Afleveringen
-
In this episode of Bricks and Minifigs 2, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down the Coffeezilla investigation into the Bricks & Minifigs Lego controversy. They explain what Coffeezilla allegedly got wrongâespecially around accounts payable, business acquisitions, liabilities, and ownership of consignment inventory.
Malcolm and Simone (experienced business buyers/sellers) dive into why the previous owner wasnât being shady, how stock purchases transfer liabilities, why the âmissing Legosâ narrative misses the bigger picture, and the legal realities of taking over a business with existing obligations. They also discuss the broader saga, corporate responses, Brian Mansellâs history with the company, and why the focus should now be on properly resolving things with investigator Ben.
A must-watch for anyone following the Bricks & Minifigs drama, Lego collectors, business ethics enthusiasts, or fans of deep-dive investigations. What do you thinkâdid Coffeezilla miss key business 101 details?
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] you had watched the Coffeezilla piece and were convinced by it on Bricks and Minifigs. And- I mean- Oh my God, I thought that you with your business background would immediately see what he was getting wrong.
Simone Collins: What was he getting wrong?
Malcolm Collins: So there were two big things he got wrong. Okay. The, the really big glaring one is when he said the previous owner sold some of the sets without sending the money to the guy, right?
And yet we see from her own words when theyâre doing the transition of ownership, she goes, âYouâre going to-â Yeah,
Simone Collins: Iâm worried about... Yeah. â
Malcolm Collins: Youâre
Simone Collins: gonna close out-â And they, theyâre like, âWeâre gonna have some- Thatâs gonna get handled by someone else.â
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs what I heard. No, no, no. But she wasnât worried about the inventory.
Mm-hmm. She, she was worried more about closing out the accounts.
Speaker 2: These are ones that havenât-- he has not been paid his percentage yet, and if I donât have the tickets, I wonât know how much I need to pay him. That, thatâs a business thing and not necessarily yours. If, if taking on the business, he takes on all that comes on that [00:01:00] part.
Speaker 3: Whatâs extremely funny about this piece in retrospect is you can see that the person, if not the CEO, at least somebody at Bricks & Minifigs properly understood the law that when you buy a business, you take on accounts payable
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. What that means in business speak is she knew part of the money that was meant to go to him had been unpaid. Oh. And sheâs like, âI need to go over my notes.â She even specifically says, âI need to go over my notes to see those amounts.â And then they say, âNo, weâll take on that responsibility.â
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: This is a normal thing in business. Yeah. This isnât her being shady. Itâs not like-
Simone Collins: Well, thatâs... When you acquire a company if it is not- an asset acquisition. If itâs a stock acquisition, you also acquire their liabilities
Malcolm Collins: Liabilities.
Simone Collins: And that, one of the liabilities- You acquire their liabilities
is your accounts payable, and that is accounts payable. Yeah. Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: thatâs, thatâs accounts... Th- this is the most 101 thing in business, and you were like, âOh, there werenât that many Legos in the store because she had sold some before,â and itâs like, n- that doesnât, that doesnât matter. And then the second thing- No,
Simone Collins: what, what Coffeezilla said is that, that I [00:02:00] thought was most notable was that the amount thatâs sort of pending was much smaller than people thought.
Itâs more, like, in the $20,000 range. Thatâs
Malcolm Collins: because he wasnât inc- including the accounts payable in the amount pending.
Simone Collins: I thought thatâs what the amount was, that the accounts payable- No ... oh.
Malcolm Collins: He was talking about the physical sets that were still in the store, because he didnât seem to understand accounts payable.
Simone Collins: Hmm, I... Th- that canât be. Thatâs too obvious.
Malcolm Collins: No, itâs obvious to you because youâre a business person. He very clearly, if you watch the piece, and he was calculating the amount of money that he said Bricks and Minifigs owed the , the guy, he just did an addition of all of the sets he could find in their inventory.
He didnât- Oh ... include accounts payable, which would have, from what weâre hearing, maybe doubled that amount. So that was the first thing that really annoyed me.
Simone Collins: I just figured if that was the case, then they would have included, featured prominently in that particular investigative episode, Coffeezilla, I mean.
Like, i- she would say, âAnd the accounts payable amount was, like, $34,000.â She
Malcolm Collins: [00:03:00] literally says that. She goes, âI need to check my records so I can settle accounts with the people who have order-â
Simone Collins: Yeah, in, in... I know, from the recorded clip, but she doesnât say how much that was. In the, in the subsequent interview that she had- Why?
In
Malcolm Collins: the subsequent... Because sheâs being an idiot ...
Simone Collins: with Coffeezilla, she would have stated that amount. â
Malcolm Collins: Cause sheâs being an idiot. But in the, i- when sheâs having the store taken over, she literally says, âI need to settle the accounts,â implying thereâs a large amount of accounts payable specifically to him.
Because, the,
Simone Collins: Then why has no one stated that amount?
Malcolm Collins: When we did our first episode, people were like, âMalcolm, itâs crazy that you saw things in this case that I just didnât understand.â I think a lot of people are just âtards, Simone. Thatâs, thatâs the, the- Well,
Simone Collins: no, but I mean, it, it, at the very le- oh, I guess the Brian, the original owner would not know the amounts because he wouldnât have been aware, aware of what was sold and not.
Do you
Malcolm Collins: think Ben or Brian understands what accounts payable is? The, the, these-
Simone Collins: Yes, I, I imagine they do. But I also imagine they couldnât know. Like, âcause i- if Iâve, if Iâve given something to a shop for consignment, I donât know at any given day what [00:04:00] has sold and what hasnât. Yeah. Like, thereâs not... Thatâs just for us to know.
Malcolm Collins: Yes, which is why she said, âI need to check my records.â Okay. So that really annoyed me.
Speaker 4: Just so you understand why the law works this way, imagine if the law didnât work this way and accounts payable magically disappeared or was transferred to the old owner of a business, , whenever the business changed hands. Now keep in mind, the owner of a business can be a business, , or not a specific individual.
So suppose, , one individual, , , , accrues a large amount of accounts payable in a business, , and they just then transfer that business to themselves for like a one dollar sale, right? , And they say, âOh, all the money that I owed people with this business...â , N-no, or letâs not say themselves. Letâs say their brother.
, They say, âAll the money this business owed immediately disappears because it transferred hands.â , That would be completely stupid. , Th- that would be like the easiest business trickeroo in the world. Like, itâs very obvious why n- you cannot have the law work this way
Malcolm Collins: And then the second thing that really annoyed me- ... that we can go further on-
Simone Collins: Oh,
Malcolm Collins: [00:05:00] God. Crap ... is they keep focusing on whether or not she, she had the right to enter into the consignment deal, which is just totally irrelevant to any of the facts of the case.
Whether or not she had that... So think of it this way, Simone. Uh-huh. Suppose I own a garage right? Or let, letâs, letâs make this different. Iâm leasing a garage from somebody else, okay? To make this even clearer. And then I use the garage Iâm leasing in violation of the terms of my lease to do what, what do you what do you call that where you, like, pay somebody to s- park your car for you at, like, restaurants?
Well, I d- I donât know the term. You pay somebody at a restaurant to park your-
Simone Collins: Valet ...
Malcolm Collins: valet. Okay, yes. So I use it for valet storage in violation of the agreement, right?
Simone Collins: Oh.
Malcolm Collins: Then the owner comes back and they go, âYou didnât have the right to run valet service here.â So then what they do is they take possession of...
Because Iâm only subleasing the asset, right? They [00:06:00] retake possession of the garage, and then they turn around and start selling all of the cars that I had been- Yeah,
Simone Collins: like you parked a Ferrari and theyâre like, âSo this is mine now.â
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, theyâre like, âThis is m-â. That is not remotely how the law works.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: You donât take possession of an asset- Mm
, Just because itâs in a location that you took possession of.
Speaker 5: Again, to understand why it would be comical for the law to work this way, suppose I owned a, , storage locker that I rented to someone, and then the moment they moved in all their stuff, I then went to, , my brother, and I sold the storage locker to my brother. And then he now said, âNow I own everything in the storage locker.â
Or I own a, a hotel, and I wait until a bunch of really rich people come there for a trip, and then I sell it to somebody, and, , now they own everything. All you would need to do to ste- legally steal stuff from somebody is to own something where you expected something of high value to go across, and then [00:07:00] immediately sell it to somebody who youâre close with the moment the person with high value walks across a w- five-foot square of land that you own
Simone Collins: Yeah, I wonder how the law works with that. Like, if someone puts stolen goods or, like, someone elseâs goods
Malcolm Collins: in your home. No, itâs, itâs, no, itâs not how the law... Itâs the clear... Okay, so m- suppose I walk into a building and I set a, a, a diamond ring I own on a table in the building.
Yeah. And then that building sells. The person who buys the building doesnât own my diamond ring. Thereâs
Simone Collins: no finders keepers law?
Malcolm Collins: Y- thatâs not remotely how it works. That wasnât included in the assets of the purchase. It wasnât neg- And this is all laid out when you make a purchase of a company.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But yeah, sorry, that really gets me as well, but it continues.
Simone Collins: How does US law work with ownership of lost items? For example, if I lose a diamond ring at a restaurant and someone picks it up Are they legally in trouble for not giving it back to me if I [00:08:00] return to the restaurant and say, âIt was mineâ? What does that
Malcolm Collins: have to do with anything?
Simone Collins: Iâm just curious about it.
âCause now Iâm just curious about finders keepers law. Itâs not a law. Itâs not a law. Iâm just wondering like-
Malcolm Collins: This is the... I mean, itâs clearly how the Bricks & Minifigs guy think the law works
The, the, the principle of finders keepers
Simone Collins: So b- basically property is yours unless you abandon it. A finder- Yeah ... generally has a right to possess an item that is good against everyone except the true owner. Okay, so there is kind of a finders keepers. But they have to give it back to the true owner if the owner can prove owners- so there kind of is a s- a finders keepers law.
Malcolm Collins: No, if the owner can prove ownership. Mm-hmm. Which the original contract proves that the person that they
Simone Collins: took the property from- Yes. No, 100%, yeah. W- yeah, with, with bricks and minifigs, of course. Thatâs, thatâs obvious ...
Malcolm Collins: didnât have ownership
Simone Collins: Yeah, and then itâs a civil issue if you refuse to give it back. Interesting Mm. Many systems distinguish lost from [00:09:00] mislaid, AKA, like, deliberately set down or forgotten. Property left on the premises is often treated as mislaid. Huh. Law is so interesting. I totally can understand why that one famous housewife women write to work, like, female equality... What was her name?
She has a, a difficult to pronounce, unflattering style name who became a lawyer.
Speaker 6: Note here, , while I say I w- donât hold it against, , Coffeezilla for not understanding accounts payable, , maybe he did understand it and it just slipped his mind in this case because he has done really complex financial stuff into some of his other videos. So itâs, itâs almost sort of baffling to me that this wasnât just like immediately top of mind for him.
But maybe -- he knows what accounts payable is, he just doesnât know what happens with accounts payable during a business transaction, ,
Like even if she was being shady, even if the accounts payable she had had accrued for a year or two years, it would still transfer to Bricks and Minifigs. , Itâs, it, itâs [00:10:00] irrelevant.
Although it appears very clearly that she wasnât being shady because she specifically asked for her books before being kicked out to ensure that she did make the payments to him
Speaker 2: These are ones that havenât-- he has not been paid his percentage yet, and if I donât have the tickets, I wonât know how much I need to pay him. That, thatâs a business thing and not necessarily yours. If, if taking on the business, he takes on all that comes on that part.
Speaker 6: because very few people... Simone and I have bought businesses before. That was our job in the past, to buy and sell businesses, which is why this is so incredibly salient for us and just seems like the simplest thing in the world.
, Which it should have been for the Bricks and Minifigs corporation. , And it seems to have been, because when the guy was making the transaction, he explained to her accurately, âWhen you do a acquisition, we take on the accounts payable.â , âThatâs a business thing,â as he said. You know, thatâs a, you know, simple understanding.
, Second here is, i-itâs not that Coffeezilla did nothing in their video. They did some really cool work. It was really cool when they showed the guy that he had all [00:11:00] this stuff in his own corporate records from his own corporate Google Drive, and the guy was like, âWhat?â And then, oh my God, thatâs so cool, the, , U-Haul thing was really neat
Speaker 9: See the window, but the problem is itâs night outside, so you canât see. And so Iâm looking at everything I can, and thereâs just nothing, you know? And I have this alternate angle, Iâm looking at that. And then wait a minute. Zoom in on that photo. Bring up the brightness of this photo a little bit and my gosh, thereâs a U-Haul in the parking lot right outside of the store the night of November 14th, 2024.
This is something that Matt said he had seen footage of, and it couldnât be true. And again, I, I believe I have seen footage from that night that shows clearly out into the parking lot, and thereâs no U-Haul. After seeing this, I said, âI really have to make a call.â And thatâs when the story changed. So last night I talked with Matt McNeff.
I brought up this question of the U-Haul. He told me [00:12:00] emphatically there was no U-Haul. Yâall came to me this morning. You said, âHey, we looked into it. There actually was a U-Haul there that night.â Can you clear up what thatâs about?
Simone Collins: Actually, it, it is a good idea to do the, the Lego mini fig one, just to give people an update on what everyoneâs missing, because thatâs actually what everyoneâs missing.
Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: I was, I was so annoyed by the Coffeezilla piece on it. I was like, it, it did- theyâre obviously talking about keeping accounts payable, and the other company, you take on accounts payable. That is normal when you acquire a business. That is like Business 101
Simone Collins: If you do a stock purchase, the question is,
Malcolm Collins: we- we- If you do a hostile takeover of a store, you obviously take on that asset.
You, you take on liabilities and assets. If y- during a hostile takeover, you absolutely do.
Simone Collins: Yeah, I donât know. I donât know how it legally works with franchise agreements, like, how the corporate entities are related
Malcolm Collins: or not. Hereâs another way to put it, Simone. It doesnât matter how you took over a company.
If that company had a bunch of stolen [00:13:00] goods, goods that were legally not theirs in a storeroom- Yeah ... you donât all of a sudden own all of those stolen goods just because you own the company now. Mm. That is functionally what the company did. They said, âYour paper only proves that the woman who we took over the store from didnât own it.â
Itâs like, no, it proves that you donât own it because you only acquired her assets. Mm-hmm. You didnât acquire other peopleâs assets simply because they happened to be around. That is the wildest thing ever. Like, I ... To think that you o- like, when you think about it with the stolen stuff, I think it becomes so much more clear.
To think that, âOh, I bought a warehouse full of stolen goods, now I own all of the stolen goods,â everyone would be like, âW- no.â Or even worse, right? Somebody was renting a, a, a storage locker from me and stole a bunch of goods, and they defaulted on their payment so I took all of those goods. Itâs like, th- thatâs not how this works [00:14:00] at all.
And youâre like, âBut it was illegal for them to have the goods there in the first place.â And Iâm like, âThat does nothing to help your case.â
Simone Collins: So you think for proper resolution, the accounts payable just needs to be paid out to this guy?
Malcolm Collins: Well, no. But the framing of the Coffeezilla where he tried to make it seem like it was over a very small amount of money, and thatâs the- Yeah, I
Simone Collins: guess his framing, if I recall correctly, was just, like, the, the big thing is where are the missing Legos?
They either were stolen by a disgruntled employee or
Malcolm Collins: one of these- No, thatâs literally not the thing, and thatâs what Iâm trying to explain. No, no,
Simone Collins: no. I, what Iâm, what Iâm trying to do is recap what his argument was, and I think thatâs what his argument
Malcolm Collins: was, right? And itâs a stupid argument. We know where the missing Legos are, functionally speaking.
They were either sold in those early books, or they were inherited by the store. What he uncovered is that the vast majority of the money to be paid for this guy may not have been in the Legos in the store, but in accounts payable. Mm. That doesnât mean the [00:15:00] previous owners did anything wrong. The, w- basically we know where they were.
They were sold. And we know the previous owners didnât do anything wrong because we have the video where she explicitly says, âI need the books to settle my accounts.â Settling your accounts means paying out accounts payable. Thatâs what that means. They said, âNo, donât settle your accounts. We will manage it.â
That, that is, that was literally them. And then somebody could say, âOh, thatâs a low-level employee saying that,â or something like that. That low a level, even if it was a low-level employee, when they took custody of the books which managed what had gone out and what hadnât gone out without going through with her, as you always do during a biggest acquisition, and she was trying to be nice in those videos and stuff like that.
Like, she was literally like, âHey, letâs get on the same page about the accounts payable, about the the, the co- consignment stuff.â And theyâre like, âNo, I donât want to get on the same page with you.â Mm. Because they knew, I think functionally what happened is they knew that the way they were shutting down the store was very immoral- Mm
and they felt really uncomfortable about it. So
Simone Collins: they- [00:16:00] Oh, like, âIâve been told to do this. Iâm just doing my job. This is corporate.â Yeah. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. They basically knew corporate had sent them to do something absolutely demonstrably immoral. And so even though she was willing to, and we see in the videos, obviously willing to talk them through everything they didnât want to be talked through everything, right?
And that, that is on them. If I since, so like, if theyâre like, âOh, thatâs a low-level employee. He doesnât represent corporate or anything like that,â itâs not even the fact that he affirmed to her, âOh, I know whatâs in these books.â Corporate at any point could have gone back to her to get better accounting, and it appears that they never tried, right?
And it appears that she wanted to give them the better accounting. What corporate does, if I send letâs say I send an employee, and the employee is the one who actually shuts down the storage locker thatâs full of stolen goods, right? That doesnât mean that I, of a [00:17:00] company, am now not legally responsible for the fact that those goods are stolen and need to get back to their rightful owner.
Even if itâs an employee who shuts down the garage thatâs full of cars that somebody had you park for them, right? That, that doesnât absolve corporate from the basic financial accounting responsibility of determining the ownership of the assets of the property, especially when multiple people are telling you these assets are not what, you know...
Speaker 14: And a day or so ago, corporate released a, their timeline of events, and their timeline of events clearly shows that from nearly the very beginning, they were very aware of this consignment Lego set. So they canât say, âWe were unaware that she didnât own this.â
Malcolm Collins: and the thing that always gets me is they keep saying, âWe tried to give Brian Mansell all of this in the past.â Mm. Why canât they provide proof of that? That would be very easy to provide proof of. Presumably itâs in an email, right? Emails are easily recorded. So [00:18:00] if they donât have that email, then I donât believe that.
And I donât understand why they havenât presented that email of them trying to give them back in the past. It seems like an obvious lie. But also one thing
Simone Collins: that- Thereâs, the, thereâs disorganized stuff on both ends. Like, why did the original franchise owner s- provide spreadsheets of records so late as well.
I donât know.
Malcolm Collins: Well, so the other thing that weâve learned since the, the co- well, this was before the Coffeezilla piece, but he didnât include it, is the way that Brian Mandzel originally acquired Bricks & Minifigs was through, in a really scammy way, suing his father for control of a company that his father had built.
And it appears that pretty much since day one, Bricks & Minifigs has been bleeding money. So he basically- Oh ... stole his fatherâs assets and used that to build his pet project company that he has never been able to get financially stable, truly. And that might also explain why they cared so much about such a small amount of money.
One, theyâre just not good at their jobs, and then two, they feel [00:19:00] really pinched on money.
Simone Collins: Right. They, they actually- When you, when you- ... donât have the money.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, like when you look at his house, when you see, you know, his, it, it doesnât look like a house with someone with that much money, right? So it, it may have been thatâs why he felt pressured to steal this stuff, but itâs still stealing.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. Well, and I mean, also, if the companyâs not immensely profitable- You know, it, it probably isnât run well. They donât have good records, like all that kind of thing. You know, like itâs not... Itâs just kind of falling apart, so. That, that makes sense.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Poor things.
Malcolm Collins: Anyway r- I mean, not poor th- th- the CEOâs not a poor thing.
He seems like a truly evil person. The, the way that heâs acting and the way that heâs responding, that he still has Ben under a gag order, you know, thatâs why I have to release this episode. Mm-hmm. Maybe, maybe you can let Ben talk, right? This isnât a normal thing to do in the world of YouTube, and I think he thought talking down to a YouTuber, he didnât realize in the world of the actual world today, YouTubers are significantly more powerful than these big CEOs who think [00:20:00] they can talk-
Simone Collins: No, thatâs why he did that.
He did that because he was getting severe amounts of harassment because
Malcolm Collins: of everyone getting his talk. Well, yeah, but cutting down the YouTuber only makes it worse. He needs to basically get on his hands and knees and beg the YouTuber. He
Simone Collins: can- Well, he doesnât seem to understand that ...
Malcolm Collins: you know, he made- He thinks he
Simone Collins: can shut it down
Malcolm Collins: Brian, like everything with Brian. Itâs like itâs not Brian you need to settle this with anymore. Itâs Ben you need to... Itâs Ben who you need to prostrate yourself to. And I know that that hurts your ego, but fundamentally, thatâs the only way this gets right. But
Simone Collins: anyway. Sorry. No, no, no, itâs not Ben. Itâs Brian.
Malcolm Collins: No, itâs Ben. Itâs Ben. Itâs the YouTuber that the CEO needs to be prostrating himself to, not the old man. He thinks he can make this right with the old man because itâs no longer about bricks and minifigs. The core issue now- Oh,
Simone Collins: itâs, itâs about the cover-up ... is
Malcolm Collins: about- Itâs destroying
Simone Collins: FanTheFacts ...
Malcolm Collins: the way that he tried to stifle Benâs investigation and Benâs honest efforts to try to get this, and then tried to destroy Benâs life through jail time, through these court [00:21:00] cases.
These are targeted, personalized court cases, right?
Simone Collins: Thatâs true. He
Malcolm Collins: could choose not to do this, but he didnât. So, no, absolutely. It is... And this is what heâs getting wrong. He needs to get Ben to accept his apology to even begin to get anywhere with this, not Brian. Ben is his problem here. Ben- Mm-hmm
is not some kid anymore. Ben is the victim in everyoneâs mind, and the core victim in everyoneâs mind.
Simone Collins: Well, especially the way he filmed that I canât talk anymore video against this dark hostage style background. But anyway- Yeah ... I have to go get the kids. I love you so much.
Speaker 12: What needs to be done next? What does that say? Itâs saying we gotta use the wrong screwdriver to do it. Oh, no. Itâs okay. Where did the wrong screwdriver go? I see a screwdriver right there. Iâm [00:22:00] talking about the wrong one. See? Thereâs a Phillips head and a flathead. Do you know the difference between the two?
Speaker 13: What? One has an X at the end and the other one has a line at the end. I donât- The one with the red handle- Oh, hereâs, here- Thatâs a wrench. Oh. Oh, hereâs, here
Speaker 12: you go, Tayn. This is the thing. Wait. Yeah, Octavian, itâs true that screwdrivers and wrenches are easier. No. Like, if you use that to turn- No, I donât ... the screw in. Hey
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 -
Malcolm & Simone Collins sit down with Nux Taku for an epic, wide-ranging conversation on the evolution of the online right, anime-to-politics pipeline, faith, culture war, and building a better future. From hentai reviews to biblical literalism, technopuritanism, abortion, consent morality, AI, demographics, and why the right feels like the âfun sideâ â this is one of the most unfiltered and insightful collabs in the nerd/tech right space.
Topics include:
* The journey from 4chan/anime degen culture to political commentary
* Why repentance & forgiveness are biblical traits that define the right
* Critiques of consent-only morality, abortion, and leftist degeneration
* Optimism, family, pronatalism, and raising based kids
* Conspiracy theories, Candace Owens lore, and truth-seeking
* AI, progress, and performative subversion on the right
If you enjoy Based Camp, Nux Taku, or discussions blending anime, theology, and red-pilled culture â hit like, subscribe, and share!
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone and Nux. This is the collab that was promised 3,000 years ago. We are so excited to be here with you. And what I wanna go into with Nux is exploring the evolution of this sort of new online culture that we share that has become, I donât know, the nerd right, the tech right, the new right, whatever people wanna call it.
Because if you were to go to me five years ago, right? E- even five years ago, I mean, imagine 10 years ago, and youâre like, âOkay, so who are, like, the right-wing thought leaders on the internet?â And itâs like, âWell, the one weâve got on now is a, a Jewish VTuber who used to do hentai reviews.â â... And then weâve got fox girls.
Weâve got, like, five fox girls.â And Iâd be like, âAre they furries?â And theyâd be like, âNo, theyâre not furries, but they are fox girls. And then weâve got, like, this slime girl, but itâs very important that you know that sheâs a chimera slime. Then weâve got Commie Mommy,â and people would say- Elf
Simone Collins: slime. Yes.
Malcolm Collins: Simone, am I not coming through?
Simone Collins: No, no. Just elf and slime girl. Like, itâs
Malcolm Collins: chimera. Oh, elf and... Oh yes, Iâve [00:01:00] got to get it right. Yeah. So Commie Mommy, and then people would be like, âWell, she, she canât actually be, like, a socialist.â No, sheâs actually a socialist, and sheâs well-liked within our community.â And then itâs like, and then you got the top of the, the, the pack, and itâs this guy who, who lives like a homeless guy.
And Iâd say to myself, like Iâd be like, âLives like a homeless guy? How does he not have any money?â Itâs like, âOh, no, he has tremendous amounts of money. Tremendous amounts.â But itâs so weird, this sort of world, and itâs a path that is not... Like, we, we in the past have tried to trace it from, like, the early online atheist communities to, like, the anti-feminist communities, then to, like, the anti-woke communities, and then to the modern right, and then it sort of, like, combined with parts of the red pill.
But you represent a different strand which comes out of the anime degen 4chan world, which we also come from as well. And I wanted to take this to sort of explore this journey, you as one of the leading content creators who sort of lived it, [00:02:00] and how your mind changed and the various points you had major inflections.
Nux Taku: Yeah, no, itâs de- itâs definitely a weird a weird area on the internet, for sure. I, I donât know. For me it was, for me it was like, âWow, I, I like making fun of retards and most of the retards are in politics. We have to start doing that.â I mean, that was the, that was kind of the thought process. Among other things, for sure.
I mean, I have to say, one of my biggest inspirations was Hasan Piker shocking his dog. That was, that was huge for me personally. Like, I, Iâm like, this guy, heâs very well accepted in like the, the streamer world. You know, the, the pop culture. And Iâm like, you know what? I, I want it to be as uncomfortable for radical leftists as for radical right-wingers.
Mm-hmm. And thatâs what I did. I dedicated... And now no one wants to collab with Hasan. You know? Hasan was on The Ben Shapiro Podcast and no one wants to touch him anymore. You know, they got obliterated for it.
