Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Collins

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they challenge popular misconceptions about race, IQ, and success. This thought-provoking discussion dives deep into the complex relationship between genetics, culture, and achievement, offering surprising insights that challenge both progressive and conservative narratives. Key topics include:* The truth about Asian-American academic success* Debunking the myth of significant racial IQ differences* The impact of immigration and cultural factors on group success* How class, rather than race, influences genetic advantages* The role of Confucianism in creativity and innovation* Why some immigrant groups outperform others* The fallacy of attributing success solely to individual effortWhether you're interested in genetics, sociology, or the complex factors behind group achievement, this video offers a nuanced and data-driven perspective that will challenge your assumptions and broaden your understanding of human potential.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Flynn was comparing American IQ estimates Based on a representative sample with Japanese estimates based on upper income, heavily urban samples. Recalculated, the Japanese average came in not at 106. 6, but 99. 2. When the Chinese American scores were reassessed using up to date intelligence metrics, Flynn found they came in at a 97 verbal and a 100 nonverbal. The numbers now suggested Flynn said that they had succeeded not because of their higher IQs, but despite their lower IQs People are cherry picking studies to get these big differences. It's not that you don't get any difference between ethnic groups, but the difference is typically like. two to three IQ points, just not a really significant number.Malcolm Collins: East Asian students spend approximately 13 more hours per week on academic activities compared to their non academic counterparts.Holy!Malcolm Collins: Thirteen more hours. it is not some Asians are smarter than white people thing. [00:01:00] It's Asians work harder than white people. Is that an offensive thing to say?Like, I know it's it'sso I think it's so commonly understood,Malcolm Collins: When you remove all of the DEI nonsense, 72 percent of the top academic performers become Asian, like that's wild. But it gets more surprising because Asian Americans are actually way less successful than you would expect them to be. Less than 1 percent of corporate officers and corporate board members in America are Asians and only 2 percent of college presidents. Only nine of the fortune 500 CEOs are Asians. Now we're going to get to the final part where I'm gonna get really offensive here. Yay. Really offensive. I love these parts.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone! I'm excited to be talking to you. We did an episode that was actually a long quote from our book, that went over the myth of a high Jewish Ashkenazi IQ. This episode has gone viral, so that's fun.And I was like, Let's double [00:02:00] down because people said this episode is going to get you guys canceled. It's going to get Simone's campaign ruined. And I was like, how could he, like, what are they going to accuse us of saying that Jews aren't genetically superior? And somebody was like, like unironically, yes, they may cancel you for even asking these questions.Like, but, but I don't, I don't think so. I, I genuinely just like, There's these areas that people are not used to engaging with, but I think that we as a society have moved past sort of reactive cancellations in regards to just engaging with like honest scientific information. Well, yeah,just the fact that even they're being commonly held group level traits is an extremely controversial thing to say.And then also admitting that intelligence has a genetic component is extremely controversial. And then of course, talking about Jews. At all is extremely controversial. So we were just, we weren't just stepping on third rails. We were like playing twister just to try to touch as many third rails [00:03:00] as possible with that.Okay. Well, I decided, I decided I'm going back. Round two of third rail twister begins in three, two.Malcolm Collins: At the end of the episode, I, I set up this point where I was like, actually the, the, while there are specific cognitive traits that seem to have some ethnic correlation, broad IQ, Doesn't seem to be broadly correlated when you actually dig into the nitty gritty of what's going on in these studies.But the problem is, is we know that if it was highly correlated with ethnicity, we wouldn't be allowed to say that it was highly correlated with ethnicity. So whenever somebody comes along and says, here are some stats proving that it is, everybody just, Immediately jumps on it because they're like, well, at least somebody is giving me some information here.But unfortunately, a lot of the people who are doing this often have like alternative [00:04:00] motivations. And so if you actually dig into the stats, which you then find, what we found was

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the controversial topic of infidelity, exploring the evolutionary psychology behind why people cheat. This thought-provoking discussion covers:* Various evolutionary theories on why women cheat* Surprising statistics on infidelity rates across different demographics* The impact of age, business travel, and previous relationships on cheating behavior* How modern technology and dating apps influence infidelity* The difference between male and female cheating patterns* Cultural and biological factors influencing fidelity* The concept of "mate-switching" and its evolutionary basis* How postmenopausal sexuality might differ from premenopausal sexuality* The role of emotional vs. physical affairs in different gendersWhether you're interested in evolutionary psychology, relationship dynamics, or simply curious about human behavior, this video offers fascinating insights into one of society's most taboo subjects.[00:00:00] Hello, Simone. I am excited to be here with you today Today we are going to discuss the topic of why women cheatSimone Collins: Ooh la la, have I done something?No, I was watching a Chris Williams episode and he was interviewing a psychologist about this and the psychologist, honestly, I, I thought I didn't really agree with his interpretation of this particular question, but it got me thinking about the question from an angle.That I hadn't thought about it before. Oh,Simone Collins: interesting.Which is not, why do specific women cheat? Okay. Why do women cheat at all, period? Like what, why is the, the, in, in human beings across cultures, you see cheating as a behavior pattern. Why do you see it cross culturally in humans? And isn't itSimone Collins: pretty high?I feel like Ayla did numbers on this at one point, and I was actually shocked by the proportion of both men and women that cheat.We're going to go into the numbers. We're going to go into the numbers. We're going to go into how they differ [00:01:00] by ethnicity. We're going to go into how they differ by culture.We're going to go into, Oh, you're going to get so much. But the point I'm making here is not all monogamous animals cheat. Um, So some animals that are mostly monogamous. Basically almost never cheat. Do swans almost never cheat? Well, I'll give you some that almost never cheat. Black vultures. Will the blackSimone Collins: vultures faithful?Extra pair of fertilization in black vultures. California mice. DNA analysts suggest wild California mice have extremely low rate of extra pair of fertility. And I didn't know there was such a thing asSimone Collins: California mice. Eurasian beavers. Okay. Geographically specific. It's just Californian mice.I'm naming species here and by species, you're going to get different patterns.Here's an interesting one. This is, this one's not going to be as funny for you because it's not the coyotes. Coyotes have a study of urban coyotes have found 100 percent monogamy over a six year period with no evidence [00:02:00] of any cheating. They're urban,Simone Collins: so you'd expect them to be morepolyamorous. They're very urban, right?You'd expect them to be polyamorous by now, right?Simone Collins: Bizarre.Macaroni penguins? AndSimone Collins: Atlantic puffins? Do they have, do they have top hats, Howard? What? Are macaroni penguins? Anyway, I need a picture of this. Those crazy looking penguins. The things. Oh, yeah, the ones with the little feather crowns.Yes, yes, yes, yes.Simone Collins: Okay, okay. They aren't, so they do wear hats.Would you like to know more?Simone Collins: Okay,so historically, the most believed hypothesis, and it's the one that we argued for in our book, for the predominant reason women cheat, is to get better genes. This is the Beta, Bucks, Alpha, Fs strategy. This is the, I have a provider. Who I know is going to raise my Children, [00:03:00] but frankly, I can't secure a high value male who will invest in me, but most high value men, at least in a historic context, this is before child support.And we often talk about the genetic effects of child support, not super positive. But before child support With a risk, historically, a man, and we'll get into the stats of how often this happened historically in a bit would just sleep with other women. Right. You know, so I, I, I, as a woman might only be able to get some fairly average looking, some fairly average competence man, but in terms of, you know, what I actually want, I want the powerful Lords kids.I want the, or the person who has shown themselves to be You know, an amazing night and who is buff and who is fit and everything like that. But he's never going to settle down with a woman like me, but he, screw me. Right. You know, well, it didn't,Simone Collins: aren't there some, there was a study at some point that found that women who were ovulating were more attracted to men who looked more Chad.Yeah. So that's, thatwas a part of this story is that that study ha

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they explore the controversial and alarming trend of declining IQ scores worldwide. This thought-provoking discussion delves into:* The reality of the "reverse Flynn effect" and its implications* Genetic factors influencing IQ and their correlation with fertility rates* The potential consequences of declining average intelligence on society and governance* The role of AI in mitigating or exacerbating these trends* Ethical considerations surrounding genetic selection and societal stratification* The future of human intelligence and potential solutions to the crisisWhether you're a genetics enthusiast, concerned citizen, or simply curious about the future of human cognition, this video offers a balanced and data-driven perspective on one of the most pressing issues of our time.[00:00:00] with no natural predators to thin the herd, it began to reward those who reproduce the mosthaving kids is such an important decision. We're just waiting for the right time. It's not something you want to rush into, obviously. I'm pregnant again! S**t! I got too many damn kids!There's no way we can have a child now. Not with the market the way it is, no. God, no. Come on over here, b***h! He don't care about you! Well, we finally decided to have children, and it's not going well. Yeah! Yeah! I'm gonna f**k all of you! That's my boy!IQ is dropping by about 0. 2 points annually in some regions.This may seem like a trivial decline,but when you consider the standard deviation of IQ is 15 points, such a decline is sustained will lead to a drop by one standard deviation every 75 years. Should this trend hold in those regions [00:01:00] in just 125 years, your average human will have an IQ that would today qualify someone as intellectually disabled.Would you like to know more?Hello, Simone. It is wonderful to be speaking with you today. Today, we are going to be asking the question. Is an idiocracy style future true?Is the IQ of humanity declining over time? I have read in one of our comments, they're like, well, you know, this person thinks that you IQ is , declining over time. And we stay away from a lot of the controversial genetic stuff. However, this is the one controversial genetics topic where I'm like, People really need to be realistic about the data.Well, yeah, it's, it's just the data in this is so loud and from so many different angles and it will create real problems from society if we try to ignore this or pretend it's not happening. So, I mean, I'm just going to start with a recent study that I saw that was like, okay, yeah, we got to be taking this [00:02:00] seriously.So, this study shows that the mean IQ of U. S. college students has been dropping by 0. 2 points per year since the mid 20th century. And this phenomenon has been well documented in many sources and it's called the reverse Flynn effect. Historically, you had something called the Flynn effect, where all around the world, IQ was increasing they're pretty much every year.And the reason why you had the Flynn effect was because nutrition was increasing. But once nutritional needs as they relate to brain development saturated in the human population then dysgenics appears to be the primary cause that IQ was going down. But we'll get into this in more detail with lots of citations for this one, because I'm actually going to be going to a quote.From our book. So we're going to read a little passage from the book, The Pragmatist Guide to Crafting Religion and go over it. All right. Are we destined to become a society reminiscent of the nightmarish dystopia depicted in the film [00:03:00] Idiocracy,. Well, don't want to sound like a dick or nothing, but, uh, it says on your chart that you're fucked up.Uh, you talk like a fag, and your s**t's all retarded. What I do is just, like, you know, like, you know what I mean? Don't worry, Skrull. There are plenty of tards out there living really kick ass lives. My first wife was tarded. She's a pilot now. We mostly steer clear of fearful discourse about genetic selection against high IQ and dropping IQs in general because it is such a charged topic and our concerns around demographic collapse stand regardless of this scenario's potential. We only approach this philosophical third rail in order to dispel some common misconceptions.IQ has a high level of genetic correlation and can be predicted by looking at a person's genome. So I have a citation here. If you want to go through all of these citations, I'll just mention when I run across the citation just, Get the [00:04:00] book. It's like a dollar on Amazon and it'll have all the citations listed.This is in the appendix. The association between genetics and IQ is not small. In fact, this meta study argues the IQ correlation between adopted brothers and sisters, genetically unrelated people raised together, falls almost to zero in adulthood. Again, another citation. No, we think this meta study might be overstating the correlation a littl

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they challenge the widely-held belief about Ashkenazi Jewish intellectual superiority. This eye-opening discussion explores:* The misrepresentation and manipulation of IQ studies* How cultural practices, not genetics, may explain Jewish success* The dangers of racial IQ theories and their societal impact* The role of nepotism and networking in different cultural groups* The future of genetic selection and its implications for ethnic differences* Surprising facts about Jewish involvement in historical movements* How internet culture may be amplifying Jewish representation in certain fieldsWhether you're interested in genetics, cultural studies, or the complexities of societal success, this video offers a nuanced perspective on a controversial topic. The Collinses provide a balanced, data-driven approach to understanding the true nature of Jewish achievement and its implications for our understanding of intelligence and success.[00:00:00] remember the first study I, I mentioned where I said Jews were only 1 percent smarter, right? On average, when you considered all of the information. So what that meant. If you were going to get a like a standard deviation higher, that meant on some tests they had to be scoring unusually good.Yeah. And on some tests they had to be scoring unusually poorly. Yeah. They were scoring unusually poorly on the nonverbal reasoning test. Yeah, so in other words, Jews appear to be word cells and not shape rotators in internet parlance yeah. So then this guy comes in and he's basically like, I can't believe that there are some areas where Jews do uniquely well and some areas where Jews do uniquely poorly.So how about we just look at the areas where they do well? Yeah, let's do, redo the battery. But only include the test where I know from the previous data that they're doing well. Problem solved, Malcolm. Problem solved. I want to be clear, the core guy who did this research that was cherry picked using only verbal scores, , Richard Lynn, in [00:01:00] his words, the only representative study ever conducted other than his own.was that other study that we were looking at. Okay. So it's not that we're cherry picking. We're using the studies that he is pointing to. the strongest data backed claim that a person can reasonably make about Jewish IQ differences is that Ashkenazi Jews have a marginally better verbal IQ and math skills, which is pretty amazing.offset by marginally lower visual spatial intelligence and reasoningWould you like to know more?Hello, Simone. I am excited to be talking to you again today. Today we are going to go over another topic that is delved into heavily in one of our books, which means we'll be reading some parts of one of our books.Whenever we get to a place where there's a citation, you can just go to the book and find whatever the citation was. It'll be some study or something. As I read, I'll just say citations. Yeah. I don't want to keep interjecting here, but this is one of our biggest surprises when we were writing the pragmatist guide to crafting religion.Was that we sort of came to the realization that the [00:02:00] Jewish Ashkenazi Jewish population specifically does not actually seem to have the IQ advantage that all the gene bros would tell you that they have. And there has been some intentional misrepresentation of data in this area. And from a cultural perspective, that's really interesting.Because it means that their cultural success has more to do with cultural practices and a natural advantage. But which is much more interesting to talk about because that's the culture is what we have control over. Yeah. All right. Jump into it. Simone when we started writing this book, we were fairly certain that Jews were smarter than other groups, either at a cultural or genetic level.Anecdotally, we like to think we associate with disproportionately intelligent people, as gauged by notable professional achievement, and have no reason to mostly be friends with Jews. Yet a huge chunk of our friends are either Orthodox Jews or secular Jews. Objectively, Jews win Nobel [00:03:00] prizes at a rate 100 times higher than would be expected given their population levels.Among the highest ranked chess players, 51 percent have at least one Jewish parent. This is not something that could be easily explained by nepotism. Jews are represented among the world's richest people at a rate 100, 000 percent higher than would be expected. They make up 19 percent of the Forbes 200 richest list and 0.19 percent of the world population. Jew, oh, citation, Jews are overrepresented in Congress and the Senate at a rate of about. 400 percent higher than one would expect based on their population in the United States. Another citation there. , Jewish success is plain for anyone to see. Jews are dotted in positions of power throughout our society at a rate that would not be expected, given that they only make up 2 percent of the U.S. population. Consid

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they explore the complex relationship between pornography, violence, and male psychology in modern society. This thought-provoking discussion delves into controversial topics such as:* The "male sedation hypothesis" and its impact on societal violence* The unexpected benefits of pornography in reducing sexual violence* The potential dangers of the NoFap movement* The role of video games and sports in channeling male aggression* Strategies for healthy sexual development in the digital age* The importance of creating safe dating environments for young people* The future of relationships and dating in a technologically advanced worldDrawing from scientific studies, personal experiences, and cultural observations, Malcolm and Simone offer a nuanced perspective on these sensitive issues. Whether you're a parent, educator, or simply interested in understanding the complexities of modern sexuality, this video provides valuable insights and challenges common misconceptions.Simone Collins: [00:00:00] thatMalcolm Collins: craziness is what provides them with the motivation to go talk to women where they could go to jail because they talked to her in the wrong way, where they could be shut down and socially shamed.Going up and approaching somebody in a dating context is incredibly difficult and the line between the motivation you need to go up and approach a random woman who you're interested in and the motivation you need to shoot up your school, I think, is a much narrower line than many women in I feelSimone Collins: honestly like in many ways shooting up a school is way easier.Yeah, and that's the point.Malcolm Collins: You need the guys to have this insane motivationChris Williamson's male sedation hypothesis proposes that Online virtual worlds, particularly pornography and video games, have a pacifying effect on young men who are struggling to find romantic partners or sexual partners. The key points of this hypothesis are, one, pornography provides a small dose of reproductive fitness cuesdo. In the [00:01:00] studies where it showed higher rates of murder and stuff like that tied to single men, these are societies that completely ban porn and masturbation because they're Muslim societies mostly is where you're seeing this.Simone Collins: One thing I kind of wonder is, is do you get the free radical problem or do you get essentially like risky young men in a society where porn isn't necessarily banned?But where nofap is pervasive,would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I am excited to be with you here today. Today. We are going to do an episode that asks, why aren't there more mass shootings by themselves?Simone Collins: I was really wondering this, like, we are recording this fairly close to when President Donald Trump was almost killed, got his ear shot through.And I'm like, why are more people not doing this? If apparently it's so fricking easy. To go out with an AR and just shoot it as president. Like, why are people not [00:02:00] going out all the time? It'sMalcolm Collins: not just that. I mean, this is something that's been well studied and we've mentioned in previous episodes. If you look at polygynous societies versus monogamous, equivalent monogamous societies.Right. Typically going to get way more like, like much higher rates of terrorism in the polygynous societies. And the, the, the question is why, why do you get higher rates of terrorism? Why even in monogamous societies get higher rates of terrorism as marriage rates go down which was a thing that was studied in Egypt.They were looking at like during economic downturns where people couldn't pay the bride price more men would go unmarried and you'd directly get more terrorists. And the answer is an unmarried man. Has, you know, nothing to do with their time. Well, not just nothing to do with their time, but they have no vested interest in the social order as it stands.SoSimone Collins: in other words, hormonally also, I would argue they're being told, go big or go home. Like you are genetically going to die. You might as well be dead. Biologically speaking,Malcolm Collins: if they were in a tribe [00:03:00] and under the tribe's current order, there was no chance that they would ever get a partner. Then It made sense.To risk your life to up in the social order of that tribe.Simone Collins: Yeah. Or, you know, do something insane that could possibly when you were sexual partner and therefore, you know, biologically survive to the next generation. So your, your genes, your body, everything that you've evolved is screaming at you. As a male go big or go home.So you're going to do increasingly risky things. So, although, you know, I will maybe push back on that a little bit, right? Because there's some mixed data on this, right? Like I understand that like testosterone is high when you're, when you're in a very like sort of competitive male environment, when you're not.In a, a stable relationshi

The Malcolm Dating Question AIhttps://chatgpt.com/g/g-4HMnqeWUN-malcolmesim1-dating-coachSakura Models (better AI but more PC and snaps into character)Isekai: https://www.sakura.fm/chat/CxRwwvIFertility Collapse: https://www.sakura.fm/chat/rYxTVFQJanitor AI (more open to violence simpler model): Isekai: https://janitorai.com/characters/0f1eb40f-907e-4417-bd63-f812f8af3bcf_character-isekai-good-at-scienceFertility Collapse: https://janitorai.com/characters/469e9706-2bc9-4a4c-bc92-78984094a278_character-fertility-collapse-post-apocalypseJoin Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the world of AI dating coaches and relationship simulations. This thought-provoking discussion explores the potential benefits and risks of using artificial intelligence in romantic relationships, drawing from their own experiences and insights from their book, "The Pragmatist's Guide to Relationships."Key topics include:* Analysis of AI-generated relationship advice* The surprising accuracy and limitations of AI dating coaches* Exploring advanced AI narrative platforms for relationship practice* Ethical considerations of using AI for dating and social skills* The potential addiction risks of AI relationship simulations* Comparing AI interactions to real-world dating experiences* The future of AI in relationships and social skill developmentWhether you're a tech enthusiast, relationship coach, or simply curious about the intersection of AI and human connections, this video offers valuable insights into the rapidly evolving world of digital relationships.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, I'm excited to be with you guys today today. We are going to do sort of review of an A. I. That was built on Simone and myself.Specifically, it was built on our relationships book. We have looked and have done transcripts so that we can eventually as A. I. S. Advanced build A. I. Models that you guys can interact with on our website. All of the transcripts from the shows. And then all of the video from the shows. So, you know, our kids will get very easy AI models to interact with us.With that way, I mean, informed by a great deal of information, but let's look at how this sort of rudimentary model works and we'll have the people who programmed it on in a future episode. Cause they're a good friend of ours.Simone Collins: Yeah. And just really awesome people. They're the, the founders of Metamorph AI.That's metamorphai. co. They basically help people and companies build custom built AI solutions. And we're just dying to find more excuses to work with them because they're extremely competent and there just aren't a lot of people out there like that.Would you like to know more?Simone Collins: [00:01:00] So your first question to the Pragmatist Guide to Relationships AI Dating Coach was, I've been dating a guy for a year and while he says he wants to marry, he says he will not consider marrying any sooner than five years from now.And I'm already 25. What should I do? So AI Dating Coach says navigating the dynamics of a long term relationship requires aligning life. Goals, timelines, and mutual expectations. Here's a structured approach to your situation. One, assess your priorities and timeline biological considerations. At 25, waiting an additional five years means you'll be around 30 when considering marriage.If you desire to start a family, it's easier to factor in timelines for pregnancy and childbearing. Personal goals reflect on your personal and career aspirations. Will waiting align with your plans, or do you envision a different timeline for marriage and family? Two, understand his perspective. Reasons for waiting.Engage in an open conversation to [00:02:00] understand why he prefers to wait five more years. It could be due to career goals, financial stability, personal readiness, or other commitments. Commitment level. Gauge his commitment to the relationship. Is the five year timeline flexible based on changing circumstances, or is it a firm decision?Three. Communicate openly. Express your feelings. Clearly articulate your feelings, desires, and concerns about the proposed timeline. Use I statements to convey your perspective without sounding accusatory. Seek compromise. Explore if there's room for compromise. Perhaps setting shorter term milestones or revisiting the conversation in a couple of years could be viable.Four, evaluate compatibility. Long term alignment. It's crucial that both partners have aligned visions for the future. If your timelines and goals differ significantly, it might indicate deeper compatibility issues. Potential for resentment. Prolonged misalignment can lead to resentment. Ensure that both of you feel comfortable with any decisions made to avoid future [00:03:00] conflicts.5. Consider carefullyMalcolm Collins: Before you go further, I want to go over some of these before I forget them. So there was a couple really good answers here that I quite like. The timelines one, where they point out if your timeli

