I really enjoyed your article with one exception.

Thanks for reading and commenting, Leo.

Your point would be fitting, if I were saying the things you claim I am. But large swathes of your comment are just fully untrue.

This statement by you (for example) has no relation at all to the article:

“You say that because he doesn’t worship at the altar of feminism and BLM.”

I never mentioned feminism or Black Lives Matter. In fact, I do not identify with both the feminist and BLM movements—for reasons I explained in this article from October 2016 (about “ideas vs isms”).

So, in this case, I think you’re projecting your inaccurate impression of who you think I am (based on some of my views and, possibly, the fact that I’m black).

Also, I never said Milo preaches hate. I only acknowledged that people who perceive him to be a preacher of hate keep trying to get him banned from things and places.

That being said, I’m no supporter of Milo. I listen to him sometimes—as I try to consume all sides of an argument or debate. But I find he brings little value beyond being a counterpoint to a popular idea or opinion. Half the time, I’m not sure *he* believes what he’s saying.

He’s a polemicist and that’s fine… but I prefer to focus on constructive discourse (what can we build, not what can we break down).

As for thinking my point of view is superior… I assure you I don’t and I hope this article doesn’t give that impression. This is just my assessment of an issue which it seems I cannot escape (everyone’s talking about it everywhere), and has become a source of frustration.

As I hope the last sentence of this article shows, I do not believe people must adopt my mentality. My issue is with the incongruence of anti-liberal behaviour among self-proclaimed liberals.

But I don’t believe being a liberal is the only way to be a good person—it’s just the one that works for me.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.