Malcolm Collins: You, you did a great job nuke- I mean, the JD Vance was like, âOh yeah, of course. You know, the dog shocking guy, right?â
Like. Itâs [00:03:00]
Nux Taku: cinema. Itâs amazing. Yeah. The we-
Malcolm Collins: I actually
Nux Taku: think- I, I think- Okay,
Malcolm Collins: take it ...
Nux Taku: no, I think putting, making the face of the left like, you know, dog shocking, you know, womanizing, brothel enthusiast, terrorist supporter, thatâs like the face of the left and itâs like, you wanna be on that side? So like you mentioned- You have, and I
Malcolm Collins: love that like on our side you have Asmongold, who literally, I donât know any other human who would do this, doesnât kill a cockroach growing, crawling on him, picks it up.
Who is that nice to a cockroach? Who is that pathologically nice? All right. And then leads it outside, right? And Hasanâs shocking his dog. But I think-
Nux Taku: Okay, I think, I think youâre taking the, the Asmongold thing like, a, a... Itâs like, loves cockroaches, supports like late term abortions, right? That, thatâs Asmongold.
You know? Itâs-
Malcolm Collins: He still-
Nux Taku: You got a lot of interesting characters out
Malcolm Collins: here ... does Asmongold support late term abortion?
Nux Taku: Asmongold, he supports abortion a moment before birth. He supports it.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, really? I did not know that. We- Yeah. Itâs interesting ... we have changed our views on abortion significantly recently.
There, there was a recent video on that.
Nux Taku: Really?
Malcolm Collins: People [00:04:00] should watch because it was the craziest video ever. It starts with a gang bang where like people got together
Simone Collins: and then- It starts with a, yeah, basically you know about Ailaâs birthday gang bang, right?
Nux Taku: Who?
Simone Collins: Oh my God. So Ayla, a very famous sex researcher for her birthday one year in like 2024, so a bit ago I think decided to have a, a gang bang for her birthday because thatâs how one celebrates in certain circles in the Bay Area with 42 men.
And one of her friends who helped to organize her organize it met her now future husband and, and father of her child at this gang bang. She was a fluffer. But, but, but
Malcolm Collins: in
Simone Collins: between- But she had this really terrible,
Nux Taku: Wait, y- you called her a sexual researcher?
Simone Collins: She is. Is that like a nice way to say a w***e?
She possesses some of the worldâs best- Like, Iâm trying to figure
Nux Taku: this out.
Simone Collins: No, so she, she has probably
Malcolm Collins: the worldâs best data set. If youâve ever seen those data sets of kinks and what they correlate to and like how they c- cross correlate, the trans community hates her âcause she always just says whatever she thinks is true. Yeah. Weâre not promoting her lifestyle. But anyway, in between, in between this party [00:05:00] and her friend getting married she had this horrible abortion experience that she wrote about that radicalized a lot of people like us, because before I was like, âWell, u- up until they have neurons Iâm okay with it.â
And now Iâm like, âNo, not even then.â
Simone Collins: Yeah, itâs,
Nux Taku: Look so- You should check it out ... so one thing, I, I hear you guys discuss a lot, like, your philosophy. I, I donât remember. You have, like, a name for it.
Malcolm Collins: Hmm.
Nux Taku: Itâs, like, about having lots of peers. Technopuritanism.
Malcolm Collins: Like, Evan- Itâs
Nux Taku: our- Technopuritanism ... itâs
Malcolm Collins: our crazy religion.
Nux Taku: Okay. All right. Could, could you describe it in a few sentences, and then Iâll, Iâll let you know my... Like, i- if this is still part of the previous conversation.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah. Well, okay, okay, Iâll, Iâll, Iâll, Iâll say it before we go on with this, âcause one thread I wanna pick up on what you said earlier, and then Iâll get into this really quickly is you were saying you liked making fun of retards on the internet.
And I think in reality- Passion ... this was what was the through line between these various communities. If you go back to the very early days, where you had the people who are now, like, right-wing influencers who back then were, like, atheist influencers or whatever, right? [00:06:00] They just liked dunking on anyone they could see as, as stupid, and then they started to feel like the Christians arenât as fun to dunk on as the feminists.
And then they started to be like, âOh, the wokies are the most fun to dunk on,â or the Tum- the Tumblr people are. And it drove sort of this political chain. But as for us and our theological beliefs, the quickest version is we think that the... We have a biblically literalist reading of the Bible that is materialist and monist.
Meaning that we a, a, we think that when the Bible says in the distant future humans are gonna be raised again that itâs talking about like, a, a, a super advanced entity in the distant future that is all-benevolent because humanity keeps evolving a billion years from now. And wants to give everybody who lived a virtuous life as long of a good life as possible, so it resurrects them.
And we try to go through. And weâre literalist, too. Like, we try to take the, the, go through all the translations and show how it could mean this. Itâs crazy, I know.
Simone Collins: I think more succinctly, itâs, itâs an accelerationist tech-forward, [00:07:00] descendant worship religion that is based on a literal interpretation of the Bible
Nux Taku: Interesting.
Wow. Okay. So I, I thought it was a lot more like materialist focused, right? Like, you know, we want- It is ... humanity to survive, so therefore... No, no, I obvious- so I think that if you follow the Bible, itâll have the best outcome for your life anyway, right? So- Yeah ... even if you were, like, the ultimate atheist, you know, utilitarian, you should still follow the Bible because itâll give you the best lifestyle regardless.
Malcolm Collins: Th- thatâs one of the things that we, we did a video recently when I was like, being an adult is recognizing that sins are just, like, a list of things that will F up your life. Itâs basically like God gave us a list of like, you know, donât, donât cheat on your wife. You know, donât, donât have gang bangs.
Donât-
Nux Taku: Okay, so-
Malcolm Collins: you know, ... I
Nux Taku: donât wanna, I donât wanna- ... murder ... correct you here or anything. I donât, I donât mean to cor- there is no Bible verse saying donât cheat on your wife.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, okay. No, th- there isnât because in- I, Iâm just saying ... early Judaism you could have multiple wives, and we talk about that.
[00:08:00] Correct. Youâre absolutely right. But, Correct ... Iâm sure thereâs some line you could take to mean that. But the point
Nux Taku: being is that- Yeah. You know, donât be, donât be adulterous. I mean, I guess you could, you could read into that.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. I, and I actually agree with you on this. We point, we have whole episodes on the Bi- the, the when monogamy became a norm in Judaism.
But I donât wanna... Th- thatâs a, thatâs a tangent. But the point being is, like, itâs just a bunch of stuff thatâs gonna make your life worse. And it, it, as an adult as a kid I always felt like, oh, sins are things that are tempting, right? And itâs like humanity was given a list of like, donât piss on the electric fence, and then immediately, like, a big portion of us just went immediately and pissed on the electric fence.
Because, I donât know, weâre, weâre not supposed to do it or something
Nux Taku: Yeah, I suppose. But yeah, no, I, I agree with that. I actually think that morals come from there actually, you know. And, and in regards to Asmongold, like, I think Asmongoldâs a really honest guy. So when, when I discuss the whole abortion thing, why my view has never changed really on abortion is âcause it says thou shalt not murder in the [00:09:00] Bible.
All right? So regardless, if, if a fetus is a human life, then killing it is murder, so therefore itâs bad, you know? So- And, and... Yeah? Sorry. No,
Malcolm Collins: so youâve always had these views? Like all the way back to your early
Nux Taku: days or did you- Okay, so even in my early days, yeah, I had these views for sure. I, I definitely fleshed them out, my faith got a lot stronger.
But you know, basic stuff like donât murder and donât steal are pre- pretty consistent I think.
Malcolm Collins: Well, no, itâs, itâs very interesting because what Iâm realizing from this conversation is a big part of the online transition has been people not coming to views they didnât have historically, but feeling comfortable talking about them.
Nux Taku: Exactly. Exactly. A-
Malcolm Collins: actually, the irony is that you were less at risk of being canceled talking about pure degeneracy, like Metamorphosis or something like this- Absolutely ... than saying you shouldnât have abortions.
Nux Taku: 100%. That, that, thatâs the thing. The entire online space, be- it became super comfortable to hate God.
And it became super comfortable to follow, you [00:10:00] know, if you look at like leftist policy, itâs like a checklist of what Satan would tell you to do. You know? Itâs like, you know, abort your babies and groom children and castrate them and, you know- Well- ... take money from people that earn it and give it to people that donât.
I- thatâs the list.
Malcolm Collins: And look at the toll that it leaves on these people. Itâs not like theyâre... I- if you look at like GDC and you see the people screaming at the sky, right? Like, thatâs not a normal response. Like, that is somebody whoâs had everything good taken from them in their life, and itâs
Nux Taku: really- Okay, but define normal.
Define normal. Sure. Y- your, the, your barometer only operates âcause you have a belief system. See, I define normal and morality based on God. All right? But, but if you view things as, well, I just want a good outcome for the most people, what does that even mean? What is good in that case?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, I mean, I think the, the, the morality thing that youâre talking about here is, is interesting because by the definitions of society right now, you and us are weird because we donât follow the, the normative cultural ethical set, which seems to be highly [00:11:00] deleterious to people living, like, fulfilling lives.
Nux Taku: I, I agree with you. I, I think that if you ask your average, like, liberal, enlightened liberal what, what morality is, itâs just basically if thereâs consenting adults, itâs fine. That- thatâs their only tenet- Yeah ... basically, because they donât want bad things to happen to themselves. Itâs selfish inherently.
They wanna be able to live whatever debaucherous lifestyle they could come up with, and they donât want anyone to step on them. So therefore, their belief system based on this preference is, âOh, if everyone consents, itâs fine.â
Malcolm Collins: Well, I think it, it... W- I, I really like that youâre drawing attention to this because you can see from this view of consent being the core of morality, where we keep seeing leftists get in hot water ideologically.
W- one of the episodes we have, we go over communist regimes and how many of them tried to lower the age of consent to, like, super low ages, like 11 or 12 or something like that. And- Yeah ... some socialist parties did. And, and the reason is, is because in reality, the reason we donât sleep with children isnât about consent.
Like, we [00:12:00] allow mentally disabled people to have sex. We allow elderly people to have sex. If youâre talking about a 15-year-old or something like that, they have a mental i- intelligence thatâs higher than a, a nine-year-old. N- nobody has a problem when a nine-year-old has sex. Itâs not about consent. Itâs about what it does to that person and the effects it has on their life, right?
And I think that w- we see the famous Ch- Chuck clip where heâs like, âI donât see anything wrong with having sex with an animal if you were like the one in...â Do you... Are you... Have you seen this clip? Sure.
Nux Taku: Go ahead. Yeah, I love that clip. You re- you mean to tell me that the inbred Islamist thinks that you can have sex with animals?
Weird. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Funny
Nux Taku: coincidence.
Malcolm Collins: No, you donât have sex with animals âcause of the negative effects that has on your life, and, like, the diseases and all of the other negative effects. See,
Nux Taku: but you know what? Y- you, you bring us to a fantastic point because if you forget God for a second. Mm-hmm. Try to explain to me under a liberal worldview why you should not have sex with an animal
Malcolm Collins: You, there, there isnât a good explanation.
Thatâs what these people are realizing. They just know-
Nux Taku: Because [00:13:00] they, because they canât consent? Is that it? No, obviously not- Thatâs, no ... âcause you can eat meat. You could literally kill it- Yeah ... and eat it.
Simone Collins: Yeah, but
Nux Taku: then- So consent
Simone Collins: is not the issue Most of them donât eat meat. Like true-
Malcolm Collins: No, they eat- ... true vegans donât
Nux Taku: eat
chunks,
Malcolm Collins: freaking veals, Simone Chunk does. Chunk eats meat They torture babies cows. This is business. And even if theyâre m-
Nux Taku: not
Malcolm Collins: m-
Nux Taku: And even, even if they didnât eat meat ... if theyâre eating dairy ... it, itâs irrelevant. If itâs all consent based, then whatâs wrong with having sex with a corpse? Itâs dead. It canât consent.
Whatâs the difference?
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs a good point. And- That is a
Nux Taku: good
Malcolm Collins: point. I, it- There is
Nux Taku: no reason- Itâs, itâs not ...
Malcolm Collins: as a progressive.
Nux Taku: Isnât it illegal to have
Simone Collins: sex with corpses? But from a
Nux Taku: progressive mindset, theyâre... I donât think so. But why? Why not? Like, they, th- thereâs no consent required. Okay, why is incest immoral according to the leftist worldview?
Why is it immoral to have s- y- you consent and your sibling consents. Really true.
Malcolm Collins: That makes sense. I hadnât thought about all of the things this breaks, but it breaks a
Simone Collins: lot. Yeah, but, but it is, I think itâs immoral-
Nux Taku: It does ...
Simone Collins: because it- Because- ... itâs, itâs rural coded, and rural coded is conservative coded, and if itâs conservative itâs bad.
So incest- Okay, well- ... has to be bad.
Nux Taku: Okay, to be fair, incest happens [00:14:00] mostly in like Muslim countries, which is left wing at this point. So like, I donât know.
Simone Collins: Right. But no, no, no. Like, in, in the leftist mind no one thinks about the life of someone in a Muslim or Islamic country. They only think in terms of the United States, and then if someone is Muslim or other, theyâre just good.
Theyâre just good. Oh. Trust me. I
Nux Taku: forgot
Simone Collins: about that. Yeah. So like, like I donât know who they are. Theyâre better than I am. Their culture is enlightened. Mine is bad. And my extra bad people are the hicks in the countryside who screw their cousins, so you know.
Nux Taku: But, but the point Iâm making though is from their logical standpoint that as long as everyone consents itâs fine.
There is nothing wrong with this.
Malcolm Collins: Absolutely.
Nux Taku: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well,
Nux Taku: that- And, and thatâs, and, and thatâs the degradation of every value and... Look, I think that itâs bad to have sex with your sibling âcause it says in the Bible not to have sex with your sibling. God said it actually.
Malcolm Collins: The Itâs actually
Nux Taku: pretty simple
Malcolm Collins: the it, one thing I found pretty interesting that Simone said there is how leftists are not allowed to look at the reality of what itâs like in many of these countries, and I think we see an embodiment of that was Greta Thunberg [00:15:00] when she wouldnât watch the voto- the, the video that like literally Hamas film- October 7th
Nux Taku: video.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Just like I donât want to see reality because that interferes with the fantasy that Iâm living in That was one
Nux Taku: I completely agree. If, I think, okay, so I mean, thereâs a, a Bible verse, right? Torah Emet in Hebrew, right? That, Right ... the Torah is truth and or the Bible, the Torah is the Old Testament.
So essentially my, my perspective is if you are gonna continue going on your like anti-God path, you are going to consistently have an issue with truth. Reality is a major issue if youâre a leftist. You know, men could be women- Yeah ... and words donât actually mean anything. And and Islamic countries are really actually based and good to gay people.
And you know, hon- and you donât even need to live in reality at this point. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Nux Taku: Because reality is bigoted.
Malcolm Collins: So when did you first feel comfortable? Like explain, was there a moment when you first felt comfortable saying this stuff or like [00:16:00] voicing this and
Nux Taku: what
Malcolm Collins: changed?
Nux Taku: So I, I, I feel like Iâve always tried to be honest.
Iâve just decided on things that Iâd rather not get into because, you know, why... Like if Iâm making anime videos, Iâm not gonna start talking about abortion, you know? Like why divide my, my audience in half by, you know, talking about something thatâs completely irrelevant to whatever content Iâm making is.
But as time went on and I started talking about like internet drama and Hasan Piker, you know, advocates for me to get killed by Hamas terrorists âcause he says Iâm, Iâm an Israeli Nazi even though not. But anyway, so a- as time went on, now that Iâm talking about politics and things, Iâm, I feel a lot more comfortable saying the things.
Iâve been backstabbed by enough people that I donât, I donât really care if you disagree with me. Thatâs your American God-given right, you know? So
Malcolm Collins: yeah. So if you were gonna like, how much of it was the people attacking you for saying things that you thought was reasonable that radicalized you to want to say more of that stuff?
Nux Taku: To be honest, itâs not that they attack me that makes me wanna say it, itâs that itâs considered [00:17:00] inappropriate to say. Like it is super inappropriate in public in American like- Yeah ... probably not in like houses and closed doors âcause everyone would pro- like a lot of people would agree with this, but if I say that gay sex is degenerate, that is considered like a, a super taboo in American online culture.
That is very true,
Malcolm Collins: yeah.
Nux Taku: Right? Because itâs two consenting adults, so whatâs the problem, right? Thatâs the, thatâs the through line. But but so I donât really care if people come after me for my opinions. Itâs, itâs- So, so for you- ... just that itâs not acceptable to say
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Oh, that is, that is really fascinating.
I mean, itâs, itâs very different from us. We sort of got radicalized by the left or, or radicalized by your channel. But like, ... it was like us originally going viral over just being like, âHey, birth rates are low.â And then people freaked out about that, and theyâre like, âWell, then you must be a racist.â
Nux Taku: Yeah. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: And then-
Nux Taku: Because you canât live in reality ...
Malcolm Collins: the thing that changed me the most was, like, the first time I started hanging out in [00:18:00] right-wing spaces or going to right-wing conferences, and I went and I was, you know, weâre... You know, youâre, youâre, youâre not... I, I donât think youâve done, like, a big face reveal or anything, so, so you donât get noticed at conferences and stuff like that.
But like, going to conferences, having beliefs that I know are really outside of a lot of mainstream conservative norms, and I was afraid that I would be sort of grilled on them or made to feel like I wasnât welcome or made to feel like an outsider, and instead I have felt the exact opposite, where when we were in leftist spaces, and we even did, like, leftist campaigning, politics, everything like that, it was a constant litmus test.
And I donât think people on the right realize how much our side benefits from being nice to people who did things in the past that they regret now or are, w- in the process of changing and still being accepting of them
Nux Taku: So do you know my opinion on why that happens among right-wing people but not left-wing people?
Malcolm Collins: I, yeah give me your opinion. Thatâs
Nux Taku: [00:19:00] Because I think repentance is inherently a biblical trait. And forgiveness and repentance only exists if you could believe in God. Hmm. And if you are on the other side where itâs all about, you know, weâre all just a whole, a clump of atoms that are whizzing through a point, a purposeless space, then why ever repent?
Why ever do better? Why would I assume that you regret your mistakes and become a better person? I wouldnât. Itâs so much easier- Yeah ... to just throw you in the box. Whereas on the other side which, and more right-wing politics, obviously itâs not, not nearly conservative enough. Not, man, I wish Trump was the guy that the left thought he was, you know?
But- Yeah, right ... yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Actually, this is an interesting point in terms of making the lived sort of right-wing parties more conservative. One of the things that I think a lot of people a little, in our wider faction are annoyed with is in UK, you know, how progressive even parties like Reform or the AD- or A- A FDR in Germany or you know, MAGA in the United States and how do [00:20:00] you realistically shift the Overton window of whatâs normal?
Like, whatâs, whatâs your thesis?
Nux Taku: That... So I, so ultimately every- all change takes time. Like, every time I see, like, the the accelerationists being like, âOh, we have to vote for leftists so they can rape our country, and then- ... and then weâll swing the other way,â itâs like, no, no, no. No, no. Trump is the swing, okay?
He is the swing the other way, and Trump is kind of a â90s liberal, you know?
Malcolm Collins: Like- Heâs a very â90s liberal. He holds the- Yeah, we were
Simone Collins: just talking about this yesterday. He 100%
Malcolm Collins: is. Itâs not just that heâs a â90s li- liberal, itâs that every one of his, like, top lieutenants was an anti-Trump leftist the first time he ran for office, whether itâs- Yeah
J.D. Vance or Elon or RFK- These-
Nux Taku: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: th- were all anti l- anti-Trump leftists, and now
Nux Taku: theyâre all- And they, and they were all, they were all Democrats, and so d- you know, Joe Rogan was a Democrat, he endorsed him, you know. So I agree with you, and I think itâs mostly âcause the left completely went insane that you know, what, what was considered a [00:21:00] left of center person from the â90s is considered, like, the far right fascist today.
But I, I- Yeah ... think this stuff takes time, you know? I think that the, especially our generation is a lot more right wing than, you know, the boomers that are in Congress. So I think it takes time, you know? You keep electing more and more radical people as time goes on. You see someone betrays the, the tenets and, you know, you just get, get rid of them.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Get them out. Well, I mean, we, we are seeing this at rallies. I mean, obviously the famous saying, and I think youâve covered this, is you go to the Biden rallies, the Su- No Kings rallies, and itâs a bunch of old people. Yeah ... and I, I hear this from our Israeli fans as well. Theyâre like, âAll of the liberal parties in Israel are just like their parades are all super old people.â
Yeah ... a- and-
Nux Taku: Mostly women ...
Malcolm Collins: what, outbreeding them works. And in the- True ... United States we actually have a fairly decent fertility rate. This is, this is actually one of my biggest consternations about Nux, is you said that you were gonna stop streaming when you have a kid. And I was like, âI really want you to have a kid, but I donât want you to stop streaming.â
Nux Taku: Well, when I said stop streaming, I [00:22:00] meant, like, live streaming. I would still be making videos probably. Oh,
Malcolm Collins: okay, okay ...
Nux Taku: itâs just, you know, when youâre live y- you wanna play with your kid, you know? You wanna, you wanna be there. So if youâre live streaming, youâre gonna be there for f- four hours in a row streaming.
You donât wanna stop, you know. Iâm not gonna pause, say, âOh, sorry, gotta go play with my kid.â Iâll... So yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Itâs, itâs awesome,
Nux Taku: man ... so whatever.
Malcolm Collins: But anyway, I, we gotta, What would be the, a, a, a, a good place? Well, another thing I wanted to ask you about is your thoughts on the sort of online right being as ideologically diverse as it is. Mm. Like when you, you look at somebody like Asam Gold and his beliefs on abortion, or Shoe0nHead and her beliefs in communism or socialism and stuff like this, w- why do you think that we are this intellectually diverse?
Nux Taku: Again because I think to some extent repentance exists. You know, obviously I think that Asmongoldâs takes on abortion are terrible. I think She Want Headâs takes on communism are terrible. You know, Asmongold because of thou shall not murder and you know, She Want Head âcause of thou shalt not steal.
But, Yeah ... [00:23:00] that said, I have faith. I have faith theyâll see the light because on the right youâre a truth seeker. You know? And thatâs why- Yeah ... you have all the crazy conspiracy theories, âcause ultimately these people wanna figure out the truth.
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs
Nux Taku: a, I never thought about that ... they might get lost along the way, but on the left the truth doesnât matter.
Men can be women on the left. N-
Malcolm Collins: The point that you made there that Iâve never thought about before is Iâve often joked to people when I first started going to, like, conservative conventions, the thing that shocked me the most is, like, everyone would just stop me and hand me, like, a printout of their private conspiracy theory.
It was like a conspiracy theory- ... like share lot. And I was like, âW- why are conspiracy theories so big?â And a lot of them turned out to be true, mind you. A lot. Like, a stupid amount that- They can be ... Caleb Tate was being funded by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Nux Taku: I could not... That was crazy.
Malcolm Collins: That just-
Nux Taku: Oh, my G- Worth, worth electing Trump just for that.
Malcolm Collins: That just- Really ... like happened and went and we donât talk about it anymore.
Nux Taku: Yeah. Oh, my God. Itâs insane. Insane.
Malcolm Collins: That, but- Like,
Nux Taku: there was so little racism that they had to pay for it. Unreal.
Malcolm Collins: They I, well, and I think [00:24:00] that itâs important, I mean, this is something we always fight for in our video, that like, yes, like racial groups, there may be reasons to have animosity or ethnic pride or pride in your culture, but if we make the right a space where other people donât feel comfortable, then weâre not gonna win elections.
And I think itâs really important to- Also true ... counter those sorts of narratives. But fortunately weâve done a good job. I mean, we pushed Nick Fuentes out of the party, right? Like, heâs a Democrat now. So thatâs... No, he said, âIâm a moderate Democrat.â Yeah. Do you see that?
Nux Taku: Yeah, I saw that. And then he said that if the left ever wins I have to flee the country âcause theyâre gonna kill me.
So, you know, whatever. I, I-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. All liberals ... a lot, a lot of
Nux Taku: what he says is hyperbole anyway, so you know.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Actually, how do you think about this? Because one of the things that I see the most in your channel, that I also see in his channel, is really sort of high, positive, happy energy. Is this something you do intentionally?
Is it just the way you are 24/7?
Nux Taku: I, I am generally a positive guy. I have faith, okay? I have faith [00:25:00] itâll... It, itâs all part of the plan. You know, even, even the bad news is, like, secretly part of the good news. We just didnât figure that out yet. So, no, I, I have a lot of faith that things are actually looking up.
I am generally an optimistic guy, and again, it says in the Bible to be happy. Itâs like-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, the thing that Iâm most surprised about on this stream that I was not aware of, of you is one, just how much youâve always held these beliefs, and two, that these beliefs are all downstream. I donât want to say like a, a, a, a, a wind-up Jew, but like they are what...
If you just followed all of the stuff that it said, all the stuff the religion said, itâs where you would come ideologically.
Nux Taku: I, I am a Pentateuch extremist. You had such a cool name for your ideology, I had to come up with one.
Malcolm Collins: But, Yeah. Make one up and con- convert people. Give it... I mean, our ideology is very heretical to the right, so you know, weâll see.
But we got, we got followers now, too, so thatâs, thatâs cool.
Nux Taku: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: I mean, I belie- Look, I... If you go back, Jewish teachings, they often talk about heaven as a place in the future. They talk about, like, the sons of [00:26:00] man. Why would you need to talk about the sons of man? Thatâs a weird word, unless we were destined to colonize space one day and have different genetic variants of humanity.
Anyhow, I get too... but-
Nux Taku: I love this stuff. I could nerd out on this for sure. Yeah. Yeah. I, I have theories. I, I do too. Iâm with you. If you think-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Oh, what, whatâs your craziest theory? I w- c- letâs go craziest Bible theory.
Nux Taku: Craziest theory? I donât think I have a craziest theory. Whatâs
Simone Collins: like any theory?
Any theory.
Malcolm Collins: Oh,
Nux Taku: a like Bible theory? The, dude, I, Iâll come up with one, Iâll tell you
Malcolm Collins: Iâll give you my Adam and Eve crazy
Nux Taku: theory.