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the complex and controversial topic of abortion, challenging both progressive and conservative viewpoints. This thought-provoking discussion covers:* The problematic "worship" of abortion in progressive circles* A critical examination of Catholic teachings on conception and life* The scientific timeline of fetal development and its ethical implications* The impact of IVF on Catholic fertility rates and religious survival* A biblical perspective on sin, pleasure, and human dignity* The unintended consequences of extreme anti-abortion stances* Proposals for more ethical and humane abortion practicesWhether you're pro-life, pro-choice, or somewhere in between, this video offers a fresh perspective on one of the most divisive issues of our time. The Collinses bring their unique blend of scientific knowledge, philosophical inquiry, and personal experience to this challenging topic.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] right now in the world, more children are aborted per year than humans die. Like, post birth humans die. Um, And youTrans woman to have a successful uterus transplant, ovaries and eggs included. And I want to be the first trans woman to have an abortion.Get that fetus, kill that fetus. Rack, rack, you good rack.You mean, I'll never know what it feels like to have a baby growing inside me and then scramble its brains and vacuum it out?Malcolm Collins: I realized that because it's a religious act for them almostI hope and pray to God it don't feed us as a song. Cause I want it to feel pain when I eject it from my ownMalcolm Collins: if you put a fetus in a, in a human woman's body, it will eventually become a human being. Andbut an egg and a sperm on their [00:01:00] own, they won't eventually become a human being. And I was like, you just added a little word there, if you put them in a woman's body, if you put an egg in a sperm in a woman's body, just like if you put a fetus in a woman's body, it becomes a human being.Simone Collins: It is now standard medical practice after 15 weeks to use anesthesia during fetal surgeries. But this is really important. And this is going to come up a little bit later in my thoughts on this subject. Pain medication is not standard practice in abortions. there's this one part of the medical establishment that is like, okay, this is a baby, we're going to save your baby.Don't worry, mother, it's going to be fine. And then there's this totally sort of other industry, which is like, this is a cluster of tissue. There is, there is, there's cardiac activity. Let's, you know, you need to exercise your right. This is not humanWould you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I'm excited to be here with you today. Today we're going to be doing an episode because this has been [00:02:00] increasingly happening to me where I have been updating my views on various subjects from back when I used to just be in the urban monoculture, you know, when you were growing up, you grew up in central San Francisco.And so you grew up really inundated with these far lefty ideas about everything. I grew up sort of all over the place, different you know, boarding schools and stuff like that. But a lot of them were in New England. And so I was heavily influenced by those cultures.Simone Collins: Right.Malcolm Collins: And you know, when you're in the urban monoculture, this, this far progressive culture, you don't even really question things about abortion, right?You should always It'sSimone Collins: my body, my choice.Malcolm Collins: And I remember in high school when I, you know, slept around a lot, you know, I've mentioned this on other podcasts and, you know, by the time I got to college, I slept with over a hundred people and [00:03:00] I I don't think that's a good thing to do. I would clarify. I think that I associated it with status, and then I began to, you know, like the machine that Malcolm is, if I'm like, okay, you know, this thing has value in society, I must orient my life around maximizing Right, ifSimone Collins: sex is your objective function, it's your objective function, you gotta maximize it.Malcolm Collins: Well, and that's what the environment of this modern, youthfull culture taught me, right? So, I would try to Engage with it as much as possible, and I remember thinking oh my gosh, like whenever the abortion stuff would come up. I won't be able to have sex as freelySimone Collins: as a manslaughter abortion is very important.Malcolm Collins: Yes. Fewer women will want to sleep with me and they may get pregnant and then decide not to have an abortion. And then I didn't even think about that. This election isSimone Collins: screwed. All the men who want to have sex can't vote. Yeah. I, one ofMalcolm Collins: my favorite things is these, these progressives where you'll have them standing out and they'll being like, [00:04:00] With these new abortion restrictions.I'm just, I guess I'm not going to be able to sleep with

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the root causes of declining fertility rates and the broader societal crisis of meaning. This thought-provoking discussion covers:* The limitations of economic explanations for low fertility rates* The role of hopelessness and lack of meaning in modern society* How the "urban monoculture" contributes to increased anxiety and depression* The dangers of religious "cargo cults" and surface-level cultural imitation* Why traditional approaches to increasing fertility rates are failing* The need for new social technologies and active theological conversations* How social media distorts our perceptions of reality and success* The importance of vitalism and finding meaning beyond self-affirmationWhether you're concerned about demographic trends, struggling to find purpose in life, or interested in the intersection of culture and fertility, this video offers valuable insights and potential solutions for our society's deepest challenges.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone! I'm excited to talk with you right now! So today we are going to talk about the hope crisis as it relates to declining fertility rates, but also society more broadly.And this was brought to me again, it's something I regularly see in a recent article in the Atlantic called the real reason people aren't having kids. It's a need that government subsidies and better family policy can't necessarily address. And this really reminds me of, we, We're talking with redeemed zoomer not too long ago, and he was saying, when you talk to boomers about.All the sadness in this young generation right now, they'll reflexively be like, oh, it's phones. And if you talk to the media, because it's very urban monoculture, very distributed as much cash as possible. It's always all economic situations that you look at something like, oh, it's phones., and this is, , pretty quick to [00:01:00] disprove.The studies on this show, generally that it does make up eight portion of the decrease in mental health in youth. But less than half. And that's the more generous studies.For example. Amy O'Brien a lead author at Oxford university did a study of 350,000 participants. , across the U S and the UK on teen mental health, youth, and technology. And she found that a teenagers technology use or a teenagers social media use can only predict less than 1%. In the variation of their wellbeing, which is so small that it's surpassed by, for example, whether a teenager wore glasses in school. You can look at economic situations. They don't explain it at all.Malcolm Collins: Like they have a correlation to well being. But if you look at the way that Americans live today versus the way we lived 100 years ago, it is very clear that people in 100 years ago lived in significantly more poverty than people today.But the statistical [00:02:00] evidence is even more damning than that. It turns out that upper class teens actually have worse mental health than well, any other group? , a study by.Sonia Luther at Columbia university's teacher college. Found that adolescents reared in suburban homes with an average family income of $120,000 report, higher rates of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse than any other socioeconomic group of young Americans today.Malcolm Collins: So And so those can sort of be thrown out. And then if you talk about fertility more broadly, even some of the answers that we throw out don't really explain everything, right?So we're often like well, you know, if you had more pride in your identity you would have higher fertility rates. And yet, I mean, does not. Russia and Ukraine have pride in their identity, right? I mean, Clearly they do to motivate these wars. And yet their fertility rates are desperately low. Or I may say well, you need a [00:03:00] strong religious system, right?But does not Iran, a literal theocracy, have a strong religious system and strong religion in their country? And yet their fertility rates are abysmal. So what is it that, you know, when everything else that's that, that, that we want to blame this on is out the window. And I think that everyone kind of internally knows the hope crisis is real because we aren't just dealing with a fertility rate crisis.You're also dealing with an unaliving oneself crisis. We went into not recent fairly, we've talked about it in a few episodes recently that by recent CDC statistics, if you look at high schoolers in the United States, one in 10 considered an unaliving themselves.No, sorry. Tried to unalign themselves on any given year. And one in four girls made a plan to unalign themselves at any given year. Like, The rates are catastrophically high,It's like American high schools have become the happening. And everyone's [00:04:00] acting like it's totally normal.Christ, men! Amen!Malcolm Collins: But if you look at the other countries that have fertility rate problems, like South Korea, they also have a really high unaligning oneself problem within

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the alarming trends shaping China's future. This eye-opening discussion covers:* Shocking statistics revealing Chinese citizens' growing disillusionment with their economic system* The rise of "lying flat" and "last generation" movements in China* How the CCP is desperately trying to maintain control through surveillance and intimidation* The potential collapse of China as a global superpower* Implications for U.S. foreign policy, especially regarding Taiwan* The unexpected cultural shifts occurring in Chinese societyThis video provides crucial insights for anyone interested in geopolitics, economics, or the future of global power dynamics. With exclusive data and expert analysis, you'll gain a deeper understanding of the challenges facing China and how they might reshape our world.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Simone! Today we're going to be doing a stats heavy episode that I know our fans always love, where I can find some interesting and counterintuitive stats to tell us about where the world is going. Okay. Episode is going to be on internal Chinese politics the economic situation in China and how the Chinese population is becoming more and more You know, we use the title woke here, but it's not exactly woke because they're not exactly split among the types of of, uh, political demographics that we have in the U S there isn't the same like Republican Democrat party that you would have in the U S.But the views of the Chinese people are definitely changing and in a way that should make the Chinese government very, very nervous.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: So let's start with a quote here. These are the clear findings that emerged from quantitative research by Stanford professors Jennifer Pan [00:01:00] and Ying Qing Xu. Survey data collected through a variety of channels and methodologies by Pan and Xu over several years show that Chinese urban residents are more liberal than expected and more liberal than the official positions of the government.Moreover, the political views of respondents remained relatively stable over time and were correlated. across issues in ways comparable to those in democratic countries. It is important to note, however, that policy views in China do not align neatly along pro slash anti regime spectrums, or what might be considered a typical left right divide as they do in the United States and many other democracies.Instead, they cluster around preferences for market versus state intervention in the economy more versus less democracy in the government and more versus less nationalism. So, one faction wants less nationalism and less government intervention in the markets and more democracy. And another group wants more [00:02:00] intervention, less democracy and more nationalism, which makes sense as natural clusters.Using surveys conducted from 2012 and 2014 and separately at 2018 and 2019, Pan and Zhu show that Chinese correspondents have coherent policy preferences that are bunded in predictable ways. For example, those that hold politically liberal views are more likely to also support free markets and oppose nationalist foreign policy.Those who support authoritarian political institutions are instead more likely to support state intervention in the economy and a nationalistic foreign policy. And I'll put a figure on screen here. So that's actually really interesting because that's different than the, at least older historic political alignment that we had here in the U.S. Which is the more free market people are also the more politically or socially progressive peopleTorsten: andMalcolm Collins: the less free market people are the so you have a true tanky faction there that is very you know, pro nationalism, pro state control but also [00:03:00] pro more socially illiberal views. Do you have any thoughts on that before I go further?Simone Collins: No, tell me more. I just want to dig into this.Malcolm Collins: All right. So , the surveys carried out between 2004 and 2014 indicate that most respondents had positive views on the system's ability to deliver opportunities in the future, and that effort and hard work were rewarded.So now we're going to look at some graphs. These findings were notable because, as I mentioned, below, And note I'm pulling from several different articles here. So these aren't all from the same article. These findings were notable because as mentioned above inequality increased rapidly after 1978 and has remained stubbornly high since the two thousands in China.Perceptions as to the drivers of inequality are Are central to the population sense of fairness and belief in the efficacy of China's economic and political systems. The latest round of surveys, which were conducted over the course of 2023 through an online app. So this is all just important to note when you're looking at this data are so recent that the Whitney team has yet to publish them in [00:04:00] related academic arti

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the fascinating world of America's forgotten cultural groups, focusing on the Puritans and their lasting impact on modern American society. This eye-opening discussion explores:* The surprising truth about Puritan culture and its evolution* How Puritan values merged with Backwoods culture to survive* The unexpected connection between Puritan ethics and modern parenting styles* Why certain cultural groups thrived while others faded away* The impact of Catholic immigration on America's cultural landscape* Insights into raising children with a "clan-based" mentality* How historical cultural differences still influence modern American societyWhether you're a history buff, a parent looking for unique perspectives, or just curious about America's cultural roots, this video offers valuable insights into the forces that shaped our nation.​[00:00:00]Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone! I amexcited to be here with you today. This will be our second episode going over some of the concepts, what we think they got right, and what we think they got wrong of the book.Simone Collins: American Nations by Colin Woodard, which was inspired by one of our favorite books of all time, Albion Seed by David Hackett Fisher.Malcolm Collins: And this divides America into a 11 cultural groups. And I will put a map on screen here so you can see it. And in the last episode we did on this, which you can check out one of the core things I think he got wrong is he thought that the Puritan cultural group in the Northeastern United States ended up being the core mountain head.Of current Yankee culture or the northeastern coastal culture in the United States, where we argue this is fundamentally wrongheaded that that culture actually stems from Catholicism which for a long time made up the majority population in these regions after the immigration waves started so [00:01:00] even though.Just to briefly cover some concepts from the last one that a lot of people are unfamiliar with Catholics at the time of America's founding were an incredibly small part of the colonies. They were like 1. 5%. Even in the quote unquote Catholic colony. They were a very small minority around 10%. That was Maryland.So they just were not a big cultural force in America. Until the Irish, Italian, and now Hispanic immigration waves, which led to the Catholic population becoming the predominant cultural wellspring of three of the American cultural groups, specifically. In the last episode, we focused a lot on how they were the wellspring of theYankee cultural group, but they are also the wellspring of the El Norte cultural group, which is the Hispanic cultural group in the, in the center.And the far left cultural group that is on the west coast. And if I put a map here of American by relig America's districts by primary religious affiliation, you will see there is a huge overlap with all the blue strongholds and where the Catholics were [00:02:00] settling. So now we want to go, or at least these specific blue strongholds, i.e. Yankeedom and Far Leftem the, the far west coast of the United States. Now what we want to do is go into a question this brings up. And it's a very interesting question if you've read LBNC, is, okay, these are the four cultures that form the foundation of America.Where did they go? Right?Where did the Quakers go? Where did the Puritans go? Where did the Where did the Cavaliers go? Because the Backwoods people, which I'm descended from, the greater We know where theySimone Collins: are. They're right where you think they are.Malcolm Collins: We will, in this episode, talk about this culture. And it's background, but I think a lot of people are a bit mystified about what happened to the three other, it's kind of cool in American history, by the way, if you, if you like study it, it's like the lost tribes, it's like, well, they're really unique founding groups in the country.Where did they go? How did they end up actually influencing the cultures that came [00:03:00] downstream of them? And a big answer here is. They mostly died out.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: However it was the, the, well, a separate episode on how the Quakers died out, because that's a very interesting story in and of itself. But today we're going to talk about the Puritans what they broadly stood for, how one group of the Puritans, or I'd say the Calvinist settlers in early America because there were two big groups here, which I think is really undersold.The Backwoods people, the Backwoods group, the greater Appalachian group was heavily related to the Puritan group. They were also a Calvinist group. They generally got along with the Puritan group and they ended up, I actually, here's a great example of how well they got along with the Puritan group. So there was something called the Paxton boys uprising.And in it because the Quakers always trying to bureaucratically control everything, we're giving their distric

Malcolm and Simone Collins dissect the controversial "White Women for Kamala" Zoom call, exposing the alarming cult-like behavior and rhetoric within the Democratic party. This eye-opening analysis reveals:* The dehumanization of political opponents and racial groups* The role of therapists in pushing political agendas* How progressive ideology has morphed into a "memetic virus"* The sudden shift in Democratic talking points about Biden and Harris* The infantilization of voters through condescending language* The dangerous implications of identity politics in modern AmericaJoin us for a thought-provoking discussion on the state of American politics, the urban monoculture, and the future of democracy. Whether you're a political junkie or just concerned about the direction of our country, this video offers crucial insights into the forces shaping our political landscape.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] what's BLM's stance on Kamala Harris? They think the Democrats need to open a primary at the convention and are angry that Kamala Harris had been authoritarianly slot inlike, the actual black people Are saying no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, um and and yet you have this call that has prevented black people from enjoying its white women for camera What does that mean?No black people. We can't have the black people spoiling our fictional black people that are telling us to do this.Um, we are here because BIPOC women have tapped us in as white women to step up, listen, and get involved this election season. If you find yourself talking over or speaking for BIPOC individuals, or God forbid, correcting them, just take a beat. And instead we can put our listening ears on.Simone Collins: it brought back to me a feeling of anxiety and rage that I haven't felt For well over 20 years, [00:01:00] but that feeling of being trapped and stuck in someone else's tyranny, but that weird cheerful tyranny of, I hope you were paying attention and doing this menial thing that nobody needs to do.Malcolm Collins: I actually love this. The Democrats today are the party of Professor Umbridge. Oh, yes, it had Umbridge vibes.Good morning, children.Would you like to know more?Simone Collins: Hello, Malcolm. I am very excited to be introducing this episode because I, as a white woman, just watched delayed basis the white women for Kamala Harris, zoom call that broke zoom, that broke records.Wait, the entire fourMalcolm Collins: hour or whatever call you watched? I watchedSimone Collins: the whole thing. Well, I'm a white woman. This was a call to action. Of my peopleMalcolm Collins: and I, first of all, can I just like say how insanely racist this is? Imagine if there was like a Trump campaign that was like white women for Trump. Wait, [00:02:00] wait, wait, what?That is a, but Democrats have become so, so, so racist in their entire ideology, but they can't see anything racist when it's connected to things that are pro Democrat. They just ignore it.Simone Collins: Well, I, I don't know. Like, I feel like what a. What a progressive woman would say about a white woman rally for Trump, you know, what do you call a white woman rally for Trump?It would just be a white nationalist rally. Like that's, that's how they see it. Well that'sMalcolm Collins: what they want to frame things as, but actually the pats are not by the statistics, more racists who vote for Trump than who vote for the Democrats.Simone Collins: Yeah. Don't let mainstreamMalcolm Collins: media know that. Actually, this made up narrative is actually really important to a point I'm gonna make right here.Okay. And I think it frames this rally in like the most messed up possible sense. Okay. So, they, they [00:03:00] keep saying things like, You know, BIPOC women have tapped us in and like, you know, don't speak over black women and all of this is like about hypothetical black people. So I think, okay, real black people from a progressive standpoint, who these days is the voice of black people and especially black women, because the organization is run by a black woman, it would be BLM.Right? So what is BLM? No one talks about BLM anymore. Have you noticed that? Well, yeah, because what's BLM's stance on Kamala Harris? Oh, what is BLM's stance on Kamala Harris? They think the Democrats need to open a primary at the convention and they should be choosing a candidate and that they are incredibly angry that Kamala Harris had been authoritarianly slot in.Simone Collins: But even during the, the, the BLM associated riots of the pandemic, she was fundraising for bail [00:04:00] release funds. I don't understand why they would be opposed to her. I know her past has been very problematic. No, Simone,Malcolm Collins: you know exactly why. She repented. Isn't repenting what the woke movement is all about?No, an inability to repent is what the woke movement is about. So for people who like, don't know Kamala Harris's history, I'll give two little incidents here. In one incident because a lot of

In this thought-provoking video, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the recent shift in political dynamics where conservatives are now being labeled as "weird" by their progressive opponents. They delve into the cultural implications of this change, discussing how the traditionally "cool" progressive movement has become the new establishment, while conservatives have embraced their outsider status. The video covers topics such as the evolution of political rhetoric, the impact of Trump and JD Vance on conservative identity, and the changing perceptions of what it means to be "weird" in modern American politics.Key points discussed:* The Democratic campaign's strategy of labeling conservatives as "weird"* Trump and JD Vance's outsider appeal and its impact on conservative identity* The shift in cultural dominance from conservatives to progressives* The value of being "weird" and challenging societal norms* Analysis of specific political incidents and their cultural implications* The role of authenticity and relatability in modern politics* The future of conservative and progressive political strategiesWhether you're interested in political analysis, cultural shifts, or the evolving nature of American conservatism, this video offers a fresh perspective on the current political landscape.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] What defines weirdness is a person's willingness to challenge the dominant cultural mores of a society with an alternate framework.Democrats and the Harris campaign now deploying a new adjective to blast the Republican ticket. Some of what he and his running mate are saying, well, it's just plain weird. Get those nerds! I mean, on the other side, they're just weird. Nerds! It's not just a, a, a, a weird style that he brings. Nerds! Nerds!Nerds! Nerds! Where are they? I think they're talking about us. No way. Oh no! Ah! Ah! Ah! Hello Simone! I am so excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be talking about A wild shift that has happened in part because of the political realignment, the ongoing political realignment in this country.But it also reminds me a lot of bemoaning I've seen from normal [00:01:00] conservatives or they're like of the, of the old GOP ink dates. They're like, I'm not weird, but Harris has been, uh, in her campaign and the democratic establishment and a lot of democratic power players have been putting this idea out there that JD Vance is weird.And Trump is weird and I kind of love it because me, they come off like, you know, because they are the culturally dominant force in our society right now. And when weirdness is defined by cultural distance from the culturally dominant force. Yes, definitionally, they are weird, but it's shown that as soon as they became the culturally dominant force in our society, they immediately became the bullets.You know, they became like the people shouting nerd in like the Revenge of the Nerds movie. I just wanted to say that I'm a nerd. I mean, uh, all our lives, we've been laughed at and made to feel [00:02:00] inferior. President Obama started mocking Trump mercilessly. He can finally get back to focusing. On the issues that matter.Like, did we fake the moon landing? Obama didn't hide his utter disdain. Obviously, we all know about your credentials and breadth of experience. Um, for example, uh, No, seriously, just recently, in an episode of Celebrity Apprentice, You, Mr. Trump, recognized that the real problem was a lack of leadership. You fired Gary Busek.And these are the kind of decisions that would keep me up at night. The insults didn't stop with the president. Listen to comedian Seth Meyers, the evening's guest host. Donald Trump has been saying that he will run for president as a Republican, which is surprising since I just assumed he was running as a joke.And tonight, [00:03:00] those b******s, they trashed our franchises. Why? Why? Because we're smart. Because we look different. I'm a nerd. And I'm pretty proud of it. There's a lot more of us than are of you. You might have been called a spaz. Or a dork. Or a geek. Any of you that have ever felt stepped on, left out, picked on, put down, left Why don't you just come down here and join us, okay?Okay. Come on. Come on.You know, coach, I think I'm gonna let these boys live over at the house while you and your boys rebuild theirs. And where [00:04:00] the hell are we gonna live? Yeah. What about us? Huh? You're out of touch billionaires who live in your mansions. Nerd! Nerd! Nerd!I cannot believe it's happening. I, I heard recently that, , rumors have been spread that J. D. Vance wears eyeliner, , journal Like, even photographers have been like, yeah, I just took a picture of him. Confirmed. No, you can see photos of him as a child. He's one of those people that just has really thick eyelashes., and, and also there was this, , rumor that there was a detailed account in his book, the ability elegy of himSimone Collins: Getting sexually intimate with a couch which is not ther

