BANNED USER: Egregiously obnoxious and antagonistic despite multiple warnings, no mitigating factors
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
Just Another Alt-MSNBC Guy. Find me at Substack: https://alexanderturok.substack.com/
User ID: 3346
Banned by: @self_made_human
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
Child support payments are part of modernity, not social conservatism
Those two are not antonyms. Contemporary American Social conservatism perceives itself as being "timeless" "common sense morality," but it's very modern. Imagine trying to convince your 1800s great great grandmother that a fertilized egg that's barely visible to the naked eye is a "baby" or "person." It's something social conservatives believe they've logicked themselves into, much like leftists believe they've logicked themselves into "trans women are women!" I'm skeptical either "really" believes it, deep down.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
I feel like this discussion is the missing ingredient to lots of the topics du jour. Let's take the leftward drift of young women- well social conservatism today seems to have, uh, not discussed what other people owe to them, only what they owe to other people.
Yep. There was a commenter here who said women lacked "accountability" because they want to be able to f*** without risking being pregnant for nine months. I'm going to hazard a guess that that message won't be a particularly popular one among young women, as like with most voters they prefer politicians who will make their lives easier rather than harder.
That said, one should be wary of parts of the gender-divide narrative. Trump's performance among white men was actually worse in 2024 than in 2016, while his performance among white women improved. CNN exit polls confirm the same phenomenon.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
Why is a Mexican meatpacker hired over the American one?
Why are you beating your wife?
My whole contention here is that illegals are doing that work because both illegals and Americans do not want to do it but only the latter have the skills to do better jobs.
An American worker cannot compete with a Mexican agricultural worker for the same reason he can't compete with a Chinese industrial factory worker
Odd, then, that American workers make far more money than Chinese industrial factory workers or Mexican agricultural workers on either side of the border.
It's the woke left vs the woke right. The woke left demands affirmative action for blacks so they can work in business, law, medicine, and government. Envy is felt toward whites for their higher-paying and better jobs. "The test is culturally biased!" The woke right demands set-aside jobs for Americans so they can pick fruit in the summer sun, being envious of illegal aliens for some reason.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
Obviously the market is distorted by access to illegal labor, as much as a market would be distorted if people were allowed to own slaves.
This reminds me of the "libertarian" on Twitter who thought "the government opening the border" was "statism."
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
Sewing bras is more conducive to wellbeing than stacking them on a shelf.
Then buy yourself a sewing machine. We shouldn't make national policy choices based on psychological theories like that.
In what world would “picking fruit” be pathetic? I think you are having trouble dissociating the image you have of these things now, with what they would look like if employers didn’t have a semi-slave class. There’s a farm near me where people — college-educated, white, smart — sign up to plant and reap for free. Because in return they get free room and board, and most importantly a social environment filled with other young white people. They work quite hard, then they drink in the evenings and dance and fuck and make music and so on. This is exactly what agricultural work was for nearly all of history.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
So your answer to the question of how White Americans can compete with semi-slave illegal workers is
Why in God's name would you want to?
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
The truth is "American don't want to do those jobs for those wages" and that is what this is (and has always been) about, wages.The Plantation owners don't want to pay the help, and once again the Democrats (who have always been the Party of the Plantation Owners) are once again threating civil war if they are not allowed to continue importing and exploiting thier non-citizen underclass.
Whenever committed ideological conservatives* hear about a minimum wage worker complaining about his low wage, they talk about productivity and demand curves and all that jazz. But mention that the worker is an illegal immigrant and all that logic goes out the window and he starts sounding like Bernie Sanders saying that the employer has infinite resources (to pay an American, not the illegal) and that only malevolence and greed stops the lowest-paid workers from getting 65$ an hour.
And even if the government could arbitrarily order wages to increase, why not order wages to increase for the better and cushier jobs Americans are more likely to do? Seems to me like it's a weird fantasy where Americans are supposed to work Bangladesh-level jobs (crop picking, textile sewing, etc) but get American wages for it because I guess the Bengali government is too stupid to just order wages to increase.