Malcolm Collins: Sorry? Iâll give you, Iâll give you my Adam and Eve crazy theory, okay? All right,
Nux Taku: go for it. So,
Malcolm Collins: In Adam-
Nux Taku: All right, and then Iâll, Iâll give you one. I thought of one. I thought of one of mine.
Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Go for it. In Adam and Eve when I first started becoming, like, religious again and rereading these stories, I wanted to go to the ones that seemed on the face I didnât understand it. I didnât understand why God would punish man for wanting knowledge of good and evil. That didnât sit right with me.
So then I went to the story, and I looked at what actually happened in the story, and we know that the first thing that man did when he got the knowledge of good and evil [00:27:00] was to clothe himself, yet I donât think anyone thinks itâs sinful to be naked in front of God and your wife. So, and we know that God allowed him to be naked in the garden as well, so it, it said that he had the type of knowledge of good and evil that God had.
So clearly thatâs not exactly what it meant. And then I thought about, oh, what is the idea of, like, shame around nudity around your wife and God? Thatâs man making up his own rules about whatâs good and evil in opposition to God. And then I noticed that actually up until that point, man only had one rule, which was donât eat from that one tree, and it said that he like, the, the, the, he, basically the curse sort of applied to him the moment he reached for the tree.
Thatâs when he gained the knowledge, not when he ate from it, because that was the moment he decided to disobey God and decided that man knows more about what good and evil is than God does. Thatâs my-
Nux Taku: Thatâs a good theory. I like it. Thatâs cool. No, thatâs really cool. Thatâs a good- so, I mean, kind of on a tangent on, on yours though, before I, before I tell you my really kooky one.
Good [00:28:00] and evil is free will.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Nux Taku: Because if, if there would be no such thing as evil then, you know, we wouldnât have some sort of- Oh, thatâs a good way to put it ... evil inclination telling, telling us to do bad things all the time. We would just do the good things all the time. We wouldnât even have the will to do bad things.
So evil, the existence of evil is the existence of free will. Hmm. And the reason why we exist at all in this world, like if you think about it, why, why did God need to create us at all? Like, what, whatâs cool about us to exist? Iâll tie it into my cool, my other theory. If God- Tie it
Malcolm Collins: in. Iâm interested to hear
Nux Taku: if God is everything, right? âCause Go- God is, he fills all things, he surrounds all things, you know, he is everything, right? So that means technically we are all part of God as well. Heâs everything. Now, he, he hides himself from us so that we have free will, but weâre also s- weâre still part of God to some extent.
So y- you ever hear like the the, like the God paradoxes? Like, okay, so if God could do anything, could God repent? Could God get better at things? And itâs like, no Godâs perfect. I,
Malcolm Collins: Iâve heard these- But wouldnât repenting- ... but I donât [00:29:00] find them very compelling.
Nux Taku: Well, I, I, I have a way to... All right. So Iâll, Iâll finish my, my thing.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Nux Taku: If we are part of God, then us repenting is the part of God that could repent. So we are part of the perfection of God due to us being imperfect.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, thatâs really clever.
Simone Collins: Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs really clever. Thatâs really clever. You should be proud of that one. I also have never heard that one in my life.
Simone Collins: Never, yeah.
Nor have I.
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs a good... Damn. Y-
Nux Taku: That, that, that oneâs like a bit- Thatâs a good- Itâs a bit of a mind f**k. Like if... Th- the issue with this one is like I feel like it sounds almost heretical. What, would you perfect God? Itâs like, no, no, I donât perfect God. Godâs perfect. And all of his creations are exactly what he wanted them to be.
So all of his- Yeah ... creations are pa- part of Godâs perfectness. And so our imperfection is part of Godâs perfectness
Malcolm Collins: Wow. Okay, so hereâs a, hereâs a side question, right? You, in the early days, were into [00:30:00] stuff like anime and the, you know... I mean, youâre still into it. You watch Adventure Time. Adventure Timeâs great, by the way.
Have you not actually watched all of Adventure Time?
Nux Taku: Yeah, itâs great. No, I havenât. I havenât.
Malcolm Collins: You gotta-
Nux Taku: Iâm working on it. Iâm working on it.
Malcolm Collins: When you have kids, you should watch that with your kids. I
Nux Taku: will.
Simone Collins: Our kids really like Adventure Time, but they also, I think they have, like, or â90s and â80s cartoons more, if weâre being honest here, so.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, we basically- Yeah ... only play â90 and â80s cartoons for our kids, like G.I. Joes and stuff. Makes sense. So they get the- Everything else is,
Nux Taku: like, gay.
Malcolm Collins: Truly though. They, they literally, like weâll show them a globe and weâre like, âThis is China,â and theyâre like, âOkay, well maybe one day we should, we should take China and make them fight for us,â he said.
Nux Taku: Yes. Dude, kids are awesome.
Malcolm Collins: They really are. Awesome. Okay. Like,
Nux Taku: you ask a kid, âShould you win wars?â And your kids will be like, âDuh, of course you should win wars.â And then you ask, like, some UN politician, âShould you win wars?â âNo.â Winning wars- For real ... is terrible. For
Simone Collins: real. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But, like, what drew you into the sort of antimate- anime and performatively subversive [00:31:00] world?
Nux Taku: Originally YouTube was a hobby. Like, you know, I liked anime and I, I needed an outlet. And and I started making videos on it, and I liked it. And then I started making fun of retards, like, in the anime world. And that evolved into, like, actually we could broaden our horizons. Thereâs a lot of retards.
, And, and here we are. But, but originally it was just a hobby. Like, I never expected to make money off this or anything.
Malcolm Collins: So itâs just like... Yeah, we have a, a larger theory on this. I donât know if youâve ever heard our theory on, like, what happened here, but if you go back to the â90s in the United States the conservative faction had two key cultural groups.
There was the the, the... What were the, what were the Southern people again called, Simone?
Simone Collins: Cavaliers.
Malcolm Collins: The Cavaliers which was a, a Deep South sort of aristocratic culture. And then you had the greater Appalachia region, which was the backwoods people, which had sort of an anti-aristocratic culture.
And when we look at, like, what this represented in the â90s, this is what we call truck nut conservatives or something like that, right? Like, the guy whoâs obviously a conservative but puts, like, sexy women on mud flaps on his trucker, right? You know. He had this sort of performative subversion to him.
And what weâve seen, we [00:32:00] can even see this in voting patterns, is that the right has moved more to this truck nut conservative type. And the reason is, is that the left- I have a theory ... the, the, yeah, the urban monoculture as we call it, ended up figuring out it could control people by saying, you know, âThis is degenerate,â or bad or harmful to society.
And then as soon as you said, âWell, Iâm not gonna do the things that are, you know, bad,â right, they can just grab that and constantly expand that category. So the only way that we as a movement were able to subvert that and even signal to other people within the movement, âNo, Iâm chill, bro,â is through su- subversion of, of cultural norms that are not inherently actually bad.
A, a good examp- You could... You were gonna say something?
Nux Taku: I, yeah, I, I think that, I, I thought what you were gonna get to is, like, itâs so weird how, like, you have all these, like, you know, trucker guys and, you know, they like sexy women and stuff, and itâs like theyâre conservatives. Like, youâd think that they would [00:33:00] be, like, prudish.
I thought thatâs what you were getting to.
Malcolm Collins: Well, no, thereâs always been a part of American culture that was conservative in an anti-a- authority sort of way, at a, an anti-aristocratic sort of way, a way where-
Nux Taku: I think masculinity is inherently right wing.
Malcolm Collins: W- I agree. R- r- I agree with that. But I think that there there, there was sort of this fear of anyone, because the left uses this so powerfully, of anyone being able to call rank on us, you know?
I have the X degree. I have the X qualifications. I decide whatâs right. I have
Nux Taku: X chromosomes.
Malcolm Collins: Right, yeah. And to fight that, we had to be subversive so that people would understand that we werenât... Like, you donât, Asmongold does anywhere in any of his videos, anywhere in your videos, do you signal that you think youâre better than other people.
And-
Nux Taku: I donât think Iâm better than other people. Yeah ... I think that everyone was created in the image of God. But I think some cultures suck s**t and we donât need to import them here.
Malcolm Collins: That is true.
Nux Taku: And itâs not, you know, that, that is not, like, a [00:34:00] contradiction.
Malcolm Collins: But this is- Yeah ... super common on the left.
Like, Hasanâs outfits, if you look at the cost of, like, his basic outfit, his dog being the most expensive dog breed in the world. Right. Right?
Nux Taku: W- which he electrocutes, by the way. Donât
Malcolm Collins: forget. Which he electrocutes, yeah. And itâs caused really interesting phenomenon that have given us a cultural edge in the current landscape.
One really big one is the left somehow became the anti-AI party and the rightâs, like, a super pro-AI party. And weâre the ones that g- have our sky brows and our, all of these AI music videos- Yeah, yeah ... and stuff.
Nux Taku: Again, I, I think, I think, I feel like so many of these things are, like, the same issue just repackaged.
Itâs because the right realizes that reality is real. AI is not leaving, okay? So yeah, artists are gonna lose their jobs, and that sucks for them, but thatâs called progress, and Iâm sorry that happened, but life moves on. You know, a lot of seamstresses lost their jobs when sewing machines were invented.
Yeah. Does that mean we should not have sewing machines? And the left, [00:35:00] because the left has decided that you know, they, they basically, you know, have become the party of the, you know, anti-reality retards. All right? They, they hate AI because they would like to still make believe that AI is not happening, and thatâs not real life.
True.
Malcolm Collins: No, and, and thatâs, I mean, thatâs a strong argument for AI. Thereâs just nothing we can do about it. And if we do do something about it, then we become like Europe and we drop off the, the global economy- Yeah ... and China ends up crushing us.
Nux Taku: Yeah, absolutely. AIâs here. Itâs here to stay. Itâs not going anywhere.
People are gonna use it. Make the most of it. Yeah. Donât be a victim.
Malcolm Collins: Well, I, I think that thereâs also sort of the, this sort of also performative, performative subversion that we see in AI, like Skybrowâs Cream of the Slop, this idea of like, yeah, okay, itâs AI slop. Whatever. Itâs still fun. And-
Nux Taku: Thereâs a self-awareness there
Malcolm Collins: yeah. Well, I mean, itâs become the part... It reminds me of the scene in Madagascar, a childrenâs cartoon. I donât know if youâve seen it where they- Iâve seen it ... th- th- youâve seen it? Mm. Yeah. Where they, they divide a, a, an island into the fun side and the not fun side. And in the [00:36:00] not fun side- ... heâs just sad about being trapped there, and his sign collapses to say, âHell.â
And in the fun side, theyâre all having fun, right? Like theyâre, theyâve made a little tiki hut. Theyâre drinking their fake drinks, spitting them out afterwards, of course, âcause itâs all seawater. You know, none- everything isnât actually perfect, but they get to have fun and pretend like it. And coming to the right, for me, felt like coming to the fun side.
Like, y- yeah, you know?
Nux Taku: Yeah. You know, you donât have to t- not everything is super serious. I mean, like, on the left they think mental illnesses are superpowers, you know? So th- theyâll sit there and collect mental illnesses like theyâre Pokemon and and youâre gonna be surprised that these are, like, the most miserable people on the planet?
Malcolm Collins: A- a- admittedly, Candace Owens probably does too, right? You know. But we- You
Nux Taku: assume sheâs right-wing ...
Malcolm Collins: Fair. Very, very fair. Yeah, she has a lot of leftist positions. Yeah. But I would s- I, it
Nux Taku: w- She, she used to run a website called Social Autopsy. Did you hear about this? Y- you
Malcolm Collins: know, that- [00:37:00] Yeah ... she, she, was it, like, anti-bullying?
Go, go into, go into the lore.
Nux Taku: Yeah. So, so anti, Social Autopsy was, like, this website to basically dox right-wing people. Like, you know, of course, this is the classic leftist tactic. Itâs like, oh, right-wing people that believe in literally anything, oh, they must be bullies, so we have to destroy them and ruin their lives.
And she was a leftist, like one of these crazy radical leftists that would actually dox people until she realized that the grift was better to be, like, the, the Black woman against BLM, you know? And and that was her new grift, et cetera. Y-
Malcolm Collins: you know she thinks Charlie Kirk was a time traveler
Nux Taku: Well, she does think that Israel and E- Egypt are working together with Sumerian time travel technology to kill Charlie Kirk âcause he was an X-Man.
Simone Collins: Someoneâs got to.
Nux Taku: Yeah. Yeah, I guess.
Malcolm Collins: We have an episode on this, Psychosis Maxxing, if you guys wanna watch it. Itâs f*****g crazy-
Simone Collins: Oh, that should be so great ... her world perspective. But no, truly, like her unholstered schizophrenia has actually been very profitable. I mean, unfortunately she is a case in which some form of, I donât know what it is, but itâs working for her, like really [00:38:00] well.
God. Whenever we criticize her- Yeah ... like people are coming into our comments being like, âWell, but I love it.â
Nux Taku: I
Simone Collins: get those too ... âSheâs got some great points.â
Nux Taku: And, and then I, then I had to make like a whole like hour and a half long video just piecing apart all of her... She says that the Jews invented dinosaurs to trick Christians into thinking God isnât real.
Malcolm Collins: That-
Nux Taku: There are so many layers to that one sentence- Jews invented dinosaurs ... itâs
Malcolm Collins: unreal ... itâs unbelievable. Like what? All that-
Simone Collins: That is a yes and. The only response to that is yes, and. Come on. To give
Malcolm Collins: her credit, she doesnât just rehash old conspiracy theories. Her world is almost like Tolkienâs world, where like she invented a totally new world of conspiracy theories.
Yeah.
Nux Taku: Okay. You are giving her way too much credit. She takes every old conspiracy in the book and then just blames the Jews for it. Okay? Actually, itâs the oldest style conspiracy theory.
Malcolm Collins: That is an
Simone Collins: interesting twist. It adds color. Itâs more fun with Jews, though. I mean, letâs, itâs, it
Nux Taku: just- Yeah, Jews, theyâre great.
Simone Collins: Itâs like adding salt to a dish. Jews. Like you need it. Itâs, itâs the MSG of, of lore, you know? Itâs just-
Nux Taku: Sure, sure.
Malcolm Collins: I mean, but [00:39:00] realistically- Great ... this, I mean, this is where we are on our channel on this, and everyoneâs always like, âcause we get some people on our channel who are like anti-Jew or whatever.
Iâm like, bro, the only people who matter in the future are the people who have lots of kids and still have technology. Some groups have a lot of kids and they do it by give, give, not having technology or not being economically productive. Thereâs only two groups on earth that have that right now, and one of them is the Jews, and theyâre even beating us at fertility rates, right?
So, weâve gotta take that seriously, right? Like the, the, being partnered with them is a lot better than being on their bad side, or that becomes the new human war, US versus Israel. But-
Nux Taku: I mean, I, I feel like there is a reason why there are so many foreign governments that are doing everything in their power to kind of be like, âOh my God, do you, do you believe Israel is, you know, killing terrorists that are trying to kill them?â
Itâs like, what? You know? And you know, doing everything. Like you have Russia promoting Candace Owens and, and Tucker Carlson, and you, k- Tucker Carlsonâs buying a house in Qatar. I love America so much. Iâm buying a house in Qatar . [00:40:00] You know? Itâs like, all right, dude. Crazy. Yeah, sure. Right? Well, I gotta- And so many of these
Malcolm Collins: I think a part of it is and we have an episode where we go over this, is that the internet has shifted of who the primary viewer is over the past 10 years, and now your average internet viewer is a third worlder.
And a lot of these people donât realize, like, theyâre... W- why, why, like why all the, the weird Indian hate in, in the United States? Like, yes, thereâs problems with them and jobs and everything like that, but theyâre not as big a problem as the people, like, murdering us on the streets and stuff like that, right?
And itâs like, well, because this matters to third worlders. Jews matter to third worlders. Like all these, you know, M- Middle Eastern countries, the, the Jews is what they think about every day. And so I think some online influencers donât realize that they have really just captured a third world audience.
Nux Taku: Donât realize or donât care?
Malcolm Collins: Donât care. Youâre right. I mean- I mean,
Nux Taku: you have someone with the million views. Yeah, itâs from packing-
Malcolm Collins: Sneako, right? Hey. Sneako just, just speed running that.
Nux Taku: Bro, Sneako, heâs like, actually [00:41:00] retarded. Itâs amazing.
Malcolm Collins: Heâs like, âI wa- I wanna be s-â Oh my God ... specifically make all of my content maximally appealing to third worlders.
Nux Taku: He, heâs amazing. Heâs amazing. I- Sneakoâs incredible. Itâs a, itâs train wreck in slow motion. You know, bro goes out there to piss off the Christians and heâs like, âOh, Jesus wasnât white. Oh, Jesus was a Jew from Palestine.â Yeah, Iâm sure he was. Iâm sure he was. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Youâre, youâre,
Nux Taku: So you mean to tell me that the Jews are indigenous to Palestine, Sneako?
Malcolm Collins: âNo, no, what do you mean?â That, thatâs wild. Yeah, no, I... Your, your video on him, this, this was one of the fun things for me recently is, i- you were looking at his numbers and youâre like, âLook at how terrible these numbers are,â and I was like Weâre, weâre not that much bigger. But Iâm like, âBut I guess heâs in decline.â
And then when I heard that he- Okay,
Nux Taku: hold up, hold up. Th- thatâs not fair. First of all, you cannot compare. Sneako has millions of subscribers, heâs well-known, people talk about him, heâs like public, he- p- in the public discourse, he was on every big show. You know- True ... he was col- he collabed with every big guy on the planet.
Adin Ross, and Andrew [00:42:00] Tate, and Nick Fuentes, and he was on Piers Morgan, and he hung out with- True ... Kanye West. He was with all the big guys, and no one wants to watch his slop.
Malcolm Collins: That is true. Which is stupid as f**k ... but the thing that gave me heart recently was learning that you didnât get to 100,000 views until your fourth year of doing this, and weâre only at year three now.
Thatâs true. So weâre, weâre- Yeah ... on track to hit your numbers if we just never stop.
Nux Taku: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: which is okay.
Nux Taku: Look numbers are ... l- it was definitely a big trade-off when I decided, you know what, Iâm gonna be Iâm just gonna say all the things that I like instead of just become, be generic normie slop.
Like, at some point I was just like, âIâll just do all the YouTube drama. I wonât, like, have any edgy opinions.â And I was like, âWhy? F**k that s**t, dude.â I want, I want the world to be better for my kids, you know?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. No, I mean, the, it, itâs fas- when we first came, even with our reboot in this channel our entire, like, theme with the channel and goal with the channel was just, like, basically, like, effective altruist philosophy, right?
Like, r- r- r- really basic leftist high-minded philosophy, because back then I still had this desire to be [00:43:00] seen as, like, this intellectual, and I think shedding that desire and realizing that I wanted to be seen for who I was and, and, and as a culture warrior it was something that I was only able to do.
And again, I really want to just emphasize this to people on the right, because when we started to make those transitions, people on the right supported us and they were nice to us even though we had only just begun to transition. And well, I mean, look at you coming on our show, for example, and youâre so much bigger than us.
You have no reason to do this other than just being completely magnanimous, right? It, it, it-
Nux Taku: Itâs
Malcolm Collins: really
Nux Taku: nice of you ...
Malcolm Collins: it only- No, itâs
Nux Taku: purely selfish. I just think you guys are cool and, Oh ... I wanted to do this.
Malcolm Collins: But I want to... Actually, what I wanna talk about before we close this out, because this is something I talked a, a little bit about, and we can see if we can get fans involved if theyâre interested in this.
But Iâve been thinking about setting up some form of formal sort of political organization for the- wider sort of cultural movement that we represent. Because, you know, when I go to my friends at like the Heritage Foundation or whatever, and [00:44:00] Iâm talking to them about like, âYou know, like I, I donât think like censoring furries is gonna play well among a lot of right-wing people.â
And theyâre like, âWhat are you talking about?â Iâm like, âWell, you know all the fox girl VTubers.â And theyâre like, âWhat are you talking about?â And Iâm like like maybe we need like- ... some, some form of i- even, even an outreach group.â So I was thinking like, what if we try to set something up and get some buy-in from the various big name voices in the movement so that they can guide.
Because I donât want something where like Iâm guiding policy. Something like a, a Turning Point USA, but thatâs focused on this sort of nerd right faction. What are your thoughts on putting something like that together and even the utility of something like that?
Nux Taku: It sounds really cool. I, I, I wonder what the major purpose is, and I, and Iâll explain what I mean.
Turning Point USA is successful and incredible because frankly itâs an alternative to the college slop.
Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm.
Nux Taku: Right? You know, you go into- Mm ... the college system, and youâre literally, th- they put the, the, [00:45:00] you know, the, the hypnosis screen in front of you and they, they just replay images of whatever the f**k they want to in- you know, install in your mind.
So I think Turning Point USA is an alternative. Itâs like, âHey, you could follow that path and be an incredibly unhappy cat woman with debt at the age of 60. Or you could follow our path, and you could like have a family and be successful.â And itâs like, wait a second. That makes- Hold up. You know?
Actually, I, I- So Turning Point USA is really effective there. When it comes to I, I guess our movement or the, the new right, the online right, I, I donât know if it needs a grass gr- grassroots idea.
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs actually a really good point. I, I think you just need to- Those things are... Now that I think about it, youâre right.
Theyâre sort of over and useless now. We, we actually were going over how if you look at Ben Shapiro, he appears to just be buying everything now or buying ads on things. Yep. And treating... His organization is just like a fundraising organization that pretends to be able to influence policy. And this reminds me, one of the anecdotes I say is when the new administration was being [00:46:00] staffed, this version of the Trump administration, the network they were tapping was the Founders Fund network and not like the Heritage Foundation and stuff like that.
Like, we had to make the intros for the Heritage Foundation people. And what I realized is I think even like the ins- the, the true MAGA, like who are staffing things, theyâre like, âWeâre not staffing. Weâre not allowing these people to influence our policy anymore. Weâre just taking like based Doge kids.â
By the way, you know, my brother worked at Doge.
Nux Taku: No way.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah,
Nux Taku: yeah. Dude, thatâs awesome.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah. Huh. That was,
Nux Taku: Iâm a big fan of Doge. I wish they wouldâve been like even more successful.
Simone Collins: Same.
Malcolm Collins: They, they did some really cool stuff. Now
Nux Taku: to something
Malcolm Collins: completely different.
Nux Taku: But thatâs where like
Simone Collins: Iâm hesitant- They, they shut down-
about policy in general. I, I, I have my doubts that like- Any, any sort of policy change is gonna make a, a difference at this point or like going into politics matters I
Nux Taku: mean, I think we, we need to get rid of the government. Okay? I
Simone Collins: only
Nux Taku: want the government- Thatâs, thatâs my only conclusion here ... to exist for law and order.
I just want law and order. Arrest the criminals, [00:47:00] close the border, win wars if you need to fight them. Other than that, I really donât wanna hear about you guys
Simone Collins: Well, and the writing is kind of on the wall. Like what we talk about a lot is demographic collapse, and when you look at just how tax bases are going to crumble, how social services wonât be able to be supported anymore, how our governmentâs basically going to start printing currency in really unsustainable ways- Yeah
until it no longer matters like there, there will be a point at which there is going to be actually very significant various forms of turnover in the government. So Iâm kind of like, well, I guess Iâm just gonna- So
Malcolm Collins: like Social Security, how long till it goes broke?
Simone Collins: I think 2032. 2030 something.
Yeah, 2032. Well, my concern is, like thereâs two ways it can go. Either at, at that year the trust fundâs gonna run out to the point where y- the existing senior citizens receiving Social Security payments will have like 32 or something percent less of their monthly checks. So theyâre gonna be super pissed while like Gen Z and Gen Alpha and millennials and everyone else is still paying into it knowing that theyâre not gonna get anything, and the people who are getting their money are mad about it and resentful.
So everyoneâs [00:48:00] gonna be really angry about it. Or theyâre gonna do something where they just totally throw the rules out the window and theyâre like, âOh, never mind, everyone gets to keep their money,â and they just kind of print it out of nowhere. And- Itâs
Nux Taku: almost like Social Security is a form of communism that doesnât really work.
Simone Collins: Yeah. We live in a huge, like just in terms of social services, like we are in such a socialist state now. If you are at or near the poverty level, the amount of support that you get from your state and the federal government is, is kind of humbling, and we didnât realize this until we looked into it. But like in most cases especially if you ca- have kids, food assistance home assistance, free childcare, i- like really in- intense levels of support that are, are, are...
Oh free healthcare, which is like huge. So you kind of do live in a socialist utopia if you are at or near the poverty level. We
Malcolm Collins: offer many times the social services cost adjusted than China does.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Like in China- Which is another- ... public school isnât free. In
Nux Taku: fact, our, our social services, Iâm pretty sure they, they out...
Like th- if you combine the military budget and the foreign aid budget, itâs still [00:49:00] dwarfed by the social services.
Malcolm Collins: Oh,
Simone Collins: yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And then of course pensions and then of course like debt servicing. Like it just- I mean, the true
Malcolm Collins: enemy of civilization-
Nux Taku: Again, I, I mention I am a, a Pentateuch extremist, okay?
All right? Like the- Yeah ... it, there are, there is no communism in the Bible. None of it, actually, you know? Thatâs unfair. You give whatever-
Simone Collins: What is your point? ...
Nux Taku: 10% to charity, okay? Charity, whatever, whatever you wanna define as charity. And other than that, what you make is yours. From the sweat of your brow you should eat bread.
Simone Collins: There you go.
Nux Taku: And thatâs it. And Iâm tired of it. The, one, one of the first chapters in the Bible is like Abraham, he goes to Ephron to buy a, a plot of land where he could bury his wife. And heâs like, âHey, I would like to buy the land.â And Ephronâs like, âNo, no, you donât need to buy the land. Just bury your wife here.â
And heâs like, âNo, no, no, Iâm buying the land. Weâre not, weâre not getting into this.â This like, âOopsie whoopsie.â And heâs like, âOkay, itâll cost X amount.â And and he bought it, and it was his. And you know what? We still know where that land is exactly in Hebron. We know where it is. We know that you know, all the patriarchs and matriarchs are buried [00:50:00] there et cetera, et cetera.
And itâs like itâs still there, you know? Thereâs no, no repossessing- Yes ... you know, redistributing. I-
Simone Collins: And in,
Malcolm Collins: I did not know that that was still known or wasnât. The the I- I mean we also know from, you know, Adam and Eve and everything like that, that like we are supposed to live with having to, to work the land.
