[@Dynamo Frokane] While I understand why they would want to distance themselves from a label that has become inconvenient and why they would want to define themselves as separate from the alt-right the political maneuvers of cultural actors isn't the deciding factor on who is defined as what. 

This is the same as the whole 'Stalin wasn't really a communist' and 'Obama wasn't a true liberal' and 'Jeb is a RINO' deal. It's no true scotsmen. The alt right is a cultural phenomenon and Milo and Ben are part of and contributors to that phenomenon. White nationalism is a different phenomenon; animated by social forces distinct (but related to) those which animated the alt-right and with a history equally distinct from that of the alt right.

Imagine if you lived in the 1960's and smoked a lot of weed, went to a lot of protests against Vietnam, wore flowers in your hair and were into free love. You would be a hippie. Now if you were a political figure at that time you might claim that you were not a hippie and perhaps you would base that claim on your disagreement with the finer policy points of leading leftist figures or holding views consistent with older forms of liberalism. But regardless of your claims you would still be a hippie. No one is afforded the privilege to define themselves (or others) as is convenient for their agendas.