While Yiannopoulos is openly gay, he has stated that gay rights are detrimental to humanity, and that gay men should “get back in the closet.” He has described being gay as “aberrant” and “a lifestyle choice guaranteed to bring [gay people] pain and unhappiness.”
We should be careful to distinguish between personal and political.
For example, Milo is a homosexual personally, but he is not a homosexualist ideologically.
A person may be personally rich and possess lots of private property but be a committed socialist.
A person may be working at a state university and using government roads personally and yet be a political libertarian.
A person may be, like Stephan Kinsella, personally an intellectual property lawyer and yet pioneer theoretical arguments against IP.
A Muslim is simply an adherent of Islam; an Islamist is a supporter of “a popular reform movement advocating the reordering of government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam.” (m-w.com) One can be a Muslim without being an Islamist.
So, on the sacking of Milo, we can’t say that the left “eats its own” until we decide whether we characterize the left as a set of personal lifestyles or as a political ideology.
To conflate personal and political is essentially to embrace Marxian polylogism which claims that “personal” necessarily determines a similar-to-it “political.”
Thus, according to polylogism, a capitalist qua factory owner must be capitalist qua supporter of free markets.
And a “proletarian” in his individual conduct of daily life must necessarily support the establishment of socialism.
And, as possibly the most vicious example of polylogism, an economist, simply by virtue of the middle-class lifestyle of most economists, is of necessity a “sycophant of the bourgeoisie.”
The reality is far more complicated.