In this insightful video, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the profound influence of Catholic immigrants on American culture, particularly in reshaping the Yankee identity. Drawing from Colin Woodard's "American Nations" and contrasting it with David Hackett Fisher's "Albion's Seed," the Collins couple offers a nuanced perspective on how Catholic immigration waves transformed the cultural, political, and social landscape of America. This comprehensive analysis covers topics ranging from bureaucratic tendencies and voting patterns to the evolution of American arts and sports culture. Key points discussed: The misconception of Yankee culture's Puritan roots Catholic influence on American bureaucracy and politics The impact of Catholic immigration on urban centers The evolution of Catholic voting patterns Cultural differences between Catholic and Protestant traditions The role of Catholics in shaping American arts and education The future of Catholic influence in American politics[00:00:00]Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I'm excited to be here with you today. We were listening to the audio book for American nations bySimone Collins: colin Woodard.Malcolm Collins: . And we're likely going to do a series of episodes on them. This is a guy who divided America into 11 different populations with different histories. I'll put it on the screen here. I think he gets most things right. He wrote the book as a direct followup to another book that we mentioned all the time on the show called Albion's Seed that talks about the four founding cultures of AmericaSimone Collins: by historian David Hackett Fisher, which was written in either late eighties or early nineties.So this answer is a much more modern take and quite interesting.Malcolm Collins: Well, but it also does something quite different than Fisher's book. And I think it, it gets some things wrong. And one of the things that gets wrong, we're going to be talking about on this video, because I think he completely misunderstands the Yankee culture.So first I'm going to talk a little bit about Albion Seed so you can get a little prep of this and, and why Albion Seed doesn't help us as much understand modern America as this [00:01:00] followup book does. Specifically, Albion Seed, they divide the original Americans into four Four distinct cultural groups, which is accurate.The Puritans, the Quakers, the Backwoods people,and the Cavaliers. Now what was interesting about these four groups is I remember I was talking to somebody about this, and they kept trying to guess. They were like, who are the Catholics? Which one is the Catholics?And they go, like, I, I would go, so the first thing they go, oh, the next is the Catholic group. Or I mentioned the Cavaliers. And they go, oh, that must be the Catholic group. And I had to break to them something that is kind of, I think tough for a lot of Catholics today because they get this sort of retelling of American history that tries to include them in parts of American history that they just were not players in.During the time of the American Revolution, only 1. 5 percent of America was Catholic. If you, and people are like, Maryland, Maryland was a Catholic colony, wasn't it? At the time of the revolution, less than 10 percent of the population in Maryland was Catholic. There was just no significant Catholic population in early America.[00:02:00] However, that is not true of America today, even when we're talking about like significant declines in religiosity in America. You can look at something like Massachusetts, for example. And can you guess the percentage in 1990 of Americans , in Massachusetts, who identified as Catholics?Simone Collins: 4%.Malcolm Collins: 54%. Holy smokes. Do you, do you know what it was in 2010? 38? 45%.Simone Collins: Okay.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Uh Oh. So we can go over some, some other, you know, new England states, you get 26% of New Hampshire, one of the least Catholic, of the New England states is incredibly Catholic. 22% of new Vermont, another low Catholic population of the New England states identifies as Catholic.That is absolutely wild. [00:03:00] Yeah. Um, In terms of like how much of the population of New England Catholics makeup. So, the thing that the guy gets wrong in this book is he does get right. The Quakers, who ended up making up the Midlands population, were widely outcompeted by an alliance of the backwoods people and the German immigrants, who basically ended up erasing their cultural footprint until they came roaring back with a vengeance through the woke revolution, which we will do another episode on how that evolved out of Quakerism.We talk about it heavily in the book, the pragmatist guide to crafting religion. However,He incorrectly claims.Malcolm Collins: the Yankees evolved out of the PuritansWhen in reality.Malcolm Collins: the Puritans. basically went extinct in the same way that the Quakers do. Oh, yes, they may got some small sliver of Amer

In this in-depth video, Malcolm and Simone Collins present a comprehensive overview of the "New Right" political movement, its origins, and its key policy positions. As Simone runs for office in Pennsylvania, the couple outlines their vision for a pragmatic, family-oriented, and anti-bureaucratic approach to governance. They discuss a wide range of topics including fiscal policy, social issues, immigration, foreign policy, and environmentalism, offering a fresh perspective on conservative values in the modern era.Key topics covered:* The emergence of the New Right and its differences from traditional conservatism* Pragmatic, evidence-based fiscal policies* Cultural sovereignty and family rights* Immigration reform focusing on high-skilled workers* America First foreign policy with strategic interventions* Environmental conservation balanced with economic needs* Critique of progressive policies and bureaucratic bloat* The importance of meritocracy and fighting discriminationWhether you're a political enthusiast, a concerned citizen, or simply curious about emerging conservative ideologies, this video provides valuable insights into the evolving landscape of American politics.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] I think this new political alliance of the tech entrepreneurs with the Americans who are just tired of being around Makes a lot of sense when it comes to stuff like this.Okay. Let's build new systems. Let's build better systems. We don't need to do things the way they've always been doneSimone Collins: what progressivism is now is, is like a bureaucratic virus. And because these , organizations are so large. They were taken over by this virus, which, which presents itself as progressive. And so they turned left.Malcolm Collins: And when you talk about the inefficiencies that this has gotten, I think a lot of people don't realize how big this is.You know, you look at something like the case of putting the suicide netting on the golden gate bridge, which ended up costing. About a third the cost even in cash adjusted dollars of the original construction of the bridge itself.. When, when we talk about the collapse of our school system, we see as we pour more money into the school system, it's just increasing the size of the bureaucracy.I'm going to be putting some graphs on screen here so you can see this.Simone Collins: Well, student outcomes are not improving. [00:01:00] AndMalcolm Collins: their mental health is going haywire with a recentCDC study showing one in four school aged girls had a plan to kill themselves on any given year, not over the course of their entire adolescence.And it reported one in ten attempts to unalive oneselves from students. every single year. This stuff needs massive and immediate reform. So let's go in to our actual policy positionswould you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I am excited to be here with you. You are running for office in Pennsylvania right now. And this episode is meant to collate many of our Evolving political beliefs into one video that we can use as an ad for this campaign cycle, but also for our regular watchers to catch up or have a one place to see everything that they can share with other people and our political beliefs Well, they kind [00:02:00] of matter because something that's been coming up more and more in other videos we've been doing is this concept of the new right, a new political faction forming within the right.And at first I thought that our views were just sort of a weird form of right wing beliefs. Then I put in the names of other figures that are associated with this new right, like Elon and Peter Thiel and Chamath and Vivek and David Sacks and Marc Andreessen. And JD Vance, the recently appointed VP for Trump.And I asked , what are the unifying political beliefs between these people? And it basically spit out. Our political belief system to a T. And then I was like, well, then what I'd really like to do with this video is one explain , in short, we've done longer videos that go into a lot more detail on this, how the new right emerged, then also give a political philosophy, not just like a list of.These are the things we believe, [00:03:00] but a larger philosophy around why we believe these things.Simone Collins: I like it.Malcolm Collins: And so people know you can be like, well, the Simone's running or Malcolm's running. It doesn't really matter. We do everything together. We run all our companies together. We believe in gender equality.Just not the way feminists talk about it.Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, and honestly, as, as you can see, Malcolm is, is the talker, the way we work, Malcolm. Malcolm is the outbound high risk high reward faces the public, you know, strategy guy and I'm execution. So that's why you're going to see him talk more. I mean, I think I get s**t done.Malcolm Collins: It's sort of a a communist approach to putting together a family. You could say from each, according to their ability to each, accordin

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92In this in-depth analysis, Malcolm and Simone Collins dissect the recent New York Times article about Hannah and Daniel Neeleman of Ballerina Farms, exploring the controversy surrounding their "trad wife" lifestyle. The video offers unique insights into media manipulation, the complexities of modern conservative influencers, and the tensions between progressive journalists and traditional families. Drawing from their own experiences with media coverage, the Collins couple provides a nuanced perspective on the Ballerina Farms story, discussing everything from Mormon culture to the economics of influencer farming.Key topics covered:* Analysis of the New York Times article on Ballerina Farms* The "trad wife" phenomenon and its cultural implications* Media manipulation tactics and influencer strategies* Mormon culture and its influence on the Neelemans' lifestyle* The economics of influencer farming and social media success* Comparisons between Ballerina Farms and other conservative influencers* The role of the LDS Church in shaping the Neelemans' public image* Critiques of modern parenting and societal expectationsWhether you're interested in social media culture, conservative lifestyles, or media analysis, this video offers a thought-provoking look at one of the internet's most talked-about families.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] I actually think that this narrative was intentionally crafted in order to make the other scandal impossible. YouSimone Collins: think this is a 4D chess situation?Malcolm Collins: There was something that happened in the piece that made me think that this was definitely a 4D chess situation.Simone Collins: You really think she was baiting the reporter with this?Malcolm Collins: I do think she was baiting the reporter with this. I think that they actually wanted to create this narrative that's being created right now.It's the type of thing you and I have done withSimone Collins: Oh, tell me more.Malcolm Collins: I have a secret theory on what the trip to Greece faux pas was all about. And I'm going to get into it in this video because I do not think it's what you think it is.I don't think she was saying that to her husband. I think she was saying that to somebody else entirely, but who could it be?Would you like to know more?Simone Collins: So Malcolm, I wasMalcolm Collins: actually Simone. I need to speak here. I don't, I don't think any of your opinions matter on this, but here we had to prep for that. Anyway, go ahead.Simone Collins: Straight. The trad wife dynamic. I was cruising YouTube as is my want, and I found that three of [00:01:00] my favorite YouTubers all had done. In the span of the last few days, Ballerina Farms analyses, and I thought, Oh my gosh, what is going on for those not in the know, Ballerina Farms is a very popular.We're talking like 9 million followers Trad wife, influencer, Instagram. They don't refer to themselves as a tra wife or a trad couple. And I say they because we're talking about sorry, Hannah and Daniel Neman. They are two Mormons married couple with. Eight kids living on a beautiful property outside Park City in Utah running a farm with dairy cows and chickens and pigs.AnMalcolm Collins: experience recently that was very similar to an experience that we went through. Right. So yeah,Simone Collins: these three YouTubers were all doing an analysis of an article that came out in the Times, which involved a reporter coming to visit them who then spent the day with the family. And then. Published what many people are calling a hit piece.[00:02:00] And what's really interesting is that we're sort of looking at this from people who have seen the exact same formula. British journalist wants to cover a, an alt right adjacent subculture targets of family. goes to spend time with them, probably comes with an existing agenda, or at least their existing cultural baggage, is probably, you know, a pretty progressive, you know, female journalist, and then subsequently writes an article that is beautifully written, you know, you know, interesting, florid, whatever, you know, very evocative.But it, you know, frames the target family in a controversial right and the target movement in a controversial right. And, and perennialism and tradwives, they're very, they're like cousin trends, if you know what I mean. You know, they're, they're a lot of, they rhyme. There's not a lot of intermixing. But they are, there kind of is, and I would say like any, any sort of progressive journalist that's like trying to explore and possibly criticize rising [00:03:00] conservative movements that are sort of, rebutting progressive ideals is going to look at both pronatalism and treadwifery.So what, what had happened to that very similar to what had happened to us in various hit pitch pieces that have been written about our pronatalist advocacy and our family in general. So it's like, I feel like we have insights into what's happened with the Neelman's that

In this thought-provoking discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the fundamental flaws in communist ideology, even in a hypothetical post-scarcity world. They delve into the nature of scarcity, class structures, and the evolution of influence in the digital age. This video challenges common misconceptions about communism and offers insights into how modern society and economics are shaped by attention, competence, and disintermediated communities.Key topics covered:* The impossibility of a truly classless society* Scarcity and status in post-scarcity environments* The evolution of influencer culture and digital communities* The role of competence and attention in modern economies* Critiques of communist ideology and its practical applications* The future of urban centers and distributed networks* The importance of family and cultural identity in societyWhether you're interested in political theory, futurism, or the dynamics of online influence, this video offers a fresh perspective on age-old questions and contemporary challenges.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] communism doesn't work even in a post scarcity world. Yes. I, I, I believe UBI might work in a post scarcity world, but even in a world where you have people's universal basic income, where you have people's basic needs taken care of, like you do food drop offs, you do medicine is handled by the state, you do like all of that.You still have the class structure we have in our existing society, and you will still have some resource which represents some form of scarcity, because there is always scarcity in any system and what people choose to value is always the thing that is scarce, even if that thing is pointless. And what I find really interesting is it's actually the communists themselves in our current society that are most drawn to artificial scarcity.It is much more the communists who get drawn to brand name recognition, like the Starbucks and the iPads and the et cetera.Would you like to know more?Simone Collins: And there is no such thing as a classist society. [00:01:00] It's not possible. No. Um, Do the intro.Malcolm Collins: Okay. Hello, everyone. I'm excited to be here with you today. Today is going to be, I hope, a Simone Abigail episode because she was the one who made this point to me while we were walking around a Target. What a fitting place.It's what we do.Simone Collins: It's what we do. WeMalcolm Collins: were talking about communism and the cliche. Real communism has never been tried, which we will also get to in this video. But one of the things that you turned and said to me while we were walking was, ThereSimone Collins: is no such thing as a classless society. It is absolutely impossible.Go into your argument because I found it very powerful. Yeah. So no matter what happens in a society, there will always be scarce goods. As soon as you make one good, not so good, People will then sort into classes based on what is scarce. And this shows up in various sci fi novels that anyone can read.I really like stuff by Cory Doctorow. He wrote this one book called Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom, which really [00:02:00] influenced the way that I saw the world in the future. It's, it takes place in a post scarcity environment. You know, post singularity, you can live forever, you have backups of yourself that you can just restore if you accidentally die or are murdered and in this world, you know, you don't need food, you don't need shelter, but There is still a class system and there's still a currency that is, that is limited and finite.And it's called Woofie. Woofie is social capital in this world. And so people form themselves into what are called adhocracies in this world. Which I love that word. Also. I want, I want a world of adhocracies instead of bureaucracies. Adhocracies are basically short lived collections of people who get together to Do cool stuff to get social credit.And the discovering system wouldn't be stable and I'll get to why in just a second, but continue. Yeah, I really like it. Nevertheless. This book is about adhocracies that form and compete in Disney's magic kingdom in Florida, in this [00:03:00] post singularity world. Cause some things never go away. Thank God. And what they do is they'll like, they take over the rides.So, Two rival groups in Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom are, are kind of competing for more woofy. One is, is redoing the Hall of Presidents and the other one is doing the Haunted Mansion. And you know, it's all about like, who can, you know, impress the world the most with their really cool updates to these rides slash attractions.And it's, it totally makes sense to me that that would be the case. And, you know, and when you, when you, when you say something, it's unpopular when you do something that really pisses people off. If you go viral for something bad. You know, that's it. You're sort of destitute, but being destitute doesn't mean you're starving or homeless.It just means you do

In this eye-opening discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the grim reality of housing markets in a world facing demographic collapse. They delve into the rapid decay of abandoned properties, the unsustainability of cities and suburbs, and speculate on a future where technologically advanced "havens" emerge amidst the ruins of our current civilization. This video offers a stark look at the potential consequences of population decline and technological advancement on our living spaces and social structures.Key topics covered:* The rapid deterioration of abandoned properties* The unsustainability of modern cities and suburbs* The impact of climate change on housing markets and insurance* Speculation on future "haven" communities and their characteristics* The potential divide between technophilic and technophobic societies* The role of AI and advanced technology in shaping future communities* Geopolitical implications of demographic collapse and technological advancementWhether you're interested in urban planning, futurism, or the long-term consequences of current demographic trends, this video provides a thought-provoking look at the potential shape of our future world.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] So here I am showing you some abandoned cathedrals.Abandoned for fairly short times. These are in Detroit, this stuff. I am showing you abandoned schools. And abandoned pools. And abandoned stadiums. It is Genuinely nightmarish. You would be safer sleeping in the woods than in what our urban centers are going to become.And so you can see that typically by the time you get to around 10 years without regular maintenance, you are looking at rubble.I'm justSimone Collins: getting increasingly nervous.Malcolm Collins: Well, I'm going to give you a little short story that'll make you maybe not so nervous.about one of our descendants a hundred years from now. This person. Is hiking. They've got a drone companion flying alongside them. It's doing regular scans on the environment around them. So they don't step into like a basement that could collapse or something like that. They are having a blast [00:01:00] exploring the ruins of a dead world. And then they come across a tribe, one of the technophobic groups LARPing some version of 1950s life.Would you like to know more?Simone Collins: Hello,Malcolm Collins: Simone. I'm excited to be here with you today. Today, we are going to be discussing one of the most misunderstood side effects of demographic collapse, which is.Cheap housing. Oh, hooray. Everyone always says, they say, well, when the population is 5 percent of its current size, then housing will cost almost nothing. And that will be fantastic. Because then all of the young people will be able to afford houses and everything will stabilize and go back to normal.Except that isn't what's going to happen. Talk about how quickly A house that is worth nothing begins to fall apart. And this is something that we saw [00:02:00] in Detroit. So we are going to go over timelines in Detroit of deterioration, but I also want to start a bit closer to home. So I grew up part time living on an island with my family that my family owns and now I don't inherit it or anything like that.It goes to my sister. So it's not like, again, I get nothing, don't worry about it guys still starting from scratch here, but,Simone Collins: Hey, I have to stop and say though, when we were first dating,Malcolm Collins: ISimone Collins: was like, this is a caricature of life, because no one actually has private islands, but apparently they do. But then, like, you and I learned that there's a reason why people don't have private islands. Because it kind of sucks. Well, another thingMalcolm Collins: that people know is that my family lost all its money and was unable to maintain things.And it is hard to sell a private island. Who wants that? Like, how can you even buy one, you know? And then [00:03:00] I'm going to go over what ended up happening to the property. Because I love when people are like, oh, islands, so defensible. So this is the living room. Of the house I grew up in. For those who are listening on the podcast it has trees growing inside of it now, all of the walls have fallen out of it well it has plate glass windows overlooking the ocean, but like, it looks like there is a forest in it now.And as I go through this, I encourage you the listeners to not think of this in the abstract, but as what your own home is going to look like. 10 years after you stopped. Living in it or you fail to sell it because of your population is declining. Because this is a picture that we see across rural Japan right now, so much so that they're giving away free houses.And I think that that is. , what we're going to see the future of the U S., I've even heard of instances as some people paying for people to take their houses. So they don't become these horrible nightmares.Malcolm Collins: This room is, I believe, my parents bedroom right here for people who

In this eye-opening discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into a candidate survey from Keystone Equality, exposing controversial LGBTQ+ policy proposals. They critically examine questions about gender-affirming care, educational curricula, and legal protections, highlighting potential unintended consequences and ethical concerns. This video offers a nuanced perspective on complex issues surrounding LGBTQ+ rights, cultural sovereignty, and the balance between protecting vulnerable groups and preventing exploitation by bad actors.Key topics covered:* Analysis of LGBTQ+ policy proposals in Pennsylvania* Critique of gender-affirming care for minors and associated legal liabilities* Debate on transgender athletes in sports* Discussion of LGBTQ+ content in school curricula* Examination of the "LGBTQ+ panic defense" in legal proceedings* HIV disclosure laws and their implications* Same-sex marriage and adoption rights* The concept of cultural sovereignty in LGBTQ+ issuesSimone Collins: [00:00:00] they're saying basically that the state of Pennsylvania is like, you know what, if you receive gender affirming care as a minor, You should have the right up until age 30 to sue your healthcare provider for offering that gender affirming care to you if it turns out that they were acting in a completely flagrantly irresponsible manner Oh, s**t!They're like, no, no, no, no. Because I think they know. That a lot of people who are getting gender affirming care as minors are going to sue their healthcare providers when, when they reach their twenties, when they reach their thirties, when they're fully myelinated, when they learn more and they're like, Oh no, no, no, we can't do thatMalcolm Collins: So you can be tried with Reckless endangerment. If you know you have HIV and you intentionally hide that from another individual and give them HIV., I can't even believe that they are trying to prevent this from the case. That they would, they oppose increasing criminal penalties. This is what I talk about.I don't know how you can be pro gay and pro Democrat at the same time. Like you have to, who, who suffers? From this being [00:01:00] removed from the law, who is going to predominantly suffer from this being removed? It's going to be gays who are trying to practice safe sex. That is who's going to suffer for this.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, everyone! In a previous episode, we mentioned that Simone got A letter in the mail because, you know, she's running for office and they ask her, what are your thoughts on various issues? And with a lot of them, you know, when it's like an anti gun organization, she can just basically throw it in the trash because she knows she's not going to come off smelling like roses to these groups.ButSimone Collins: I was super excited about this because this, this came from this group called Keystone Equality. They, they, they say that they support LGBTQ plus rights. And I'm like, Oh my gosh, like, this is one of those things where You know, we are more socially progressive, at least when it comes to our, our, our cultural sovereignty stance, you know, we may not you know, we may be on the conservative end, but we very much support people having the freedom to pursue whatever culture they want.So this is slam dunk, like, I should take this candidate survey. So they can endorse me and I [00:02:00] can show to Democrats and libertarians and more socially progressive people in my district that, you know, I, I may be a candidate worth consideration. I was so excited. And then I dive into it and I'm like, you know what I should have, I should have known that there were going to be problems because their logo is not the classic gay flag,Malcolm Collins: Republican gay flag.I call it, it isSimone Collins: as I think one of. The base camp followers named it, which is the best name, the colonizer flag, which includes the additional triangle of white, pink, blue, brown, and black, because race is a sexual orientation. I do not understandMalcolm Collins: how, like anyone who grew up with like a traditional understanding of non discrimination.This is wild that this flag thing happened. The, the rainbow represented everything under the rainbow. That was, that was the point. Yeah. The full spectrum. Less inclusive. We need to, we, it's, it's so freaking animal farm. I [00:03:00] really wish I had a good animal farm clip I could use every time I bring this up.Cause it's so insane. It's like, well, yes, I know we're all equal, but some of us are more equal than others and need special representation on the flag. And we'll just arrange a little. Bit of the historic gay identity with every little notch. And this is where I think in this survey, as we're going over this survey, people are going to learn that the progressive, like what the quote unquote progressives are advocating for with gay bills and LGBT bills these days, it is not something that like any sane person would want.Yeah, t