Like, weâre supposed to have to work to support ourselves, and it
Nux Taku: makes- And so do you wanna hear another theory?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, o- ca- continue.
Nux Taku: Yes. Another theory. So God, all right, th- this is the same topic. God cursed both Adam and Eve when they ate from the tree of knowledge, right? Mm-hmm. So Adamâs curse was the sweat of, from the sweat of your brow you shall eat bread, all right?
Meaning you have to work to eat, as opposed to just, you know, Godâll just give you all the things for free. And Eveâs punishment was, you know, men will rule over you and it, you know, itâll be painful. The child birthing process will be painful, right? So that was Eveâs punishment. Now I would argue not only, first of all, obviously true, right?
Yeah. That, that actually did happen to humans for, since then. Thatâs one. But [00:51:00] two, itâs necessary. Itâs part of our psyche to feel fulfilled as people to exist in a system where the man works and where women are ultimately respecting men.
Malcolm Collins: We- and we actually, this is another one of our spicy takes, but we, yeah, we argue that as well, that like God was not being capriciously cruel to humanity by giving what we interpreted as curses, but giving us a way of living that is fulfilling, and that as we have shaken off this way of living, we realize that this was more like training wheels than a genuine punishment.
Simone Collins: Yeah. And things
Nux Taku: like, And now you have, and now everyoneâs depressed. Yeah. Like, the men donât work and theyâre depressed. Now the women donât have kids and theyâre depressed, and itâs like-
Malcolm Collins: And theyâre not a little- Yeah, yeah ... depressed. Right now the average kid at school, during COVID it was one in four, now itâs one in five, the average girl makes a plan to un-alive herself on any given year.
That is how sa- that is how-
Simone Collins: Well, the weird thing is, is- Damn ... women in the absence of pain crave pain
Malcolm Collins: This
Simone Collins: is CDC
Malcolm Collins: stats, by the way. Not,
Simone Collins: like, a,
Malcolm Collins: a right-wing conspiracy
Simone Collins: Yeah, [00:52:00] but I mean, if you look at just anecdotally, women in the absence of pain crave pain. When women live in... Like, if, if you look at spoonies, theyâre majority affluent teen girls who basically have no other pain in their lives, and theyâre like, âIâve been developed-â Well, look at, look at womenâs books
âThis mysterious diseaseâ Itâs all, like, dystopian futures where they, they live in- Yeah. Yeah, women growing up in, in peaceful times with no conflict love to read dystopian teen novels. Iâm reading Lena Dunham, L- Lena Dunham, Dunhamâs fame sick biography now, and, like, she had horrible partners who would do violent, awful things to her âcause she grew up in a, like, loving family that always supported her.
Like, thereâs... Itâs kind of sick how people respond when, yeah, they grow up in sort of the absence- ... of pain and strife. It, it is one of those things where like, yeah And if, if you
Nux Taku: ever wanna get radicalized, you go into, like, a Barnes & Noble womenâs section-
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Nux Taku: and itâs like, yo- Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: we
Nux Taku: talk about
Malcolm Collins: that. I get
Nux Taku: so- We- You know, woman was raped by a werewolf billionaire and fell in love with him.
I, I- Itâs like-
Simone Collins: Living the dream
Malcolm Collins: We, we get so annoyed by... Because thereâs some right-wing influencer, women especially, who are like, âOh, itâs all of this [00:53:00] male porn that, like, radicalized men.â Iâm like, âMen didnât make 50 Shades of Gray a bestseller.â Yeah. Men didnât make The Monster at Barnes & Noble, right? Like-
Simone Collins: No, l- legit, men donât wanna do that on average because itâs too much effort.
This is definitely a female fantasy. Men are like, âI donât have... I donât, no.â I
Nux Taku: mean, I, I think also because men, men are mostly stimulated by, I guess, superficial attributes, I would say. You know? Mm-hmm. A sexy woman, and thatâs it. Men, heâs good. You know, you see some curvy piece of driftwood and, you know-
men are like, âWe can figure this out.â But for women-
Simone Collins: No, no, like literally- ... I think a lot, a lot of itâs- ... Malcolm and I had a conversation last night ...
Nux Taku: you have to get emotionally
Simone Collins: invested, you know? Yeah. We were... I, I... Like, Malcolm walked up to me last night and I was like, âMalcolm, how do... With sex dolls, how do they deal with, like, the off-gassing scent?
Like, doesnât that really... Like, there must be some way.â Malcolmâs like, âNo, Simone, they donât care. Like, it looks like a woman.â Like, Iâm talking about for real dolls, like, the, the life-sized ones. Yeah. And Iâm, like, thinking about how, like, well, it must smell too much like plastic. Like, how do you deal with that?
And heâs like-
Nux Taku: Men do [00:54:00] not care. Men do not care.
Simone Collins: Oh, well. Anyway.
Nux Taku: You know- So I think w- a- get- the Monster F****r Island Barnes & Noble, thatâs just as porn as any male porn. Oh,
Simone Collins: it- Oh, yeah. Yeah. Like- Yeah ... but not, not even that, just, like, all, all the erotic materials. Women consume way more erotic materials, period, than men.
And pay way more for it. And the, and the industryâs bigger. Itâs, itâs more, thereâs more money there. Thereâs more time there. And women are just openly reading it like, in public. Itâs just no shame. Theyâre, theyâre learned women. Itâs book talk. Itâs great. They, they talk about
Nux Taku: it. The whoreification of society.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. True. True. Well, it has been great. I do not want to take up too much of the time of, of Nux. I want to have a channel where you can reach out to us whenever. One thing I want to end with, with people, because I think the, what one of our goals should be to make peopleâs lives better, and thatâs, you know, if, if youâre watching this, go out and try to learn something new.
You know, learn how to use AI in a new way. Learn how to use some tool in a new way. Society right now is changing faster than [00:55:00] anyone could imagine, and weâre seeing it in our community to an extent that astonishes me, because I get so excited when I see, like, Sky Browse and stuff like this, or Holy Ball.
You know, when I see these, these content creators who are pioneering entirely new ways of doing stuff and you, you can be that. Any of you can be that in, in, in new ways. And look for a sp- a s- a spouse, a partner. Try harder.
Nux Taku: Yeah, that, thatâs what I was gonna say. You know? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, get married, have babies.
Itâs awesome.
Simone Collins: Totally.
Malcolm Collins: Really makes life awesome. Well, spectacular. Iâm gonna turn the recording off and, Oh, anything you wanna say at the end? Any-
Simone Collins: Yeah, anything you want people to go to, check out,
Nux Taku: whatever. Iâm, Iâm good, Iâm good.
Malcolm Collins: Everybody knows who you are. Iâm
Nux Taku: the Blue Jew. I wander over YouTube.
Malcolm Collins: Right there. Like, we have, like, youâre, like, our fifth most over subscribed channel, so just... End recording? Oh,
Nux Taku: hell yeah.
Simone Collins: Oh. Iâm trying to get Tex to eat, and I, I took a little video âcause the one thing that he actually does wanna put in his mouth, âcause I, I keep giving him stuff obviously he immediately just, you know, like they fall out of his mouth, right?
Thatâs what... [00:56:00] It always happens, right? They look kind of,
Malcolm Collins: afraid,
Simone Collins: and then it falls out of their mouth. And the, the one thing that he likes that Iâve noticed he chews on is veggie straws. So Iâve, you know, let him chew on like the odd veggie straw here or there, and he was chewing on them this morning, and I was taking this video of him, and he just starts-
Malcolm Collins: Octavian thought it was the funniest thing ever.
He came in. He had to tell me. He goes, âMommy was filming.â
Simone Collins: I thought, âOh, letâs capture his first moments eating.â I donât want our kids to, like, think that... You know how thereâs the trope of, like, the first kid has, like, a billion photos. You get bored after the first few? Yeah, okay. Yeah, like, yeah, like second kid, no photos of anything, you know?
And I donât wanna be that mom, and Iâm trying to capture these precious moments. And what does Tex do? What does Tex do when I try to capture a precious moment? Heâs like... Immense amounts- Iâm sorry you had to deal with that ... of liquid. He, he doesnât like drinking that much, so I donât know where itâs coming from.
Malcolm Collins: I am very sorry you had to deal with this.
Simone Collins: Itâs a pleasure
Yeah, see, [00:57:00] he doesnât wanna drink. You have no interest in drinking. You just wanna wave your hands and grab my headphones.
Oh, heâs here. Hey. Oh my gosh, thatâs a good background. Oh,
Malcolm Collins: we got an American flag in the background. Thatâs fantastic.
Simone Collins: Thatâs perfect.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: Okay. Can we hear him? Yeah, I was thinking,
Nux Taku: like- Go ahead ... do, do I put an Israeli flag in the... No, Iâm kidding. Yeah.
Simone Collins: Oh. That wouldâve been-
Malcolm Collins: I would, I would troll people
wonderful. Theyâre gonna get some, Yeah ... spicy comments from that. Oh. For
Simone Collins: real.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Nux Taku: Yeah. Iâm
Malcolm Collins: gonna dive right in. Well, itâs such a
Nux Taku: pleasure to meet you guys.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, yeah,
Simone Collins: likewise. Itâs really good to meet you, too.
Malcolm Collins: Itâs, itâs so huge to be doing something, because weâve done, like, peers. Weâve done bigger people before, but Iâve never done anyone who I watch as much as you.
Yeah. So,
Simone Collins: like- No, youâre, like, liter- like, literally part of, like, the wallpaper- ... of, of our every... I mean, you know how it is. Like, you, youâre just, youâre always on. So we hear your voice all the time, and itâs, itâs really weird. Wow. Itâs one of those things- Thatâs crazy ... I think we havenât even thought to do
Malcolm Collins: that.
E- even today you helped me win an argument with my wife. Yeah, itâs true. Because she got big mad- Letâs go ... about a title card that I made today. Yeah. And sheâs like, âThat implies that Black people, thereâs a portion of Black Americans that want [00:58:00] white Americans dead.â And Iâm like, âItâs true.â And then you said the same thing in your title, and I was like, âSee, Simone?â
Simone Collins: Yeah. I was like, âWell, if Nux says it, okay.â But also, yeah,
Nux Taku: I mean- Listen, Iâm not, Iâm not an authority here, but what other interpretation would there be to these guys crashing out that Carmelo Anthonyâs going to jail? Like-
Malcolm Collins: That-
Simone Collins: Yeah ... is there another explanation? I hadnât seen that footage, and now I have.
And now Iâm very alarmed. I know.
Malcolm Collins: I mean, I, I do, I think that they think that they should be treated differently by the law. I think that thatâs, like... W- weâll get into that later.
Speaker: Yeah, I think he likes it. Oh, heâs still figuring out how to swallow solid foods after he chews them. See? Heâs kinda going through it. He doesnât really know how to swallow food. Oh, it d- oh, okay. Oh, dear. Well, you know.
Speaker 2: He threw up. Oh, boy. There it goes. He threw up. Oh, God.
You think itâs so freaking funny. [00:59:00] You donât have to clean it up.
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 -
Zijn er afleveringen die ontbreken?
-
Malcolm and Simone Collins break down the growing public anger over glaring double standards in interracial violence, media coverage, and the justice system. They dive deep into the Kamelo Anthony case (the stabbing of Austin Metcalf at a Texas track meet), European migrant crime incidents, fundraising scandals, jury selection disparities, crime statistics, and the disturbing normalization of anti-white violence.
This episode explores why many feel the law is applied unequally, the oppressor/oppressed worldview driving it, immigration realities, and what a realistic path forward looks like â including building a broad, accountable coalition rather than narrow racial politics. A raw, data-heavy discussion on race, crime, culture, and civilization in 2026.
Watch the full Based Camp episode for unfiltered analysis.
Show Notes
The Flash Point Cases
2026 Karmelo Anthony Murder Judgment
* On June 9, 2026, a Texas jury found 19-year-old Karmelo Anthony guilty of murder for fatally stabbing 17-year-old track athlete Austin Metcalf at a high school track meet in Frisco, Texas, on April 2, 2025.
* Anthony was subsequently sentenced to 35 years in prison
2025 Dublin case
* A 20-something illegal migrant from believed to be from Africa (with prior deportation orders) allegedly sexually assaulted a 10-year-old Irish girl in state care at a hotel housing asylum seekers
* This triggered riots, vehicle burnings, and clashes
June 2026 Belfast Knife Attack
* On 40-something white Stephen Ogilvy by Hadi Alodid, a Sudanese refugee granted status in 2023
* Hadi Alodid was charged with attempted murder (but there was immediate unrest over immigration)
What people are saying online
Media angles (echoed on social): âIs the far right exploiting the attack by a refugee?â with focus on disorder rather than root causes like vetting. (e.g. FRANCE 24 - Europe posted: âIs the far right exploiting the âsickeningâ attack by a refugee in Belfast?â
Depa wrote: Kristallnacht in #Belfast begins:
Masked thugs smash windows of houses of black& brown people after Sudanese immigrant tries to kill (Scottish?) man in a brutal knife attack
Houses were also torched, mobs attacked POC in Glasgow after far right influencers called for protests..
iResist wrote: Anti-immigrant far right thugs in the city of Belfast in the UK have torched vehicles and buildings after a Sudanese man was arrested over a knife attack that left one person with serious injuries.
Masked men are hunting immigrants in the city.
April 2026 Belgium Kortrijk gang rape
* Nine migrant minors (from various non-Western backgrounds) gang-raped a 14-year-old Belgian schoolgirl (âloaned outâ among them).
* âThe abuse took place during the Easter holidays in April 2024 in the Kabouterbos, a wooded area in Kortrijk. The victim was 14 at the time, while the suspects were aged between 11 and 16â (ReMix News)
* She was lured into the woods by her then-16-year-old boyfriend
* They filmed her rape and posted videos to snapchat
* All were found guilty but received no prison
* Instead, they got probation/community service (30 hours max).
* Their lenient treatment was criticized as emblematic of soft juvenile justice for migrant offenders
What people are saying online
Critics of outrage call it disproportionate or ignoring similar intra-native cases.
Per Al Jazeera, Sikh/Muslim/immigrant advocacy groups are distancing themselves from the perpetrator while documenting rising hate incidents.
December 2025 Henry Nowak Stabbing Case
* 18-year-old White university student Henry Nowak was stabbed to death (multiple times with an 8-inch Sikh ceremonial dagger/kirpan) by 23-year-old Vickrum Digwa (Sikh).
* Digwa and his brother falsely claimed to police that Nowak had racially attacked him (grabbing turban, slurs).
* Police initially handcuffed the dying Nowak based on this.
* Digwa was convicted of murder in 2026; the judge called the racism claim a âwicked lie.â
* It sparked major outrage, questions from PM Keir Starmer about how racism accusations influenced police, and reviews of policing. Critics argued initial response prioritized the false hate claim over the victimâs life
What people said online
Hebb Rule is Enough fir AGI/A Creative I - Jayan wrote: âThe Sikh man and his family are not walking around looking to stab people. Henry Nowak was a drunk racist abusing the Punjabi and got what he deserved. The police correctly identified the drunk aggressor and just didnât realise he was stabbed.â
Bakara Amuri wrote:
đšđłSIKS ARE FIGHTING BACKâŠ. UNPRECEDENTED MOVESđŹđ§
Innocent Sikhs have been targeted, while the elderly and vulnerable are
being urged to stay indoors, following the sentencing of Vickrum Digwa.
Amarjeet Singh, from Hounslow in west London, has launched a website for Sikhs across the country to report incidents of hate crime.
The site has received numerous reports in the past five days, with many respondents believing the abuse they experienced was linked to Digwaâs conviction.
Will you report any anti sikhs âcrimesâ?
The British Sikh Report 2025 found:
49% of British Sikhs were already worried about rising antiâSikh sentiment.
Many reported being mistaken for Muslims or targeted simply for wearing a turban.
according to the report here is the reason why:
âfarâright mobilisationâ
Is There Really a Policing Double Standard?
The standard understanding is that there is a double standard, but itâs in favor of whites and to the detriment of non-whites.
Per organizations like The Sentencing Project: Evidence from policing, sentencing, and media coverage shows racial double standards do existâbut they do not take the form of ânonâwhite offenders being treated more leniently on average.â Instead, the consistent pattern in U.S. research is harsher treatment of Black and other nonâwhite suspects/defendants, especially when victims are white, and more sympathetic social treatment of white offenders.
A 2021 study of coâoffending partners found that Black offenders were significantly more likely than white coâoffenders to be arrested for the same incident, especially in assault cases. That is, when a Black and a white suspect commit an offense together, police are more likely to formally arrest the Black suspect, indicating differential enforcement rather than equal treatment.
Interracial Crime Realities
One thing people are discussing online is the reality of mixed-race attacks/crimes
First: Most violent crime in the U.S. is intraracial: people tend to victimize members of their own racial group. In 2020, about 69% of violent incidents against white victims and 66% against Black victims involved an offender of the same race or ethnicity. That means âwhiteâonâBlackâ or âBlackâonâwhiteâ crimes are a relatively small subset of overall violence, not the dominant pattern (as reported by the US Department of Justice)
Per a 2024 Department of Justice Report, which provides counts and percentages of violent incidents by the race/Hispanic origin of victims and offenders, based on victimsâ perceptions:
* Whiteâonânonâwhite* (white offenders, nonâwhite victims):
* Whiteâonâblack: 57,370
* WhiteâonâHispanic: 334,770
* Whiteâonââotherâ: 217,140
* Total whiteâonânonâwhite â 609,000 incidents.
* Nonâwhiteâonâwhite (nonâwhite offenders, white victims):
* Blackâonâwhite: 536,120
* Hispanicâonâwhite: 271,410
* âOtherââonâwhite: 262,120
* Total nonâwhiteâonâwhite â 1,070,000 incidents.
*Here ânonâwhiteâ = black, Hispanic, and âotherâ race categories.
These tallies exclude incidents where offender race is unknown or mixedârace groups that the table pushes into âotherâ; they are best understood as approximate patterns rather than precise totals of âall interracial incidentsâ.
General Findings:
* The authors highlight that the share of violent incidents with white offenders (47%) is smaller than whitesâ share of the population (60%).
* They also note that the share of incidents with black offenders (28%) is more than double blacksâ share of the population (12%).
* Asian, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander persons are underrepresented as both victims and offenders relative to their population share.
Key interracial/intraracial findings in their terms
From table 13 (incidents by victim and offender race/Hispanic origin):
* White victims experienced about 3.42 million violent incidents in 2024.
* Of these, about 1.71 million incidents involved white offenders (intraâracial), while about 0.54 million involved black offenders and about 0.27 million involved Hispanic offenders.
* Black victims experienced about 0.77 million violent incidents.
* Of these, about 0.40 million involved black offenders (intraâracial), vs about 0.06 million with white offenders and about 0.12 million with Hispanic offenders.
* Hispanic victims experienced about 1.16 million violent incidents, with roughly 0.27 million involving Hispanic offenders, and substantial numbers involving white or black offenders.
These joint victimâoffender counts allow you to identify which victimâoffender race pairings are more common in terms of incident counts but still are not presented as ârates of interracial crimeâ in the reportâs framing.
Key incident counts from Table 13 (2024 NCVS legacy)
All numbers below are counts of violent incidents, based on victimsâ perception of offender race/Hispanic origin.
* Total violent incidents involving white victims: 3,421,720.
* White offender: 1,706,750
* Black offender: 536,120
* Hispanic offender: 271,410
* âOtherâ race offender: 262,120
* Offender race unknown: 645,320
* Total violent incidents involving black victims: 773,420.
* White offender: 57,370
* Black offender: 402,960
* Hispanic offender: 121,880 (flagged âinterpret with cautionâ)
* âOtherâ race offender: 54,360 (caution)
* Offender race unknown: 136,850
* Total violent incidents involving Hispanic victims: 1,160,980.
* White offender: 334,770
* Black offender: 288,130
* Hispanic offender: 274,230
* âOtherâ race offender: 36,930 (caution)
* Offender race unknown: 226,920
* Total violent incidents involving âotherâ (Asian, NHPI, AIAN, multiracial) victims: 719,720.
* White offender: 217,140
* Black offender: 144,420
* Hispanic offender: 128,240 (caution)
* âOtherâ race offender: 106,310 (caution)
* Offender race unknown: 123,600
Limitations of the report
* The NCVS relies on victim self-report and perceived offender race, so all offender race numbers are based on perception, not official records.
* It does not publish a simple table that directly says âX% of white victims were victimized by nonâwhite offendersâ or ârate of interracial victimization per 1,000 by victim raceâ; you would need to derive that from the incident table and separate population denominators.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] hello, Simone. Crazy times we live in. It seems like weâre heading right into one of these.
Speaker 2: It seems to be a survival guide of some kind. Survival of what? From the looks of it, a contagion outbreak of the worst kind.
Speaker 4: Oh my God.
Malcolm Collins: But we are right now, and what weâre going to take this episode to go over is a sea change in public opinion around racial relationships, and I think the beginning of a realization that a portion of America and the wider Western world simply did not at all care when white people died. And, and this is kind of shocking to say, but we right now had a situation where basically being a white American was beginning to feel like this
Speaker 10: This is about protecting people, ,
Speaker 9: somethingâs wrong.
Speaker 10: Look [00:01:00] out! You did what you had to. Youâre a hero. That may be true, but Iâll have to live with this the rest of my life, even though Iâll be walking around a free man.
Hey, wait a minute. This kid
Isnât just white
Is a Mormon with a large Lego company
Speaker 10: Wait, what?
Speaker 9: Guilty.
Malcolm Collins: My God. A- and, and when people are like, oh... Because you see on a lot of the conservative bloggers, and Iâm, Iâm not gonna rehash all this, have shown you the protesters outside of the Anthony trial.
Speaker 19: What do you want us to do? Thatâs right. What, what do you want us to do at this point? What? I, I, Iâm, Iâm lost for word. I donât know what to do. I got five boys. I donât know what, I ainât got nothing to tell them no more.
Speaker 21: play out since then and what weâre watch happening now is because
Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm. Which weâll go over which was very, very open-and-shut case and really i- [00:02:00] insane.
They ended up raising $600,000 for the case moving into a $900,000 house and then-
Simone Collins: Wait ... the- The family of the attacker?
Malcolm Collins: Yes. Then he had to be, he had to s- s- basically sue the court and say, âIâm, Iâm destitute,â and be repor- like supported by a public defendant. Yeah.
Simone Collins: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. So wh- Oh, okay.
The attackerâs family raised a ton of money but said they were destitute?
Malcolm Collins: Y- basically, they raised a ton of money. Uh-huh. They spent all of the money on personal things- Oh ... and then they said they didnât have- And then they couldnât afford- ... enough money to get like a defender. Oh. And they have personally reported to the media, âOh, we didnât do that.â
And so like Snopes will say like, âOh, this isnât true,â but itâs one of those things where Snopes is so ideologically captured at this point, if you just... Then why is he [00:03:00] using a public defendant if he raised $600,000? Why do they have a new house? W- like, a- and why are, do they admit they have a new house in their own social media postings?
There, there, there was a, a incorrect accusation at one point that they had done this, which is the funny thing, is basically the right accused them of doing this before they actually did it. Oh, and they
Simone Collins: were like, âThatâs a great idea.â
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, but theyâre like, âYeah, we can prove we havenât withdrawn the money yet.â
And then like literally just weeks later, âNow we withdrew the money and bought a new house.â Oh,
Simone Collins: huh.
Malcolm Collins: But anyway, so, we have people like Cardi B saying I donât know if you saw... Like, so itâs not just the crazy people outside of this place, like, a- and, and saying that he got a new car by the way.
Simone Collins: Oh, no.
Malcolm Collins: Where
Simone Collins: is- Is, so is this his brother? Because just to be, to be clear, I know, and most people have heard about this, but what happened was in December of 2025, a, an 18-year-old white university student named Henry Noak was stabbed to death multiple times with an [00:04:00] eight-inch Sikh ceremonial dagger.
So this was also like specifically a- What are we
Malcolm Collins: talking about? Thatâs, thatâs not what weâre talking about right now. Weâre talking about the Anthony- Wait,
Simone Collins: which case are you talking about?
Malcolm Collins: The Anthony case.
Simone Collins: Okay, sorry. The- There are so many. Who is, who is, where-
what, who, Anth-
Malcolm Collins: sorry. I- Weâre talking about the Anthony case, the Black guy who stabbed a white track star to death.
Simone Collins: Oh, God. I didnât even come across that. I have all these other cases that I looked at. This is becoming way too much of a pattern Wait, do
Malcolm Collins: you even, there are so many random killings of white people
Simone Collins: Yeah, no.
So thereâs the 2025 Dublin case where a, a 20-something illegal immigrant believed to be from Africa allegedly assaulted a 10-year-old Irish girl, and then that triggered a bunch of riots. And then thereâs a, the June 2026 Belfast knife attack
Malcolm Collins: where
Simone Collins: a 40, a 40-something white, Stephen OâGifley, and, and was, was stabbed by a Sudanese refugee who was granted status in 2023, and then he was charged with attempted murder.
But after, immediately [00:05:00] after that stabbing took place, obviously there was a lot of unrest over immigration. And then there was the April 2026 Belgian case of group unplanned surprise sex in a forest. H- I donât know how else to put this. Basically nine migrant minors from various non-Western backgrounds gang- the prize sex attacked a 14-year-old Belgian schoolgirl who they filmed a- attacking in a forest after she was lured there by her 16-year-old boyfriend.
And then posted it on Snapchat. And they were, they were found guilty, but they didnât receive any prison sentences. They, they got 30 hours max of community service.
Malcolm Collins: No prison sentences?
Simone Collins: Yeah. Just, you know, clean the f- clean the highway for 30 hours and weâre good. Weâre-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Youâre not even finding the ones that Iâm finding.
Like, did you- Yeah.
Simone Collins: Then, then thereâs the, the, the Henry Nowek case, which, which Iâve been hearing about the most on social media-
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs the most famous- With the, this huge- But weâll go over that later âcause everyoneâs aware of the [00:06:00] details of it ...
Simone Collins: dagger. And then thereâs w- well, wait, so who, whoâs this tracker?
Wait,
Malcolm Collins: hold
Simone Collins: on. Iâve never even heard of
Malcolm Collins: this- You didnât even find the Sudanese guy who just yesterday attacked- No ... a mentally disabled man in Ireland?
Simone Collins: No, and I look at the headlines every single morning. I look at X, I look at Drudge, I look at New York Times- Or
Malcolm Collins: the four- I look at Twitchy ... Iraqi guys who did a drive-by, killed a 14-year-old girl, in I wanna say Germany.