Also, most farmers vote Republican and the CSA constitution forbade the international slave trade.
*Not to be confused with normie GOP voters
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
Why do you think it makes sense to say that the views of some random politician are emblematic of the "online racialist Right"?
She's a member of the United States Cabinet!
Lotta people have gotten used to being out of power. Now that Trump is President they're forced to either defend the administration they supported and voted for or criticize their own side, and they don't want to do either.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
AlexanderTurok, You claim that you are "anti third-worldism", but if that is true, why have you consistently aligning yourself with those who are trying to make the US more like a third-world country against those who want to make it great?
It wasn't MAGA that turned San Francisco into a fecese-strewn open-air drug market. It wasn't MAGA that worked behind the scenes to put a dementia patient in the Whitehouse. And it is not MAGA that has been marching in solidarity with HAMAS, shooting at federal officers, or trying to put a Communist in Gracie Mansion.
Good thing I haven't aligned with any of that.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
So you want a serf/slave class of the "inferior" brown people because such jobs are below the dignity of the "superior" white people (never mind that white people all over the world used to, and still do, such jobs). We needn't be afraid that the browns will do anything, because we should (as the superiors) ensure they have no rights apart from being cheap disposable labour until robots can do the job and hence they will be debarred from polluting our culture due to not being able to influence it, and we shouldn't encourage white people to pick up the slack by doing these low-class jobs because such jobs are only fit for low-class people and we don't want low-class white trash, that reflects poorly on our superiority.
I don't agree with "no rights apart from being cheap disposable labour." All their negative rights should be respected, though not "rights" to collect welfare or anything like that. The issue is not specifically racial. I don't think anyone should aspire to those kinds of occupations, nor romanticize or fetishize them.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
if you are as racist as you claim, then surely you would prefer to live in a place where all jobs were done by white people, if only because it would mean that you would only have to interact with white people. But instead your position is that for abstract reasons, it offends you to allow white people to do manual labor, so its better to import brown people to do it, even though it means that you and your friends and family have to interact with brown people all the time?
Without anti-discrimination law people would be able to choose whether or how much they want to interact with brown people.
And you now risk brown people becoming a meaningful voting block in your society that can never be expunged.
A reasonable concern. But it's worth looking at the impact on America so far. In Florida and Texas, the majority of Hispanics voted for Trump. Hispanics nationally still voted slightly more often for Democrats, but if you account for the fact that Hispanics are more likely to support centrist than far-left Dems, (just look at the melanin content of a pride rally or a DSA meeting) it doesn't seem like they're moving America to the left at all.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
There are reasons to “uplift the in-group” and you need to articulate why this is an innoble goal in and of itself
I never said it was. I think uplifting the in-group by getting them jobs sewing bras, picking fruit, hauling equipment, and digging ditches in the rain is pathetic.
They are raised with values that are de-socialized by our ridiculous mandatory education culture, and this isn’t the kind of thing you can arbitrarily re-socialize at will
The fundamental difference between me and you is that I like white people more, which extends to liking first-world societies that white people built. I'm not concerned that these Guatemalans coming across the border are going to out-compete whites because they have a "better" culture.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
Recently @RandomRanger accused me of strawmanning the Right:
Turok was being banned for being overtly aggressive and obnoxiously creating imaginary narratives like "The "Woke Rightist" looks at his race, sees a mostly imaginary mass of helpless unemployed drug addicts and demands tariffs so that they can rise to the lofty heights of sewing bras, picking fruit, hauling equipment, and digging ditches in the rain."