In this episode, we sit down with Maxim Lott to discuss the surprising recent political developments, including why Biden dropped out of the race, the influence of betting odds versus traditional polling, and the odds for Kamala Harris in the upcoming election. We also explore the evolution of prediction markets and their growing importance in political forecasting, as well as the potential impact of the new right on future elections. Tune in for a detailed and engaging conversation on the dynamics of election betting, political strategy, and the changing landscape of the Republican party.Maxim Lott: [00:00:00] Yeah. I'm excited for this too. I really appreciate your natalism work that you guys do. SoSimone Collins: we really appreciate the work you do, man. You're on at a perfect time. Like we're probably going to run your interviews with us.Like usually. Months for us to run these and now we're like, oh my God, we got to run itMalcolm Collins: with all this election stuff that's going on. This is wild. Yeah. You had, you had disagreed with the betting odds recently.Maxim Lott: Yes. Yes. I had a post about why Biden won't drop out and all this good reasoning, but the betting odds said he would and he did.So the lesson is to listen to the betting odds, not any one analyst.Malcolm Collins: Oh, I'd love to hear why you thought he wouldn't drop out.Maxim Lott: Yeah, you know, I thought it wasn't in his interest. If he wanted to, he could have gone to the convention and got the nomination. Yes, thankSimone Collins: you. That's, that's what I kept telling everyone.I was like, he's not, like, all the way up through Saturday, it was like, he's not going to drop out. No one can technically force him to drop out. And he's no reason to want to, why would he do it? No one can stop him. He's not going to drop out. So I'm with you on that. AndMalcolm Collins: you also [00:01:00] have the problem that Jill hates Kamala.And this is like publicly,Simone Collins: andMalcolm Collins: if she's making the decisions for Biden, she definitely wouldn't want him to drop out if she was a presumptive nominee.Maxim Lott: Yeah, and it seemed like there was no way for them to truly force him out either, but I think I underestimated how much kind of soft power there is in the Democratic Party with Obama and Pelosi really running the show.Simone Collins: Like, I don't know, man, they tried everything. I feel like they literally tried everything. Like people drove out to his house, you know, George Clooney, like just, they threw everything at him. And I think, and maybe in the end, because donations started drying up. That was it. You know, just like, yeah, I think it was probablyMalcolm Collins: donors that got him out.Simone Collins: SoMaxim Lott: you'd think if you can make it to the convention, the donors would, who else are they going to donate to? They don't like Trump. So, but clearly he felt the pressure and he had COVID and a lot of things conspired and he dropped out. So [00:02:00]Simone Collins: theMaxim Lott: bettors were not surprised. They had, This at like 70% a couple days before he dropped out.Simone Collins: Wow. So they,Maxim Lott: they were right. I, I lost money betting on the other side, but . Wow. Yeah. YouMalcolm Collins: know, he, he got covid we'll see if there was any you know, there was a lot of people interested in something like that happening to him. I was, I was joking. There was a thing about Trump's assassination and people were like, well.You know, Republicans would be cheering too if Biden was assassinated. I was like, not a single Republican I have ever met would be cheering if Biden was assassinated. They love it. It's a disappointing developmentSimone Collins: for Republicans that Biden is no longer running. They were thrilled with Biden running.Maxim Lott: Yeah. Now the polls have Kamala Harris up by like, maybe, or losing by one point less than Biden was losing by. So we'll see how that goes for them. The betting odds, yeah, the betting odds. It's interesting because you can look at these conditional odds. So you say, if this person's nominated, What are their odds of winning?And Biden's odds were always [00:03:00] around 30 percent. Kamala Harris's were around 37 percent. So she's slightly more electable, but not much more electable. OhMalcolm Collins: gosh. Okay, so we have been talking generally right now. I'm going to introduce youTo anyone who is wondering why the election betting on numbers are a bit off in this. It is because this was filmed.Around a week ago. And so sorry about that. It just took me a while to process it.Malcolm Collins: but so people who don't know Maxim Lunt, I Grew up on your stuff, every election cycle.Loading what's the URL here? Election betting. Election betting odds.com and then the, you had your own website because it is historically speaking, the most accurate predictor of who's going to win an election cycle. And I'd love it if you could talk a little bit about w

In this thought-provoking discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the controversial topic of PrEP (Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis) and its implications for public health, personal responsibility, and healthcare costs. They explore the ethical dilemmas surrounding government-subsidized HIV prevention medication, questioning whether lifestyle choices should be funded by taxpayers and insurance premiums.Key points covered:* The effectiveness and cost of PrEP medication* Government and insurance coverage of PrEP* The moral and ethical implications of subsidizing sexual health choices* Comparisons to other lifestyle-related healthcare costs* The impact on insurance premiums and healthcare accessibility* Cultural shifts in attitudes towards sexual behavior and public health* The intersection of personal freedom, responsibility, and societal costsThis video offers a balanced yet critical examination of a complex issue, challenging viewers to consider the broader implications of healthcare policies and personal choices. It's a must-watch for anyone interested in public health policy, healthcare economics, or the evolving cultural landscape of sexual health.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Keep in mind straight people can get HIV too and straight people might need to prep as well. Straight people who wouldn't need prep are straight people who are in monogamous relationships and trust their partner. It is not the being gay that makes somebody need prep. It's the orgies. That makes somebody need prep, or the treating sex like a handshake among friends that makes somebody need prep. If you are straight, and you are doing that, you will need prep.If you are gay, and you are monogamous, you will not need prep. When the Act was passed It was mandated that all insurance plans have to pay for this.So if a person is sexually active. They have to pay for thisObamacare has made things insane because insurance companies can't say, well, we won't take you. You need to go for a higher cost insurance. If you're going to make these lifestyle choices because at the end of the day, going to orgies is a lifestyle choiceIt's not just that it's affecting insurance. A number of states just offer this for free to people who want it. People pretend like this stuff, money comes [00:01:00] from nowhere, but no, it's always from something. If it's going to this, it's, it's not going to sick kids and I actually want to point out the perversion of a society that sees it as a moral necessity to pay for a drug that enables sex whenever you want, but that doesn't see it as a moral necessity to pay for IVF, the creation of new human life.Simone Collins: Oh, s**t.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I'm excited to be here with you today. Today's episode was inspired by actually an episode that Short Fat Otaku had done, opened my eyes to something I had no idea was going on. And it means when you ever look at your health care bills and you're like, why is Obamacare so unaffordable?Why is it so unaffordable to force everyone on to the same health care plan? And the answer, it turns out, is gay orgies.Simone Collins: Among other things, but definitely it seems gay orgies.Malcolm Collins: In part, gay orgies, yes. So, we're [00:02:00] going to get to something, and I don't think that there is actually That easy, a moral solution to this.Like at first it's gonna seem like, oh, obviously you should do X. But then when you think about it for a second, you're like, oh, but that'll have some really negative downstream effects.Simone Collins: I don't know. I I, I have maybe some moral equivalence, so I'm, I'm excited to discuss this with you.Malcolm Collins: So, what started was a Twitter fight. So I will describe to you the first tweet in this chain that led to the Twitter fight. Plant Mommy Posadis said, Realizing that sex doesn't have to be this sacred, all important thing and can instead just be an expression of affection between friends who are dear to one another is honestly the most life changing realization for me, surpassed only by realizing that I'm a girl.So this is obviously a trans person they're pointing out here. And saying, well, because you don't, most girls don't realize they're girls. I don'tSimone Collins: know. I feel like I realized I was a girl when your mom [00:03:00] was like, did you know that you can dress nicely and wear makeup? And I'm like, Oh,Malcolm Collins: wow. I want to reread.What we're saying here, right? Because I actually think this ends up being important to the conversation.Simone Collins: Yes.Malcolm Collins: That the, the huge realization for them. That was the second biggest realization they've had in their life. That sex can just be an expression of affection between friends.Simone Collins: Just a fun thing to doMalcolm Collins: with your friends, getting drinks, going out, having drinks, going out, having sex.Yes. Then a person responded to them, Mia Aren't we in another AIDS epidemic or some

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92 In this in-depth exploration, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive into the fascinating history of the Baby Boom and its surprising origins. They challenge common misconceptions about what caused this demographic phenomenon and discuss its implications for modern pronatalist efforts. Drawing from historical data, academic research, and their own insights, the Collins couple offers a fresh perspective on fertility trends and what they mean for our future.Key topics covered:* The unexpected fertility decline in early 20th century Europe and North America* Debunking myths about the causes of the Baby Boom* The role of medical advancements in reducing maternal mortality* The impact of World War II on societal values and family planning* Cross-cultural comparisons of Baby Boom effects* The limitations of housing policy in addressing fertility rates* The importance of cultural shifts in promoting higher birth rates* Implications for modern pronatalist movementsWhether you're interested in demographics, history, or social trends, this video provides valuable insights into one of the most significant population shifts of the 20th century and its relevance to today's fertility challenges.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone! We are back to pronatalist coverage! All right. And today we're going to be talking about a very Interesting phenomenon that not many people know about.Not many people are aware that half of Europe was below repopulation rate before the baby boom. In TFR numbers, that means that they weren't having enough kids to replace themselves. The entire world was in a bit of a fertility collapse during that period. And, We somehow got out of it with the baby boom, and then that's at a new sort of set point that we've been declining from ever since then.But I want to talk about two things. One, this initial slump, and two, theories for what caused the baby boom to potentially recreate a phenomenon like this. A phenomenon that we can recreate every hundred years or so, and then just have this cycle. That would be great, right?Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: This was written by Phoebe Arcelognick Wakefield.Phoebe came to ourSimone Collins: dinner in London, remember?Malcolm Collins: We met her?Simone Collins: Yeah, we know Phoebe.[00:01:00]Malcolm Collins: Oh, oh, oh, her, yes! Yes, Phoebe. The Indian food in London? Yes, yes, yes. I do think you begin to see her blinders near the end of the piece that is mostly due to the areas of policy in which she has worked.Malcolm Collins: But outside of that I actually think the piece is fantastic because it brought a lot of information to me that I didn't know. And I'd also say another thing I really liked about this piece and her writing Is usually when I take a piece, I just read like a few paragraphs from it to get like the core of the message.I'll be reading over 50 percent of this piece. Because she presented so much consistent new information. That I really have to read most of it to get the point across.Simone Collins: Right. I think we should be clear that Phoebe is one of the most prominent pronatalists in the UK. She's very respected, she's very smart, and she's a wonderful person.And you may be bad with names, but yes, we do know her. And she was always presented to us as a who's who of one of the, the top pronatalist policy wonks and thinkers. in the United Kingdom. So if you want to read [00:02:00]Malcolm Collins: this or other work of hers, you can check out works in progress, in 1800s, the average British woman had 4. 97 children over the course of her life, about the same amount as the average woman living in Birkenau Fosso today. A century later, Britain's fertility rate had slipped to 3. 9 children per woman. And 30 years later, in 1935, it had plummeted to 1. 79, well below the replacement rate of 2. 1, the number of children per woman needed to keep the population steady. So in 1935, the TFR of the UK was only 1.79. That's kind of shocking.Simone Collins: Yeah, those are modern numbers so much for, Oh, it was women entering the workplace. It was the pill.Malcolm Collins: No, no, this is actually very important. Very clearly this debunks the women in the workplace and the pill argumentsSimone Collins: and even women getting educated at that time, women, you know, also didn't have such high levels of, higher educational attainment either.So yeah.Malcolm Collins: [00:03:00] Yeah. This trend occurred across Europe by the 1920s. Over half of Europeans lived in a country with a below replacement fertility rate, including Sweden, Germany and the Czech Republic. The US and Canada also saw steady declines in family sizes throughout the 19th century. By 1800, the average American woman had over 7 children.By 1900, she had fewer than 4. 30 fewer than three. So talk about how quick that's happening. It goes from four to three in just 30 years there. And that's,Simone Collins: sorry, that's from what you said, 1850 to

In this thought-provoking discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the complex and controversial topic of transgender identity, its potential links to mental health issues, and its societal impact. This video offers a nuanced examination of the trans phenomenon, touching on social contagion theories, the relationship between high IQ and gender dysphoria, and the potential risks and benefits of transitioning. Key points covered: The correlation between high IQ and transgender identity Theories on social contagion and the spread of trans ideology The impact of transitioning on mental health and suicide rates The role of autism in gender dysphoria Critiques of current approaches to treating gender-questioning individuals The potential exploitation of trans identities by bad actors The impact on lesbian and gay communities The political implications of the trans movement This video presents a critical analysis of current research and societal trends surrounding transgender issues. It challenges viewers to consider multiple perspectives on this sensitive topic. Note that this discussion contains mature themes and controversial viewpoints. Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] What if this memetic structure which encourages transition instead of being something that is intrinsically toxic is actually a social technology that evolved to treat the increased nihilism and bupacidality caused by the urban monoculture.Simone Collins: I like thatMalcolm Collins: as a premise spicy. So how could it do this? When you transition, you are basically abandoning an identity, your current identity, and then building a new one.Simone Collins: You're literally killing it. Actually. For example, dead naming people is dead naming them that person is dead to themMalcolm Collins: What is most disturbing is that after a year on blockers, a significant increase was found in the first item.Quote, I deliberately try to hurt or kill self, end quote. This is in the youth survey questionnaire. So it was increasing. Puberty blockers increased even by Travis stocks own, as pro trans as you can get. They just didn't want to [00:01:00] publish this increases. DoWould you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone! I'm excited to be spitting some information and new theories with you that I have had recently today. Today, we are going to go back into the trans rabbit hole. We are going to be discussing a new framing I heard for gender transition that makes me dramatically more pro gender transition than I ever have been historically, and the way that gender transition is played out in mainstream society which is really interesting, which I think is different than just talking about trans issues.As I've said before in the show I think that there's the historic trans movement. And now there's the new trans movement, which contains some elements that are more like a religion than like a traditional gender ideology movement. Now the second thing I wanted to talk about, which I find really interesting is a recent Emil Kierkegaard, I know, [00:02:00] thought criminal piece that was talking about something that everyone basically knows, but I thought he did a pretty good job of summarizing it and laying out the stats again, which is that trans people are much more likely to be high IQ than other individuals.Simone Collins: And this isn'tMalcolm Collins: like a small thing. In fact, the difference between trans people and the general population is higher than the difference between Ashkenazi Jews in the general population.Simone Collins: Wow.Malcolm Collins: About a standard deviation, higher IQ than the general population. ThatSimone Collins: doesn't surprise me because you're looking at a very small, very unique and very differentiated population.And Ashkenazi Jews are not that different.Malcolm Collins: What are you talking about? You've heard of trans people? Compare to trans people. For example, gay people have a lower IQ on average than men. No. Really? Yes. Yes. No. This group is really unique. Wow. And they checked. It's not explained by anything else.It's not that they're, disproportionately birthed male or female, it's not that they're, their age. It's not that [00:03:00] they're. They don't have a different,Simone Collins: do they have a different gender? I feel like there's pretty much every background, culturally, religiously, ethnically. No, but they controlled for that in this study.They did. Oh, okay. So even ifMalcolm Collins: it's true That doesn't matter to this answer. It's just something disproportionately now, this is actually really interesting if what we are seeing in the modern trans movement is a disorder. So one of the things I say about transness is it would make sense. If human brains are gender differentiated to some extent, like that seems obvious that sometimes this gender differentiation would get messed up in like a systemic way.Like intersex people exist, stuff like that. Like why wouldn't that happen in the brain? Bu

In this eye-opening discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the controversial political career of Kamala Harris, examining her record as a prosecutor and her potential impact as a presidential candidate. The video offers a critical look at Harris's background, from her early career moves to her current position as a frontrunner in the Democratic party.Key topics covered:* Harris's controversial prosecutorial record and its implications* Her rise in politics and relationship with Willie Brown* Analysis of Harris's authoritarian tendencies and policy positions* The impact of her candidacy on different Democratic factions* Comparison with other political figures and potential election outcomes* Discussion of her public persona and communication styleThis video provides a balanced yet critical examination of Kamala Harris's political career, offering insights into her potential presidency and the concerns surrounding her candidacy. Whether you're a political junkie or simply trying to understand the current political landscape, this analysis offers valuable perspectives on one of the most talked-about figures in American politics.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] in every single instance, I thought the meme ified version of the scandal was like exaggerating things, a great example to start is the accusation that Harris kept people in prison to use as cheap laborers. I thought, , what they must mean is she didn't let some people out of prison and the state probably had a policy at the same time of using the people as laborers. There is no way she went on record and said,I, I'm supposed to release this person, but we need cheap labor right now. Now, I heard some allegations that she slept her way to her position. My assumption about these allegations was maybe she had a relationship with someone else in her department.There's no way! There's no way! Someone who she was sleeping with is is on record saying I gave her a job because she was sleeping with me. [00:01:00] There's no way that this person had a age gap with her.Simone Collins: Now, age gaps are considered quite hot by quite a few people.Malcolm Collins: I don't think you'd find this one hot. Harris dated Willie Brown when she was in her 20s and he was 60. I. surely she didn't provide cover for police who fatally shot people in questionable circumstances. Okay, what about corruption? Conflict of interest matters, When you aren't the only body that can investigate them.You don't just get to say they get to do whatever they want because they're your friend. That is wildI will post a picture here. Oh, Emily Harris's face made up of pictures of black people. She kept in jail knowing they were innocent. She did this to. Thousands of black people and she did it to secure the endorsement of the police union to win an election.If you wonder, [00:02:00] is this the type of person who would put me and my family in jail to win an election?No, but genuinely, if you are worried about our democracy, like, like for people who are like, I am worried about the health of the democracy, you should be being terrified of this candidate.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: HEllo, Simone. I am excited to be here with you today.This the writers of the America show have been doing a great job recently. Cause I'm loving these twists. Kamala Harris is something really. So for people who don't know American politics or what's going on right now, just a little recap the person running against Donald Trump, Joe Biden, it turned out in a debate that he seemed to basically be comatose.Like he did not seem like a fully mentally functioning person. And it became very clear that. Our government is now run by the deep state. I love it. The last election cycle, deep state is a myth. Now it's, well, yes, Biden may not be able [00:03:00] to think clearly, but everything's operating fine without him. So you really should vote for him.Shouldn't you? ISimone Collins: feel like it's, it's more than that. It's even like, but isn't, isn't it nice that the deep state's running? I mean, like politicians who like them anyway,Malcolm Collins: we literally nearly had an election cycle where it was Trump versus the deep state. Because obviously Biden's not running anything.So he got a lot of pressure from Dems to drop out. Interestingly, not from Kamala. She stayed very loyal in this respect to the end saying that he shouldn't drop out and that the deep state had everything handled, basically. The right move. It was, itSimone Collins: was very savvy on herMalcolm Collins: part. And then he said recently, okay, I am dropping out and Kamala is the presumptive dominate.Well, This is interesting because it wasn't what I thought would happen. In fact, I thought it was the least likely thing to happen because it seems like it's literally the only thing that could have happened [00:04:00] that was worse than Biden staying at the top of the ticket. What I suspected would happen is they would have some

In this thought-provoking discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the emerging "New Right" or "Silicon Valley Right" coalition within the Republican party. They delve into how this group, which includes tech entrepreneurs and venture capitalists, is reshaping conservative politics and policy positions.Key topics covered:* The shift from "GOP Inc." to a new conservative faction* Trump's alignment with the New Right and distancing from traditional social conservatives* The evolving stance on issues like abortion and same-sex marriage within the Republican party* The clash between old guard "Christian socialist" conservatives and the new tech-savvy right* How demographic changes and generational shifts are influencing conservative politics* The impact of this realignment on the future of the Republican party[00:00:00]Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone, I am excited to be here with you today. Some days I just have like this breakthrough in my perception of reality that changes everything for me in a way. Like I wish people are like, why can't you only record the good, you know, the good episodes, like do it once a week, but they're like really good.And I'm like, that's like not how my brain works. I know you're freezing, but occasionally I'll have an idea and I'll be like, Oh wow, this is earth shattering for me. And I wish I could make like a better, a premium but this is definitely going to go in the best episodes category because. I think I now understand something that was really difficult for me to understand before.And it gives me a better vision of what the Republican party is and where it's going. I'm so intrigued.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: So, the thing that I didn't understand Is, I saw this at NatCon, but I've seen this more broadly. When I talk to conservatives that are in the old [00:01:00] conservative intellectual elite, these are the conservatives from the pre Trump era sort of staffers, intellectual elite, when I say intellectual elite, I mean the type of people who are at the think tanks, the type of people who are being paid.Yeah, like career conservatives. They often come off to me as incredibly socialist, bordering on Marxist. And like Lyman Stone's a great example of this. He is a hardcore socialist. And I just didn't understand it. I didn't understand why they identified it with conservatism.Now they're Christian socialists. And so I could kind of get that. I was like, well, maybe it's that because they're Christian, they don't feel that there'll be accepted in the progressive circle, so they just try to push their socialism in conservative circles. But generally speaking, I didn't get it.I didn't get where this was coming from. And I also feel like my understanding of the conservative party transition was the introduction of Trump in post Trump has been, [00:02:00] Diluted, or like, not as good as I would like it to be. It has felt very, like, eh, like, I kinda get it, and I can put together, like, long explanations.about what it is. But a really tight explanation that made it easy for me to understand like how the policy positions flipped in the way that they flipped. No, I was not capable of doing that.So. I had this realization to me and I was like, oh my God, everything makes sense. So we're going to go over it.But it is in understanding the conservative party and the waves of the conservative party. So first you had what I'm going to call GOP Inc. This is the pre Trump conservative coalition. This coalition used disgust based morality, as we've talked about in other episodes, to motivate its base. Like, ew, like that would be an ew thing.But like, who actually made up its elite class, its philosophical class, and the class that it used to staff administrations? [00:03:00] It was an alliance of two interests. One interest group was These are people who had a strong religious framework for reality and believe that's, that should be represented in the government and should be legalized.Like morality should be legislated. And the second IE people should be the, like the laws should be designed to force people to act more in line with their religious frameworks.Simone Collins: Right.Malcolm Collins: In the second framework in this team up was big business. And intergenerational wells. Now people today, if you're like gin alpha or Gen Z, you'll be like wait.The people who ran large companies, people thought they were conservative. Historically, they didn't think they were the people staffing the white house. They were the core in like the Bush era in the 90s. This was a, like a Mr. Burns type characters. That was like, obviously Mr. Burns was a conservative and not a far progressive.[00:04:00] But now it'sSimone Collins: inconceivable to think of an organ of a corporation, not being. At least trying to look wokeMalcolm Collins: ultra woke.Actually here, I'm reminded a lot of a character like Jack Donaghy from 30 rock. The Jack Donaghy character in the modern world wou