No. They then moved her body off the road. The police lied to the girlâs mom, saying that it was a German who did it.
Simone Collins: And- Oh, for the love ...
Malcolm Collins: and then when the mom basically found out and did an investigation, she found out that none of the men even served any jail time. They, they said, âOh, itâs a, itâs a regular hit and run,â even though they knew that they had moved her body off the road.
Oh, for the- Right? Like, they, they are actively covering this up.
Simone Collins: Yeah, not e- not even a hit and run, a hit and hide.
Malcolm Collins: My God. So what Iâm talking about, this is happening so frequently in our society now, like
Simone Collins: we, we even- Like, the, the news cycle canât even keep up with it. Itâs like, I donât know.â No, news cycle canât keep up with it.
Itâs, itâs, now, now itâs like that South Park episode on school shootings of like, âWait, you [00:07:00] got an F on your math test?â
Speaker 34: Stanley, well, do you want to tell your father about what happened at school today?
Speaker 35: I flunked my math quiz.
Speaker 34: No, the other thing.
Speaker 36: What other thing?
Speaker 35: Oh, the school shooting? Yes, the school shooting! Oh yeah, some kids shot up the school.
Speaker 36: Was it you?
Speaker 35: No.
Speaker 36: Did you get shot?
Speaker 35: No.
Speaker 36: Oh. Well, whatâs this about failing a math quiz?
Malcolm Collins: Well, and the expectation that there will be no repercussions if you kill a white person- Mm ... has gotten so extreme that you will even have not just these crazies, like, outside a courtroom, but Cardi B tweeted, âWow, just wow.
Disgusting. This is not justice. This is trying to make an example.â
, So weâll go over the case of, of the Anthony case, which a lot of people are talking about now, and youâll get to hear about for the first time, Simone.
Simone Collins: Yes, tell me about this track star?
Malcolm Collins: No, the core thing that everybodyâs whining about with the Anthony case, like the other side, is they [00:08:00] go, âThere were no Black jurors.â
Hereâs the problem. Only three Black people showed up for jury selection in this case. Oh, dear. That we are aware of.
Simone Collins: Yeah, thatâs-
Malcolm Collins: Black people, it turns out, show up for jury selection at an extremely low rate. They show
Simone Collins: up- Oh, like even disproportionate to their share of the US population?
Malcolm Collins: Yes. So 44% of the time, Black people are non-responsive to jury summons.
While this is a-
Simone Collins: Well, I think also they dis- disproportionately may serve in jobs that are, like, hourly, and itâs really hard to get time off. You lose shifts, you lose your job. Like- It
Malcolm Collins: could be. I mean, it, it could also be less a sense of civic duty. Like, we donât know, right? But they, they donât show up for jury nearly as much as...
What, whites show up, they only have a no-show rate of 12%. Okay Extremely low.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: And the three Blacks that did show up were dismissed for normal reasons, which is they were educators. And in cases involving minors, it is normal to dismiss educators. Thatâs just a normal part- Why is that? What?
Simone Collins: Why would that [00:09:00] be?
Malcolm Collins: Because theyâre seen as being overly sympathetic to minors.
Simone Collins: Oh, I thought theyâd be overly prejudicial. Itâs like, âIâm fed up with these kids. Put them in jail.â Like, minors are now This is my chance to fight back. Oh,
Malcolm Collins: okay. Well, and another thing I wanna talk about that weâll get to in the end here is all this sort of performative racism weâre seeing from the conservative side, where itâs, like, obvious theyâre not real racists.
Itâs like, on our channel, us pretending to be racist, and Iâm gonna do that whitest kids you know skit- Oh, God. Not again ...
Speaker 12: all right. Guess Iâm just gonna have to come out and say it. Now, donât be mad, but Iâm a little bit of a racist.
Speaker 11: Oh, really? Youâre a racist?
Speaker 12: Yep.
Speaker 11: No, youâre not.
Speaker 12: What?
Speaker 11: No, youâre not.
Speaker 12: I am. Iâm racist every day, all the time.
Speaker 11: Well, call me the N-word.
Speaker 12: What? Why?
Speaker 11: Call me the N-word.[00:10:00]
Speaker 12: I, I would. I love slaves.
Speaker 11: You love slaves? -
Speaker 12: ery I love slavery.
Speaker 11: And what is it exactly that you love about slavery?
Speaker 12: I, I think itâs awesome that you people... Not you people. Yes, you people have to work for free all the time.
Simone Collins: Which I forget on cue again. Oh, yay.
Malcolm Collins: But letâs go over the, It, it, oh, Iâll, Iâll, Iâll quickly go over the, the money and the fundraising. So they raised 634, 4K. What it appears happened is first they were accused of buying luxury things with it before they actually withdrew it.
Then they withdrew it, hired a lawyer, right? Who was a real lawyer who they did use for a period. But then after that period was over, and it seems that, like, through most of the middle of the trial, while they were able to retain him, they donât [00:11:00] appear to be able to have kept him on board throughout the entire trial as the main lawyer.
This is Mike Howard. And then they had a state defendant. So it is, it is, thereâs no way that could happen other than spending the money. Because they would need to prove to the courts that they donât have enough money to continue to hire a lawyer. Oh,
Simone Collins: thatâs true. Yeah. That they just donât... Right?
Yeah, so I believe- Or I, I think, I think, canât anyone request a, a public defendant? Let me quickly check that, âcause it could just be even not based on
Malcolm Collins: financial- Yeah, they need to prove something called, Resisting public despite the fundrai- in indigent status and indigent status means... I mean, itâs very similar to the Black Lives Matter scam where they, they bought mansions and stuff like that with the money that was meant for Black Lives Matter and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
It, it, it, it, it designates an individual as impoverished
Simone Collins: but verify. Weâre, weâre, weâre peer reviewing this. You ask Grok, Iâm asking Perplexity. Like, as Mingold does. In the US, you only get a court-appointed public [00:12:00] defender if, one, you are facing a charge that can lead to jail or prison. Oh, thatâs this person. Or two, the court finds you cannot afford to hire your own lawyer.
You are indigent under the jurisdictionâs rules. So no, this, this person was facing a charge that could lead to jail or prison. Presumably then they could choose to have a public defender. Well,
Malcolm Collins: th- whatever. They claimed were indigent. They claim to be impoverished. Thatâs th- th- they- They
Simone Collins: really, like, thatâs, thatâs, that is attested.
It is, it is- That
Malcolm Collins: is whatâs attested by them, is they donât have any money left. And I get really annoyed that even Snopes now is, like, going to bat for them when, like, the fact, why would you hire a court-appointed attorney if you still had the money? And they had the money at one point. So where did
Simone Collins: the money go?
That is true. That is true. Regardless of what theyâre saying, it- if theyâre choosing to not spend this money... I mean, I, I, if Iâm really trying to steel man this, maybe they had a, a falling out or they lost faith in the lawyer and were like, âLook, I just, we have to keep going. Thereâs an- another hearing. We canât miss it.
We donât have time to [00:13:00] find another lawyer. You know, no oneâs willing to work with us. We gotta use a d- public defendant.â
Malcolm Collins: No, they could have hired another lawyer. They had plenty of time. They didnât have the money. Oh.
Simone Collins: Wow.
Malcolm Collins: S- anyway, to the points of the case, and, and, and, and this is where-
Simone Collins: Hereâs, hereâs another thing, though.
And âcause I was th- when I thought you were describing the Sikh family, but it could just be a case of a family cutting their losses. Like, âLook, I know that my kid- We- weâre just gonna write this kid off? The best thing we can do is, like, raise money for the rest of our family and do the best we can
Malcolm Collins: and- Well, and the familyâs raising money again now after the conviction, by the way.
So theyâre like, âOh, the great way to raise a bunch of money.â
Simone Collins: Look, you know, if you have a fail son, and your fail sonâs gonna get locked away for life-
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs generational wealth right there.
Simone Collins: I mean, the reparations. Itâs... I donât know. Like, maybe thereâs some psychology to it all.
Malcolm Collins: Anyway, to continue on April 2nd, 2025, at a high school track meet in Frisco, Texas during a rainstorm, 17-year-old Kamiller [00:14:00] Anthony from Centennial High sought shelter under the tent of Memorial High Schoolâs team.
Austin Metcalf, 17, and others told Anthony to leave. It was their teamâs tent. Words were exchanged. Anthony reportedly said something like, âTouch me and see what happens,â while reaching into his bag.
Simone Collins: Oh, boy.
Malcolm Collins: Metcalf pushed or grabbed Anthony to remove him, so he intentionally tried to physically try to remove him.
And note itâs been attested that they asked him to leave something like 20 or 30 times-
Simone Collins: Oh ...
Malcolm Collins: beforehand, and it w- he clearly wasnât supposed to be there. It was not his tent.
Simone Collins: Okay ...
Malcolm Collins: and while they, note, they didnât hit, they didnât beat him, they, they merely tried to- They just tried
Simone Collins: to, like, pick him up and-
Malcolm Collins: to physically remove
Simone Collins: him,
Malcolm Collins: yes, from their property, right? Mm. A- Anthony pulls out a folding knife and stabbed Metcalf in the chest, then fled. Metcalf died from the wound. But note, note, Anthony did say, âIs he okay?â at some point after fleeing. So- Oh ... he, heâs capable of experiencing s- s- remorse that something may happen to him?
Like, I [00:15:00] canât even... I cannot believe- Mm ... like, the one Black lady whoâs like, âHe, he said that.
Well, you donât know that heâs not just interested in his own...â Like, they, they... It shows that she thinks that if you are Black and you kill a white person and you express remorse- You feel bad
Simone Collins: about it. ...
Malcolm Collins: That you shouldnât be punished Which is astonishing.
It w- the court case was so bad and biased that there was apparently a moment when the jury gasped- Ooh ... because the person defending the guy tried to suggest that the guy stabbed himself accidentally while pushing him out of the tent.
Simone Collins: Oh, that, that the victim stabbed him- Yeah. The public defender tried to argue that?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, I, I mean, I love that, like, the courtroom actually gasped upon hearing this.
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: Now, as to why everybody considers this such an open-and-shut case for self-defense law, which is what they tried to say, which is the wildest thing ever. You canât go onto somebody elseâs property and then claim self-defense when theyâve repeatedly [00:16:00] asked you to leave.
Simone Collins: Oh, isnât that kinda how states that donât have stand-your-ground... A- actually, isnât that even kinda how stand-your-ground rules-
Malcolm Collins: This, this was a stand-your-ground state.
Simone Collins: Oh, okay.
Malcolm Collins: So for a stand-your-ground state, a reasonable belief of imminent unlawful force or deadly harm, which obviously wasnât the case here.
Yeah. The response must be proportional and involve provocation by defender. Obviously the court clearly- So they
Simone Collins: should each be trying to pick each other up here.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Yeah, okay.
Malcolm Collins: No duty to retreat from some situations, but you canât escalate or bring a weapon into a minor dispute. Again, like, he fails at literally every level of what you need for a stand-your-ground law to, to work.
Anthony , had the knife ready and issued a threat. Like, he basically brought a knife and issued a threat, right? Like, you canât do that with stand your ground. Witnesses said he reached into his bag and warned, âTouch me and see what happens,â before physical contact.
This looks like premeditated escalation rather than pure reaction. He didnât just happen to have the pocketknife with him. A pole is not a deadly threat. And we have multiple consistent with [00:17:00] witnesses.
So to go over some other cases that have looked like this where we sort of see the opposite reaction of this you know, instead of, like, the person of color automatically you know, having to face any repercussions that I think created the assumption of no repercussions.
You have Tamar, 14, from Marken, this is near Amsterdam, oh, so it was in Germany left home at night after an argument with her parents about going to bed. She was walking along a dark road. She was struck by a gray Mazda car, but her body was found dragged to the side of the road just, like, dragged into a ditch after murdered, a 14-year-old kid.
The car contained four Iraqi men one of whom was the driver. And they were seeking asylum status. In Germany with German plates. Police initially told the m- mother of the, of, of, of the girl that it was a German driver, even though they knew that it wasnât. When asked why they had deliberately lied to the parents of a dead and grieving girl, they said, âOh, it was we didnât want the Wilders effect.â
That is a politician, Geert [00:18:00] Wilders. Thatâs like saying we donât want to boost Trump or MAGA, like a mainstream political movement. Itâs not even, like, racism. We are afraid of it helping a mainstream politician in the Netherlands, and they just never got any repercussions for doing this. You know what the Iraqis had to pay?
A single 1,500 pound euro fine now-
Simone Collins: That, that canât be in, in like concurrence with law in Germany, right? Like, thatâs not what happens. Thatâs not whatâs supposed to happen with males. Well, itâs
Malcolm Collins: not what happens to Germans, but... And this is what Iâm talking about, where itâs actually gotten to the point where the law is just being applied completely separately.
If you see our episode in the... I mean, and, and especially when you look at all of this and then you look at, at instances where the law is, you know, protecting rich white people. Oh, oh, theyâre fine. Like, look at the bricks and minifigs situation, right? You know? But when you look at the, the way that itâs being applied to like average people.
When we had the case of you know, the guy trying to defend someone [00:19:00] on the subway and ends up killing the guy, right? And everyone was just like, âHow could you do that? How could you defend yourself? Youâre just supposed to lie down and take it.â And what I want to sort of go through in this episode is just sort of normalize how far weâve come as a society.
That you are just supposed to let yourself be stabbed at this point. And th- this is what some communities have normalized to. And itâs leading to really bad action in mass. You know, we have instances, like during the Black Lives Matter protests, that we now know that people were burned alive in that protest, right?
You know, bodies have been found in, in some of the stories. I, I know at least one, I think more than one.
Speaker 23: Yeah, , a man, , Oscar Lee Stewart, had his store looted and was locked inside, and it was deliberately lit on fire, and he was burned alive. , And so i-if, if you didnât hear about this, this, this is huge. 19 to 25 people were killed in the riots. N- nobody talks about it. Nobody cares about it. Itâs insane
Malcolm Collins: You know, they, they... we... And this wasnât widely report- like, this wasnât something that [00:20:00] the progressive media covered, right? Like we- Yeah,
Simone Collins: this is my first time hearing about that. Thatâs terrifying.
Malcolm Collins: We have allowed society to enter a degree of just pure degeneracy that cannot be allowed to stand. And in Europe, thereâs not even really parties attempting to fight this in a big way. Like, w- when you talk about the mainstream, like the Wilder party or Reform in the UK or the AFD, these keep being called fringe movements.
They frame centrist rightism, like the AFD run by a lesbian in an interracial marriage with kids you know, as a, a, a far-right party is, is, is comical. They, theyâre like, âWell, theyâre far right because they want to get rid of immigrants.â And itâs like, how could you not want to get rid of immigrants if this is the case?
If theyâre making up... In some of these countries, Iâll, Iâll read after this, but I think itâs like 80% of rapes in some of these countries, right?
Speaker 24: A Lund University 21-year study showed that of grape convictions, only 37% had Swedish parents. If you look [00:21:00] at a country like Germany, despite being only 10% of the population, immigrants account for 40% of SAs. And we see this all over the place throughout Europe. Itâs just horrible.
Malcolm Collins: You know, and we do need to, in the United States, even with the Native American Black population you know, we do need to get more realistic in how weâre having these conversations.
They make up a rate of homicides that 6x their population, right? They-
Simone Collins: Yeah, so if you look... Like, this is something people are discussing a lot in this discourse. Like, especially for this one 2024 Department of Justice report that gives counts on percentages of violent incidents by the race- Of origin of victims and offenders based on, based on victimsâ perceptions, so thatâs a caveat there.
But it reports 57,370 white-on-black incidents, but then 536,120 black-on-white incidents. [00:22:00] That is-
Malcolm Collins: And did you see the rates? The rate stats were almost comical when they came out. Mm-hmm. Where it showed that there wasnât, in the year of recording, a single instance of white-on-black rape in the United States during that year.
This was the National Crime Victimization Survey, a mainstream nonpartisan crime survey
Malcolm Collins: Iâm gonna find those statistics to read them, because itâs just, it, thatâs where it just gets comical, right? Like, oh, so this is really a unidirectional violence that weâre dealing with here.
Simone Collins: But I also, I, rather than, I, I wanna make sure that we donât just straw man the other side while youâre looking at those stats.
Malcolm Collins: Well, no, hold on. If you look at- So- This is, this is from Penn, an Ivy League university in the United States. There was also a Harvard study that showed this, but Iâll just go into the Penn one. Mm-hmm. Regardless of socioeconomic status, Black communities face higher gun homicides. Well, and it
Simone Collins: says- Yeah.
And to be clear, like 60, in the 60s for both whites and Blacks and, and other groups, 60%-ish, or, like between 60% and 70% are, of crimes are race-on-race. Like white-on-white, Black-on-Black. Like the crimes are, are typically [00:23:00] concentrated in your own group.
Malcolm Collins: Right. But the point Iâm making here is that these are higher rates even when youâre...
So you canât be like, âOh, itâs because of historic discrimination,â or something like that. It, it is- No ... because of... And, and why not? If, if you are a Black person and youâre growing up, like, and you see everyone in your community being like, âOf course a kid shouldnât go to jail for stabbing a kid when he was asked to be re- like multiple times to be removed from the property and they had to eventually physically remove him.
Thatâs a totally normal thing for someone of our community to do.â When they act with shock at this they, they then for young Black kids, they grow up and they think, âThis is a type of thing I do. This is a type of thing thatâs normal for me to do.â
Speaker 15: Webster defines a
Speaker 15: moment as a moment when ignorance overwhelms the mind of an otherwise logical
Speaker 15: male.
Speaker 14: What did you say, b***h ?
Speaker 14: Hey, squeeze it, .
Speaker 15: Causing him to act in an illogical, [00:24:00] self-destructive manner, i.e.,
like a .
Speaker 15: But they all end up bad. If they had their own category,
Speaker 15: moments would be the third leading killer of Black men behind pork chops and FEMA. Itâs a fact.
Every
Speaker 15: moment begins with a .
Speaker 15: Without that key element, all youâre left with is peace and quiet
Malcolm Collins: And itâs, itâs true within the immigrant community, itâs true within these, these Sikh communities with these Muslim communities that are immigrating into these countries.
When they see these communities have these protests about like, âWe should be able to do this,â which weâve actually seen counter-protests. When people have gone out there to protest, like the, the guy the, weâll talk about this case now. The white kid who was stabbed and then the, the Sikh kidâs family tried to hide the wea- the weapon.
His mom hid the wea- weapon. His, his brothers were complicit in this. The police believed him even though he told them multiple times, âI, Iâve been stabbed, Iâm dying.â And we now see these anti-discrimination procedures that they have to go through, [00:25:00] and what the anti-discrimination procedures basically say is you need to always presume the white person is at fault.
Well, it
Simone Collins: would explain why what happened happened. I, I donât know if youâve seen footage from that particular incident, but like Yeah, it, it, it does kind of feel like theyâre acting on procedure of like... That, plus also it genuinely seemed like they didnât believe the white kid. Like, they were like, âYeah, sure you have been.â
Like, âI donât see anything.â Like, whining.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, well, I mean, police in the UK are awful, generally speaking. Like my- I havenât
Simone Collins: had any encounters with them, so I donât know.
Malcolm Collins: My experience is theyâre like, well this is what happens when you take away their guns and you put them in the far left environment of the UK, is they begin to act like ultra Karens.
Simone Collins: Well, I wouldnât wanna be a police officer in the UK. I mean, to be a police officer without a gun, Iâd be terrified. Yeah. But what, it, it is, like that is, I think in terms of the, the social media posts that were made online that Iâve seen, the worst are around that case. Like, this one guy on X posted, âThe Sikh man and his family are not walking around looking to [00:26:00] stab people.
Henry Nowak was a drunk racist abusing the Punjabi and got what he deserved. The police correctly identified the drunk aggressor and just didnât realize he was stabbed.â Like, that is not
Malcolm Collins: good. This, again, what Iâm saying here is they genuinely... We need to move, because I think it can sound like people are being hyperbolic.
And I, and I wanna go through some articles where, where people talk about, like, the, theyâre so concerned about the rise in reportings of these crimes. And like, The Guardian of course has a piece, panicked that these crimes are being reported at higher rates now. And we need to go from the they want you dead isnât hyperbolic.
Itâs what they when, every time they cheer when they say... Because historically this is how it started. Itâs like, oh, the number of you know, whites will no longer be a majority in the country. White populations are going down. And you would see at leftist rallies they would cheer. This really happened, right?
We would see them cheer. Eh, that means, [00:27:00] oh, this is exciting for us. Like, we are getting rid of this population. H- A, a generation raised singing that and normalizing for that is of course not going to mind as much when they see white people being killed, and is going to react absolutely in panic when they see white people defending themselves, which is what we repeatedly see.
Of a continuous post here.
Simone Collins: So an- another response thatâs really common with, like, this specific Si- Sikh stabbing incident is, âSikhs are fighting back. Unprecedented moves.â This is from Baakara Amri. âInnocent Sikhs have been targeted while the elderly and vulnerable are being urged to stay indoors following the sentencing of Bikram Dhingra.
Amrit Singh from Hounslow and Mas- âwest London has launched a website for Sikhs across the country to report incidents of hate crime. The site has received numerous reports in the past five days, with many respondents believing the abuse they experienced was linked to Dhingraâs conviction.
âWill you report any anti-Sikhs crimes?â The British Sikhs 2025 [00:28:00] report found 40 thou- 49% of British Sikhs were already worried about rising anti-Sikh sentiment. Many reported being mistaken for Muslims or targeted simply for wearing a turban, according to the report. Here is the reason why. Far-right mobilization.â
So what, what... And this is a really common pattern across most of these incidents, which is instead of respond to the actual crime or to condemn the actual aggressors- Mm-hmm. Yeah ... in these crimes, theyâre like, âYou know what? This is just the right trying to use this to radicalize people.â And instead of having a real conversation about whatâs going on of, like, this is not acceptable.
We have to punish these people. They cannot be lenient punishments. We need to reconsider deportations. We need to reconsider immigration. Instead itâs like, âNo, no, no. Youâre just, youâre just hating on people.â And that, I think, is where I feel like the conversation is just people screaming across the bow to each other, is that there has, from what I can tell, actually been a policing double [00:29:00] standard in favor of white populations in majority white countries, and to the disfavor of non-whites.
Like per organizations like The Sentencing Project, evidence from policing and sentencing and media coverage shows a true racial double standards, at least historically, have existed. They just happen to be, you know, a- against, you know, the favor of-
Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, we can, we can... So one-
Simone Collins: I think whatâs happening, though, what Iâm trying to say- We know that this happened-
is maybe right now people are over-correcting for hysteric- sorry, historical favoritism toward white people, historical bias, and theyâre going too far. And now what needs to happen is a market correction. But one side, the progressives, people on the left, are just so, like, stuck in the there is discrimination.
There is discrimination that they canât see that maybe theyâve over-corrected at this point. And then on the right, theyâre just so angry that the left isnât even listening to them that theyâre getting more and more extreme and shouting louder and louder.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, and that, the entire point Iâm making is I think that that is the [00:30:00] wrong takeaway from all of this.
Simone Collins: Really? Okay.
Malcolm Collins: Yes. Yes. I think that for a long time that has been my position. My position has been this is just marginal over-correction. But when I look at the posts and the people, when I look at how incensed they were that Anthony was charged, when I look at them saying, âOh, itâs good that the Sikh killed this kid in the street and that the police let him die,â what Iâm seeing, when you see mainstream figures, not just online crazies, like Cardi B saying that this is disgusting, that, you know, justice was carried out, what we are seeing here is a m- a large part of the left, and especially these minority communities, genuinely believe that The law should not apply to their communities.
They, they, they, their communities should be allowed to kill this other group with impunity because this other group is so beneath them, so beneath in, in the long for- This is why we [00:31:00] saw, and I think we should have assumed this, when we saw the people having the parties for the October 11th attacks, you know, before the IDF did anything in response or anything like that, on college campuses around the United States they really believe, and watch our video on Zoran Mandani where we break the psychology and politics of this that the world exists in two classes: the oppressor and the oppressed.
And anyone whoâs in oppressed class, even if they functionally have societal power which they do today if theyâre in the oppressed class, they can do anything they want to the oppressor, and it is never immoral. So when they go and, you know, Hamas is dragging girls away from a peace protest, right, which was what it was, the big concert that they had, and gang raping them and murdering them in horrific ways, this isnât bad because girl was of oppressor class, the other side was of the oppressed class.
And I think that this is hidden from a lot of, a lot of people under the mindset that you are going right now, which is just [00:32:00] like, âOh, we over-corrected.â This isnât over-corrected. This is cheering when people are brutally graped or murdered and things alike, like the police actively lying to a girlâs parents about the ethnicity of who just killed a 14-year-old girl.
That isnât like,
Simone Collins: Yeah, no, that, that is, that is something thatâs atrocious Thatâs
Malcolm Collins: like the height of like Jim Crow South and stuff like that when I went through-
Simone Collins: Yeah, oh, and also correction, I completely mixed up in my head Nicki Minaj and Cardi B. Cardi B is very anti-Trump. Nicki Minaj is the person who, like, showed up s- with some support for Trump, and people on the left defenestrated her for that, of course.
So itâs Nicki Minaj whoâs being boycotted.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, when you have something like a teenage girl being gang graped in the woods and, and, and no one is sent to jail for this.
Simone Collins: I mean, to be fair, they were like age 11 to 16, so it might just be about like minor offenses, but I think there are plenty of cases- Thatâs not a
Octavian Collins: minor offense.
Simone Collins: No, no, no, but [00:33:00] they are minors, and they are offe- They murdered a girl. They are a threat. I n- Malcolm, they are minors. They are below the age of 18. Yeah, I
Malcolm Collins: know. They should still go to jail. Theyâre clearly a threat to their community.
Simone Collins: Right. I mean, there are certainly exceptions in which minors are tried as adults.
I just donât know
Malcolm Collins: You donât need to be tried as adult. Thereâs prisons for minors. What are you talking about?
Simone Collins: Oh, well, I, I mean, who knows how it works in other countries. I, I mean-
Malcolm Collins: No, you can go to jail as a minor. There,
Simone Collins: thereâs entire prison- Theyâre extremely
Malcolm Collins: lenient in many European countries And you donât get to just murder or grape someone because youâre a minor.
And the mindset it shows to not only video... This is what Iâm talking about when I say
Simone Collins: they think about- No, itâs so sick, and itâs, itâs truly sick. Itâs, itâs, itâs horrific. It, yeah ... to video it,
Malcolm Collins: put it on Snapchat. To do that shows you donât believe youâre going to be punished.