That's not what the 'woke right' thinks and he surely knows it. He need only check the MAGA rhetoric from Trump about good factory jobs, or the rhetoric from the right about the need to mechanize dull fruitpicking jobs and raise productivity. Why, they say, should millions of people be brought into the country if AI is going to destroy everyone's jobs? Or the need to have American wealth kept in America rather than sent off in remittances. Or them hating H1Bs as cost-cutting that interferes with developing talent. Or them not seeing the country as purely an economic zone but having responsibility to native citizens. It's an insanely uncharitable and aggressive butchering of other people's ideology.
Did I strawman the Right? Let's ask Lori Chavez-DeRemer, the United States secretary of labor:
FOX: I think American citizens are willing to do the jobs that illegal immigrants are willing to do.
LORI CHAVEZ-DeREMER: Americans are willing to do the job. What we have to give them is the opportunity to have those jobs.
DeRemer refers to "Americans," the online racialist Right is talks about whites, but in both cases the vision is the same, uplifting the ingroup means getting them the opportunity to do the jobs currently done by the guy standing in the Home Depot parking lot. Is there any wonder high-income whites are moving away from the Republican Party? Working-class whites, too, don't want their sons working casual labor, which is why in the video DeRemer goes on to talk about how Americans will be given opportunity through being "skilled, upskilled, re-skilled" and how the Trump administration is increasing apprenticeships. Of course, few illegals do those high-skilled jobs, so upskilling Americans won't replace many illegals, but it's not like the Fox News host is going to point out the apparent contradiction.
Given that I've given an example from a cabinet-level Trump administration official, (not "nutpicked" from some rando on Twitter) I expect that @RandomRanger will withdraw his claim that I "obnoxiously created imaginary narratives" in the interests of truth and courtesy.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
Also, why post a picture of one of the guy's Mexican wife? That guy just tried to murder cops, he could be in a polycule with bearded North Koreans and it would not be relevant. Put the picture of his wife in once she is wanted or charged with anything.
This group being whiter than a white nationalist meeting doesn't fit with the narrative.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
he mixes viewpoints that may be aligned against the woke but are otherwise quite distinct
Yeah I'm off the anti-woke reservation.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
Also you conveniently forgot to mention that Guatemalans might come to US by foot only because OTHER US Whites, not rust belt whites, are helping them to do so.
How so?
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
I'm not anti-HBD. I'm anti third-worldism.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
positive ideas
Strength. Health. Beauty. Intelligence. Fertility. Truth. Reason. Vitality.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
You're quoting me out of context to make it seem like I'm saying the opposite of what I'm actually saying:
This worldview would seem to conflict with HBD theories. Indeed, one would have to conclude that whites are an inferior race. Guatemalans in their "third-world s***hole" don't just sit around despairing, they cross multiple borders and look for work in a country where they can't even speak the language, while white men who got laid off in their rust-belt factory towns twiddle their thumbs and inject fentanyl, unable to compete with said Guatemalans. They see whites like people have long seen the American Indians, a "noble" race who ought to "own" the country but who are ill-equipped to deal with the evils of modernity that more advanced peoples have introduced like liquor or fentanyl.[1] But where this worldview makes some sense in the case of the Indians, it is utterly nonsensical to apply it to whites
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
What was wrong with it?
Instead you post: Acktually, if HBDers really believed what they say, they "would have to conclude that whites are an inferior race." Therefore all HBD enjoyers must be nazi white supremacists.
What I actually said was:
whites, who all the statistics show have higher incomes, higher IQs, higher educational attainment, and lower unemployment
Maybe the problem here is you reading things that aren't there, not my writing.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
On the sidebar it says "This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases." In this thread, it is claimed "the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here."
After my ban for this comment, it's hard to take that seriously. It did not include personal attacks, name-calling, strawmanning, or attempting to enforce ideological conformity. It "spoke plainly" and provided evidence. Yet the mods banned me for it, saying I was being an "immense pain in the ass."