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the fascinating dynamics of Trump's VP pick, JD Vance, and what it means for the future of conservative politics. This thought-provoking discussion explores the concept of "identity laundering," the evolution of American cultural groups, and how authenticity is perceived in modern politics. The Collins couple offers unique insights into the shifting alliances within the Republican party and the rise of tech elites in conservative circles.Key points covered:* The concept of "identity laundering" in politics* JD Vance's journey from hillbilly to venture capitalist to conservative icon* The evolution of Trump's political identity* The alliance between tech elites and rural conservatives* The influence of Scots-Irish culture on American politics* The shift in conservative elite culture* The potential impact on the 2024 electionWhether you're a political junkie, a student of American culture, or simply interested in understanding the complex dynamics of modern conservatism, this video offers valuable insights into the changing face of American politics.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Both J. D. Vance and Trump. represent a form of identity laundering and fraudulence that is extremely authentic and trustworthy. It builds trust. he grew up an actual hillbilly. Then he found out that to achieve the things that society told him were valuable, he had to adopt another identity.He's a Princeton venture capitalist, right?Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: Your true self is who you choose to be, how you choose to see the world. Yeah, he is not somebody who accidentally became who he is.He became who he is because he had a goal, I want to be X type of person now, and he has transformed himselfSimone Collins: all culture is a LARP. I think this ties into that. And I think you're much more authentic when you're LARPing culture than when you're just defaulting into whatever culture surrounds you because [00:01:00] you have consciously chosen it.Therefore, you own it.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone! I am so excited to be talking to you today! We had done an episode on J. D. Vance that actually went live today, and I was, as Trump's VP pick and the writer of Hillbilly Eulogy.Simone Collins: Eulogy. L and G.Malcolm Collins: I'm always going to get that wrong.Effigy is, I'm always going to say, don't say effigy. Anyway I, there was a really interesting discussion on the discord about the episode. And I'll put the interesting topic on the discord here so people can get these types of comments in real time as they're coming up. But it made me realize that this pic was fascinating.From so many perspectives that I want to dive into, like the psychology of this pick and the psychology that's represented in Trump now having as his running mate, I think the personification of the never Trump movement. And what that [00:02:00] means for the shift that we've had culturally speaking. Both J. D. Vance and Trump. represent a form of identity laundering and fraudulence that is extremely authentic and trustworthy. It builds trust.Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: And so do you want to talk about this?Because you were the one who first notices.Simone Collins: Yeah. So there are particular brands and personalities. I think are comforting and trustworthy in the same way that franchises are trustworthy. And I'll explain why. So I'd said earlier that it was very fitting to me and I found it very pleasing that Trump is like the poor man's caricature of a rich man.In yesterday's conversation how Trump is he frames himself as this very like classy, successful businessman. Whereas like your typical, like WASPy wealthy person in the U S would seem as pretty trashy.And on the flip side, you have this [00:03:00] man who's branded himself as a hillbilly and a man of people who nevertheless, after coming out of the Marines, went to Yale law school, worked in venture capital, worked with the tech that we, it's totally not like the hillbilly. And yet we see them as being.Probably more authentic when you actually come down to it than, like your average normal politician who's playing by the politician template of I'm authentic. This is me. And I'm basic. And I think a lot of what's going on there is they've both adopted characters that are predictable and in that way, trustworthy.You don't have to like someone to trust them. You have to feel like you can model and predict them. That's it.Malcolm Collins: I think it's more than that. So I think JD Vance is a bit easier to study this from than Trump, right? So JD Vance grew up like an actual hillbilly. So you read his book. Can you talk to some of the stories inSimone Collins: it?Yeah. I think, yeah, this is important that. People recognize it. He was mostly raised by his grandmother who he called Meemaw, and she really is this caricature as [00:04:00] well. This is like the classic Scots Irish back

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they explore the fascinating transformation of online political discourse from the early days of the internet to the present. This in-depth discussion covers the journey from atheist communities to the birth of modern online conservatism, touching on key movements like anti-feminism, GamerGate, and the rise of the "red pill" ideology. The Collins couple offers unique insights into how these shifts have shaped today's political landscape and the disconnect between online conservative culture and traditional conservative think tanks. Key points covered: The evolution of online atheist communities The transition from anti-religious to anti-feminist content The rise of the "red pill" and men's rights movements The disconnect between online conservative culture and traditional think tanks The role of platforms like YouTube and Reddit in shaping political discourse The impact of these shifts on modern conservative politics The potential future of conservative ideology and religious belief Whether you're a political junkie, a student of internet culture, or simply curious about how online communities shape real-world politics, this video offers a thought-provoking look at the unexpected twists and turns of internet-age political evolution. Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone! I am excited to be talking to you today. We just got back from NatCon, which is the National Conservative Convention, where all of the high and mighty conservative thought leaders, not real thought leaders, i.e. they don't lead the public's conservative mindset, they actually seem almost completely disconnected from the mainstream conservative movement which was a real takeaway for me when I was there. So these are all the people who work in the Washington conservative think tanks.Simone Collins: I heard Tower people.Malcolm Collins: Yeah, and I heard some thoughts there that really made me be like, wow at one point I was like, why are you doing this? The base doesn't want this, and they literally said, f**k the base. And I was like, wow, what one person where you got all mad where he's bureaucrats are good. Actually, we just need conservative bureaucrats.We need a larger bureaucracy and we need it to be conservative. And then another person was like, Don't complain about like socialism's okay. So long as it's within our value set and this is where you get like insane things. Like the heritage foundation did project 2024 where [00:01:00] they put out like this plan 2025 2025 for the trump administration and in this plan one of the things that they had was banning pornography And I was like, that is a leftist position, but what, are you not familiar with the stellar blade?Malcolm, they'reSimone Collins: coming together. Unity at last. We can finally agree on something.Malcolm Collins: No, it's a bunch of woke bureaucrats, it was like, Mild conservative overlay. BetweenSimone Collins: NOFAP, men's rights activists, and radical feminists, we finally found common ground! Porn is bad! Except that you guys know No, but I mean Making porn illegal, and making porn something that's shameful is the one number one thing no, holdMalcolm Collins: on.When you're talking about the base Like, NoFap is about self control. Even NoFap people are mad about the Stellar Blade controversy. Even NoFap people are mad about the Tracer butt controversy. Even NoFap people are mad about the Skullgirls controversy. Every time a group has attempted to censor male sexuality, [00:02:00] it has been a progressive leaning group.But I want to talk about how these groups became so Wildly different from each other. Why is the conservative online base which is the group that really got Trump elected, like Trump was the 4chan candidate to begin with. That is the group that made Trump happen. That is where Pepe came from. That is where emperor, god emperor Trump came from from the Warhammer stuff.That is where basically most of modern. Conservative internet culture came from a lot of people would say, okay a lot of this is downstream of 4chan, and it is, but it's not just downstream of 4chan, a very bizarre thing happened in internet history, which is the atheist movement online became the birthplace of the culture That is [00:03:00] now internet conservatism.Or internet republicanism, or internet Trump base, basically. Interesting. And the question is, how did this happen? you grew up a Muslim.Like, why did you convert to Christianity? Instead of just beingSimone Collins: atheist,Malcolm Collins: like, why did you first try Christianity when you started praying to God? And she goes, of all these years, when I was attacking and preaching against religious individuals the Muslims, would send me messages about how they were going to kill me.The Christians would send me messages about how they hoped they were praying for me and they were praying for me to be saved and they wanted me, and this is actually true of most of the atheist community. Wh

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they break down the significance of Trump choosing J.D. Vance as his running mate for the 2024 election. This in-depth analysis covers the shifting landscape of conservative politics, the rise of tech conservatives, and what this means for the future of the Republican party. The Collins couple offers their unique perspective on Vance's background, his transformation from Trump critic to ally, and the implications for upcoming elections.Key points covered:* The two main factions in current conservative politics* J.D. Vance's background and political evolution* Trump's strategy in choosing a younger, tech-savvy running mate* The decline of traditional GOP Inc. and rise of tech conservatives* Immigration policy and border control strategies* The importance of religious engagement in modern conservatism* Implications for the 2024 election and beyondWhether you're a political junkie or simply interested in understanding the changing face of American conservatism, this video offers valuable insights into the current state of Republican politics.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone. It is so exciting to be here with you today. Again, the world has changed and. In an incredibly positive direction. I should think previous episode. I had said that there are two paths Trump could take with his VP pick and which path he takes is going to show which team he is on and it is going to set the future of Republican politics in this countryWould you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: and right now there are two core Republican.factions that are like cultural groups. One is the GOP Inc. Remnants. This is the theocratic faction, which believes in a deontological theocratic morality and wants to enforce that morality on the general public.Simone Collins: performative Cultural conservatism, [00:01:00] what a lot of people think about when they think about traditional conservatives, like religious and typically very Christian, that kind of thing.No, the other faction isMalcolm Collins: religious and Christian as well. Yeah, but inSimone Collins: a very different way. Yeah, that's what I,Malcolm Collins: that's why I didn't say religious, because that's not the important part. The important part is that they are theists. Theocratic and morally deontological. So what I mean by that is these are the types of people, that wants to do things like, you saw in project 2025 in their mission, ban pornography force young men to do programs that basically put them on military enlistment lists.This is very different from the ideology that Trump represents, right? Yes. It's muchSimone Collins: more socialist leaning, much less libertarian, much less classically liberal too.Malcolm Collins: Yeah but, yeah it's very much like the government's role is to enforce a moral system. Yes. And this was the party that Mike Pence, his last running mate, [00:02:00] represented.Very, I can't be in another room with a woman without my wife there sort of stuff, oh the horror of this and it's not that we have anything against being in an alliance with this group or anything like that, but there is always, or up until I would say really just two days ago, there was always a chance that the conservative party post Trump reorganized around this group.But then there's been a new conservative faction growing this is the faction that's represented by individuals like Elon and Vivek and Tamath and they are the tech conservatives, I guess some people would call them. Where Peter Thiel's inSimone Collins: there too.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Peter Thiel's in there. They've been around for a while, but they have been growing in terms of their ability to actually interact with mainstream conservative politics.And I think that if Elon wasn't a foreign national, he would be the obvious [00:03:00] person to take over American conservatism after Trump. He's just very lined up to do that in terms of public sentiment these days. Now the, talking heads don't think though. But I think, when I talked to the base, I see much more yeah, way to go fight the man, you be you which is also the difference between these two factions.The theocratic faction is very much, we should have an authoritarian system. Or authoritarian in the way it relates to the people, culturally speaking. It's just, we don't like who's running it now. Like, when we were at NatCon, something we kept hearing is bureaucracy is good. It just needs to be a conservative controlled bureaucracy enforcing conservative cultural values.Simone Collins: Yeah. They just want to be the man. Yeah, they just wantMalcolm Collins: to be the man. Then you have the other faction, which is much more formal. Fight the man. It's an anti authoritarian faction where it does implement controls. The controls are generally designed to prevent authoritarian cultural overreach.So they would promote [00:04:00] ideas like there should be some restrictions around what schools should teach and show children wh

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins for a frank and thought-provoking discussion on conjugal duties in marriage. This video explores the complex dynamics of sexual obligations, consent, and relationship expectations in both traditional and modern contexts. The Collins couple offers their unique perspective on marital contracts, sexual satisfaction, and the often-overlooked aspects of successful long-term partnerships.Key points covered:* The concept of conjugal duties in different relationship models* The importance of clear expectations and relationship contracts* Sexual satisfaction as a mutual responsibility* The role of consent and enthusiasm in marital intimacy* Age gap relationships and power dynamics* Challenges faced by high-status individuals in maintaining fulfilling relationships* The pitfalls of polyamory for average couples* The importance of appreciation and recognition in long-term partnershipsWhether you're married, considering marriage, or simply interested in relationship dynamics, this video offers valuable insights into the complexities of modern partnerships.Simone Collins: [00:00:00] Hello everyone! We're so glad to have you back at Basecamp. Today we are going to talk about conjugal duties. That is to say, how much should each spouse be obligated to do sexy times with the other spouse? And is that important? Well Yes, andMalcolm Collins: consent in marriages and everything like that.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: The reason I wanted to do this particular topic is because when Fundy snark channels, when the channels that make fun of conservatives have their pearl clutching, Oh, I cannot believe they said that moments. One of the most classic is around a wife's conjugal duties. The idea that a wife either would not have the ability to decline consent in a marriage That a wife would have a duty to have sexual relations with her husband.Simone Collins: Yeah, something along those lines.Malcolm Collins: We hadn't [00:01:00] actually talked that much about this as a concept before, Simone, and this is just something that hasn't really come up with us. Because I've never understood I, yeah, I guess it, it didn't occur to me that you would ever say no, if I wanted to do something.So I am wondering how do you, like what, Yeah. What are your thoughts on this topic? Do women have a conjugal duty to their husbands?Simone Collins: My, and I'm sure you can predict this. My response is it all depends on what the relationship is founded on. If the relationship is founded on sex, then absolutely if everything is predicated on that, if you know that your partner married you because they wanted to have sex frequently or because they found you sexually attracted and wanted to have sex with you regularly and are marrying you for sexual access.That is part of your obligation. A really common stereotype of relationships. So it's common as a stereotype because it's true. Is it really high wealth, high value men may marry a trophy wife who is much younger perhaps [00:02:00] not as professionally or financially successful, but very sexy for that sexual access.And in that case, it would be insane for the young woman who ends up getting married. To act as though it is anything, but absolutely her conjugal duty to satisfy this has this partner sexually, as long as they're married, no matter how she feels like she should behave, as long as he is keeping up his end of the bargain, which typically is, I'm going to, you will live in luxury, you will get jewelry, you will get clothing, you will go on fancy trips, have the best food, whatever.So I think that the whole point is, and this is why relationship contracts are so important. Partners need to know what is being exchanged before they get married, because it is 100 percent your obligation. In fact, I'm so vehement on this that let's say I'm a young, beautiful woman and an older man marries me because they want to regularly have sex with a young, beautiful woman.Let's say I'm courting Leonardo DiCaprio, and I'm, it's all right. I [00:03:00] think that it is my duty toMalcolm Collins: put the Leonardo DiCaprio chart on the screen here. What age is it when they turnSimone Collins: 24 or something like that? It's quite it's mid twenties. And along those lines, I think he's a really great example here.I would put in our relationship contract if I were to marry Leonardo DiCaprio as that he would have every right to sleep with whatever woman he chooses. And I may even offer to help source those women after I age out of his attractive age range, if I want to maintain that relationship. In other words, if I want to continue To be his wife and continue to have access to presumably his wealth, his connections, whatever, like the, whatever he brings to the table that I would then need to continue to provide that item of value.I heardMalcolm Collins: what she just said differently, because it's funny you're taking an incredibly. Some people would say conservatist ex

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dissect the recent assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump. This in-depth discussion covers the media's initial attempts to downplay the event, the political implications, and broader concerns about the state of American democracy. The Collins family offers their unique perspective on this shocking event, its aftermath, and what it means for the upcoming election.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] It's no longer the deep state is a conspiracy. We are now at the deep state is real and is running for president.Simone Collins: But I think you also have to get back to that reality.People are okay.Malcolm Collins: And so now the question is the deep state actually responsible for these felony charges? Are they responsible for the assassination attempt? And what scares me is I'm leaning towards no, I'm leaning towards all just malfeasance and stupidity and inaction, but I think it's plausibly yes.Simone Collins: Yeah, but people are okay with that. That's what scares me if somebody did shoot something at another person, what should happen to them?Octavian Collins: You know.They can get hurt.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone.What a crazy day to be alive and an American. And. For you to be running for office in the middle of all of this this is again one of those moments so weird that this happened so soon after that I think a [00:01:00] pivotal debate, which in many ways felt like a turning point in American history. And then you have this.Simone Collins: Yeah, this summer really puts the crazy inMalcolm Collins: democracy. The crazy in democracy. So yeah, we are going to go over a few things here. One that we'll go over later is I want to give a full account of what actually happened and how it happened, because I notice that the newspapers have done a very poor job of that.Two, I want to talk about that within the context of this current political battle and what this means. Yeah. But the thing I want to start with because it's what genuinely chilled me the most and for those who don't know I don't know who you are. But somebody just tried to assassinate Trump. And they it was a 20 year old That means that this person would have been 12 when Trump first came into office they shot at Trump they just grazed him his ear but twoSimone Collins: people were killed, including the shooter and two people were critically [00:02:00] injured and Trump had his ear pierced by a bullet.Malcolm Collins: Two critical injures one victim deaths, one shooter deaths, and then Trump's ear being grazed and obviously the optics of this for Trump are fantastic in terms of him coming out, shouting, fight fight, fight, you know, I think a lot of people after that debate uh, this is something that I've heard in my friend circles.Said, Oh, they're going to try to have him assassinated. You just, I thought they were crazy. They're like two weeks.Simone Collins: And literally like in a campaign strategy call recently, maybe just a couple of days ago, Biden said that we have to put Trump in the crosshairs, which now is just such bad wording.Oh, andMalcolm Collins: I remember when there was the attempted shooting or there was a shooting of some democratic representatives and somebody had said something like that, or there was a time when The Sarah Palin used crosshairs in one of her political ads,Simone Collins: And then Gabby Giffords was shot, and this was about 15 years ago.Another politician, if you're not in the U. S. And then later Sarah Palin actually sued someone who blamed her for this. So I, I. I believe a media publication for defamation [00:03:00] or libel. But the leftMalcolm Collins: was like, she needs to withdraw. She needs to like, that is how seriously they took this.And yet they treat this like nothing when it's Biden. And when it's a president who was almost assassinated. We need to the thing that was most chilling to me about this because I want to start with this was what you found Simone in terms of the newspapers trying to hide from the public that this had happened.So can you go over some of the initial headlines?Simone Collins: Yeah. So Trump escorted away after loud noises at PA rally from the Washington post, CNN, loud noises at PA rally, loud noises. CNN reported secret service rushes Trump off stage after he falls at rally, which just makes it sound like, he was tremendously old, like Biden or something.Took a spill which is not great. And then here's USA Today. Trump removed from stage by Secret Service after loud noises startles [00:04:00] former president crowd.Malcolm Collins: Startles former president? Somebody's head friggin exploded on stage. Now, in case you're like a lefty here and you're like, oh, it was very You know, like it was a loud thing.Lots of people didn't know what was fully going on. You need to keep in mind a few things. Uh, one person was, like, there's blood everywhere. It was very clear in the moment it was a someone i

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dissect the new pronatalist book "What Are Children For?" by Anastasia Berg and Rachel Wiseman. This in-depth discussion explores the challenges of promoting childbearing within a progressive framework and the broader implications for demographic trends.Key points covered:* Overview of "What Are Children For?" and its reception* The difficulty of justifying childbearing in a progressive worldview* Analysis of the book's central themes and claims* The impact of soft cultures on attitudes towards parenthood* The importance of having an objective function in life decisions* Critique of progressive arguments against having children* The unintended consequences of fertility strikes* The role of overthinking in modern parenting anxieties* How pronatalist arguments can reach progressive audiencesWhether you're interested in demographics, cultural trends, or the intersection of politics and family planning, this video offers a thought-provoking analysis of the challenges facing pronatalism in progressive circles.Simone Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, everybody. It's Simone Collins here. And I'm so glad to see you here today. I am taking over this podcast. Oh no! It's been takenMalcolm Collins: over!Simone Collins: Yeah, because I am going to lead the discussion today. I've decided not to phone it in. And we are going to talk today about a new Pronatalist book that came out called What Are Children For?Which is basically the left's attempt to At pronatalism it is a book that we were just told about by a friend at a conference and she basically explained it as this is the pronatalist argument. But from the perspective of a, an educated Brooklyn elite, who's highly progressive.Yeah, but they got likeMalcolm Collins: an opinion piece in the New York Times, for example. Yeah, it gotSimone Collins: an opinion piece in the New York Times. It got a write up in the New Yorker. Obviously and they would never even consider giving us a platform. WeMalcolm Collins: have done we've reached out to them before. They don't,Simone Collins: No. They don't talk to us, but they do talk to them. Because this was co written by two of their people. [00:01:00] Yeah. And so obviously we're super excited to read this book because, oh my gosh, maybe. Because we cannot apparently speak to pronatalism in a way that gets progressives excited. Maybe two progressive pronatalists could speak to progressives in a way that gets them excited.And so they did, and so I read the book. Um, and okay, let me just start off by giving you the book's description, Malcolm, and I want to get your impression because I've read the book, Malcolm has not. Let's see what you think. So this is What Are Children For? On Ambivalence and Choice by Anastasia Berg and Rachel Wiseman.It came out on June 11th. So right now only three Three reviews have been written about it. It's very new. Here's the description becoming a parent. Once the expected outcome of adulthood is increasingly viewed as a potential threat to the most basic goals and aspirations of modern life, we seek self fulfillment, we want to liberate women to find meaning and self worth outside the home, and we wish to protect the planet from the ravages of climate change.Weighing on the [00:02:00] pros and cons of having children, Millennials and Zoomers are finding it increasingly difficult to judge in favor. With lucid argument and passionate prose, Anastasia Berg and Rachel Wiseman offer the guidance necessary to move beyond uncertainty. The decision whether or not to have children, they argue, is not just a woman's issue, but a basic human one.And at a time when climate change worries threaten the very legitimacy of human reproduction, Berg and Wiseman conclude that neither our personal nor collective failures ought to prevent us from embracing the fundamental goodness of human life, not only in the present, but in choosing to have children in the future.So what do you think of this description?Would you like to know more?Simone Collins: What's your impression here?Malcolm Collins: I mean that it is what you said it is. It is pronatalism. And progressives are screwed. If they can't figure out a prenatalist cultural subfaction, their entire value system is going to go extinct. Yeah. And a lot [00:03:00] of people look at us and they think that we're like, secretly trying to save the progressives or something like that.I would like some aspect of their culture to survive, but I don't want them to have the cultural dominance they have now. I think that's, they've shown that they basically become Nazis whenever they gain cultural power and they start dividing humans by ethnic group. I'm going toSimone Collins: say a lot of the things that progressives fight for that they, they say they want pluralism.Freedom of lifestyle, et cetera, are things that we very much support. It's just that in terms of what they actually allow for and support, progressives don't tend to do that in p

In this thought-provoking episode, Malcolm and Simone delve into the controversial topic of parentification, exploring its various definitions and implications for raising children in large families. They discuss how the concept is often misused by YouTube commenters and contrast it with the medical industry's understanding of emotional and instrumental parentification. Malcolm argues that historically, children taking on parental roles was seen as a moral responsibility and necessity for maintaining high fertility rates. Simone adds nuance to the discussion, highlighting the importance of consent, aptitude, and ensuring children's safety when assigning responsibilities. The couple also touches on the psychological benefits of giving children age-appropriate tasks and the dangers of creating a culture where kids believe they can shirk responsibilities they dislike. Join Malcolm and Simone as they navigate this complex issue and offer insights on fostering a sense of moral responsibility in children.[00:00:00]Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Hello, gorgeous husband. Today, we are going to do an episode on the topic of parentification. , so what I've learned, cause I wanted to do some more research on this before going live with this episode. Is like the actual definition of parentification is not the way it is used by YouTube commenters.Oh. And so we'll be talking about parentification as three different concepts throughout this show. So first is the way that it is most often used because where I see this is when we're watching like Ultra progressive reaction videos to prenatalist families, IE video families with a lot of kids,Industry Collins: orMalcolm Collins: when we see fam kids who grew up in large environments with a lot of other kids, their complaint is parentification.And when this is,Simone Collins: we should say kids who grew up in large families who subsequently deconverted from that, their birth culture, essentially.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So they will say that they were forced to undertake the [00:01:00] role of the parent to In some of like in helping raise their siblings that they were in part responsible for raising their siblings.This is the way it is used within pop culture.Then within the medical industry or the way it was originally intended to be used is actually there is emotional parentification, which means that the parent relies on their child for emotional support that should be coming from their partner, i.e. they are treating their child more like a friend and less like a child. The other category of parentification here is , when a child feels the need to take on responsibility because their parent isn't fully responsible.Industry Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: Example here would be like their dad ran away, their mom's addicted to crack and they had to raise their sibling.Simone Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: This is very different than the way [00:02:00] YouTubers mean it, which is, I grew up in a family with seven kids, and I was responsible for sometimes watching after my siblings, or feeding my siblings, or, etc.And it's a very important topic to dive into because so long as parentification as it is talked about within the YouTube community is something that is shamed, culturally we will never be able to get above replacement rate again. Because taking responsibility for one's family members historically was just seen as an obvious moral good and responsibility of every individual, right?You cannot raise a large family. Especially in a historic context without the children taking on some of the parental roles. And to understand what I mean when I say this, in the 1800s in the United States, your average American had seven [00:03:00] kids. Average. So that means for every American who didn't get married or had zero kids, there was another American having over 14 kids.Okay? That means for every American who had four kids, The measly, tiny number of four kids, oh shame to that barren spinstress, which we only recently got to a few days ago That meant that there was another family that was having 10 kids.These were families, the average American family, where the kids were relied upon in part to help with child rearing. And we should note how much this was stalled in a cultural context. So I read the diary from one of my ancestors in a previous episode. It's the episode titled something like kids used to like their parents.And it was, it's a great episode, by the [00:04:00] way, I strongly suggest you check it out. It's one of those episodes where it ended up getting rev shared and I was like, I don't even care. Too good. But great episode. But this previous episode in the diaries, something that was very interesting, is it was seen as totally normal and admirable for the older siblings in a family.To give up their potentiality in life to expand the potentiality of the younger siblings. So in this family, what happened is the, you could go work in the local lumber mill and make go