Simone Collins: Yeah, they, they, they expected some level of impunity, and they got it.
And- I mean, like, they werenât wrong to do that ... and then they got it. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: This is the thing thatâs changing. When youâre like, âItâs a m- itâs a minor changeâ- Yeah,
Simone Collins: I guess if we live in a society in which young [00:34:00] teens believe that they can do such a thing, post it to Snapchat, and, and not be that at high risk and actually get caught, and then only get 30 hours community service shows how bad it is, I guess.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And I think that w- I think the wrong takeaway from this, right? Which I think some of the right is going to have, is that this means that we need to exclude all members of these communities from our faction. And that, that is a huge mistake, because you donât have enough white people to win elections.
The, in, in, in fact, a lot of this mindset, while it is prevalent in some of these minority communities, is coming downstream of, of white women. Okay? You donât have the votes to win if you try to take a racialist perspective, like, say, a Nick Fuentes does. If you want to win, you need to get on our team- P- people who want their group to behave respectably and want their [00:35:00] group to be held accountable.
That, that, once you get that, then, then it works. Itâs okay. Bring them over, right? But thatâs the world we need to move to if, if weâre gonna win, realistically. And then with everyone else, I think we need to get dramatically harsher. And I think that we are seeing a model of the way that the West or the United States at least, should reorient the way it sees people who...
And, and, and groups that are acting bad. I think Israel is sort of modeling the direction we need to go. And I think that thatâs one reason why they make such a natural and strong ally right now, is some people are like, âWell, you know, Jews see themselves as a distinct group,â and yes, they have, you know...
I can go to Israel and have a great life. Like Iâve, Iâve, Iâve been to Israel before. Itâs a really nice place. You donât face... At, at least when I was there, I never got any sense of any discrimination. Itâs not that there arenât parts of Israel you canât go where you will face discrimination but thatâs true of anywhere, right?
You know, there are white communities where youâll face discrimination in the United States. Thereâs Black [00:36:00] communities where youâll face discrimination in the United States. But the, the overall, theyâve created a multi-ethnic society in Israel and a multicultural society. But it is still a society where there is a, a ethnic identity and cultural identity and religious identity sort of recognized.
And I think that that is the direction that we can go in the United States that will be sane. And we actually see, like a lot of people can think, âOh, youâre not gonna peel off, you know, Black voters.â We actually have a significant Black fan base, first of all, for people who are unaware of that. And in addition to that when the left tries to do all these crazy things like de- go, defund the police and stuff like this, on average Black people, when I talk about like wh- whites donât have enough money not enough votes to win on their own on average, Black voters were more anti-defund the police than the average white voter.
Note here, Iâm not talking about like Republican white voters. Iâm talking about the average white voter. That means you can peel off people easier [00:37:00] from the Black side than the white side on this particular issue. And the a- answer is, is because when you recognize, oh, this community is more violent, because as Simone said, they are disproportionately the subject of that violence And you say, âOkay, this means we need to act in a different way when engaging with this community,â the, the, the, the people who benefit from that the most are the people from that community.
Thatâs why Blacks didnât want the police defunded, right? Like, a- and if you, if you look at... Well, I mean, youâve, youâve obviously got different portions of these communities, but the Blacks who still have healthy families and are having lots of kids are, from what Iâve seen, universally in this conservative camp.
It is, a- a- and note, there are a lot of, you know, raised without dad stuff in the Black community. The, the rate is astonishingly high. But I donât think that that is going to continue to be a problem going [00:38:00] forwards, because weâve seen the Black fertility rate drop below the white fertility rate in the United States.
If youâre not aware of that, that, that happened. Not controlling for income, just raw numbers dropped below the white fertility rate. I, I remember when I mentioned that on the stream, people were, like, confused. They thought it was like... Watch our episode on it. Like, we go over all the data. Like, like, if you look at native-born Blacks, they have a desperately low fertility rate in the United States.
Most of the Black fertility rate is pumped up by immigrants. Native Blacks mainly have a fertility rate of, like, 1.3 at this point. And so, what, what basically what Iâm saying is this is a community we can eventually get on team.
Speaker 22: Reverend Jordan Wells. Iâm a Black man, proud conservative, and a follower of Jesus Christ. When I see protesters outside the Collin County Courthouse chanting, âF**k white lives,â after Karmelo Anthonyâs sentencing for murdering Austin Metcalf, my soul grieves. This isnât justice. This isnât community. This is a demonic hatred, plain and simple.
All lives are made in the image of God, every single one, Black, white, brown, doesnât matter. Celebrating the loss... This is, this is [00:39:00] true. Celebrating the loss of any innocent life or cheering on evil because of skin color is straight from the pit of hell. And hereâs the truth they donât want to say out loud.
When Black conservatives, Christians, or truth tellers like me call this out, we get labeled as traitors, Uncle Toms, or betrayers of the community. Itâs true. Let them talk. Iâd rather be disliked by some in my own community than stand before a holy God and be found guilty of excusing evil, hating my neighbor, or twisting justice for racial points.
My allegiance is to Christ first, not color, not tribe, not political pressure. Woe to those who call evil g- good and good evil, Isaiah 5:20. I ch- I choose truth over tribe, light over darkness, God over man. Who else is tired of the hate? Drop a prayer hands if you stand for real justice, not skin color
Malcolm Collins: You know, reacting with hostility to everyone in the community.
But when it comes to the people who are doing things like protesting the Anthony ver- verdict or stuff like that, you know, the people [00:40:00] who we see, you know, the Cardi Bâs and stuff like that, the level of anonymity we need to have to these people should be as if, you know, th- like, like they have genocidal intentions.
The people who cheer when the white population is falling, theyâre doing that because they want to get rid of this population. In every other context we call that genocide, and they have violent genocidal intentions. And thatâs the way we need to reframe how we see who we are up against. We need to be the side of true and genuine diverse groups working together to win and preserve civilization against the racist spastics.
And the left has become the team of racists. I mean, youâve got Nick Fuentes on the left now saying heâs a moderate Democrat, voting leftists since forever. Youâve got the Islamists there. Youâve got the, the the gay extremists there. Watching the Islamists and the gays fight over pride was hilarious.
But the point being is every one of the mainstream racist factions, like David Duke went to the left, right? Like the, the, the head of the KKK [00:41:00] went to the left, right? Every one of the major racist factions in the United States has naturally drifted to the left because the left has become a coalition of supremacist groups that are simply living in denial about the fact that theyâre not at the top of that particular coalition, or that think that once they knock society down, their side will rise from the ashes.
And th- this is what weâre seeing. Like, obviously the gays know that the Islamists want them, you know... I think itâs, what? 35% of American Muslims, and these are the ones who are having the majority of kids in Muslim communities, want Sharia law. Like, thatâs literally want them dead. Thatâs not like a, a figurative thing or something like that.
But they, they are aware of this. And same, like Nick Fuentes is aware of this as well, right? Like David Dukeâs aware of this as well. But they just think that, oh, well, once they knock things down, once they, they, they donât wanna be in a faction that allows Indians in. They donât wanna be in a faction that allows Jews in when theyâre willing to play ball, right?
But we need those groups to win, right? D- even [00:42:00] just, like outside of the morality of this and everything like that, we need them to win because the right is the side of the honest conversation. And if the honest conversation says w- we are going to create a society where you are treated, you know, in, in, in a way that is demonstrably unfair or something like that then theyâre gonna be like, âWell, I donât, I donât wanna be a part of that coalition,â right?
Whereas the left, they can have these conversations where one minute they say something Islamist and the next minute they go to Pride, right? Because it, thereâs no inter- it doesnât matter whether theyâre being logical or, or not. But as long as we are the logical conversation, we canât play that game, and we need to push back against people who are performatively racist not to show
Because thereâs, like, the jokey performative racism, which a, a lot of people on the right do to sort of show in group where theyâre not truly being spiteful about a group, right? But theyâre saying something thatâs edgy, and so you know, âOkay, yeah, heâs one of us,â right? Like I can, I can take [00:43:00] what heâs saying seriously.
An, an example of this, Leaflet actually had a really funny joke, is she was looking at all the protesters outside the Anthony trial, and she said that she should start a stand for you know, that juice-soaked pineapple trend. Have you not seen the juice-soaked pineapple trend?
Simone Collins: I heard thereâs something about pineapples and Kool-Aid and the CIA thatâs floating about the internet, but not this.
Black people
Malcolm Collins: apparently, like, invented this thing where they sort of pickle a pineapple in heavily sugared juice.
And itâs an extremely high calorie thing, and thereâs videos of, like, fat Black woman eating it, and then Asmongold tried it, and he said itâs disgusting. But itâs become, like, the, the joke, the Black thing, right?
And, and so she said thatâs not genuinely being mean to that group or anything like that. Itâs just being edgy. Like- Itâs like the, I donât know, the, the w- w- with the watermelons of our generation or something like that. Oh. Or the fried chicken of our generation. Itâs like,
Simone Collins: if you- Well, isnât it kind of like making fun of [00:44:00] a basic white b***h for liking pumpkin spice lattes?
Malcolm Collins: Yes. Itâs exactly like a, a basic white b***h l- And, and itâs so weird that for a while in our society you could say, âOh, pumpkin spice latte,â like, as a joke about white women, right? And everyone would laugh. And you say fried chicken, why, why, why is that a problem to say? Like, fried chickenâs a tasty thing, right?
Like, itâs not like- Really good ... disparaging a community to say that they like fried chicken. Itâs not like saying they like
Simone Collins: being- Itâs a testament to good taste. Now all I want is Wing Bucket. No.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, like if, if, if, if you were talking about, like, okay, maybe if you say that, like, Indians smell like curry or something.
I mean, I generally think curry smells good, but, like, I could see that being disparaging. But saying you like fried chicken is just like- Saying you have to- Duh ... is disproportionately true in the community. Itâs like a known- Yeah ... bla, bla, bla. But we as- Yeah, yeah, yeah ... a society just, like, acted like, âOh my God, you canât do that,â which shows one thing- Yeah, I
Simone Collins: guess itâs-
exactly ... maybe thereâs an episode in that on its own. Iâd kind of like to explore, [00:45:00] like, why kind of teasing a, a racial, national, or ethnic group about food sometimes is okay and sometimes not. Like, if someoneâs like, âOh, those natto-eating Japanese,â like, I donât really know anyone who eats natto whoâs not Japanese.
And itâs really- What the heck is natto? I think itâs really gross. Most people, even, like, a lot of Japanese people think itâs really gross, but, like, talking about it isnât gonna make it get me in trouble, whereas, like- What is natto? Natto is a very, very healthy but kinda st- like, really, like, mucusy fermented soybean.
Really good for you, like incredibly healthy food. But-
Malcolm Collins: Okay ...
Simone Collins: yeah, Iâm, Iâm not for it
Malcolm Collins: Are you workshop slurs here? Natto eaters, is that too much of a-
Simone Collins: Na- natto, N-A-T-T-O, natto. People
Malcolm Collins: arenât even gonna be able to pronounce this. This is ridiculous. Youâre- Well, anyway- Youâre
Simone Collins: not even- I, I donât get it.
Like, itâs, itâs one of those things of, like, can, can you not? Like, like, I know that... Like, I stayed with a Japanese family once where, like, one, one family member would eat it every morning for breakfast. He was a doctor. He knew how good it was for you, and itâs like a [00:46:00] very traditional Japanese, like, breakfast food over rice.
And, like, the rest of the family was like, âThatâs nasty.â But, like, but but then Iâm sure there are lots of people per this, like, pineapple dish youâre describing, within communities where itâs popular who are like, âThatâs nasty.â And I think that there are lots of people in the white community who are like, âI am not ever going to touch a pumpkin spice latte.
I, I am, Iâm a purist. I only drink espresso from the specially sourced coffee bean.â Right? Like- Right ... why is it weird to... Anyway, weâre getting off topic. Well, because itâs weird because
Malcolm Collins: we created a racial caste system. That is what happened. It was a caste system where different social norms applied to different groups.
This is historically what we called racism where one group had specific social norms around their behavior that was expected to be followed, and they got, they, they got used to it being the case that they couldnât be criticized as a group.
Simone Collins: Oh, Germans and krauts. So there, there was that against white people, and doughboys.
Well,
Malcolm Collins: potato [00:47:00] eaters, you know,
Simone Collins: I donât... Was potato eaters this? Iâve never heard potato eaters. Iâve heard krauts. Iâve heard doughboys. This is for the Irish Well, yeah, but Iâve never heard someone say that. Iâve heard people say krauts. Iâve heard people say-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, but it, th- those terms are horrible.
But the point being is imagine when youâre trying to understand how somebody could, like, be like, âOh, itâs disgusting that this person was tried for a crime they obviously committed,â right? How you end up with that mindset is you first have to live a life where your group is never responsible for the things it does, and this is genuinely the world they lived in.
When you could not talk about Black crime statistics without being yelled at for being a racist, that means that they grew up without hearing that at equivalent rates of incomes, Black have significantly higher rates of homicides, right? Like a, a, a per- when... Because that wasnât part of the conversation, it warped their brains.
Because they grew up seeing, like, âOh, I can just Snapchat myself graping someone, and I get off scot-free,â right? Like, it warped their perception, and itâs funny that the left [00:48:00] n- normalize this term, but when you grow up with privilege being treated equally feels like persecution. And we as a society, even on the right, even you, a sane person, I think didnât realize how much privilege many of these people grew up with.
The feeling that whenever they are... And we see this in our society. Whenever they you know, suppose they, like, run a scam on a place and they get caught. Now all of a sudden they can scream racism, right? You know, with, with, with bricks and minifigs being like, âOh, this is anti-Mormon bigotry,â right?
You know, getting so used to claiming this group status means that you personally, maybe your entire life, never really felt what responsibility feels like because it was always the other personâs fault because you were always taught to make it the other personâs fault. And that allowed you to violently escalate like this.
And I think that we, like, when you talk about how do you, and every, every, [00:49:00] I think, like, Black person or a Muslim who actually cares about the future of their communities. Well, Muslims are a bit different because they have a different long-term goal, but Black person at least in the United States. When they think about how they wanna fix their community, they know step one is responsibility.
Like, when theyâre being... Because you canât begin to teach anything else until you can teach responsibility. And if you watch older Black content, this was the core thing that they were trying to teach. They were like, âThis is the direction we need to go as a people.â And it was something that was even core to Black culture, as we point out.
In the 1950s, Blacks had half the rate of out-of-wedlock births that the white population had. But anyway, thoughts, Simona. Am I, am I going too far here?
Simone Collins: I still feel like thereâs something missing in the discourse. Like, thereâs something missing in How, like what, these people who are posting like, âWell [00:50:00] good, Iâm glad that this person did this.â
âCause what, what theyâre saying is, I think what I worry about is that weâre just seeing an increased escalation where itâs like a Chinese finger trap, right? Where like one side is like really, really mad and then the other side starts pulling away too, and then like we just keep doing this and it gets tighter.
No, no,
Malcolm Collins: no, no, no, no, no, no. Youâre completely misinterpreting what you, what, what youâre seeing. What you saw was one side that secretly had really, really atrocious, abhorrent, evil perspectives, opinions, and goals, but that didnât publicly voice it. And the other side now being like, âWait, youâre not actually saying itâs okay to just stab a white kid, right?
Like, and itâs, you donât actually think he should face... You donât actually think that you should be able to kill a white girl then have the police cover for you, right?â And the other side being like, âNo, that is our position.â And you hearing them say, âNo, that is our position,â [00:51:00] your confusion comes from the fact that you feel like they have reactively backed into this position when thatâs not what happened.
This is just their revealed preferences for a long time finally being forced to be put on the table
Thatâs, thatâs... And I, I think if you think about these positions, if you look at the writings of Dorhan Montani, the way they talk about colonizers versus colonized the way that they, they talk about any of this, right? Like you even talked to me about this where you, thereâs this phenomenon of white progressive women feeling like they have to go ask people for permission to have children âcause they do not want to accidentally increase the white population, right?
Like, that is an, a racial underclass when youâre at that, that point. And I think that we as a society overly tried to think of them as just sort of like a more extreme position of like whatever Democrats were in the â90s or whatever, and thatâs not what weâre seeing here, okay? Weâre seeing a political ideology [00:52:00] that needs to be responded to with, I think, a level of force that we in the United States are not used to needing to use.
But it, it-
Simone Collins: So explicitly then, what is your proposed solution?
Malcolm Collins: As Iâve said, I think the politics of right-wing I- Israel is the politics the right-wing United States needs to move towards. I think that that is the, the realistic... Like basically a lot of people are gonna have to be deported. A lot of people are gonna have to be deported, and itâs not gonna look nice.
But we need to stop sympathizing with obvious bad actors and understand that the enablers of the bad actors are as bad as the bad actors themselves because they prevent punishment from being handed out. If youâre the person who lets go of the grapist, right, like the gang grapist and then they go out and do that to somebody else, youâre as responsible as they are for that, and we need [00:53:00] to be applying that responsibility throughout society.
To people like Cardi B, to people like the people who are tweeting this, to The Guardian, to these leftist organizations and politicians. While ensuring that we do not normalize an environment where people of different backgrounds do not feel comfortable because they can help us, right? They can be our biggest enforcers.
And the, you know, the Sikhs, like, yeah, we, yeah, we need to get rid of the bad actors in the Sikh community. We need to get rid of these immigrants who are coming here, taking all the... Thatâs a person who you can get to vote for you, and now you can win, you can win elections, right? Or you can have run on your side and win an election, right?
Like, I know you may not like it. You may have to hold your nose now that youâve developed some sort of like racial consciousness, but your racial conscious ideals will never win in an environment where you act as an eth- an a, an antagonistic ethno-nationalist rather than a team [00:54:00] player.
Simone Collins: Yikes.
Malcolm Collins: And I feel strongly about this âcause we can never do anything about the bad actors as long as we enable the bad actors on our side that prevent us from winning the big tent.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah, no, thatâs true because, well, theyâre, theyâre the primary blocker of genuinely moving forward as long as they, they get to, like, represent the movement or become, at least be accused of being a face of it even if theyâre not.
âCause thatâs the, I think the big problem is all these people on the left are refusing to even engage with any critical thinking because a single person who is genuinely racist is showing up in the protests, right? And then, like, that, the presence of that one person- And
Malcolm Collins: that allows them... Th- I mean, think about what the leftâs saying.
They say if one racist person comes, we can just kill them. Yeah,
Simone Collins: it renders everyone elseâs opinions entirely moot. They, they donât count. But remember,
Malcolm Collins: itâs that it renders everyone else, because they say, you know, kill a [00:55:00] Nazi, right? E- everyone else now, because anyone who goes into a room with a Nazi is a Nazi, as they say.
So if one bad actor shows up at a protest, and remember theyâre considered, like, just MAGA Nazis at this point which is more than 50% of the American population they, they consider everyone there a target to be murdered, right? Like, as weâve seen from their repost. And I think that we on the right just need to wake up and realize that.
Theyâre not just saying it. It is, it is, theyâre doing it, right? Like, itâs, itâs, itâs, it, th- theyâre cheering for it. You have to stand up in a way that can allow you to win. Yeah. And the way that... And thatâs the other thing. I just get so angry. I have as much anger at an individual like Nick Fuentes as I do against one of these people because he is functionally protecting them through his politics.
And I think you should view him with as much disgust as somebody like Cardi B.
Simone Collins: Does he express racist,
Malcolm Collins: like- He wonât build partnerships with, like, Indians or [00:56:00] people in interracial relationships like JD Vance.
Simone Collins: You know? Oh, right, I forgot. Right, even that was too far for him.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, so- Okay ... youâre never gonna win.
Youâre never gonna win in the United States with those views. So itâs stupid and it prevents us from actually creating an accountable country Anyway Love you. Hopefully I- This is depressing because I
Simone Collins: donât see this resolving anytime soon.
Malcolm Collins: I love we had a, w- Iâve been posting instead of just the boring gear, I was like, âOh, letâs post some RFAB images,â right?
And Iâve been posting images of my wife, and somebody thought they were a sexualized Catholic nun, and Iâm
Simone Collins: like- Two, two people thought that they were nuns and as- Did you respond
Malcolm Collins: to them?
Simone Collins: I did. Th- that is disappointing because nuns and Puritans do not dress the same at all. Like, thereâs a very big difference between a habit and a bonnet, but-
Malcolm Collins: No, a habit and a bonnet look nothing alike.
Your outfit looks nothing
Simone Collins: like a nun. Well, there, there are many different types of habits with different forms of cowls or no [00:57:00] cowls, and some, some habits I know of some orders do look quite minimal, but they never look like bonnets, but I donât know. I mean, what are you gonna do? Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: you can tell by your outfit.
It had a clear Protestant church behind it in multiple of the images, right? You know, a, y- your, your outfit is incredibly distinct. You dress like a medieval woman. Which by the way, we want to make more of a thing. When I learned that Leaflet in real life dresses this way, and, like, a bunch of other people dress this way-
Simone Collins: Yeah, it seems like other people in the, the base camp world also have wives who dress this way.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, we
Simone Collins: need to make this, like, the, the conservative womanly- Or themselves dress this way ...
Malcolm Collins: way of dressing going forward. I, itâs fun. I like it. Itâs you know, itâs, it, itâs cool and aspirational, and doesnât, like, try hard to, like- Try hard ... be a goth or something like that.
Simone Collins: Well, the argument I was making to Malcolm is that itâs I think thereâs this point of peak enshittification of modern clothing.
At which people are going to have to just have this reckoning of either they are going to admit that theyâre wearing the equivalent of hospital gowns, of, like, just Kleenex thatâs going to fall apart after a couple wears that they have to keep rebuying or [00:58:00] theyâre going to declare bankruptcy and, and take a totally different approach to clothing.
And one of those approaches is just to go back and, like, you know, Iâm just gonna wear a chemise and a skirt and cinch it in with stays or a girdle or a belt. And, like, that works, because it, it fits all sizes. It changes as your size fluctuates. Itâs great in all weathers. Itâs just so useful.
Especially if you get more durable natural fiber fabrics of higher quality. So letâs make it a thing. Yes.
Malcolm Collins: I love it and agree, but yeah, I, I, I, I was, like, personally offended that they watch you every day and they, th- that wasnât immediately... She has big circular glasses, a Puritan outfit, and wears a bonnet, which Simone wears on occasion.
Anyway, the... But I wanted to, the reason Iâm posting her, by the way, is Iâm like, âLook, we on the right can be cool and sexy and alluring. Thatâs not the same as being promiscuous.â
Simone Collins: Maybe not. I donât think everyone-
Malcolm Collins: No ...
Simone Collins: thinks that deranged looking Puritan woman is cool and sexy. [00:59:00]
Malcolm Collins: I, I think fun anime girls is, is part of how we win this.
AI anime girls is a weapon the left doesnât have. So letâs have fun. Letâs be the side of the party, and stop policing everything, and stop yelling- about everything because if we make our side not fun, weâre not gonna be able to pull people over. There is a difference between degeneracy and a fully clothed long sleeve AI of your wife with a yandere face.
You know? That, that, those two things are as far apart as possible, and I think we need to reflectively not attack things that are not actually in any way immoral or bad. Getting people on board with the idea that Christianity can be fun and alluring is, is the... Even the Catholic Church made an anime girl, right?
You know? Something we should do. Anyway, have fun, Simone. Love you to death.
Simone Collins: Love you too, Malcolm Okay. Hello, Simone. You
Malcolm Collins: look beautiful today.
Simone Collins: So do you. You look sharp- Yeah ... even though I know [01:00:00] you need to sleep. Did you sleep today? Did you sleep? I did.
Malcolm Collins: I slept for like an hour and a half.
Simone Collins: Oh, yeah. I did. Yeah. Even though you, like, woke up at 2:00 AM. Thatâs not gonna help you. âCause you stayed up later than I did, pretty sure.
I think your light was still on when I went to sleep. Ugh
Malcolm Collins: Well, thereâs so much to do. I, I know- Yeah, but what happens if you, I mean, Iâm
Simone Collins: dead or if you die or get dementia, like, what good are you to any of that work, right?
Malcolm Collins: Well, Iâve gotten everything I needed to done.
Simone Collins: So youâre gonna go to sleep super early tonight?
Because you were staying up way too late. You need to start chilling earlier so you can be relaxed
Malcolm Collins: and up for sleep. Well, guess what we have working on the site now, is better not safe for work image-to-image model systems.
Simone Collins: Well, thank you. Thatâs what I
Malcolm Collins: was killing myself over, is
Simone Collins: getting those- Now people can goon more efficiently.
Thank you.
Malcolm Collins: We need money.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Well.
Malcolm Collins: You know, and this is what people pay for, okay? The, the, that is the world we live in. Yes, Jerome ... and so if, if I can, I will make money doing that. Itâs RFAB, by the way, dot AI, for people who wanna try it. The, I mean, the main thing that people use [01:01:00] it for is narrative storytelling, like a choose-your-own-adventure type story.
Itâs where you can build your own narrative engine and play through them with any frontier model you want.
Simone Collins: And I primarily use it for vibe- Image ... any vibe coding Iâve ever done has been on RFAB, and then I, lots of image generation. It has such a good image generator.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: And recipe generation now.
Malcolm Collins: And we charge a- across the board, a 50% flat margin on any model that youâre using which is, like, way less than almost any other site.
Most itâs 5X margin. Itâs enormous. Well,
Simone Collins: the best thing about it is its latest video tutorials, which I donât think youâve brought live yet. I, I wanna be able to post them next to- No, theyâre all live. Video tutorials are all- Did you upload them to the folder that I can use to post them elsewhere online, because
Malcolm Collins: they- Do you like how angry I look in them?
Simone Collins: Theyâre, theyâre very angry tutorials. Like, heâll be like, âOkay, and how to use our recipe tool. Actually, never mind. If you canât figure that out yourself, youâre mentally deficient.â Heâll, like, go through steps and be like, âYou know what? Just figure it out.â Like, itâs, itâs, itâs great. I agree. And theyâre actually helpful.
To be clear, these [01:02:00] are very helpful. They walk you through the process. Theyâve made things that Iâm like, âI donât wanna try this. I donât know how to do it.â Like, I donât, oh, and thereâs... âCause he- The VTube- ... he puts in a lot of options. It can be kind of overwhelming to look at the screen. I think the video tutorials are genuinely useful.
