Of course, it wasn't just one person, but he was emblematic of everything. Suddenly there was a vocal force with an audience behind the Gamergate movement. See, Milo understood (and was a product of) this culture through and through. A master at throwing self-hatred back at the world, he was incendiary and willing to throw himself into this with reckless abandon. And armed with the conservative political aim, even emboldened by that support, he realized he could stoke anti-PC sentiment as the lynchpin into larger frenzy of extreme right thinking. You can see the blueprint in everything that he wrote. They preyed on young confused gamer kids who felt social anxiety about women. There was the popularization of the term "Social Justice Warrior" to undermine the empathetic aims of being PC and turning into some kind of pathological careerism. There was no attempt to parse anything over and sort out good from bad. There was only the intent to demonize. Individual or made-up events became entire bits of evidence of some grand conspiracy. In a case of turning Godwin's law into the boy who cried wolf, they used literal Nazi disinformation tactics to discredit opponents, all while eschewing the typical Nazi-language and instead creating a whole code-language and symbols (like Pepe) so they could use dog whistles in plain sight. They co-opted the language of the enemy to use against them. Suddenly, the troll army that never believed in sexism and racism was calling you sexist and racist. While there were impressionable people who actually got swept up into believing that, it was most evident in false accounts pretending to be LGBT popping up to discredit the games industry and say "I'm not your shield" (. stop making liberal games in my name). When Tim Schafer made a joke about the tactic, gamergaters went right after him declaring him as being racist and homophobic. The goal was always to invert up and down. But most of all, they became masters of the strawman argument and cherry-picking. Like the source of gamergate itself, they would take a weak kernel of a seeming truth, or often something made up, then bash it into oblivion. They would make ornate long essays that connected various "dots" as "proof." They targeted anyone they could, especially the most vocal members of the opposition, and use information on their life to construe elaborate falsehoods from nuggets of seeming truth. All of this is not me trying to tell you that I'm dismissing something sight unseen. This was all constructed with the same conspiratorial insanity of how you get pizzagate. Trying to fight it, trying to reason with it, was like trying to fight smoke. It was only designed to confuse you. And it was all part of getting you to see the big joke.
All of Trump’s 16 Republican competitors would have ensured more of the same—as will the election of Hillary Clinton. That would be bad enough. But at least Republicans are merely reactive when it comes to wholesale cultural and political change. Their “opposition” may be in all cases ineffectual and often indistinguishable from support. But they don’t dream up inanities like 32 “genders,” elective bathrooms, single-payer, Iran sycophancy, “Islamophobia,” and Black Lives Matter. They merely help ratify them.
Chapters 4 and 5, "Academic scribblers and a defunct economist" and "Boys on the edge of the gang"  discuss the Left's reaction to Serbian atrocities against Bosnian Muslims in the 1990s. He details how scholars like Noam Chomsky , along with the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP), denied the existence of concentration camps and the Srebrenica massacre .  He also discusses the Living Marxism trial ,  in which survivors of Trnopolje concentration camp testified against Living Marxism magazine, which had published an article claiming photographs of the camp were fabricated. The far left's defence of Milosevic, Cohen writes, was not a product of Islamophobia but of instinctive anti-Americanism; once the US bombed Serb forces in 1995, the far left set out to claim the intervention had been unjustified: "The ignoble and inevitable terminus of the reasoning of Chomsky and his comrades was denial. It had to be. The Yugoslav equivalents of the gas chambers of Auschwitz were Srebrenica and the pictures of wild-eyed starving men at Trnopolje. Both had to be denied if the project of blackening the belated intervention in the Balkans was to stand a chance of succeeding."  Chapter 9, "Kill us, we deserve it", criticises how many leftists reacted to 9/11,  arguing the atrocity was motivated by anger at American foreign policy, rather than by the violent ideology of al Qaeda . Cohen argues that, by dismissing the attacks as a response to American misdeeds, leftists failed to acknowledge the threat of al Qaeda's own hateful narrative.