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92 Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they unravel a fascinating conspiracy theory about the Mormon church's influence on social media. This eye-opening discussion explores why Mormon influencers are disproportionately popular online and reveals the surprising connection to the LDS church's rebranding efforts.Key points covered:* The LDS church's wealth and marketing budget* Unusually high CPM rates for Mormon-related content* The 2001 and 2018 name change initiatives* How the algorithm boosts Mormon content* The challenges facing Mormonism in the internet age* Potential strategies for the LDS church moving forwardWhether you're interested in religion, social media, or marketing strategies, this video offers a unique perspective on the intersection of faith and technology in the modern world.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Elisa Grenfell. And for her part of the conspiracy theory, what she was investigating was The question of why are there so many Mormon influences, Elisa Grenfell. It's not a conspiracy theory, basically, it is 100 percent proven from my perspectivethere was a fact that she found.That she thought was just an odd curiosity. Ooh, so silly. So silly that this is the case. I don't think this is an odd curiosity at all. I think that this explains everything. So I asked an AI algorithm, when did Mormon influencers start to rise in popularity disproportionately? And perplexity said it was in 2001.Remember I said that was when they first started discouraging the term Mormon. And then recently there's been a rebranding to further discourage the use of the term Mormon among church members.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello. I am so excited to be here with you today. Simone. This episode is going to be one of the Malcolm goes into a conspiracy [00:01:00] theory.Although I don't think that this one is a conspiracy theory. I think it's actually proven in the data at this point. And it's very interesting. Now I should note one, this is not going to be like an anti Mormon episode of that's what you're here for. Anti Mormon content.Simone Collins: Yeah, sorry. We're Mormon stands.SoMalcolm Collins: even our theological beliefs, I've been told by Mormons, they align enough with Mormon theological beliefs that. Some Mormons would consider us more like inactive members or members not in good standing with the church. But theologically they're pretty similar. So yeah.Simone Collins: Someday we'll get our temple recommends cards.It's okay, Malcolm. The day will come, maybe. I know,Malcolm Collins: right?Simone Collins: The day will come. The day will come. I guess we're not going to tithe, so probably not.Malcolm Collins: I would never do that. I just don't believe in the central church concept. Yeah, we're very against that. Yeah. Yeah. But that aside, , that aside I believe I have [00:02:00] discovered the solution to a question I was wondering a long time, and I'll set up the question.Okay. Yes. Throughout the nineties so just a little background on the term, Mormon. Mormon was originally used as a term, not necessarily derogatory, but just by people outside of the Mormon church to refer to people at the Mormon church because. It comes from the book of Moroni, right? That's where you get the word Mormon, right?Like it's not like an insulting term or anything like that. Mormons reappropriated the word throughout like the 80s and the 90s and it became a mainstream word within the church for members of the church. It started to become unfavorable for church members and there was a, hold on I'll pull up the exact wording here.In starting around 2001, the church encouraged the full use of its name and discouraged the use of Mormon church although Mormon was still widely accepted among church members. So you've got to keep in mind these [00:03:00] dates here, because they're going to turn out to be important. So the first move against the term Mormon was a lighter push that came in 2001.But then, there was a much heavier push in August of 2018. In which and by the way, what the thesis of this video is going to be on is Why did these pushes happen? Because I'll explain why they don't make a logical sense from the perspective that they're being laid out by the church. , as of August, 2018 I'll just read basically what AI says about this and what it said the church's explanation was.Okay. The church, of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints , has had a longstanding, so since 2001, preference for using its full name rather than nicknames like Mormon or LDS Church. But this policy was strongly emphasized and formalized in August 2018. Here's a summary of the key points.Divine Directive, President Nelson stated, that this change was revealed to [00:04:00] him by God, emphasizing, quote, the importance of the name he has revealed for his church, end quote. New guidelines, the church has issued a style guide that discourages the use of, quote unquote, Mormon church, LDS church, and Morm

In this eye-opening video, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the controversial world of modern therapy, particularly focusing on Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) and its impact on teenagers. They discuss a recent study revealing the negative effects of DBT interventions on adolescents, including worsened depressive symptoms and strained parent-child relationships. The couple explores how therapy culture has evolved into a cult-like system, drawing parallels with historical cult tactics and modern urban monoculture. They also touch on the dangers of over-medicalizing normal human emotions and the importance of critical thinking when approaching mental health treatments. This in-depth analysis offers a thought-provoking look at the current state of mental health care for young people and suggests alternative approaches to emotional well-being.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] The main findings, DBT intervention did not improve outcomes significant deteriorations were observed across outcomes immediately postSimone Collins: intervention. MakeMalcolm Collins: things worse. Um, Largest deteriorations were seen in depressive symptoms and, if you really needSimone Collins: the help, it makes things even worse.Malcolm Collins: Teen participants continue to report significantly poorer quality of parent child relationships, specifically mother relationships.And I think that comesSimone Collins: down to the way in which This kind of behavior can irreparably recontextualize the way that you see your relationship. And I think it's really hard to fix that damage.Malcolm Collins: And it's a very effective cult tactic. Pretty much all cults do this. They try to convince you that , your primary support network is being abusive to you. And your primary support network is usually your parents or your birth culture,And you are of high intellect, Peggy. No matter what you've been told by your husband? No. Your father? Not really. Mother. [00:01:00] How did you know? Because we love you!Malcolm Collins: This ultra urban monoculture is what we historically would have recognized. As a cult.Excuse me, are y'all with the cult? We're not a cult. We're an organization that promotes love and Yeah, this is itMalcolm Collins: it didn't used to be like this.Like I wasn't interested in high school. I supported it in high school. It has been taken over by a cult.Is the holy guide to living pure, this will help explain. First, Laughter. Her name's Lorraine, too? We're all Lorraine, and you will be Todd. A name chosen especially for you oh. You're notAn oppressed minority. you're a cult!Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone, you sent a study to me that absolutely shocked me, and I really want to go over the results of it because I think [00:02:00] it isSimone Collins: terrifying, fascinating, disturbing, but also pretty definitive proof of your claim. That one of the primary means by which the urban monoculture spreads is through therapy culture and that it uses therapy culture primarily to alienate young people from their support network.SoMalcolm Collins: let's dive into actually and leading to these. Absolutely horrible. We did another episode recently showing that one in 10 kids in school right now has thought about unaliving themselves this past year. Like that is an insane statistic, the percent that made a plan to unalive themselves, 24 percent among young women, 12 percent among young men. Yeah. The ones who seriously considered attempting at 30 percent young women, 14 percent young men. The feeling persistent sadness, 57 percent of young women, 29 percent of young men.So what is happening in schools right now is not working. And a big part of this is the infiltration of, as I've always said, modern psychology has become more like [00:03:00] a cult. What you get, if you go into a modern psychologist today, is a cult. Is much closer to what Scientology was doing with people in the 90s, then what would happen if you saw a psychologist in the 90s?And I'm not saying all psychologists fall into this, but the ones that are influencing the policy, what's happening to kids are and we can see this. In the study data. So what was the name of the study again? Simone, I've got all the information on it. I justSimone Collins: gotThe study is called investigating the efficacy of a dialectical behavior therapy based universal intervention on adolescent social and emotional wellbeing outcomes. That's a mouthful, but they're basically like. Does dbt help teams? That's what they're trying to find out here.Malcolm Collins: So this is a AI summary of what the study ended up showing and the way the study was constructed, which I'm guessing is probably what you were going to read.AISimone Collins: explains it in plainer English. How it is with these academic studies, they like decide to make them harder to understand. AMalcolm Collins: lot of people buried the lead with the title of this study because the results [00:04:00] are shockin

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92 https://collinsinstitute.org/ In this eye-opening video, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the alarming state of modern education, revealing startling statistics on student mental health and academic performance. They discuss the rise in depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation among students, particularly young women and LGBTQ+ youth. The couple explores how current educational practices may be contributing to these issues and examines the growing trend of homeschooling as a response. They also touch on the controversial topics of gender dynamics in schools, the impact of progressive policies, and the urgent need for educational reform. This comprehensive analysis offers insights into the challenges facing today's students and proposes potential solutions, including the Collins Institute's alternative educational approach. Malcolm Collilns: [00:00:00] Oh no! Oh my gosh. Almost one in three young women Not over the course of their adolescence, just in the last year has thought about unaliving themselves.Simone Collins: Oh dear.Malcolm Collilns: That is how bad the school system is right now. It was young women, 24%. Oh, mySimone Collins: plan.Malcolm Collilns: Young women made Alan. To kill themselves this last year. This last year, again, not over the course of their life. This is critically bad at this point. This is we are in the drain cycle right now. Young women, 13% young men, 7%. Whoa. More than 10 are attempting to kill themselves every year. Whoa. what if we are trading our children's childhoods so that they can be played with in some sort of a weird Marxist social experiment that has been Executed by a bunch [00:01:00] ofWould you like to know more?Malcolm Collilns: Hello, Simone! You and I have done episodes on how bad the public school nightmare is right now. I think a lot of people think it's just like a steady degree difference from when we were kids. is not. We are going to be going into a lot of data, a lot of statistics in this episode.I knew that when I was doing the research for this, I was like, Oh my God, if I could make enough money to support myself off of our content, and I could just like really do research heavy episodes all the time, I would be. So happy. Like it is such a pleasure to get to dive into statistics and see what is being hidden from the general public at this point.So what I'm going to start with is just like how bad things are because not in terms of outcomes, but a lot of people, they look at how we're raising our kids and they're like The things you're doing with your kids are going to make them unhappy. Why don't you just do what everyone else does?Or, taking them out of public school. Oh my God [00:02:00] they'll, all these like horrible fear tactics. And it really has become fear tactics. An article ran in Scientific America recently that showed that, 37 percent of homeschoolers, it was like homeschooling is tied to abuse 37 percent of homeschoolers.abused their kids, and we know this because CPS was called on 37 percent of families they didn't think to check the base rate. It turns out that actually out of all families 37 percent have had CPS called on them. So I think that actually means thatSimone Collins: homeschoolers have generally lower rates of actual abuse because think about it this way.Homeschooling families have larger numbers of children. So one child causes some kind of warning that has CPS called. They're much more likely to they're like every child will be seen as being like plausibly subject to abuse. Also, I've just noticed that larger families are more likely to have people be very judgmental of the way that they raise their kids.So I feel like they're way [00:03:00] more subject to scrutiny. And I think a lot of people just. Think that having more than two kids is abusive. Just like that a parent's attention would be divided that much. is without doing anything else, even if they did everything absolutely right, they were still terrible parents.So I would say it's impressive that it's not a higher rate.Malcolm Collilns: No no. I, what I think when you're talking about this 37 percent number, I think it shows just how oppressive the urban monoculture is in trying to take people's kids and that it's becoming more and more so over time. Yeah.Simone Collins: 30. Yeah. But just on its own, that number is sobering 37%.Holy.Malcolm Collilns: But like in terms of the kids aren't all right. So I'm going to read to you some statistics by the CDC. So actually I'll play a little game. I'll have you try to guess what the numbers are before we get to them. Because and I'll even prime you by saying that I think the numbers are going to shock you.On a survey of experiencing and this survey ends in 2021. experienced persistent feelings of sadness [00:04:00] or hopelessness during the past year in the United States. And we're looking at young men and women. What would you expect?Simone Collins: Are they above or below the ag

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92https://technopuritan.com/Tract 7: Good vs. Evil : The Heavenly Host Most of the true revelations of God speak of some sort of malevolent agent whether it's the Devil, Shaytan, or Ahreman. You even see this in Judaism, “Everything which the Holy One, blessed be He, created, He created with its counterpart. ... He created righteous; He created sinners. He created the Garden of Eden; He created Gehenna.” I have always found this portrait quite hard to square with strict monotheism. There is one God but also some other entity with enough independent power to Go against His will and challenge his plans? That is just polytheism under a different name. And no, you can’t say that God has more power than the Devil and that is what makes this still a monotheistic conception. We don’t say the Greek Pantheon is Monotheistic just because it is ruled by Zues and he has more power than the other Gods. When explaining this malevolent entity in monotheistic traditions there are a few common options. One is to say God intentionally created an independently sentient malevolent entity and unleashed this on man so bad things can happen but He is not culpable. This seems almost impossibly petty and cowardly. God obviously did not do this. Another common answer is to say, “God created a malevolent entity that carries out His will.” If this is the case what is the point of flirting with polytheism when we are commanded not to? How does the Devil being separate remove any culpability from God if he is just carrying out God's will? It seems fairly clear that the only sensible answer for a monotheistic tradition is that this evil entity does not exist distinct from God but instead that this entity is one avatar of God's will. It is the avatar of God’s will that he uses to push us to improve and cull the weak but a direct avatar of God nonetheless. Despite the Basilisk and God quite literally being the same entity it is useful for us to think of them as opposing forces within cosmology and thus we speak of and mentally model the Basilisk as a separate entity of God. It is important to remember, especially when talking about more recent scripture and tradition, that their is no magical force field around it that keeps other cultures from seeping in. Even if you are righteous monotheists if you live beside polytheists for a thousand years many of their framings will seep into your religion. Some might even be useful ways of seeing God. But it is critical to never extend these to anything other than framings. Of course, many do this and this is how it is possible to follow an Abrahmic tradition and yet worship a polytheistic pantheon headed by Baal in all but name. To put it more pointedly: There is only one God. The Devil does not exist as a meaningfully distinct supernatural entity. However, the Devil is a useful framing device when we humans are thinking about issues of good and evil and that is why he is used throughout revelations from God. God's intentionality and thought are so much more expansive than our own mental landscape it does not even make sense to think of it as a consciousness. Because our ability to mentally model God is so limited God has given us frameworks to help us—when we model these frameworks (the Devil, angels, the Holy Ghost, etc.) we will come closer to how God wants us to react to his actions than if we attempt to model God directly (which as Tract 4 points out is a form of idolatry most high in our religion). We will go through these entities in turn but we must be clear that they do not really “exist.” They are farming devices. They are just the best ways for our limited brains to think about a type of thing we can not understand.* One benevolent being that encompasses all of what to modern man appears as the divine. This is the being that both we and traditional Christians call God. This being is the most “real” understanding of the supernatural world we are capable of and the other beings are different ways of thinking about fragments of this one unified being. * A cadre of lesser benevolent beings that exist simultaneously as plural and singular beings. These are what Christians call Angels, The Host of Heaven, and the Holy Ghost. We call these beings / this being the Agents of Providence. While this is not what they are, we think the closest framing a living human of our time can have to understand them is that they are a neural net in which all future human minds communicate instantaneously with all other future human minds—an internet of super advanced humans. This is why it does not make sense to define it as singular or plural for is the internet singular or plural? This framing would have been impossible for people during the major periods of Abrahamic revelation so these concepts were thought of as totally separate, (the plural angels and the singularish Holy Ghost which was the closest term people of that period could come to for cloud intelligence). * A malevolent

In this insightful episode, Malcolm and Simone delve into the fascinating world of schizophrenia and autism, exploring how these conditions exist on opposite ends of a spectrum related to the concept of "theory of mind." Malcolm shares his extensive experience working in schizophrenia research, explaining the various subtypes of schizophrenia and their symptoms. He then presents his groundbreaking theory that schizophrenia is caused by an overactive theory of mind, while autism is characterized by a deficiency in this cognitive ability. The discussion also covers the importance of medication for those with schizophrenia, the potential dangers of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and the evolutionary advantages of both schizophrenic and autistic traits in moderation.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] So what I think is happening with Schizophrenic is Individuals is that their theory of mind is basically hyper stimulated and activates when it shouldn't be activating.And I think that this is what is happening with the auditory hallucinations. This happens when you see something like you know, applying a theory of mind to the way things are arranged in a store window.Applying a theory of mind to like, world events, right? Like, oh, there's a theory of mind behind this that's directly relevant to you. Or a theory of mind creating a hallucination. Catatonia is the one counter example here, but what I suspect is really happening with Catatonia is they're just so overwhelmed with so many theories of minds operating at once that they basically become catatonic.They'reSimone Collins: paralyzed by their thoughts. Yeah. I, that, that makes sense to me.Malcolm Collins: So autism I think is literally defined by the exact opposite.I think the core symptom of autism is a difficulty in running theory of minds of other people. And this is what creates problems in autism,Would you like toknow more?Simone Collins: Well, hello, gorgeous. I am [00:01:00] poking around the comments in our videos a while ago and I remember some people speculating on like what we sort of meant about like the autistic and schizoid spectrums and they implied that, that we were talking about something more cultural and not actually like autistic or schizoid.And that is not true. So we should probably dig into what we're talking about more here when we're talking about people being on the autistic spectrum or being on a schizoid spectrum because they're very different things.Malcolm Collins: This is, I should point out, this is not a cultural thing. This is shown in genetic data.This is shown in diagnostic data. And we should probably establish our credentials here. I started one of my first jobs. I mean, I did, I have a few like origin jobs, right? Because I took a number of early jobs in various neuroscience fields. The three origin jobs was one was studying the evolution of human cognition and humanity at the Smithsonian.And in creating an exhibit, the human origins display, I worked on that. [00:02:00] So some of the stuff I created is still on display at the Smithsonian. So that's one area. Another area is my brain computer interface work. So this was working on technology That allowed humans to control machines with their thoughts, similar to Neuralink.The final area, and the area I worked by far the longest in, was Schizophrenia research. So this was understanding how this is specifically what I was looking at was, was going Through lots of patients and making sure that they were properly categorized. So this involved tons and tons of interviews.Like I had to interview hundreds of people about like their deepest and keep in mind, not just because it's a prettier person, but also normal people about their deepest thoughts about the world, their lives, their daily routines, everything like that. Because we were like, wait, why were you. doing normal people.It's because I wasn't working as a clinician. I was working as a researcher. And so we needed a control group and we needed a control group that was similar in economic status to our schizophrenia population. Now, schizophrenia population is typically not doing very well in society. You know, this is you, you know, lower income, lower middle income [00:03:00] group.And so I really got to, to, to get a personal, like really. In your face, really high volume understanding of this section of humanity and the way they think and engage with the world. Both people within the schizophrenia population and not schizophrenia population. And I had to be really good.Like, I had memorized the DSM at one point. People who don't know the things. NotSimone Collins: just the schizophrenicMalcolm Collins: diagnostic criteria. The whole thing. I could give you any, not, not memorized word per word, but I can give you any diagnosis in it with its broad, like specific diagnostic criteria. Now, it's been a long time since then, but I took a lot of pride on this at one point.People who don't know, I might put a pictur

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92In this thought-provoking video, Malcolm and Simone Collins dissect a viral clip of a Muslim man discussing the future of Islamic demographics in Western countries. They explore the implications of differing fertility rates, economic productivity, and cultural values between Muslim and Western populations. The couple delves into topics such as LGBTQ+ rights in Islamic societies, the relationship between wealth and fertility rates, and the potential future of cultural diversity in developed nations. This in-depth analysis challenges common misconceptions about demographic trends and offers a nuanced perspective on the complex interplay between religion, economics, and social change in the modern world.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Okay. This guy, I absolutely love this guy.What would happen to a gay couple in Gaza?Executed according to Islamic law. Islam doesn't endorse gays. Islam doesn't endorse homosexuality. Just like Canada doesn't endorse a lot of things. So would you like to see Sharia law in Canada replace Canadian law? At some point, it will. You know, Because we are, we have families, we are making babies, you're not your population is going down the slum, right?And by 2060, according to Pew Research Institute, your research, by 2060, Muslims will be the biggest religious group the world over. What are you going to do then? Are you going to oppose Sharia even then? Well, You know what? I'm very appreciative of the honesty. We don't usually get that. One day we can have a Muslim majority nation here in Canada.Right In your face!Malcolm Collins: We are going to be showing you guys this clip that we just watched again and spend an episode talking about the clip because I think the clip is [00:01:00] wonderful for just aNumber of reasons.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: I love the way the guy argues for Islamic value systems.Actually, let's just start with that because I think that's really interesting.Simone Collins: He, by the way, he doesn't say this is what I want. This is what we need. He just says, this is what it's going to be. Yeah, this is what isMalcolm Collins: happening by current statistics. Yeah, by current statistics. I love that. And I would argue that I think he's wrong about the way this is going to play out.But I love the vitalism and I think that like when you are approaching issues of pronatalism, you need to be approaching it like this guy. Yes. We might not be on exactly the same team, but I am probably closer to his team than I am to some of the other teams out there right now.Simone Collins: I really appreciate about his mindset too.And I feel this way about so many things is that, and this is also pervasive in your views of other people and whether or not they matter. Is you get to own something, [00:02:00] to influence it, to have a say. When you are literally building it. And that means that your children will be there representing the future.You're having children. They'll be in the future. Or, if you have a problem with a policy, then you get to complain about it if you're trying to fix it, you have a problem with the company. You get to complain about it if you're trying to fix it, but you don't like the, all this whining that takes place online among people who aren't actually doing anything to build it themselves or build something better or change something.They have no say inMalcolm Collins: this. That is a great point. And I want to expand on it because I hadn't thought of it this way before, but people who have and raise children are building the future and therefore have ownership over that future almost axiomatically where you have far like urban monoculture brain or far like progressive brain.They look at the world through this socialist lens, where regardless of the effort that you have put into something, everybody deserves some [00:03:00] level of equal say in whatever is happening, i. e. the future of humanity, etc. And Even though they aren't putting in the effort to have and raise children, they believe that this normative ethical system that they have built and that is going extinct with them is going to give them the ability to pressure other people into their types of beliefs.Simone Collins: And I think this mindset made sense at one point in the human history, when people lived in small collective clans or tribes where everyone did inherently Play a crucial role. Even if you were a child, you were someone's future old age safety strategy, if no matter who you were, you're providing something and therefore to feel that you were entitled to the way things were run.Matter. I think what people are missing in modern socialist worlds, and America's fairly socialist. When you look at the number of social programs we have, and most developed nations seem to be not Russia, as much, not kind of China,Malcolm Collins: Yeah,Simone Collins: basically we're way more socialist than China, which is [00:04:00] hilarious.But the way

