuit of *the truth*.

Freedom of speech stop[ed being looked at as pursuit of the right and the true and became just another tool of branding and self-obsession.

Mr. Y appealed because he seemed to be standing up for the second definition — seemed to be fearlessly pursuing the true. He fell because he slipped into standing up for the first — standing up for his right to make money and get famous telling people that sin is good.

I have sympathy for him because I suspect he doesn’t even know where he went wrong. In the end, he’s just another casualty of America’s war on men and on the family, a young man given no direction about how to be a man, trying and failing to do the right thing in an environment of moral chaos. I give him credit for trying.

Like what you read? Give L. P. a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.