I think the mods, and most people here, believe that they want this to be an open discussion forum with people of many different viewpoints, but when they're actually confronted with it, they feel it's an "immense pain in the ass." They called me an "obnoxious trolling shitstirrer." Yes, I am a shitstirrer in the sense that I say things that go against the dominant ideological viewpoint here, and I know in advance that hostility is likely to result. But isn't that what you want here, rather than another online echo chamber? I'm sure many of you have experience being "shitstirrers" in online spaces where you're in the ideological minority, now the shoe's on the other foot.
The mods accused me of "snarling" at my enemies, which gets to the meat of the issue: do you want an ideologically diverse forum or not? I freely admit I have a contempt for forms of conservatism and white nationalism I see as third-worldist. (Anti-vax, raw milk, conspiratorial, superstitious, fetishizing low-skilled manual labor, etc.) That's why I disagree with you guys and don't identify as part of your political tribe. If you think I'm a "leftist," try talking to a real one, the kind who uses terms like "patriarchy" or "heteronormativity" non-ironically. They do NOT like you. They see you as a malignant, cancerous influence on America. If you don't want to have a discussion forum with people who dislike you, change your rules to state that they aren't welcome. If, on the other hand, you want people from other tribes to be in this "jury," then you've got to accept them as they are rather than the imagined versions who disagree with you but like and respect you and never come around to actually posting here.
It seems to me that what some people here want is a forum with "left-wing" equivalents of David French. For the unfamiliar, David French is an allegedly "conservative" columnist for the NYT whose articles are just one after another telling liberals they're right and that conservatives are gross and mean and only ever making "we need 50 Stalins" criticisms of the Left. Thing is, French doesn't play this role for free. And you should be glad you don't have David French's, as I suspect that they have had a detrimental impact on the Left's electoral fortunes. If your only exposure to "conservatives" is people like David French, you're going to get a warped view of American politics that will lead to bad election strategy.
None of this is to say you should get rid of your rules against shaming, strawmanning, name-calling, etc. Maybe a new rule should be "be as polite as possible without being insincere." I admit that this is a tough balance to strike, I just think that right now the Motte is too far toward forced politeness leading to ideological conformity.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
With that said, I don't really support Aarvoll's project. I don't want to live in an intentional ethnic enclave in Arkansas, I want to live in Manhattan. There's no logical avenue to political and cultural power with this project. At best, it goes nowhere, at worst it gains the smallest amount of traction and gets absolutely crushed, ruining the lives of good people and blackpilling many more.
It may not get crushed, if you buy a house from a real estate developer who discriminates, you're not liable. If the ADL comes up with some legal wizardry that you're liable for "conspiracy to discriminate" or whatever, the Supreme Court is different from what it was in the 1970s and may follow the letter rather than the "spirit" of the law. And if you lose and they try to evict you, let the world see when thugs come in and try to throw you in jail for the crime of wanting to live next to other white people. Polygamy was illegal in Arizona and Utah and yet when they raided the community in the Short Creek raid of 1953, it was a PR disaster for the government. Again, it isn't the 1970s anymore.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3mo ago
You do have a point, I wrote a character in one of my stories who makes these arguments:
“Nobody has addressed my point that there’s no path to political power with this stuff. Republicans, moderates, and Democrats do not want to elect anti-Trump Nietzschean centrists! I have some real, non-condescending advice for you guys: get involved in your local Republican parties. Run for state legislature, run for city council. Are you elite human capital? Act like it. Nietzschean centrists glorify Napoleon and Ceasar, Men of Action. What would Napoleon be doing were he alive today? He’d be running for office, telling the proles what they want to hear. You have no respect for the creekshitters? Rule over them, natural aristocrat you! A lot of these guys don’t want to deal in the democratic system; don’t want to take up the gun and fight it either. They just want to have their podcasts and laugh at the proles. I’m like, ‘that’s fine, but can you be a little less self-congratulatory about it?’”
https://alexanderturok.substack.com/p/march-2025-whynat-meeting
Would be difficult. Fortunately nobody not made of straw would need to. All pro-choicers say is that if she wants an abortion she can get one.
More options
Context Copy link