I just also find the delivery extremely entertaining because heâs so irritable about it. So-
Malcolm Collins: Because I have tooltips explaining
Simone Collins: this to people. I know, itâs just Iâm so used to, like, very tedious tutorials. You know, itâs like, âDa-na-na, next you do this,â and here itâs, like, actually both funny and useful, so thank you.
Malcolm Collins: So yeah, on the on the, This is for the VTubers where we have the, the biggest tutorial. We also have one for ImageGen, and we have one for, Oh. Whatâs the other one for? We have one for the new AIDubber. Thatâs the one thing that doesnât c- take a 50% margin. Itâs just, itâs so expensive to dev full anime episodes.
Itâs, like, 10 bucks or something. So for that reason we only take a 20% margin on that.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Because I wanna be magnanimous or whatever.
Simone Collins: Well, you wanna be practical. I mean, anime [01:03:00] watchers need their time or money for merch tables at anime cons
Octavian Collins: Mommy, I running, I ran downstairs and I fell b- before.
I was trying to place in the stairs, and now I need a replacement.
Simone Collins: Well, I will give you a replacement after weâre done recording. But now you can just leave that here, and Iâll fix it when Iâm done recording, okay?
Octavian Collins: Okay. You can let me use one of the pins from that
Simone Collins: like- That is exactly what- Yeah ... Iâm gonna be doing.
Octavian Collins: Yeah, you can get, like, another of these, like, from the other finger thing.
Simone Collins: Yeah, just leave it on your desk, okay?
Octavian Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: Thank you, love. Have fun. Be safe.
Speaker 26: A ravine A ravine? Yeah. Thatâs scary. Do you want the kids to survive? Yeah. Do you want the evil hacker to survive? Yeah. Oh, well, letâs see what happens. Uh-oh. Doesnât look good for him, does it? I donât think- You donât like him very much? Whereâs the ravine? The ravine? Well, heâs kind of in it now
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 Based Camp episode, Simone and Malcolm Collins explore an expanded framework for personal morality and âmodern sinsâ designed to maximize mental health, personal efficacy, and long-term human flourishing. Framed through a Christian and Techno-Puritan lens, they discuss how biblical morality has iteratively improved over time and why we need updated rules for todayâs world.
Topics include: avoiding busywork and performative suffering, rejecting pride and status signaling, the dangers of inaction and moral absolutism, self-flagellation, empty words, corrupted mercy, and living with aplomb. They emphasize consequentialist ethics focused on future human (and post-human) flourishing through science, technology, and disciplined living.
A practical guide to building a better life, overcoming common traps, and aligning daily actions with higher purpose. Applicable to Christians, secular listeners, and anyone seeking a high-agency value system.
Techno-Puritan Sins, Summarized
Sin, per Techno-Puritanism, is any pattern of behaviorâmental, emotional, or practicalâthat wastes your capacity or undermines long-term flourishing for yourself or humanity.
All Techno-Puritan sins are derived from a single principle:
* Maximize long-term human flourishing and effectiveness
* Minimize:
* Wasted effort
* Short-term thinking
* Self-indulgent or performative behavior
1. Acting from social expectation (performative living)
It is sinful to:
* Do things just because theyâre expected (e.g., ceremonies, reunions).
* Especially when they donât align with your goals or values.
Why? Obligation without purpose is wasted life energy.
2. Pride as social comparison (âproving others wrongâ)
It is sinful to motivate yourself primarily by:
* Showing others youâre better than them.
* Seeking validation through superiority.
Why? External validation distorts decision-making. Seeking it may produce shallow or misaligned decisions.
3. Living to fit an image or archetype
It is sinful to:
* Make decisions to match a role (e.g., âideal Christian,â âalpha male,â âtradwifeâ).
* Prioritize appearance of virtue over actual outcomes.
Why? Doing so drives one to âperform goodnessâ instead of doing good and leads to inefficient or even harmful choices.
4. Wasted effort / misaligned roles
It is sinful to do things that:
* Donât actually help others
* Arenât valued by those theyâre meant to serve (e.g. Performing âideal spouseâ behaviors that your partner doesnât need or want.)
Why? Effort without impact is morally wasteful.
5. Busywork (major emphasis)
It is sinful to:
* Spend time on on tasks that feel productive but arenât meaningful (e.g. Working 12 hours but accomplishing less than 2 focused hours.)
* This Includes:
* Overwork without output
* Performative productivity
* Inefficient labor
Why itâs considered especially bad:
* Reduces overall effectiveness
* Crowds out meaningful work
* Worse than leisure because it gives no recovery or benefit
6. Pure indulgence without purpose
It is sinful to
* Do things solely for personal pleasure with no broader benefit (e.g. indulging in excess entertainment or sexual behavior detached from long-term outcomes)
Nuance:
* Some indulgence is tolerated if it supports long-term function (rest, motivation).
7. Performative suffering / overwork signaling
It is sinful to:
* Show off stress, exhaustion, or hardship as a badge of honor.
* This includes:
* Bragging about long hours
* Glorifying burnout
Why? Suffering is not inherently virtuousâonly meaningful outcomes are.
8. Emotional indulgence (lack of âaplombâ)
It is sinful to adopt unproductive emotional states, such as:
* Self-pity
* Anger
* Excessive grief expression
* Cynicism or snark
Why?
* Emotions are (to a degree) controllable and reinforce themselves.
* Indulging in negative emotions:
* Harms others
* Weakens self-control
* Reduces effectiveness
* Conversely, maintaining calm, forward-moving resilience, especially in hardship, imparts strength to oneself and others
9. Self-deception about morality
It is sinful to convince yourself that:
* Youâre being virtuous when youâre not
* Busywork or image-performance equals goodness
Why? Mislabeling behavior prevents improvement.
10. Failure to pursue meaningful contribution
It is sinful to not direct effort toward:
* Long-term human progress
* Knowledge, science, or societal development
Why? Immediate charity often distracts from long-term impact and can actively run counter to efforts that would maximize long-term human flourishing.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone. Iâm excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be discussing personal re- morality as it relates to, one, this is going to focus on just general advice for living a good life. Hmm. And a good way to structure your life to overcome many of the challenges that people face.
So this would be applicable to people of Christian perspective, non-Christian perspective, techno-Puritan perspective. But Iâm gonna be couching it within the framing of Iâm talking to Christians here. Okay? And the reason Iâm couching it in that is because when we look at something like the Bible, people often get hung up.
Theyâre like, âWait, so I read all these parts about morality and, like, the seven deadly sins in the Bible and the Commandments, and then I read stuff like, âIf a man sells his daughter as a slave, she is not to go free as male slaves do. If she does not please the master who selected her for himself, he must let her be redeemed.
He has no right to sell her to other foreigners because he has broken faith with [00:01:00] her. If he selects her for his sons, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. If he marries her to another woman, he must not deprive the first one of food, clothing, or marital rights. If he does not provide her with these things, she is to go free without any payment of money.ââ
And people are like, âWait, is that a bunch of rules about how to sell your daughter into slavery and then treat her afterwards?â You know, like, they do seem like nice rules about selling your daughter into slavery, but it would seem like it might have been better to just not do that, to just be like, if youâre thinking of selling your daughter into slavery, and, like, pretty clearly because it, it talks about potentially marrying her sex slavery is what we would call that today donât do it.
And the way that Christians and Jews get around this is they go, âWell, iteratively, that was a more moral way of dealing with slavery than other common traditions of this period.â Hmm. And we have a whole episode where we go through that. And if you look at our last tract where we also went into morality at the societal level, we talk about the [00:02:00] many...
Like, you, you remember me going over them. It was a number of them, places in the Bible where God commands people to kill infants, and lots of infants. Like, the number of infants is very, very high, right?
Speaker 7: If you want to go through that, check out the episode, âChristianity Was Never a Religion of Peaceâ that we released, last week. Itâs a great episode. , We cite all the verses where this happens, , and itâs a pretty frequent thing throughout the Old Testament
Malcolm Collins: And so people are like, âOkay, well,â he told people to do that because those societies were practicing child sacrifice.â
And I was like, âThatâs not a very moral answer.â Thatâs like saying, âOh, we rescued a bunch of children from Epsteinâs island, so we killed them all?â Like, presumably if youâre saving the children who might be child sacrifice, right? Like, you donât kill the... And note here the term used in some of these instances.
You canât be like, âOh, heâs only talking about toddlers who has absorbed the culture.â They use terms meaning, like, breastfeeding infant, like suckling infants, right? Like, [00:03:00] very young. So itâs like, okay Whatâs going on here, right? Was this just like iteratively more moral than what came before it? Do these types of things still hold?
And how does this hold at like a personal level? And what Iâll note here is what we see, if you take the stance that God said all of this because it was iteratively better than the way things used to be done before he laid those things out, then presumably itâs been a pretty long time since the New Testament was written.
More is expected of us or a more advanced understanding of morality is expected from us than what- Yeah ... was laid out in the New Testament
So what are those things? And thatâs what weâre gonna go into today, is basically a new and expanded understanding of sins that will help you be like, âHmm, if I just make a personal commitment to never do this list of [00:04:00] things, I will be both a much more mentally healthy person, I will be a much more efficacious person, and I will be able to do a lot more to push human civilization forwards.â
And note here when we talk about pushing human civilization forwards, obviously this is a wider, like, technopuri- puritan track series, but itâs, we try to make them more applicable to general Christians now as well. One of the fun things that you see in regards to us talking about the sons of man, which you also see all over the Bible.
You know, by the way, I didnât make up the term the sons of man. Thatâs all over the Old Testament. Very weird way to talk about people. Why would you talk about people as the sons of man, right? Like, thatâs a... W- why in
Simone Collins: the world- Yeah, why not just, you know, humans or people?
Malcolm Collins: Why not just man, right? Well, suppose that these rules were supposed to apply to not just the humans we have today, but when we become a space-faring species, when we take our manifest destiny among the stars, weâre going to need to use genetic technology.
You basically have to. You canât easily have people live their entire lives in zero G without some [00:05:00] form of gene editing, and most other planets are gonna require some gene editing to live on. And how extensive that goes could be bigger than that. Youâre gonna eventually have some humans that are AI integrations.
Youâre gonna have some humans... weâre gonna have AI working alongside us. So we take the sons of man to mean all of the intelligences which are downstream of humanity be those AI intelligences, uplifted animals, human intelligences of the far future that are genetically modified and stuff like that, and thatâs why it says the sons of man.
I like that fun little, like, weird prediction of the applicability that that would have to have, but it tracks with the way society looks like itâs going. So if weâre looking at that and weâre asking, okay, so if Godâs sort of broader moral framework and at least how itâs expressed seems to shift over time how can we find out what he really wanted with those frameworks?
Like, what was the point of the frameworks as they were laid out? And it appears [00:06:00] fairly clear, because we can look at the effects that these frameworks had on individuals and society at large. Okay. Which is an increased amount of human flourishing, right? This is human technological, civilizational flourishing, right?
The reason why you would want to create more humane rules around the selling of your daughter into slavery
Speaker 3: I was on a stream with Leaflet and somebody was asking, âWhat are sins?â âCause we were talking about them more broadly, and I was like, âWhen you boil it down, sins are just a list of things that will up your life.â
Some of them may seem like a good idea in the short term,. In the same way eating candy every morning for breakfast might.
Speaker 6: Whatâs going on? Maybe itâs all this stuff that you both eat. Oh, you get off that? No, honestly, itâs true. Okay. Moss, what did you have for breakfast this morning? Smarty Cereal. Oh my God. I didnât even know Smarty made a [00:07:00] cereal. They donât. Itâs just smarties and a bowl with milk.
Speaker 3: But in the long term, youâre going to suffer from it. Itâs basically a long list of... And we saw this in one of the recent episodes we did on, , you know, rampant consumerization of human sexuality leading to the normalization of things like abortion and this destroying peopleâs lives, right?
, The, the sin that they were committing, , ended up having this absolutely huge deleterious negative impact on them. The women who go out and w***e themselves when theyâre younger, the effect that this is gonna happen when they hit the wall, and then nobody wants them anymore, and then, , you know, you see this with pride, lying.
, Look at whatâs going on with the Bricks & Minifigs CEO right now, right? , There is no sin, thereâs no, like, rule that weâre given that isnât long term in our own best interest. Sins are just a really [00:08:00] long list of, âDonât piss on the electric fence.â , And so if we are increasing the number of sins or expanding our understanding of sin, , itâs basically expanding this.
Good rules to live by, good things to look out for. And when I pointed this out on, on stream, some people were like, âWell, no, you know, sins need to be, like, this really difficult thing to deal with. This really, like...â And itâs like they are insofar that anything you do purely for your own self-interest is a sin.
, EG playing video games or something like that. , And e- and even those things can eventually have negative effects on you. , But in terms of the more, like, explicitly labeled sins, , for example, sleeping with another dudeâs wife, right? Like, it may feel good in the moment, but not even... Y- you donât even need to say, like, civilizationally this is a bad idea to normalize.
Itâs just obviously gonna come back and cause you more pain in the, in the long term.
And I would also [00:09:00] note that this seems to be a core thing that differentiates Christianity from other Abrahamic traditions. Like, I donât think thereâs anything actually negative, at least within a modern context, , where like a Muslim canât eat pork, right? Like, I donât think pork actually has any negative externalities in a modern context.
Or where a Jew cannot mix, you know, linen and flax in a single outfit. but in Christianity, I am unaware of any Christian sins where Iâm like, âThis is just an obscure thing that was totally unique to a specific era.â
Malcolm Collins: Sorry, what, what does he want?
Simone Collins: He wants to tell the viewers what he learned.
Octavian Collins: Like Germs can go in your body and some- theyâre, theyâre like tiny little dots, they can multiply. Multiply. Wait.
Malcolm Collins: So germs
Octavian Collins: get into you- White blood cells kind of have like mouth thingies that eat the [00:10:00] like germs that are like the other things I was talking about recently, the green things.
Simone Collins: Smart. Smart
Malcolm Collins: so first, how do you determine , , and the fact that the way that God expresses his morality has changed over time shows that the intentionality of God on humanity through these systems as they have evolved is that is, itâs consequentialist in its framing, right?
Like it, it, it is based on some outcome, right?
Simone Collins: Well, and as you framed it in a different conversation when you discussed morality on the societal level, you argue that the New Testament was made for a point- At which human civilization had become much more globalized already, and you had different cultures interacting more, and you needed to begin to mask the brutality of Christianity to appear to be symbiotic so as to not become an existential threat to other cultures and obligate those cultures to completely [00:11:00] take out Christianity.
Malcolm Collins: Exactly. But it, but even, I mean, during the early period when they enter it ended the period where that was necessary. When they began to take over the, the Roman Empire they did not forget how brutal their religious teachings actually are. Mm. They just that, that only became sublimated later.
That only... I- in like the last 100 years, I wanna say, is really when the, all those parts of the Bible were forgotten. But to continue here. Except by some groups like the Quakers who, they annoy me, and the Anabaptists who I generally like. But anyway, to continue here. So whatâs a good way to build your life in terms of like moral rules and everything like that?
So first, and you can see how to do this in The Pragmatistâs Guide to Life, is build an objective function. That is, think through whatever it is, whether itâs because God, you know, youâre coming at this from a Christian perspective or youâre coming at this from a completely secular perspective the collection of things that you think is of intrinsic good to maximize with your life.[00:12:00]
And then build a set of functions around that. By that what I mean is it might be like, well, within my life, maybe some of these things will be purely indulgent. I think I need X level of happiness, and once thatâs satisfied, then I will put all of my effort into X or Y. You know, thatâs the way functions are constructed.
Like 50% into doing this, 50% into doing this. Now if youâre a techno-puritan, youâre just gonna have one framing coming from what I was talking about here, which is what is Godâs plan? Godâs plan is continued human flourishing, so itâs probably some level of comfort. And then once you reach that level of comfort thatâs needed for, you know, maximum personal efficacy and not distraction then focus on maximizing future human flourishing.
And this is often best done through scientific advancement, which weâre gonna get to in a bit, right? Which is to say, generally speaking there are many places where you could, for example give money to the poor, right? And over, in 100 years, [00:13:00] in 200 years, because God doesnât love somebody in 200 years and I donât care less about somebody in 200 years than I care about a human today which is going to help more aggregate people?
Almost always things that help the civilization continue developing are going to have a bigger impact. And, and note thatâs not just technology. Thatâs things that help it economically develop. Thatâs things that help it develop in terms of its moral systems how it deals with outside or parasitic groups that are exploiting systems.
So weâll get into all of that. And also note here this line I think highlights what I think is expected In terms of dedicating yourself to an extent to continued scientific progress. When we did our episode on Genesis not being incompatible with science one of the things we, we, we kept getting in the comments is, like, people forgot that, like, all of the early scientific advancements were made by people who were trying to understand God better.
Yeah. Right? Like, they, they... And, and even the Bible, like, goes into this. So, if you look at lines like, â It is the glory of God [00:14:00] to conceal a matter. To search out a matter is the glory of kings.â Mm. Which is to say you, the best of you, the best of humanity your greatest endeavor is the search of knowledge of things that God has not made immediately obvious, right?
Mm. So when somebodyâs like, âOh, well, you know, God didnât exactly and very cleanly lay out evolution in the Bible,â why didnât he do that, right? Why, why wasnât that done? Itâs like, oh, itâs the glory of God to conceal a matter, and to search out a matter is the glory of kings. Which is to say that if you take a approach to everything that does not update post Jesusâ time perspective on our understanding of nature and the world, youâre literally acting in rebellion to what the Bible is telling you to do.
Simone Collins: Right.
Malcolm Collins: All right. So- If youâre just inventing a religion for, like, savages, telling them, like, âDonât give yourself to lust, donât give yourself to gluttony, donât give yourself...â You know, like, seven deadly sins, stuff like that. Original Ten [00:15:00] Commandments. Very easy rules. But there are so many deleterious things that trap humans today at a significantly more socially and morally developed standpoint.
I think itâs worth laying out additional sins so that you can easily categorize these in your head. So letâs jump right into these.
Speaker 4: Note, , I think the majority of the additional sins Iâm gonna be laying out are things that we are warned against at some point or another in the New Testament. , Itâs just that the warnings are often not as explicit or salient in the way that the New Testament is often taught today.
, So if I give one of these out and youâre like, âOh, actually, , this line here could be used to mean that,â yeah, I know
Malcolm Collins: And do try to keep track as weâre going, Simone, so you can add any that you think I miss here. Okay. âCause we now have, like, actual people who follow our religion. Iâm like, well, if weâre doing that, we should do more to help them live a good life,
Simone Collins: right?
Well, we need to make our... I mean, weâre gonna be following these rules, too. Weâve been discussing this all week, so we need to have our own internal... [00:16:00] Well, we need a list we can publish somewhere. Yeah. Well, this
Malcolm Collins: actually came up with me this week, where I was like, should I go to my high school reunion, or should I not go to my high school reunion?
And it would have been, like, a 24-hour car ride, right? And I was like, one, no, that is against my objective function. It is cleanly against my objective function. It is purely indulgent, but itâs not even an indulgence that will make me happy. And this here comes to the first sin of modernity, which is doing a thing because of societal expectation.
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: You... Anytime you do a thing just because you think that it is whatâs expected of you, like a graduation ceremony. How did the graduation ceremony actually help you, right? Or is it just a waste of time? Now, if you are doing it because your parents paid for you to go to college, and theyâll be proud, and thatâs why youâre going, fine.
But if your parents arenât showing up, why are you? Right? That is time that you could be [00:17:00] spending on doing something productive that moves yourself forward, educating yourself more, or moves human civilization forward. A second one here, which Iâm really, this comes to the graduation thing. I wanna go to the graduation and I wanna show all these people, look at, look at me.
Look, look at how great I am these days, right? Iâm doing so much better than you. I have a Wikipedia page. I have all these followers. A that, that makes me amazing, and look at you and your sad lives th- that arenât doing anything, right? That-
Simone Collins: Which, and this, this is a big motivational factor for many people.
Malcolm Collins: It is. Is what, what the Bible was trying to warn us about was pride. But I think people have recontextualized it. People motivate themselves, and I motivated myself when I was younger in a big way by owning the people who thought they were better than me. And this is a unique, I think even genetically baked in problem with people of the backwards tradition.
Yeah. Is we just love, get deep satisfaction of owning people who think theyâre better than us. And Iâm not [00:18:00] saying you should never indulge in that satisfaction if you can use it to motivate efficacious and moral behavior. However I am saying that you shouldnât do it if itâs leading you to do something which is purely indulgent.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: This is the same way where, like, feeling good during sex isnât bad if youâre using it for procreation, obviously, right? â
Simone Collins: Cause thatâs the point. Thatâs what is, it was evolved to motivate.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, but it can still pull you down a path of evil, right? If you approach it the wrong way. All right, so, tho- f- first two sins laid out there.
Next, living to maximize your image in somebody elseâs eyes. I have noticed many people-
Simone Collins: You mean to look good to other people?
Malcolm Collins: No
Simone Collins: Maximize your image. What does that mean?
Malcolm Collins: They build their heuristics for making decisions. We have an episode where we talk about Honza, who is an example of somebody who does [00:19:00] this, where we notice that this m- male thought leading influencer in, like, the red pill-ish diaspora community was basically saying when he was making major life decisions, like, what decision is the more mannish decision to make?
What decision is the more masculine decision to make? He is optimizing his major life decisions around fitting some image that he thinks is the image that he needs to be living. Not towards- Mm-hmm ... the effect that that image will have on society, not towards the effect that image is gonna have on other people, not towards anything thatâs efficacious, but entirely based on an image.
Simone Collins: Right. So, okay, the, the, the distinction here is, is that itâs, itâs about an archetype, fitting an archetype, and that being really not, not cool. Yeah. Donât live your life to try to fit an archetype, like the sexy woman, the desirable man, the tough guy, the, the saintly caretaker, if thatâs just what youâre trying to satisfy without understanding the moral [00:20:00] fundamentals, the, the values that youâre working to serve.
Malcolm Collins: Yes.
So, and, and where this can become really dangerous for people who otherwise would frame themselves as good Christians is they attempt to fit the image of a good Christian. They abandon actual morality for a social role in maximizing that social role
Simone Collins: Okay, yeah
Malcolm Collins: This can be a big problem for like trad wives,
like, if itâs the self-image of a tradwife, if itâs the self-image of a tradhusband, if itâs the self-image of a good Christian woman, for example. And people can say, why is that a bad thing to do if itâs a positive self-image? And itâs because attempting to maximize positive self-images is something that can lead to immorality.
So letâs- Well,
Simone Collins: I think whatâs worse is, like, letâs say that your goal is to serve God, and then the way you think you can moor to that is by [00:21:00] invoking in your mind the image of the most holy, saintly person, and if I just sort of cosplay maximally well as that caricature, then presumably I- Iâve got my bases covered.
The problem is then you will think that you are actually doing morally good things, when instead you are just putting on the costume of someone who does morally good things and congratulating yourself for it and, and assuming that itâs all working out just fine when itâs really not.
Malcolm Collins: Exactly. And, and to, to, to give examples of how this can, for example, destroy a marriage.
If one person is, rather than being a good wife because they want to serve humanity and society by serving their children and their husband, for example they can say, âWell, these are the strict roles and things that a tradwife is supposed to do, and you as a husband are supposed to make all of these things doable for me,â right?
And so then the family ends up in a scenario where they may, for a childâs medical bills, require a second [00:22:00] income or something like that. Mm-hmm. And the woman doesnât end up doing that, and it causes the man bitterness, and then they end up fighting with each other. The woman doesnât under- Like, the, the, the things that sheâs doing arenât even really appreciated by the husband.
Like, the reason youâre supposed to do all these tradwifey things are because it is for the behalf of the husband, right? Like, they, presumably they like these things. What if they donât even value these things, right, and they would prefer you did something else that is difficult for you to do? Now itâs just completely wasted effort.
And waste-
Simone Collins: Yeah, thatâs a really good point. What a lot of tradwife influencers are things that, like, women want to do for themselves and that men donât really care about.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And, and wasted effort is inherently sinful because every amount of effort that you waste is time you could have spent on something else.
Mm-hmm. Here I guess Iâll just go into the next sin which is busywork busywork is as sin as doing something that is [00:23:00] directly immoral without societal externalities. Hmm. So I, I guess e- examples here, right? I think anything you do thatâs, like, personally indulgent and doesnât move society forwards is sinful because we see from Romans, Okay, so
Simone Collins: that could just be, like, doing a spa day instead of working toward something you value.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Anything you donât do for God or anything you cannot say to be doing for God is a sin, and if Godâs goal is the long-term flourishing of humanity, anything thatâs not contributing to that is sinful. Now, we are all sinners. You shouldnât expect to live a sinf- sinless life.
Simone Collins: Sure.
Malcolm Collins: However, many people confuse themselves and lie to themselves by acting as if they are doing something less sinful by doing pointless busywork than by doing something like playing video games or masturbating,
Simone Collins: right?
Well, yeah, I think something uniquely common in the United States, where you see a lot of performative suffering and performative exhaustion, is people... And actually, this, I think, happens a lot in Asia too, where you see, like, the six-day workweeks and people who work extra long, and the norms [00:24:00] of you canât leave your office in Japan until your boss leaves, and your boss stays way long that, well, if youâre suffering and if youâre not happy and itâs really not fun, then youâre working really hard and youâre doing good things, when really, like, okay, great, youâre miserable and youâve just wasted a ton of time.
And why-
Malcolm Collins: Like,
Simone Collins: that
Malcolm Collins: is- Yeah, why busywork is strictly a higher form of sin than- Hmm ... pure indulgence
Simone Collins: than- Yeah, like you should have just played a video game for- Yeah ... three hours that day, spent one hour actually doing meaningful work instead of being so sleep deprived and stressed out that you could only do 15 minutes of actually productive work that day.
Malcolm Collins: Exactly,
Simone Collins: because it lowers- Even though youâre in an office for, like, 12 hours ...
Malcolm Collins: it lowers your overall efficiency, right? Yeah. Like, at least f- forms of indulgence can help you stay sane- Yeah ... feel rewarded, feel motivated. Busywork does not do that, right?
Simone Collins: Thatâs a really good point.
Malcolm Collins: A- and so it is a worse sin and more of a sin to call out in your partner, in yourself than other forms of, of [00:25:00] sin.
It is, it is truly a- This is
Simone Collins: for sure my biggest, like, I, I struggle with this. Itâs
Malcolm Collins: your biggest sin by far. Yeah. Itâs your only sin, really. I donât see you d- sin in any other way than busywork.
