Charlie Kirk Basically Stole MILO’s Entire Bit

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
December 11, 2019

As we saw in his recent interview with Nick Fuentes, MILO hates Charlie Kirk.

This is confusing at first, because we seem to see that Charlie Kirk shares virtually all of Milo’s views.

But that is why he hates him. Charlie stole his bit.

The entire presentation of Charlie Kirk is very strange, if looked at in a vacuum.

His positions are:

• Israel First
• Mass legal immigration
• Promoting homosexuality
• Talking about socialism being evil
• Anti-racism
• Obsession with falsely claiming that large numbers of brown people can be convinced to vote Republican
• Low taxes
• Faux-edgy jokes about triggered snowflakes

Basically, what happened was a team of marketing experts looked at the success of Donald Trump in 2016 and tried to shape a platform that superficially appears to follow the same “vibe” of that movement, and yet includes all of the old programs of the GOP – the basic tenants of which are:

• Israel First
• Mass legal immigration
• Low taxes for corporations

Everything else is negotiable.

So Kirk presents a lot of fluff.

And most of that fluff was borrowed directly from MILO and others like him.

Milo was the first major homosexual figure in the American conservative movement. And at the time, this was considered novel, primarily because Milo was likable and charismatic. Milo also talked about homosexuality in a weird way that a big corporate marketing firm could never streamline: he did openly promote it, but he also said that homosexuals are too powerful and that heterosexual white men are oppressed. This made the homosexuality a lot easier to swallow, since he was using self-deprecating humor in relation to his own anal behaviors.

This is to say, Milo’s popularity as a homosexual conservative pundit was a fluke, not something you can base a corporate marketing strategy on.

But that is what the marketing teams behind Turning Point USA tried to do, and that is how they ended up with Rob Smith on stage with Charlie Kirk telling Christians they are secretly gay and need to go find someone to do sodomy with.

Secondarily, they thought they could take Milo’s Zionism – which took the form of aggressive anti-Islam sentiment – and turn that into a plank.

That could probably work, actually, if you were willing to go to the levels of insulting Islam that Milo went to. But they aren’t willing to do that. Instead, they have reverted to basic “greatest ally” talking points, while pretending to be “hard on terrorism.” Their “hardness on terrorism,” as we see with Turning Point fellow Dan Crenshaw, mainly takes the form of promoting wars for Israel.

And everyone just hates that.

Milo was calling for Moslems to be banned from America, in line with Trump’s call for the same, and basically just saying all Moslems were evil. And if you lead with that, you are speaking to a fundamental disgust of Moslems that all white people have, and you can slip pro-Israel stuff in there.

Otherwise, supporting Israel while also being anti-Christian and pro-homosexual creates a completely unworkable strategy.

And the “triggered snowflake” stuff just kind of got boring and old. And for the most part, the left seems to have gained some form of self-awareness, and has stopped engaging in that.

The Charlie Kirk college tour was based on Milo’s college tour, and they thought they were going to get a bunch of Trigglypuff-type leftists to come out and throw fits, but that simply didn’t manifest.

It was a phenomenon isolated in 2016. Like so much other phenomena in American culture.

So what you were left with was simply Charlie Kirk on stage calling people “Nazis” for asking why we’re giving so much money to Israel and why he wants to staple green cards to diplomas.

The entire bottom fell out of a multi-million dollar marketing campaign, because they thought they could take an organic political movement and turn it into a consumer product.

What Now?

The big question now is how much further this TPUSA agenda will go, and how they will try to transform it.

Charlie Kirk has already walked back a lot of his really crazy stuff, and is now saying that he in fact doesn’t support stapling green cards to diplomas, and believes maybe there should be less immigration.

But if he says “no immigration,” “Israel before America,” or “scale back corporate control of America,” then the money disappears and there is no more TPUSA.

The frustrating part is that the stakes are very low. Due to the insane behavior of the Democrats, it is virtually impossible for Trump to lose in 2020, meaning that there is not an immediate need to present a platform that people actually want.