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
Notice how you didn't dispute my point that Trump, RFK, Hulk Hogan, and prayer breakfasts alienate EHC. You know it does. You're correct that Trump's a good (as in, good at winning elections) politician. If your priority is winning elections by appealing to the unwashed masses, congrats, it worked. Don't turn around and complain that EHC don't want to vote for your party when you did nothing to appeal to them.
You're right that Auron does not give an alternative plan to co-opt EHC, but do you have one?
No more Trump, RFK, Hulk Hogan, or prayer breakfasts.
Auron's just talking past him. He says "the institutions must be dismantled and replaced from the ground up with organizations that reject wokeness and the root ideology of universal material equality" and doesn't address the issue that you can't do that without human capital.
but the little nugget about "up to a third of programming is now done by AI" does seem to be a straw in the wind. Yes? No? Just means they're not hiring new junior staff?
Jevon's paradox applies to programmers.
Yes, Toruk is mixed I think, so any racial solidarity movement would exclude him
I'm a mischling, which "soft WN" is full of.(BAP, Yarvin, etc.)
Probably the reason he is obsessed with white identitarians is not that they are currently powerful, but that they are up-and-coming
Yep.
I expect non-Hajnali 'whites' to basically end up as an underclass, so it is what it is I guess.
That would be a surprise to the 40 million or so Irish Americans.
The Online Right is small and powerless
Not true. Google Marko Elez.
So, again, let's start with the heart of the issue: why does the concept of white solidarity make you uncomfortable?
It doesn't. Nothing in the post was directed against white solidarity, which I have no problem with.
Can't even begin to respond to how hateful this message is.
If you read more carefully, you'd realize I was mocking the message and saying it was wrong.
Yeah that was what reminded me of the subject.
Anyone remember that whole "HBD" thing? You don't hear much about it anymore. It makes sense. The new narrative on the Online Right is that there's a huge mass of white men without jobs who have no choice but to inject fentanyl because of "the border" and free trade sending the factories to China. The unemployment rate is only low because these people are so dispirited that they've given up looking for work. We need to drastically remake our economy to help these unfortunates, who are incapable of helping themselves. 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, who all the statistics show have higher incomes, higher IQs, higher educational attainment, and lower unemployment. Even opioid overdose deaths, initially a "white" issue, are now highest for blacks and American Indians, as with most social problems. (Whites do die at higher rates than Hispanics or Asians.) Labor force participation rates have indeed declined, mostly because there are more students and retirees. 89.2% of men aged 25-54 are in the labor force, a figure that is likely higher for whites, and the 11% who aren't include students, prisoners, stay-at-home dads, and those who can't work because of legit disabilities.
The Online Right has often been compared to the woke left. The woke black looks at his race, disproportionately poor, uneducated, and working low-skill jobs, and demands affirmative action so that more blacks can work in medicine, law, business, and politics. 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. Is that really what you want your political ideology to be?
Now, you may be asking, "what about the real unemployed drug addicts?" For one, this is a disproportionately non-white group. One study found that blacks are 3.5 times more likely to ever be homeless in their lifetimes than whites, while Hispanics are 1.7 times more likely. Still, while not as common as some of you think, they do exist. Tariffs aren't going to help them. Law enforcement, drug treatment, mental health care, and legalizing SROs might, though the real issue is that these people need to help themselves. If I believed, as many of you profess to, that my race was at risk of going extinct, I wouldn't be centering my politics around helping the least capable members of said race who refuse to help themselves. Don't you have bigger problems? It's not like you should feel any "political" loyalty to them, Trump's working-class base work, homeless people rarely vote.
- The "heritage American" label reminds me of this. Like white people are Ford model-Ts, outmoded machines that nevertheless have aesthetic and historical significance.
Or there were, anyway, I haven't seen them around in a while; they just got called racists like all the others.
What does "assimilate" even mean in this context?
He openly admits he's a eugenicist
No s***. It always circles back to DemsRRealRacist, Bible thumping, and not being very bright.
The ones against illegal immigration.
Planned Parenthood does more than just provide abortions. If you can't see the difference between "Medicaid doesn't cover abortion" and "Medicaid can't cover non-abortion care if the provider also provides abortions" I don't know what to tell you.
Show me the statute that would make Planned Parenthood ineligible.
Democrats defected first with immigration laws
More accurate to say that it was a bipartisan phenomenon engaged in by Republicans like George W. Bush.
+1
Sometimes I forget how bad some people are at basic reading comprehension.
Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic - Abortion.
It sounds to me like Congress put a condition on federal Medicaid funding, South Carolina is ignoring it, and the Supreme Court is saying "the federal government can enforce the condition by taking away South Carolina's Medicaid funding" knowing it will not actually do so, effectively nullifying the condition Congress put in place. Maybe the court decision was right, you don't want to create a situation where the government is buried in endless lawsuits, but it certainly looks like the executive branch is just blatantly ignoring the law. If that's acceptable, I don't want to hear any complaints about Democrats refusing to enforce immigration laws.
I'm much more about Nietzsche than Sex and the City, which I've never seen.
The kid with the e-thot was conceived naturally.
someone using natural family planning within a Catholic marriage
That isn't what the article describes.
It burned down because it was on fire.
The richest man in the world has basically the same political program you do (like literally wants everything in your list), and he's powerless to enact it for this specific reason.
Um, what? Elon Musk is modelling dysfunctional ghetto family norms.

One of these things is not like the others
One of these things doesn't belong
Can you tell which thing is not like the other
By the time we finish our song?
More options
Context Copy link