In part one of this article I wrote the following: Is the leftist claim that Yiannopoulos represents Nazism credible? Yes! (as to him but not yet as to Trump). Because they know what conservatives do not: that Nazism was always about Nationalist “butch” homosexuals wresting power from Communist/Socialist “femme” homosexuals, first in the streets and then in the seats of government and the treasury. (Anti-Semitism was only incidental to the Nazi agenda for the first dozen or so years.) In that sense “Milo” represents the very essence of Nazism as will the Trump Administration if it aligns with the homosexuals instead of the Christians and Torah-faithful Jews. (By definition it’s an either-or choice for Mr. Trump.)
That summary skips over a couple of steps in my analysis and I apologize for leaving people confused.
No, I’m not saying the Yiannopoulos is himself a Nazi, or even a “butch” homosexual. What I see in Milo is just another too-smart-for-his-own-good, overly indulged, Torah-defying Jewish boy making his fortune by acting outrageous and defying social norms (in this case the politically correct norms). Indeed, I strongly suspect that he is a closet leftist or cynical opportunist simply “punking” the conservatives like Sasha Baron Cohen punked and humiliated those poor Eastern European peasants who fell for his “comedic” fraud. (This short video clip shows how thin Milo’s veil of false sincerity really is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgoyQevEhhQ).
As such, Yiannopoulos himself (while perhaps sincere at first) is just cashing in on the Kardashian-effect of our dysfunctional celebrity freak-show society and will may well pull a David Brock and switch sides whenever it stops paying off financially, or perhaps like Bruce Kaitlyn Jenner he’ll just swing for the higher trapeze to stay in the spotlight a little longer.
However, for all his smarmy pseudo-conservatism, Yianopouloos is a symbol of the “gay right” whose celebrity is not of his own making. He is a tool of hidden forces whose purpose is to normalize homosexuality in the right wing by people like billionaire Paul Singer, There’s the danger, because the real “gay Nazis” are salted through this society as they have been in every society – the same general ratio of masculine oriented male homosexuals to femmes here as in pre-Nazi Germany. Homosexuality is a bi-polar gender identity disorder with some manifesting a dysfunctional form of masculinity, others manifesting effeminacy – with a small percentage on each side going to polar extremes, like transsexuality. Most Femmes lean Communist/Socialist. Most Butches lean Fascist. My charts on this phenomenon can be seen here: http://www.scottlively.net/2016/02/20/understanding-sexual-disorientation/
Just as effeminate male homosexuality reflects a certain recognizable demonic spirit (a flamboyant hypersexalization of all aspects of life), so the masculine version has a common psycho-spiritual identifyer: a pathological conviction of it’s innate superiority and right to control the world by brute force. This is thoroughly documented in The Pink Swastika and has been more-or-less acknowledged by the “gay” movement itself: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-strange-strange-story_b_136697.html
In that sense, then, Yiannopoulos is the useful idiot popularizing the “gay right” to the millennial generation (and schoolchildren) that will empower the “butch” homosexuals to come out of the closet. That’s what I mean by the rise of Nazism. You might not be able to see it yet, and might even doubt my analysis, but remember that I said it because it’s coming and you’ll be able to recognize it when it does.
Now, as to how this “Milo phenomenon” could cause President Trump to “Break Bad” against Christians and Torah-faithful Jews, we need to look at how he chooses sides on social issues that aren’t his personal priorities.
It would seem that Mr. Trump’s positions on business and immigration issues reflect his actual worldview, but on other matters he seems to choose positions and personnel through a process similar to the “trial by combat” of the Middle Ages. He invites the best candidates to compete with each other for his approval and then picks the last person standing; sort of like what I imagine he did on “The Apprentice,” though I have never watched it (or any other “reality” show).
I think that explains why he has chosen some strong pro-family leaders for his inner-circle, chief among them being Mike Pence, but has at the same time leaned in favor of the “gay” movement rather than the pro-family one regarding public policy. This is because the “gays” ostensibly won the culture war on “gay marriage.” I say ostensibly because if you ignore the ever-dishonest LGBT narrative parroted by the mainstream press and look objectively at the facts, the pro-family movement actually won that war with 35 state DOMAs but was robbed of its victory by Justice Anthony Kennedy and a small handful of activist federal judges. But this is about Mr. Trump’s perceptions, and I think he believed the narrative so he went with the “gays” on LGBT issues.
He’s pro-life because Christians now have the muscle to defeat the pro-aborts. He’s pro-Russia because Putin is tougher than NATO. He’s pro-Israel because Netanyahu is tougher than the Moslems. I think he really sees the danger of Islam to the West and would back Israel anyhow, but I think he could switch from partner to policy dictator in Israel if a less Trump-friendly leader became the Jewish Prime Minister. I think that’s a concern across the board with Mr. Trump: even if you’re a player, he only loves you if you back him (e.g. the Ted Cruz relationship).
Carrying this analysis further, consider the implications for the Trump administration going forward. His inner circle is a balance of Christians and Populists which are faced off today over what some of us recognize is the ultimate spiritual issue of the end times: homosexuality, the sin that triggered Noah’s Flood and the incineration of Sodom and Gomorrah, and that 2 Peter 2 defines as the basis for the heresy of the last days.
I don’t know the dynamics of the Trump inner circle but for the sake of convenience lets say it’s Pence v Bannon representing the opposing camps. Mike Pence is a strong pro-family Christian but he caved in a pinch when, as Governor of Indiana, he faced the Borg of LGBT power regarding the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Bannon is probably the mastermind of the “Milo phenomenon.”
If my analysis is correct President Trump is going to go with one camp or the other based on who’s got the muscle to win the fight. That means we’re at fork in the road TODAY that will determine whether the Trump administration goes with the Bible or with the Milo-influenced crowd tomorrow. The results could not be more dichotomous nor more consequential. If ever there was a time when Christian leaders needed to take a firm persuasive stand, it is NOW. That means we need an immediate, unequivocal and robust rejection of the idea of the myth of the “gay conservative” by the church.