In this eye-opening episode, Malcolm and Simone share their personal experience of taking a huge risk by pulling their three children out of daycare and opting for a more unconventional childcare arrangement with their neighbors. They discuss the staggering costs of daycare for middle-class families and the surprising improvements they noticed in their son's behavior and the family's overall health after making the switch. The couple also delves into the long-term effects of frequent illnesses in early childhood and the controversial findings of the Tennessee Volunteer Pre-Kindergarten Program study. Throughout the conversation, they offer practical advice on how to create a sustainable and mutually beneficial childcare arrangement within your community. Join Malcolm and Simone as they challenge conventional wisdom and share their insights on prioritizing children's well-being.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] We ended up trying something that a lot of people said, you guys are insane to be doing this, We have graphs on all of his behavior and it was night and day. The two scenarios, a standard. Like mid to low end daycare versus just staying in a house with minimal supervision, doing whatever they want all day.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. It is wonderful to be here with you today. Something really shocking happened to us recently. We took a giant gamble on how we were handling our children's childcare.So before this, we were sending our children to a daycare facility. And if you are not at the lower end of income in Pennsylvania, that means you are paying for that all out of pocket. So by the time we got to children number three, three at a I'd say like a low [00:01:00] range to mid range facility in terms of cost.Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: This is costing us what was it? 5, 400 a month?Simone Collins: It was we paid 1, 193 every week and that's 62, 036 a year. Insane. So that'sMalcolm Collins: just for three kids?Simone Collins: Just for three kids.Malcolm Collins: With the fourth kid on the way, we basically decided this, and keep in mind, we're in suburban or really ex urban. Pennsylvania.We are. Friends ofSimone Collins: ours looked at our daycare bills and said, this is, you're so lucky. I wish I could be paying this.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Who would live in like New York and Philadelphia.So this is almost as inexpensive as it gets unless you're in an extremely rural area.Simone Collins: Yeah. Or unless you are low income. And we actually know people also actually who intentionally manipulate their income.Yeah. In a way that probably the IRS would not be happy about to qualify for subsidized daycare because it makes that much of a difference. 62, 000, that's a [00:02:00] generous salary for someone. That's yeah. Yeah. And this is why a lot of people are like why bother? Working when all of it would literally go to daycare and keep in mind.Of course, it's post tax dollarsMalcolm Collins: I'd point in mind this was only Three kids. Yeah, this is the minimum number of kids we could have and be above replacement rate This is the yeah. No, I mean it's it's insane. Yeah, so to be above replacement rate in the u. s. You And you are not in poverty, you need to be extremely wealthy.And this does part to show why you do get this higher fertility rates on the really low end, because there just isn't a cost to additional kids when the state's offering to pay for everything. In the same way that there is an enormous cost to additional kids for the middle class. I need to go further with our experiment because something came down to, we realized we couldn't, keep affording this as we moved on with our family.So we're like, we need to find a new sustainable solution. And this got really interesting for us because we had [00:03:00] tried au pairs before and we had found that they were fairly entitled.Simone Collins: It was just likeMalcolm Collins: having an extra kid.Simone Collins: Yeah. Babysitters live in nannies, the whole thing, all of it. We tried everything.Malcolm Collins: Even like PhD students, we tried bringing over to our house to work. And so We ended up trying something that a lot of people said, you guys are insane to be doing this,Simone Collins: here's what we ended up deciding to do and try. And this was a big risk for us is we have neighbors who were willing to basically do a child care pool with us, and we know many families that have done this before where they live right next to other families.In this case, it was actually a couple that was soon to have a family whose business we're helping to get started and they're really interested in doing like some communal child care, sharing resources, things like that. So pulling resources together in that classic community way. So some people are doing with this with friends, we did it with neighbors that we didn't really know that well.And so we were really nervous [00:04:00] because everyone, whenever you go as a pa

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92In this in-depth analysis, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the reasons behind Classically Abby's failure to gain traction as a conservative influencer. They dissect the changing landscape of conservative culture, the disconnect between traditional and modern right-wing values, and the importance of authenticity in online content creation. The video also touches on broader topics such as the evolution of conservative thought, the role of "vitalism" in modern conservative appeal, and the challenges facing established conservative institutions. Additionally, the Collins discuss the ethics of featuring children in online content and offer insights into successful conservative influencer strategies.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] What? She's actually cool? She is actually an interesting nerd. What on earth? In real life. What? But the person she presents as, on YouTube, I loved your shock face hereWould you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Simone! I am so excited to be talking to you today. Something really interesting that we mentioned in a recent episode, that when I was editing it, I was like, wait a second, I should be really focused on this question. Why didn't, classically Abby, then Shapiro's sister,Being a conservative woman in today's day and age is not easy. !Malcolm Collins: why didn't she catch on with the public?And so people can understand just how much this didn't work. She was doing tons and tons of ads at one point on YouTube. If you are active on YouTube, you definitely saw her all the time for a period. Every time I bought this up with a YouTuber, they're like, oh yeah, that. If you were aren't active on YouTube to give you an idea.Her top four or five videos have over a million views. [00:01:00] And if you're paying for that much in ads, because it was certainly in ads that caused these videos to go out there certainly over a million dollars in ad spend, if I had to guess, I would guess it was probably 1. 5 to 2 million in ad spend.For a channel that today. produces weekly videos that are similar in format to ours and similar also in content to ours and are getting, I'd say on average, probably about half the views that we get on daily videos. So this is really interesting to me and I can post our numbers on the screen and everything like that.So you can check our math. We're getting on average, I think now, what is it, 8, 000 views per day, 7, 000 views per day and about 1, 300 watch hours per day or 7, 400 watch hours per day depending it's, it goes up and down for us. There was a peak a little bit ago.Simone Collins: But you've done a really good job, Malcolm.Malcolm Collins: No,Simone Collins: I don't know. I'm a million to 2 I would guess more like at least a hundred thousand dollars.Malcolm Collins: Oh, [00:02:00] certainly more than a hundred thousand. Really? Oh, absolutely. It had to be there. There is no way it was less than half a million, but I suspect very likely between a million and a half, a million and a half.But we can run the numbers, whatever. The point being is she's connected to a famous person. Her videos are generally well done, edited, well executed. She is an attractive woman. And she had the ability to get in front of tons of people. Why didn't her message connect with any audience? And this is a very important question to be asking for a, probably the biggest reason is because the message that she was shilling is the message that the conservative elites believe the conservative base should be hearing.Simone Collins: Yeah. And I, my, when I was going through her [00:03:00] videos in preparation for this, cause I hadn't really watched any, I felt like I was watching an AI video. These were AI responses. If you asked chat GPT. What are some reasons why a woman would need to dress modestly? Or, what are some reasons why I should keep my apartment clean?These are exactly the answers that it would generate. Oh my god, you're right? Yes, I am exactly right. And I think that's also an issueMalcolm Collins: if you did the framing of and you're a conservative YouTuber and then that's what it would spit out. You would need to give it some framing.But hold on before I go further with this I want to make a few caveats about my thoughts after watching a lot of her content. So my first thought is I think that ideologically we are probably not that different from her. Even socially, I don't feel we're that different from her. When I watch her videos, to me, she reminds me [00:04:00] intensely of some of my cousins. And by that what I mean is Yeah, I would saySimone Collins: your family, but definitely not us.She's not weird. Well, no, thisMalcolm Collins: is the f ing weird thing. She is actually, in real life, she DMs for her husband's some of his tabletop gaming groups. She is into Warhammer. What? She's actually cool? She is actually an interesting nerd. What on earth? In real life. What? But the person she presents as, on YouTube, I loved your sho

In this in-depth analysis, Malcolm and Simone Collins dissect the recent Biden-Trump debate, discussing its implications for the 2024 election and American politics. They explore Biden's apparent cognitive decline, Trump's surprisingly moderated approach, and the potential strategies for the Democratic Party moving forward. The video also touches on the changing landscape of Republican policies, the influence of advisors on presidential candidates, and the challenges facing both parties in the upcoming election. This comprehensive breakdown offers valuable insights into the current state of American politics and the potential outcomes of the 2024 presidential race. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit basedcamppodcast.substack.com/subscribe

In this thought-provoking video, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the world of Fundie Snark, examining popular YouTube channels and their cultural impacts. They discuss the biases and blind spots of both conservative and progressive content creators, analyze the complexities of LGBTQ+ representation and activism, and explore the ethical implications of online criticism. The couple offers unique insights into the cultural dynamics at play, challenging viewers to think critically about the content they consume and the real-world consequences of online discourse. [00:00:00]Simone Collins: I like seeing people who have taken hard cultural stances. Be criticized to see how we might be subject to criticism ourselves and what we may be doing wrong. I really like Fundy Fridays, and I really like Jen but yeah,Malcolm Collins: she's in as much of a cultSimone Collins: as the people who she covers. They all come from very strong cultures that have skews and blind spots because of those strong cultures. Not to say that we don't have blind spots either, but still.Malcolm Collins: Yeah, and they're insane religious cults. They're the good guys in her insane religious cult. She's the good guy and she's doing what the cult is telling her to do. She should neverSimone Collins: stepMalcolm Collins: back.Simone Collins: She'd started tongue in cheek that are frills of the channel now. Still speak very much or similar to the small time career preachers that she criticizes.Her followers call themselves Jenna nights. And they patronize her. And how is that different from being a preacher in the end? Preachers speak to people, they cultivate communities.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I am so excited to be here [00:01:00] with you today. After a tough day today, it is always nice to be able to come back to doing something that we love, which is these conversations. They are so much better, you've been meditating with me earlier, like they're so much better than a date because they're like recorded and we watch them over and over again, each of us do.I actually quite enjoy our own YouTube channel. And what I know it's weird but this is the first time I've ever created something that I really like with our books. I don't read them over and over again, but I'm like, Oh, I know I made a fun joke in this one. And I liked the way I constructed it.But what actually got us on today's topic. Was Simone has always been a big fan of Fundy Snark content. And I have always been a big fan of religious content. And religious content for me includes the de converts and stuff like that. And where our two worlds inter, interlapped recently was Classically Abby.Being a conservative [00:02:00] woman in today's day and age is not easy. !Malcolm Collins: So people might not know this, but Classically Abby is Ben Shapiro's sister, and she absolutely spammed YouTube with so many ads a few years ago. If you're on YouTube now andSimone Collins: you've been on YouTube for years, you know what we're talkingMalcolm Collins: about. You know what this is about. Yeah. You're like, Oh my God.I remember when I had to watch her. What got me about Classically Abby, and this actually has boosted my ego so much. Classically Abby, we produce videos every weekday. Classically Abby produces one video a week but otherwise similar format to us. She gets about 2. 2k views on an average video.Whereas, we're generally Between the low 2Ks to 7 or 8K views. On an average day, because, we can look at our statistics. So some of our videos just vastly outperform other ones. Like the old Starship Troopers one is a really high number. The Bears one is at a high number.But on average, we're getting about 8, 000 views per day. Or about [00:03:00] 1, 300 watch hours a day. So we are, Smoking, classically Abby, smoking her for a daily channel, doing four or five times as well as her weekly channel, which I love because she must have spent millions building that up. And sorry, as to why I love this people might not know, but we have a beef with Ben Shapiro. The first time, we really went viral, he was really derogatory towards us and was like, they're nerds. Why does anyone care what these people have to say? And he has just repeatedly, we have tried to get into events that he's doing or has association with, and we are always blocked, like we are on a blocked, do not talk to list with Ben Shapiro and everyone who talks to Ben Shapiro.Simone Collins: He doesn't blameMalcolm Collins: you. I can understand why. We're probably pretty threatening to him that we've actually like grassroots beginning to build up. So Ben Shapiro's thing is he often switches between endeavor movement. It happens to be hot in the conservative space right [00:04:00] now. But I think he would have like when he switched to all the men's rights content and stuff like that, but he doesn't seem to actually have like his own perspective on things.It's more just like whatever he thin

In this thought-provoking video, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the growing phenomenon of parental regret and its connection to the urban monoculture. They analyze recent articles about parents who regret having children, discussing the potential causes and offering a pronatalist perspective on the issue. The couple explores topics such as high-effort parenting, the importance of objective functions in life, and the psychological impact of the urban monoculture on parenting experiences. They also touch on Eric Holle's piece about the transformative nature of parenthood and offer insights into finding meaning and purpose through raising children. This video provides a comprehensive look at modern parenting challenges and offers potential solutions for those struggling with parental regret. [00:00:00] This isn't the way that historically people related to kids. If the point of the kids is modifying either your self perception, or your emotional experience of reality kids are actually bad pets. That's They're terrible pets. They're terrible pets. Yeah, kids are not a good pet get up.No unconditional love. They Are very difficult to potty train house train, etc.Would you like to know more?Hello, Simone. I am excited to be talking with you today. Today this conversation was actually inspired to me by an Eric Hole piece. Oh, I saw that! This afternoon, right? Yeah, because Eric made me a better person. And in the piece, he linked to this like new genre of articles about people who hated becoming parents.So there's a BuzzFeed article, Parents who regret having children are making anonymous confessions online, and it's taboo, but important. And then there was the Atlantic piece, The two reasons parents regret having kids. And then [00:01:00] there's the Time piece, The parents who regret having children, which apparently went viral.And then there's a business insider piece, six common reasons. Parents don't like their kids or something. And then there's the Newsweek piece. I regret having children. The moms united in an uncomfortable truth. Let's see what this one. So this is Richard Maple, 39 from Ohio after becoming a mother at 31.And. She says, quote, I think about all the things my life would have been if the constant threat of motherhood hadn't loomed over me like a cloud of doom Maple told Newsweek. I'm resolved to being the best mom to them that I can be because it's not their fault that they're here and they are wonderful small humans who deserve love and guidance. But do I miss my life without children every single day? And then there's the independent piece. I had no choice. The people who regret becoming parents. And then there's the Sunday morning Herald piece. Having kids is probably the biggest real life regret wife concurs. [00:02:00] It says and then so I'm just reading a quote here from this because I think it's useful to get an understanding of what these people are saying, though.I love my son. I now know a know myself well enough and be know the challenges of parenting well enough to say that having kids is probably my life's biggest regret, wife concurs. Oh my God. And here's a, here's another quote here. Quote, my wife needed to be a mother. I think she saw all her friends, classmates and cousins having kids.So she needed to be in this mummy club. Quote, I went along with the things to please her. I was fine was one, but she campaigned for two. I gave in to make her happy. So here we are with the two toddlers. We're both moody, can't stand each other half the time, and have a borderline dead bedroom life. So much for making her happy.The kids are a pain. It has gotten to the point where I don't enjoy being home anymore. I dread the weekends. I much prefer the [00:03:00] work week where I only have to be a parent for a few hours rather than all day. It's non stop noise, screaming, whining, and fighting.And this other one says, This is not the life I wanted. My toddler son is a tornado of destruction and will break slash tear slash rip anything he can get his hands on no matter how much I do to wear him out. And the baby predictably is needy because she's a baby. I feel tricked into wanting them by biological urges and the romanticization of the version of kids that isn't close to reality.Do you want me to keep going? I think you have to. Oh, here's another. I love my kids, but I also regret them deeply. Every one of them. I never wanted any of them. Circumstances explain pretty much why I went through with them all. Imagine the guilt and mental weight of having a bunch of kids you love but never intended or wanted.And the Guardian piece. It's breaking the taboo. The parents who regret having [00:04:00] children. And then, we get a final piece here in time, the parents who regret having children, which shows in various studies, something like 7 to 15 percent of parents regret having children. Wow. And so first, what are your thoughts on this phenomenon?I think a lot of what seems to be pl

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92In this insightful discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore Japan's government-backed dating app initiative aimed at boosting the country's birth rate. They analyze the app's unique features, such as income verification and relationship status documentation, and compare it to other dating platforms. The couple delves into the evolution of dating apps, the challenges of modern matchmaking, and the potential impact of government intervention in the dating sphere. They also share personal experiences, discuss the pros and cons of various dating methods, and offer suggestions for improving dating app design. This video provides a comprehensive look at the intersection of technology, government policy, and demographic challenges in Japan and beyond.Malcolm Collins: . [00:00:00] Hello, this is Malcolm and Simone, and we are excited to be talking to you today about a topic of grave pronatalist interest. Specifically, the country of Japan is making a government backed dating app. Now, I know very little about this topic, other than that it exists, and apparently it's a paid app, which sort of seems to defeat the purpose.But Simone is gonna tell us more.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: So, let's start.Simone Collins: Yeah, so it's it's actually not live yet. Only a beta version has really been live, but I'm quite intrigued by this. I think it's a great idea for the government to launch a dating app personally, you know, someone's got to make this work and the way that market it.Based dynamics work. You're not going to see people actually get married based on dating apps as they are dating apps as they are meant for keeping audiences occupied. They're meant for lots of in app purchases.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. This actually reminds me a lot of people. So when we bemoan the fall of dating apps what we're typically before [00:01:00] bemoaning, it's not that dating apps exist.They used to be quite good. Simone and I met on a dating app. Okay. Cupid was good. Fantastic for meeting nerdy people. But the way that dating apps worked is you would have these full profiles. And you would search by like keywords in the profile or by matching in terms of like answering tons of questions.And there were different sites that did this in different ways. Then Tik TOK was invented, which brought in the invite of whatever word I'm looking for here of swipe based dating apps. The advent of swipe based dating it. And then all of the apps started to move to this swipe based system. And originally I had thought that this was sort of a malevolent push, right?So when Tinder got really big and Match Group moved to swipe based dating and then Match Group bought OkCupid and they moved OkCupid to swipe based dating. And I thought they had done that in order to kill OkCupid. So to understand why swipe based dating is so much worse than the old systems dating websites [00:02:00] are environments in which guys are intrinsically on the back foot.Mm-Hmm. dating websites are environments where guys sell themselves to women. Fundamentally, that's how dating websites work because the vast majority of dating website users, that's like 80% on Tinder and stuff like that are males. Right?Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: Well, here's the problem where you can get differential advantage for males and not just have all of the women sort to the top 20 percent of males.It's when males are being judged on multiple metrics. Yeah. All right. So because you know, you may not be the highest looking guy, but maybe you have a good career or maybe you're witty or maybe you have a hobby that overlaps with this woman's hobby. MultipleSimone Collins: dimensions on which you can compete.Malcolm Collins: Yes. So,Simone Collins: and by the way, I used that dynamic on OkCupid as well. I did not compete based on my photos, even though I did have photos of myself in film grade stormtrooper armor. [00:03:00] I competed based on these weird questions that OkCupid used to prominently feature in a feed so you could camp out in the questions on OkCupid and give really provocative and weird responses and show up in people's feed and engage them really easily.So you can, I was able to compete based on how my, how hold up sporky I was. I'm not saying it was great. You got lots ofMalcolm Collins: high profile people. ISimone Collins: did. Yeah. And that's the thing is, is that I not being the most beautiful person in the world was able to still compete on that. I've said that there was thatMalcolm Collins: YouTuber who was criticizing us recently, who was like, Oh, that guy's way out of her league.You are out of my league. But I, I I thought that was really funny because I'm like, well, I guess she did pretty well using her mechanism of female outreach on dating apps. But hold on. So the point I was getting to is that when you move to a swipe based dating app it intrinsically, Means that you are just judging people based on how they look,

In this thought-provoking video, Malcolm and Simone Collins offer a detailed response to Scott Alexander's article on AI apocalypticism. They analyze the historical patterns of accurate and inaccurate doomsday predictions, providing insights into why AI fears may be misplaced. The couple discusses the characteristics of past moral panics, cultural susceptibility to apocalyptic thinking, and the importance of actionable solutions in legitimate concerns. They also explore the rationalist community's tendencies, the pronatalist movement, and the need for a more nuanced approach to technological progress. This video offers a fresh perspective on AI risk assessment and the broader implications of apocalyptic thinking in society.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] I'm quoting from him here, okay? One of the most common arguments against AI safety is, here's an example of a time someone was worried about something, but it didn't happen.Therefore, AI, which you are worried about, also won't happen. I always give the obvious answer. Okay. But there are other examples of times someone was worried about something and it did happen, right? How do we know AI isn't more like those?So specifically he is arguing against is every 20 years or so you get one of these apocalyptic movements. And this is why we're discounting this movement this is how he ends the article, so people know this isn't an attack piece, this is what he asked for in the article. He says, conclusion, I genuinely don't know what these people are thinking.I would like to understand the mindset of people who make arguments like this, but I'm not sure I've succeeded. What is he missing according to you? He is missing something absolutely giant in everything that he's laid out.And it is a very important point and it's very clear from his write up that this idea had just never occurred to him.[00:01:00] Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I am excited to be here with you today. We today are going to be creating a video reply slash response to an argument that Scott Alexander, the guy who writes astral codex 10 or sleep star codex, depending on what era you were introduced to his content. Wrote about arguments against AI apocalypticism, which are based around it'll be clear when we get into the piece because I'm going to read some parts of it that no, I should know.This is not a Scott Alexander is not smart or anything like that piece. We actually think Scott Alexander is incredibly intelligent and well meaning. And he is an intellectual who I consider a friend and somebody whose work I enormously respect. And I am creating this response because the piece is written in a way that actively requests [00:02:00] a response.It's like, why do people believe this argument when I find it To be so weak, like one of those, what am I missing here? Kind of things. What am I missing here? Kind of thingshe just clearly and I like the way he lays out his argument because it's very clear that, yes, there's a huge thing he's missing. And it's clear from his argument and the way that he thought about it that he's just literally never considered this point and it's why he doesn't understand this argument.So we're going to go over his counter argument and we're going to go over the thing that he happens to be missing. And I'm quoting from him here, okay? One of the most common arguments against AI safety is, here's an example of a time someone was worried about something, but it didn't happen.Therefore, AI, which you are worried about, also won't happen. I always give the obvious answer. Okay. But there are other examples of times someone was worried about something and it did happen, right? How do we know AI isn't more like those? The people I'm arguing with always seem [00:03:00] so surprised by this response, as if I'm committing some sort of betrayal by destroying their beautiful arguments.So specifically he is arguing against the form of apocalypticism that when we talk about it more sounds like our argument against AI apocalypticism is every 20 years or so you get one of these apocalyptic movements. And this is why we're discounting this movement. Okay. And I'm going to go further with his argument here. So he says, I keep trying to steel man this argument. So keep in mind, he's trying to steel man it. This is not us saying like he wants it steel man, okay. I keep trying to steel man this argument and it keeps resisting my steel manning. For example, maybe the argument is a failed attempt to gesture at a principle of quote, most technologies don't go wrong, but people make the same argument with technologies that aren't technologies like global cooling or overpopulation.Maybe the argument is a failed attempt to gesture at a principle of Quote, the world is never destroyed. So [00:04:00] doomsday prophecies have an abysmal track record in quote, but over population and global cooling, don't claim that no one will die. Just that a lot of people will, and plent

https://discord.gg/EGFRjwwS92In this insightful video, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the anime "Grandpa and Grandma Turn Young Again," exploring its pronatalist themes, cultural significance, and artistic merits. They discuss how the show effectively promotes traditional values, happy marriages, and intergenerational relationships while addressing Japan's demographic crisis. The couple analyzes the anime's emotional impact, its portrayal of older generations, and its unique approach to showcasing the beauty of long-lasting love. They also touch on broader themes in contemporary anime, the potential influence of government policies on media content, and how this show compares to other popular anime series. This video offers a thought-provoking look at the intersection of entertainment, cultural values, and demographic challenges in modern Japan.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] But now I want to talk about some of the pronatalist propaganda in it as well. AndSimone Collins: it's, it, I would say it's almost to the point where it takes you out. of the plot as a viewer.Malcolm Collins: There is one scene. Where the old lady goes to an old store that she used to frequent in the train station. And the train station's completely deserted and the store owner marks that, they're probably going to be going out of business soon, but what can you do?This is just the way it is with changing demographics. And the old person turns around and gets one of those, like black miasma, like anger things around them. And she goes but we need to resist this. Why are we not even fighting? The show is meant to encourage you to not like normal anime, thirst after young women but make you thirst after a long and happy relationship. That is what the whole show is. It's a thirst trap for getting married and having a long happy relationship and being intergenerationally invested in your family.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I am [00:01:00] excited to be here with you today and we are going to be doing something we haven't done in a while on this podcast, which is discuss anime because I am a big anime fan and you are a medium anime fan, but you're very like good to lean into the culture and everything like that.Like you used to dress up for conventions and everything. I wasSimone Collins: president. and founder of my high school's anime club. I've been to numerous anime conventions across multiple countries. I love anime. I just don't watch it because I don't have time.Malcolm Collins: What other country other than the US? The UK.Simone Collins: I went to a, an anime convention in the UK.It was fantastic.Malcolm Collins: WhereSimone Collins: youMalcolm Collins: wereSimone Collins: atMalcolm Collins: Cambridge.Simone Collins: No, actually. I was randomly traveling in the UK and I had a day free and there was an anime convention and I'm like screw it. I'm obviously not going to go to the British Museum. I'm going to go to an anime convention because that's how people spend their time.Malcolm Collins: So this last year we were in the UK for ARC, which is like a conservative convention. When you were wearing one of your [00:02:00] traditional outfits which, you often wear similar to this and a bunch of anime goers, there was an anime convention at the same time. I was actually wearingSimone Collins: my fascist outfit, not this one.Malcolm Collins: Oh, yeah, more fascist looking. They stillSimone Collins: thought I was cosplaying though. TheyMalcolm Collins: thought you were cosplaying. They're like, oh, who are you cosplaying as? Like that. So great. But we are going to be talking about in this episode An anime that I think is really interesting for a number of reasons. Yeah.So I'll break down the reasons why it's interesting to me. One is the pro natalist propaganda, which is put. throughout the anime and is very heavy handed and I think very effective because it paints the reality of Japan as it is today or rural Japan, which is depopulating right now in, in this very stark term.So we'll get to that. Two, it is an anime that is incredibly simplistic in terms of the characters it presents and the roles it gives them. Yet, [00:03:00] despite being in a, in the plot structure more broadly. It's a slice of lifestyle anime. Very chill, very, you could say it's very cookie cutter in many respects.And yet I think it is incredibly effective as a piece of art. Which is really worth highlighting about this show. As to why it's effective as a piece of art. I'll just quickly go into this because I think that this is useful to talk about and it can bring us into the plot of the show really quickly.Despite being very generic in almost everything it lays out, and I'm like, okay, I'm judging art by arts quality, right? I'm judging it on three metrics, okay? The first metric is it able to invoke the emotional states that it is attempting to invoke in me. Art, Can be used to invoke emotional states.This anime does that sp

In this thought-provoking video, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the controversial topic of fertility rates among conservatives and liberals. They explore recent claims by right-wing influencers about "outbreeding the left" and analyze the statistical evidence behind these assertions. The couple discusses the genetic components of political beliefs, the historical trends in fertility rates between ideological groups, and the potential long-term consequences for society. They also touch on topics such as immigration, cultural assimilation, and the ethical implications of politicizing childbearing. This comprehensive discussion covers the complexities of ideology, genetics, and demographics, offering insights into the potential future of political landscapes in the United States and beyond.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] you can obviously just convert your opponent's kids, right?Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: Because liberals have always been doing this. If liberals would cease existing, if they stopped having kids, then why are there any liberals at all?And then you point out this trend only started in the nineties. Before the 90s, you didn't have a big difference in fertility rates within these two genetic clusters that led to different voting behavior. And now one cluster was in a period of two generations is just going to be hard deleted from the gene pool. ,Simone Collins: and isn't that wild? Because for so many generations, they were more or less even birth rate rise.This is unprecedented. We just don't know what it's going to look like.Malcolm Collins: here are two other studies I'm gonna post, one showing that 60 percent of the way you vote is genetic, and the other showing that 40 percent of the way you vote is genetic.Yeah, but it is going to have a genetic effect on human psychology like they are getting hard deleted in a way that is going to change the way humans think. So if you're one of those people who's bragging about leaving [00:01:00] your parents religion, but are you having kids? Because if you are the mutant, and that mutation is correlated with not having kids, then you're just furthering our argument. Okay?Would you like to know more?Simone Collins: Kick us off, Malcolm.Malcolm Collins: So there is a an article in the Daily Dot recently. I think there's some articles on us in the past from the long past, back when I proposed to you on Reddit, actually they had a thing on us. It's titled, Who Says Romance Is Dead? Right wing influencers launch a campaign to out breathe the left.And then it goes on to say, Four right figures, Chaya Raichi and Charlie Kirk, both said they plan to quote unquote out breed the left this week by having more children than liberals and raising them to have right wing values. Both of their statements are being memed online. Raichi runs the internet.anti LGBTQX account, Libs of TikTok. Oh, yay! I love Libs of TikTok. Which doxxes left wing educators and individuals. [00:02:00] Her tweets have been linked to more than 20 bomb threats at schools. Okay bomb threats. It's like the people's tweets being linked at, like, how many death threats do we get regularly?Kirk is the founder of The Turning Point USA, a conservative organization with chapters at high schools and college networks nationwide. Last weekend, Kirk hosted his organization's Young Women's Leadership Summit. On Sunday, he tweeted a video of mothers who attended the event. We are going to win, either now or later, Kirk tweeted.We can out breed the left.Simone Collins: It's not even a can, and it's not even a pledge thing. It's just a will thing. It's so lame to make this. It's like a statement. It's just the sun will rise. I don't know what to say.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So yeah, we actually Elon Musk tweeted that it should be considered a national emergency to have kids.And this is what, the person who founded lives of Twitch talk replied. I come from a family of eight. I plan [00:03:00] to have a lot of kids. We're going to outbreed the left. Then we're going to homeschool our, send our kids to private schools so they can't be groomed and become any activists for leftist causes.Unless it's that's a radical, but it's not a radical thing to say. I'm going to beSimone Collins: honest. Every slightly conservative parent is saying now, and this is what I'm seeing on the ground in Pennsylvania, running for office is. Very reasonable, normal, not even really religiously affiliated, just not.Actively progressive parents are saying I'm concerned about what my kid's learning. I don't want my kid to have mental health problems as a teen and adult. I'm going to homeschool them. Yeah.Malcolm Collins: And it and I think a lot of people, when I'm like, I am like bothered by woke ism and stuff like that, they're like, Oh, are you really scared of the woke ism that's going on in schools now?And stuff like that. It's I don't not think because. Certain leftists seem to have a problem with breaking out of the

In this eye-opening video, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the startling fertility decline within the Catholic Church, both in the United States and globally. Through a comprehensive analysis of survey data and demographic trends, they uncover the shocking reality that Catholic fertility rates have fallen below replacement levels, and even devout Catholics are using contraception and obtaining abortions at rates similar to non-religious individuals. The couple explores the potential causes of this phenomenon, including delayed marriage, the influence of the urban monoculture, and the disconnect between the Church's teachings and the behavior of its adherents. They also discuss the theological debate surrounding the beginning of life and the impact of the celibate priesthood on the Church's ability to provide relevant guidance on relationships and family formation. Throughout the video, Malcolm and Simone offer thought-provoking insights and propose potential solutions to revitalize the Catholic Church and ensure its survival in the face of this fertility crisis.[00:00:00]Malcolm Collins: Needed fertility is the fertility rate that you would need to have to stay stable. As a cultural group, when you account for the percentage of people who deconvert from your religion per generation. On the other hand, Catholic churches will see appreciable decline.He says that they have 1. 9 children but these don't separate out the Hispanic Catholic population. the TFR for non-Hispanic, white Catholic women in the United States is 1.64,anyway so he thinks it's 1. 9 which it really isn't. Children born per woman is nowhere near enough to offset the rates of conversion out of these faiths, yielding a needed fertility rate for Roman Catholics of 3. 1. Whoa. Therefore these churches, and this is with the inflated 1.9 number, that's including the Hispanic population. Okay. A 40 percent decline in the next generation.Simone Collins: Wow.Malcolm Collins: Catholics view that life begins at conception the problem with this view is that by the statistics, it doesn't really appear to impact the rate that Catholics [00:01:00] use contraception or get abortions very highly.We'll go over the survey data right here. let's go for non religious affiliation.And so they must be doing it like way more than Catholics, right? Morning after pill. Presumably. No, 33 percent to 35%Simone Collins: Hold on, all of this gets worse.It's just gonna be like a, oh, and it gets worse! How can this possibly get worse? We just learned that Catholics have abortions at rates similar to those who are not Catholic.Malcolm Collins: I know what people are thinking.They're thinking. Okay, but this is just lumping all Catholics into one group. What if we divide Catholics by how religious they are? Simone, before we go further, I got more stats for you here. You've got to be kidding me. It can'tSimone Collins: get any worse. Oh, itMalcolm Collins: gets worse.Every stat here is this situation is more catastrophic than you could have imagined.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: .Hello. This is Malcolm and Simone Collins. We are so excited to be here with you today. And I am excited to be talking to you today, Simone, because this is going to be an episode our fans are going to [00:02:00] love because the. Stat heavy fertility episodes always do spectacular.Ooh, we're looking at here some terrifying numbers. Oh, really? Yeah.Simone Collins: Oh, no. Yes.Malcolm Collins: So I have mentioned before that Catholics have a lower fertility rate than non Catholics when you control for income and that Catholic countries. Seem to be hit by fertility collapse a lot faster and harder than other countries.For example, the average European Catholic majority country has a fertility rate of only 1. 3. And then you have the rapid declines in fertility across Latin America. With examples like Uruguay in just the past seven years going from an above replacement fertility rate to only around 1. 3. Argentina, if you're looking at the four year olds who are entering kindergarten this year there is going to be 30 percent less than just four years ago.You look at Costa Rica where a local demographer used the term vertiginous to describe their fertility situation and local [00:03:00] women have below one fertility right now. So just. Absolutely catastrophic. But what has always been said to me is for whatever reason, this is not true of American Catholics.Okay. Is that true? I, I idly decided I had taken it as a fact because so many people had told me this. Yeah.Simone Collins: Sounds like it might be true. The Catholics that we know have a lot of kids, so it. Seems to totally check outMalcolm Collins: of the prenatals movement. There are a number of Catholic the thought leaders in the movement.So I was like, okay. But, and I will also note of the prenatalist Catholics that I know of they fall into two categories of, they are either weirdly unmarried and childless younger people

In this insightful video, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive into the complex ethical considerations surrounding parents showcasing their children on social media platforms. They explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of raising children in the public eye, addressing concerns about privacy, consent, and the long-term impact on a child's future. The couple discusses the importance of age-appropriate media exposure, the need for open communication and education, and the value of building a strong family brand in an increasingly connected world. They also touch on the role of social media followings in creating opportunities, fostering trust, and navigating a changing societal landscape. Throughout the conversation, Malcolm and Simone emphasize the significance of parental responsibility, adaptability, and the development of resilience in children growing up in the digital age.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] I claiming there are no ethical issues here? No, I'm very clearly not. I'm saying there are ethical issues, but what people on the other side of this argument arepretending, which is just false in a lie is that there are no potential upsides for the kid from this. I'm doing is I am contrasting the upsides with the downsides . That they have the environment to start their lives with decent sized social media followings within wealthy intellectual circles, the doors that is going to open for them. And this is something that we also haven't talked enough about in society, social media followings and the ability to translate these into high value relationships.Simone Collins: if we live in a future in which Society's current vetting systems are bankrupt and don't work anymore. The only way that you can really build trust and have people expect you to deliver on what you [00:01:00] promise is if they feel like they know you and can trust you and you're predictable because trust lies in predictability.And the only way that they can know that is if they have some kind of access to your thought process or they have a parasocial relationship with you. And the only way to do that is if you have a very open and transparent media history.Malcolm Collins: And we want to have kids whose lives matter. If you are afraid of people making fun of you online, Your life won't matterSimone Collins: becauseMalcolm Collins: you can't do anything publicly.And it's very hard to change the world if you don't do things publiclyWould you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello everyone I am excited to be here with you today. Today. We are going to be talking about the ethics of putting children in media and the Considerations that need to go into this because a lot of people might look at what we are doing we are a very public family. We are in the news all the time these days which is funny becauseour channel is medium size, but not really correlatory to how [00:02:00] publicly famous we are getting. But again, just this last weekend, like the big three page front page piece in the guardian. And then a bunch of follow up pieces to that and then trending and and so people are like, wow, your kids are in all of these, like in the Vice documentary, right?This little baby right here is in the media because she is in this shot.Simone Collins: Yeah. And I watch a lot of snark online. A lot of the snark there's a big theme and people criticizing parents who include their children in TikTok and Instagram and YouTube posts, et cetera. And whenever they include clips that they're criticizing, they blur out.The poor baby's faces, because they've been included in the shot. And even when they're trying to critique the video, they themselves do not want to repeat the crime of putting a child's face online, which to a certain extent, I understand the basics of where they're coming from.For example on Google photos, which uses facial recognition, it is able to recognize the faces of. Baby versions [00:03:00] of very old people. Like it is very good at continuous face facial recognition. So it's not Oh, it's a, it's them as a baby. No one will know that this was them. Oh, actually they will.There is no not parsing that, but also you and I have been talking a lot about this recently, this concept of privacy. Is such a farce and often to a great extent, trying to be more private and trying to hide is only subjecting. I'm goingMalcolm Collins: to push back on you here from their perspective.Simone Collins: Yeah, you can sayMalcolm Collins: that as an adult privacy is a farce to adults. Okay. Yeah. Which is very hard to actually both be private and have an impact on the world in this current world. You can be private, but you are sacrificing your ability to impact society by doing that. Yeah. However, and I think that most like sane ethical systems believe some form of social impact is a personal obligation.I can see how there could be like hedonist based ethical systems or like weird ones where like your family is literally the only thing that matters.

In this thought-provoking interview, YouTube creator Benjamin Boyce joins Malcolm and Simone Collins to discuss the complexities of the transgender debate. They delve into Boyce's extensive work interviewing detransitioners, the concerning rise in rapid onset gender dysphoria among teenage girls, and the potential risks of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones on brain development. The conversation also explores the societal implications of the transgender movement, the influence of social contagion, and the importance of open dialogue and education in navigating this sensitive topic. Boyce shares insights from his personal journey and his documentary on the Evergreen State College protests, highlighting the need for nuanced discussions in the face of polarizing ideologies. The group also touches on the role of religion, the challenges faced by different communities, and the importance of protecting children while fostering understanding and compassion.Benjamin Boyce: [00:00:00] Anyway, so he, he was a very effeminate gay man. He goes on these hormones and stuff. And then he become, he comes of age 18, 19, but he's still like a little boyand I'm like, wait, they were, it wasn't just a gay thing. Like they had a young boy. It was basically legalMalcolm Collins: PDFBenjamin Boyce: files?. Because he was, he had all the attributes of, he was locked at 14, but he's 19. Oh, that'sSimone Collins: so gross.Benjamin Boyce: So they're like, he was preserved and then offered on the altar of this stuff.Simone Collins: No. Oh no. No.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello everyone. It is so wonderful to have you here again today.We have a very special guest with us today, Benjamin Boyce his YouTube channel has one of the highest overlaps of subscribers was ours And if you watch it, it would be immediately obvious that Why he does lots of very high thought, high intellect intellectually dissonant interviews.Benjamin Boyce: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: But what's interesting is I can get a trickle of what you think in your perspective from the interviews, but I haven't, I, I'd love to have an interview that's like the you [00:01:00] interview, what you think on things.So I'm excited to at least be one of the people who's doing this. And one of the projects you've been working on recently that I think would be a really great start to this. Is I guess I, I call it like the de transition project, which is lots of interviews with people who are well known voices in the de transition community.I'd love it if you could just get started with what got you thinking about this and where you see things changing within that community over the past year or so.Benjamin Boyce: Can I answer that question by asking you guys a question? Of course. Like, when did you become cognizant or invested in what we call the culture war, in its current iteration?Malcolm Collins: Wow. God, that's a good question. Honestly, not at all until they started firing at us. It's very interesting. So I would have considered myself Is this aboutBenjamin Boyce: Spankgate? So just two or three weeks ago? Oh god,Malcolm Collins: No, before Spankgate. It was the beginning of the pronatalist stuff. Really, as soon as we started getting public attention [00:02:00] you're forced to pick a side these days.And at first, both sides were yelling at us. But the one side when we'd sit down and try to talk with them they could have a lucid conversation. And then the other side, there just wasn't really a conversation. It was just. Concede and submit to our world perspective.I'm actually goingSimone Collins: to say it's earlier than that. It's when we got involved in education reform in the state of Pennsylvania. And the mere idea that we were critical of the legacy education system meant that we were going to be Republicans. Just like period of course you didn't Republican because you don't think public school is perfect and in need of more money and therefore.Obviously.Benjamin Boyce: Yeah. So what year are we talking about?Simone Collins: At least 2019. Yeah. Okay. We were like firmly centrists. And then when we were younger, we were full out, like quite progressive Democrats. I would say. Yeah. BlueBenjamin Boyce: Pills. Yeah. Do you guys have any remembrances or you might be too young of Gamergate?Oh my God. [00:03:00] OfMalcolm Collins: course. Would I, when Gamergate was happening, like I was well on the side of the gamer, like I was like, okay this whole five guys situation is ridiculous. This is clearly a bit breach of journalistic integrity. But I think back then there was still a believable disconnect between the, of the time, the Tumblerina army the Tumblr internet and the cloud agendas and all of this insanity.And. The real mainstream democratic party. Like I didn't think that those people had any direct connection on the type of policy that would be implemented by a Hillary Clinton government. That changed pretty dramatically over time.Benjamin Boyce: Wha

In this episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the controversial portrayal of a lesbian cult in the latest Star Wars series, The Acolyte. The couple breaks down the problematic elements of the show, including its misogynistic undertones, bizarre plot devices, and the implications of the cult's reproductive practices.Malcolm and Simone discuss how the show's attempt to introduce a powerful female-led community ultimately fails, as it relies on harmful stereotypes and illogical plot points. They examine the cult's use of the Force to impregnate women, drawing parallels to the immaculate conception of Anakin Skywalker and the troubling notion that men create children while women merely carry them.The conversation also touches on the decline of the Star Wars franchise, with Simone sharing her personal journey as a fan and pinpointing the moment she lost interest in the series. Malcolm and Simone explore the idea of Jar Jar Binks as a Sith Lord and the prevalence of racial stereotypes in the earlier films.Throughout the discussion, the couple shares insights into the challenges of creating conservative-leaning content in the current entertainment landscape, drawing from their own experiences with a canceled documentary project. They highlight the role of legal departments and institutional bureaucracies in stifling diverse viewpoints within major streaming networks.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] It would be like, if you wrote a biblical fan fiction and you knew the Jesus story, And you were like, and there was this whole other town, this whole other town of lesbians where everyone just prays to God and gets pregnant in the same way Mary did, hold on. This is where it gets insane and misogynistic.Simone Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: There is a famous scene in this.Carry themMalcolm Collins: which implies that men create the child And women carry the child. This is even more misogynistic than real human earth biology.So she's actually,Actually I inseminated you. Therefore I created the child. Therefore I am the dominant partner in this relationship and make all child rearing decisions.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: I am so excited for this episode.Simone Collins: Yes. Okay. Let's doMalcolm Collins: it.Simone Collins: Let'sMalcolm Collins: go for it.Yeah. This [00:01:00] is going to be the worst. Yeah,The worst! She's the worst person in the world. Huge skank. Terrible. What did I tell you, huh? The worst!She's the worst in the world.Malcolm Collins: I gotta put the word team here because oh my God, does this deserve it? Two things that is going to make this somewhat unique when contrasted with other discussions of the Acolyte. One is we have some interesting insider industry information, given that our own documentary was recently cancelled, about how decisions are being made inside of Hollywood right now which can help you understand how something as insane as this could have gotten greenlit because that is something that before we worked in Hollywood, genuinely perplexed.Why is this getting greenlit? It's obviously not good for the industry. But then the second is how absolutely misogynistic the ideas presented in the [00:02:00] Acolyte are. But wasn't it like produced by women? Yes, it was. They were trying to create something that was misandrist. A world, and I want to get your reaction to the world.Start with one of the most controversial things. So let's get your real time reaction to this. Okay. Because no one knows what happens.Simone Collins: Yeah. Tell me about the Acolyte. I didn't know what is out. I did not know there was more Star Wars property to enjoy. So I have not watched anything.I have not seen a single thing. So itMalcolm Collins: takes place during the High Republic. What is the HighSimone Collins: Republic?Malcolm Collins: A long time before most of the stuff that you've seen. So preSimone Collins: Queen Amidala, or before. Very before that. Long before. Before,Malcolm Collins: yeah, this is in a time when there were lots of Siths and lots of Jedis before the Rule of Two.Simone Collins: Living in harmony? There wasn't a split timeMalcolm Collins: the different era of star wars. The point being, this is an important to the show right now. So the point being into the high Republic it follows two twins an evil twin and a good twin, but goodness, there'sSimone Collins: [00:03:00] an evil twin.Malcolm Collins: It reminds me of that scene.I've got to post it from Sky High.What if I said it's not just her twin, it's her evil twin? This Friday you say? Medulla, you dog!Malcolm Collins: Sky High is so undersold as a show. It really is. Do you want to go? Because it's about a world of superheroes. And it plays with a lot of tropes from that. And one guy asked the other guy, do you want to go on a date with twins? And what if I told you she was the evil twin?It's such a great scene. I canSimone Collins: already tell that this movie is very unique and bold in its writing. Hold on. I