Simone Collins: Well, I think itâs... And but this is where I need advice on this sin is I feel like often I lack the judgment in really understanding where I should be putting my time and focus.
I mean, thatâs
Malcolm Collins: my- I think that you know perfectly well when youâre doing something that doesnât actually need to be done as frequently as youâre doing it, but you do it as an indulgence in the same way that I play video games as an indulgence because you feel that you wonât be able to hear yourself think, as you say, if you donât do it.
The question is, are you on, being honest with yourself about how much of that busywork you need to do to hear yourself think and how much of it is just performative?
Simone Collins: Hmm.
So- Well, I guess what we do is I check in with you a lot. I should check in with you more on, like, help me balance this out and sanity check this.
And probably having a third party. It could be a person, ideally, you know, like your spouse or something, but it could [00:26:00] also probably be an AI- ... if youâre operating independently.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah,
Simone Collins: busywork. Just evaluating it. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Which I, which I... And one of the things was, like, thatâs not in the Bible. Like, the Bible, they didnât have busywork at the time of Jesus.
It just wasnât a sin that he needed to warn people about, right?
Speaker 10: So Simoneâs gonna mention a passage that could be taken to mean this, which I love that there are passages, and then in addition to that passage, you could also take the parable of talents from Matthewâs to be about this, or you could take Luke 10:38-42, Martha and Mary, to mean this. , And this is just really cool.
But, but, but you do actually see this in parts of the Bible with
but Martha was distracted with much serving, and she went to him and said, âLord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? To her then to help me.â But the Lord answered her, âMartha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled by many things, but one thing is necessary. Marsha has chosen the good portion, [00:27:00] which cannot be taken away from her.â
But again, even if this is a parable against busy work, itâs often not in a salient context when Iâm in like a church. Have I-- And I used to go to church every week. , Did I ever come away thinking, âBusy work is a sin. Gotta make sure not to do thatâ?
Simone Collins: No, I think the... There was a passage you read when we talked about societal morality about not suffering publicly.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, not suffering performatively.
Simone Collins: That is an extreme vice in the United States. Again, like bragging about sleep deprivation.
Malcolm Collins: Well, this is, this is not in the busy work category of sin. This is in the Iâd say- No ... a plum sin.
Simone Collins: No, because people brag about the hours. They go, âOh, I work 60-hour weeks, blah,
Malcolm Collins: blah, blah.â Right, but this isnât, this isnât that. This sin is very different. So this is the aplum sin which means not acting with aplum is sinful.
Iâm sorry,
Simone Collins: weâve moved on to a new one.
Malcolm Collins: Yes. Okay, [00:28:00] yeah. So this covers a number of emotional states which are adopted for purely indulgent reasons- Mm-hmm ... and donât actually help you.
Simone Collins: Oh, like acting exasperated or-
Malcolm Collins: Yes ... snarky. You are taking on a negative emotional state- Uh-huh ... which causes negative externalities for everyone around you.
Mm-hmm. It causes your children, your spouse, your coworkers to be less happy, to be less productive. It causes you to be less happy and less productive, when at the end of the day, emotions are generally a choice. You can choose how you contextualize. You know, you get fired from a job, for example. You can say, âOh, woe is me,â right?
Or you can say, âOh, well, this is exciting. Now I get to try to look for something new. Now I get a change of pace. Now I get a new challenge.â And people are like, âWell, what if something truly bad happens? Like, what if Simone died,â right? Then it is extra upon me to not act with sadness and with grief.
Because if I do [00:29:00] that, who suffers? Who suffers from that?
The people who are going to suffer the most are going to be my kids, and they just lost a mom Okay?
Simone Collins: Yeah That- Do they also want to have a, an absent, emotionally ruined, angry, grieving, sad, bereft father? Like, you donât wanna lose two parents, you know?
Malcolm Collins: The, the implication of this sin is proportional to the severity of the loss that you have undergone.
Right. Itâs the severity, the time when you need to act with the most aplomb. And note this isnât generic happiness aplomb. Th- this is, you know, acting with plucky continued diligence and move forwardness like a happy soldier. Those are the times when it is the bleakest for you. Yeah. When can you least afford to have self-pity is when you just got fired and have a family to support.
Simone Collins: Exactly.
Malcolm Collins: When can you least afford to act [00:30:00] with these other forms of indulgence, it is when you most feel them, right? And so donât wait until something really bad happens to adopt this. And Iâve, Iâve noted here, Iâve watched some Mormon influencers, and they complain that Mormons are told to do this, right?
That theyâre
Simone Collins: told- Oh, yeah. El- Alyssa Grenfell explicitly goes on about how itâs really messed up that thereâs sort of a limited amount of grieving that is considered socially acceptable within the LDS church. And like per, like traditions and the way that funerals go and memorial services. Yeah, and itâs really interesting to hear her talk about that when w- we would see that as such a s- like a huge, huge sign of the churchâs good taste.
There are other moral rules- Right ... that weâve been talking about internally that weâre like, âMan, this backfired.â Like, they, they completely did this the wrong way. Like setting certain standards, either contemporarily or historically, that just are being completely misconstrued or have been outsized to [00:31:00] out- sorry, outsourced to outside authorities.
Like saying, âOh, we donât watch rated R movies,â but then having this completely unassociated non-Mormon body determine what the R rating is based on. You know? This is,
Malcolm Collins: this is actually where this, this todayâs sort of tract because we, we donât number the tracts anymore. Mm-hmm. This is technically a techno-puritan tract, but itâs applicable to all Christians or people more broadly came from, which is we were talking about the words of wisdom, which is where, like, donât do this stuff is laid out by Joseph Smith.
And some of this is useful, like the be happy thing. Other of it is just wasteful. Like, donât drink hot liquids, like coffee and stuff like that. Like, at the time, they thought that it had, like, negative health effects, but we now know that it doesnât. It actually has positive health effects, and itâs been very well studied.
So itâs like, oh, like, we should have a techno-puritan words of wisdom. We should have something where I try to go through and future-proof these, so I can try to-
Simone Collins: Well, yeah, I donât, I donât know if it was negative health effects. M- it might have been that it was recognized that caffeine was addictive, or that it was- Right
un- an unnecessary expense That didnât yield, you know, caloric [00:32:00] benefit. But for whatever reason, now even if, like, caffeine is the thing to be avoided which from a health perspective doesnât make sense because itâs, itâs broadly seen as having health benefits on the aggregate aside from being addictive, though it is quite addictive.
Now you have all these Mormons drinking heavily caffeinated, often dirty sodas, you know, very high in calories, not helpful calories and, and not drinking coffee, like a zero calorie m- you know, moderately healthy drink if you donât put a ton of stuff in it. It, itâs clearly something thatâs not being optimally construed as a word of wisdom.
Malcolm Collins: Absolutely, yeah. So weâre like, âLetâs, letâs build these, but try to make them better and future-proof.â So also you guys can warn me if I ever do something in a track and youâre like, âThat could have really long-term negative ramifications.â
Simone Collins: Yeah, we wanna know ...
Malcolm Collins: if, if the community becomes, like, really big and fanatic, âcause I always try to think, âHow is a fanatic gonna operate on this,â right?
Mm-hmm. Like, if, if [00:33:00] somebody goes down that pathway 200 years from now, right? And thatâs also why the tracks take so long to produce, is because I need to go through, you know, everything Iâm saying and think, âHow could a fanatic twist this?â But the happiest thing I just see is... And for people who arenât aware of this, they can be like, âWell, isnât it, like, a part itâs, like, useful to grieve?
Itâs useful to experience negative things. Itâs useful to experience anger and sadness.â And itâs like, itâs strictly not. Mm. We know from studies that, like, if you punch a wall when youâre angry, you have a harder time in the future controlling your anger. If you, if let yourself cry, like just have a cry when youâre sad, youâre going to cry at lower thresholds in the future.
The reason for this is when you stop yourself from these forms of emotional indulgence is you are activating the inhibitory pathway in your prefrontal cortex, which gets stronger with each activation. If you have not frequently activated it, you are incredibly susceptible to intrusive thoughts and intrusive emotional states.
Mm-hmm. Which [00:34:00] puts you... Like, itâs just, this isnât even just a for your family thing, itâs just worse for you. Because presumably being sad or being stressed or going over about how hard youâre working these days I probably... Would you say I work harder than anyone you know, or in terms of
Simone Collins: like- yeah.
You absolutely work harder than anyone I know. You wake up at 2:00 AM in the morning to start working, and you work through every moment of the day that I ever see you. Like-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, I mean, people could
Simone Collins: see- ... you might take an hour every day to chill, and I mean, th- this is also, like, itâs not that you have some kind of period where youâre unwinding while, like, making dinner, âcause I do that.
Like, you have almost zero wind-down time unless youâre, like, hauling out trash or hauling in groceries for the family. So- Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: So, but do you ever see me complain about how overworked I am or how
Simone Collins: stressed I am? No, never. Nev- Or- Iâve never heard you talk about being overworked.
Malcolm Collins: Whistle while you work, right?
I work with happiness. I work constantly and I work with happiness, and thatâs an [00:35:00] easy thing to do. Because there is no moment in your entire life will you were- ever feel as good Is when you are s- suffering and sacrificing for a well-thought-through value system. Yeah. That is the greatest happiness that any human has access to, and the people who chase directly after hedonism- Mm
even when they have all of the resources they could ever want, as Iâve pointed out, they live the most tortured lives. Who are the people I have met who live the most tortured lives? They are the famous actors and actresses. Mm. You know, theyâre, they, they have everything they want- For
Simone Collins: people who live pure lives of leisure itâs-
Malcolm Collins: All the fame-
very scary ... all the hedonism, all the sex, all the partners, all the respect, and yet they are mentally destroyed, and they often die of drug overdoses and stuff like that, and are seeing a thousand therapists, and are living states of mental terror. They are terrorized by their own mind because of this, because they went down a pathway that was not based on sacrificing through hard work and with a [00:36:00] plum for attempting to make the world better.
And when you see actors who clearly do live by that, you typically see them live very happy, fulfilled lives. Consider, like Mr. Rogers, for example. Like, he wasnât like... He, he clearly had, like a moral value system, and he attempted- Yeah ... to push it through his show to advance human society. Mm. And you didnât see him, like, get addicted to drugs and crash out in a, a parking lot somewhere, right?
We are rewarded for making these sacrifices and exhibiting this self-control, and you will be rewarded for fighting sin, even within this expanded category.
Speaker 5: So a lot of people, we did a video recently about people who did like gang bangs and the horror shows that their lives can descend into, and people wanted us to be like angrier or speak about them with more disgust. And itâs like this is-- Oh, itâs not something Iâm drawn to. Itâs not a sin that Iâm tempted [00:37:00] by, thankfully.
, But in addition to that, like their lives compared to the lives that Simone and I and my kids live are literal hellscapes. Like I know some of these people and even my friends in this group, I know the mental torture they go through being like, âHow am I gonna make this work?
How am I gonna have a family? How am I gonna...â And I want to help them, and I can offer them guidance, but thereâs only so much I can do. And so I think, you know, when you see the end state of what happens to these people and what itâs like to be them, , itâs a lot harder to be-- to, to look at them with so much anger
When you accept that the additional rules that we live by are not arbitrary restrictions that make our lives harder and are just meant to make society a better place or something, but actively improve our own lives, itâs a lot harder to hate somebody for breaking those rules, for being a sinner.
Malcolm Collins: So next. Moral absolutism [00:38:00] is the next sin.
Simone Collins: Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: This is allowing primitive- ... or overtly extreme signs of acting moral to override what is actually moral, right?
This is where the Vatican says, âOh, just bring in endless immigrants-â â... because the Bible said you should feed foreigners and you should feed the poor, and so weâre gonna maximize that line out of context. And through that, weâre gonna bring in endless foreigners and- ... who cares what long-term impact this is gonna have on the people weâre bringing into the country, right?
Who cares what long-term impact- ... this is gonna have on their family when the citizens get pissed off and they decide to deport them and they have kids in the country- ... and all the kids are separated from their parents, and that all couldâve been avoided if you just hadnât brought them in in the first place.
Or you leave them in the country and they end up overtaxing the social safety net, and then pensioners donât get their pensions, and people who relied on Social Security in the country donât get their Social Security and they starve to [00:39:00] death like there are negative externalities from this. And this sort of moral absolutism you see whether itâs coming from the Vatican, because itâs often very indulgent, right?
It is, it is moral hedonism as weâve defined it. Itâs saying, âOh, Iâm the good guy here,â right? Like, âIâm doing the good thing,â without considering the consequences. Itâs saying I have some deontological... This is why I always crash out about the deontologists, because what deontology really does is push the cost of your moral purity onto outsiders.
When you say, âI wonât ever kill,â and then an intruder breaks into your house and rapes one of your kids because you wouldnât fight back. And this, like functionally really happened when there, like pirates happened in in, around Philadelphia, and the Quakers wouldnât, wouldnât send forces
Simone Collins: to deal with them.
Oh, yeah. A long, historically,
Malcolm Collins: yes. And people were terrorized and brutalized because a- at the cost of their moral purity, right? That is functionally evil, right? Because, a- and they [00:40:00] are as responsible or more responsible for those atrocities than the pirates themselves.
Speaker 12: And there, there are ways of approaching
non-consequentialist frameworks that prevent the extremes, like Thomism, which Iâm not particularly against. It just feels like a weasel out for me. It feels like a way of framing morality where you donât have to deal with the potential extremes of either consequentialist or non-consequentialist world perspectives.
And I guess thatâs good in that it doesnât have the extreme negatives, but I also feel like it doesnât accept the full moral weight that is important to accept of a moral framing. It just uses a bunch of rules to carve off the extremes
And the rules feel arbitrary and non-morally weighty to me. I think any real and good moral system is going to push you to positions that a normal person would be mortified by because I, I think real moral [00:41:00] conviction looks like that. It looks like something where other people say, âOh my God, like, why?
Why, why are you doing this?â And itâs like this, this, then this. , If something removes through whatever amount of thing any choice that goes against a personâs intuitions, , I, I think itâs removing moral complexity
And I think we can see in the Bible that Godâs clearly not a Thomist when he punishes someone like Saul for not killing literally everyone and their animals of the enemy tribe. Thatâs not within the bounds of Thomas ethics. Yes, self-defense is, but something like that isnât
Malcolm Collins: Because they said and note here people had asked on a call, so I should lay this out here.
There are times when a group having these beliefs, these moral absolutist beliefs, exerts a negative externality on society and times when they donât. And the difference between the two is whether or not they are power hungry and why they are exerting the moral absolutism. Mm. So a good [00:42:00] differentiation here is Amish pacifism does not exert an externality on society because Amish donât seek power for themselves.
They almost never hold elected office, and they often donât even vote unless theyâre actively being victimized as they have been in the most recent few election cycles. Whereas Mur- Quakers disproportionately historically held positions of power. And so theyâre able to say even though itâs not Quakers who the police would be intervening on behalf of, âOh, donât, donât go do that.â
And we see this not just from the Vatican, we see this from wokes all the time, you know, with this- Mm ... this, âOh, Iâm doing the more moral thing,â because on a surface level it looks more moral and Iâm just maximizing these surface level rules. Or we can even see it on a when people go and spam racism or antisemitism in ways that isnât like, this is where we need to be asking some serious questions about Israel, but where theyâre trying to show off, right?
This is a very smoothed brain thing to do because these are groups that weâre going to have to work with in the future, right? Like [00:43:00] clearly if you look at their fertility rate, their level of influence youâre going to need to find a way to work with places like Israel and the Jews long-term, whatever cultural group you are.
And there is a big difference between just spamming something like, âOh, Iâd go to war with them in a second if I could.â The dumbest thing America could, could do, but some conservative influencers have actually said that. Iâm like, âYou idiot.â Like, d- think about the long-term implications of that. Yeah.
Simone Collins: Not smart ...
Malcolm Collins: yeah, itâs, itâs extremely stupid. And you could, oh, even if you what, purged... W- whatâs your real end game? Even if you purged every Jew, right? Do you know what happens when you purge every Jew from a country, right? They go to other countries. And do you know what those other countries do with those now angry Jews?
They build atomic weapons. Thatâs what we did, okay? When we look at leaders historically, what they have said is, âYes, the Jews might be an outside group. Yes, they might not always be aligned with us, but there are ways that I can utilize that community for my long-term benefit,â [00:44:00] which we saw with people like Oliver Cromwell bringing the Jews back to England to better fight the expansion of Romanism.
And I think that that shows, like, whe- how, how to think about this stuff without, even if you have an outside group, even if you have a group that has at times victimized you is worth considering. Okay, with all of that being true, whatâs actually the best long-term path going forward for me to signal?
Octavian Collins: Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Next, inaccurate. Inaction is a massive sin in the modern age, and very, very important to note. Itâs when you say, âI will do,â and this is the most common form of it, âI will do X thing after Iâve accomplished Y thing,â when Y thing is not a necessary prerequisite for X thing. This is very different from traditional sloth.
Mm-hmm. Because when you think about traditional sloth, youâre not doing it because [00:45:00] youâre lazy. Inaction is something like saying, âWell, once I have the right body, like once Iâm skinny enough and hot enough-
Simone Collins: Mm. Mm-hmm ...
Malcolm Collins: then Iâm gonna start dating.â
Simone Collins: Or, once Iâm certain that no oneâs going to make fun of me if I do this, or that Iâm 100% certain that Iâm right.
Like, weâre not certain about anything. Weâre, weâre just trying to move in the least incorrect direction possible, but we believe that itâs sinful to not move forward at all. Mm. Whereas a lot of people are like, âWell, if Iâm not absolutely certain that I can move forward in the morally perfect way, Iâm not going to move forward.â
And we think that that is, that is worse.
Malcolm Collins: That is that PA form of inaction, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah. You know, even if weâre moving forward in, like, a slightly wrong direction, in the end weâre gonna be closer to the morally good thing than you are if youâve not moved at all.
Malcolm Collins: If you are like, âBut I donât have the information yet,â right?
Like if youâre in a state like the one thatâs going... Come up with what test do you need to run to get that information?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: [00:46:00] Not having enough information should never be a reason to not move forward anymore. If youâre a boss, youâve had the employee who you come to them, you gave them a task, and they go, âOh, sorry, I stopped like 20 minutes into the task when I realized I didnât know how to do, like, stage two or something, or stage three.â
And youâre like, âWhat the f- is wrong with you,â right? Like genuinely I feel this way sometimes. Iâm like, âYou should have either immediately come to me when you stopped, right, and I wouldâve told you what to do next, or figured it out.â But we are all- No,
Simone Collins: heâs talking about me. Heâs, heâs just talking about me.
Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, you have done that a few times recently. Mm-hmm. Iâm not... I actually wasnât thinking of you, but it is
a-
Simone Collins: Yeah, you were. Itâs okay ...
Malcolm Collins: massive because it, itâs something that you... I, I wasnât. I was thinking of other employees. But you have done this a few times recently, and itâs a massive sin when done to yourself, because ultimately weâre all our own bosses.
And if you ever reach something and youâre just like, âIâm not sure,â then develop a heuristic for how you get to the next step when youâre not sure. It can be as simple as asking your favorite AI model.
Simone Collins: [00:47:00] Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Just go to your favorite AI model and say, or two out of three models. Go to Reality Fabricator thatâs our AI site, and type in, âHey, we have some that run, like, multiple models on a thing, X or Y, and it will run multiple models, and itâll cross-check the answer for you for the best answer, right? Like, thatâs a fun way to approach this, and you can do that, right? Like, we have the technology that you should never, ever be stuck on any question.
And this is where Iâve got annoyed at Simone when I, like, came back to her and I was like, âOkay, so where are you on X task?â And sheâs like, âI got stuck at, like, stage three.â And Iâm like, âWell, then go to an AI, right? Because Iâm just gonna go to an AI when you kick this back to me, so why donât you go to an AI, right?â
But oh well. This was on getting the RFAB component ready for Apple computers, which she had to do. Mm-hmm. And now it works, by the way, for Apple, for people who wanna use it for, like, coding on Apple and stuff.
Simone Collins: And to be fair, the, our third stage of doing this, I did finally get around to just doing that and not giving it back to you until it was done- [00:48:00] Yeah
no matter how many times it failed.
Malcolm Collins: But A- So ... but this is, and this is why Iâm expanding the list of sins. This form of inaction is functionally as bad as sloth, and is more of a temptation for most people than sloth.
Simone Collins: Well, and, and again, like, it, I think the big theme that differentiates your sins is that you have this extra prejudice, justified, toward virtue signaling sins.
Well- Anything that, you know,
Malcolm Collins: people- The Bible had that in it. If you read the freaking New Testament like we did in the last chapter-
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: Jesus was like, âYeah, make sure when youâre giving money, you donât do it in a way that is overly performative. Make sure when youâre fasting, you donât fast in a way where other people can tell that youâre fasting.â
Mm-hmm. âBecause thatâs overly performative. Make sure when youâre praying, you donât do it in a way thatâs overly performative, because thatâs really bad.â Like, this is made cl- this is in the spirit of whatâs listed out there. Itâs just not explicitly listed out so people have-
Simone Collins: Well, yeah, [00:49:00] I think itâs maybe people missed it because itâs not so explicit.
Itâs more just like, âHey, donât be flashy when you do, when you engage in self-deprivation or, like, active acts of piety.â It doesnât have an explicit proactive prohibition on general virtue signaling.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Itâs just like, âOh, when you do these things, be, be subtle about it.â Which of course, people miss that too, but this is a whole different level of stuff.
Malcolm Collins: Next sin, self-flagellation. This is when you are hard on yourself or allow yourself to experience negative emotions when in the past you acted either... It, thereâs, thereâs two types of self-flagellation, justified and unjustified self-flagellation. I think even justified self-flagellation is a sin, but weâll get to how in a second, okay?
Mm. So if within any moment of your life you made a decision based on the information you had available [00:50:00] to you, and in a way that was directed towards long-term human flourishing or the good of the individual you were doing it for, like it could be how youâre raising your kids, how youâre treating your wife, anything like that, right?
And it leads to some negative outcome, right? To feel bad about that is enormously sinful, because itâs indulgence. Itâs, it, it, now this is one of the hardest sins to avoid And just knowing that it is a sin, like just laying it out as a sin and talking about puritanism, I think will help people better categorize these emotions and compartmentalize these emotions so they do not overwhelm you, and the, the weighted emotion of them doesnât overwhelm you.
But when, when is it actually justified to feel bad? When you acted in a way historically where youâve had full access to information or with the information you had at the time, and you acted in a way that was not in accordance with that information or that was designed not [00:51:00] for long-term human flourishing, but for some personal benefit.
This is where, you know, you knew you probably shouldnât have gotten that fancy car when finances were tight, but you really wanted to show off to people, so you got the car even though it had no functional utility to your family. And now your familyâs suffering for that You have permission to take time to meditate on those past failings so you donât do them in the future, but to not overindulge.
This should not be more than 10 minutes of emotion, okay? You need to move past this, and- Yeah ... since you have created a scenario for yourself, all you can do is move forwards. The only iteration of yourself that you can do good for are iterations of yourself that have yet to come to exist. And you are suffering or living a life of rewards for the actions of past iterations of yourself.
And this is how Simone [00:52:00] sees sort of actions. Like weâre a constantly changing and new person with every moment, with every second of the day, and youâre constantly paying it forward to the future you.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, and are you... Is, is this iteration of you that is acting right now, that youâre consciously experiencing going to be, going to go down in history as like a war criminal in your massive army of instances, or a hero that did something good, that moved you all in a good direction?
Yeah. You have a chance to be a hero. You have a chance to be, you know, a mutineer. What are you gonna do? And then
Malcolm Collins: the next one here is a fun one. The indulgence of sin. The indulgence- Whoa ... of sin is the sin of for no reason other than to test yourself or because you think you are honing yourself and making yourself stronger you needlessly expose yourself to temptation.
So an example of this would be... Now, this isnât [00:53:00] normal, daily sorts of temptations. Like TV, erotic images, all of these things, theyâre going to be all around you in modern society. You do have to be able to resist them to live a normal life, right? To not crash out. The people who crash out at the slightest exposure to one of these things, when people are like, âWhat if my kid sees X online?â
And Iâm like, bro, if, if your kid loses it to like something that every kid is going to see within 10 minutes of opening the internet your kidâs probably in a pretty bad place in terms of how you structured their value system and the rules that you laid out for them. So, a- a good example of this for someone like myself could be you donât have the same temptations that I have.
You donât live with the same temptations that I live with. But naltrexone, an opioid agonist I take daily which prevents me from feeling my opioid pathways, which makes it much harder for addictive things to get their hooks into me. I could, if I wanted to, just be like... And, and some Christians are like this.
Theyâre like, âOh, [00:54:00] donât, you know, blunt yourself to the temptation,â right? Like, âThatâs a bad thing.â And itâs like, why not? Like, when I have the technology to do this, I should do it. If a person knows that they heavily struggle with alcohol in a way thatâs gonna cause them to die or something like that having a fully stocked liquor cabinet is not a moral necessity for them.
Yet in terms of the temptations that Christians expose themselves to, I have noticed some think itâs, like, cool or something to do this, right? Itâs not cool. It leads to long-term negative consequences. The only types of exposure that you need to make sure youâre okay with is the types of exposure that youâre going to experience anyway.
And, and that can be tied to recreational sins that youâve accepted. So an example of this can be, I believe playing video games is sinful in that it is an indulgence that doesnât move human society forwards, but I [00:55:00] think I would, like, mentally break down if I didnât have any recreational time.
So, and note I often play video games while Iâm working. My normal way to play video games is while I have an episode running so that Iâm editing it, right? You know, so I even try to do it, like, while Iâm doing something else. Or when I watch anime, Iâm often vibe coding, right? Like, I try to... But these are still sinful.
I could be more focused, for example.
Simone Collins: So I- Thatâs about balancing your efficacious pursuit of your values with whatever it is that keeps you happy and motivated and productive. And sometimes our long-term values when we pursue them are so abstracted and sort of built on delayed gratification that the bodies weâve evolved to live in canât really keep us motivated.
Like, we have to create mini games- Right ... to like, to trick our bodies into keep going.
Malcolm Collins: Video games are a sin that Iâm like, I will take that sin because I know that it doesnât like consume my entire life, right? Like video games and [00:56:00] anime do not consume my entire life and so I am able to engage with them in a way that I canât engage with, for example, alcohol when Iâm off naltrexone.
And I think many people can relate to pornography in this way. Some people can engage with pornography in a way thatâs just totally like, oh, a once a week thing or something like that, right? Whereas other people itâs like, they see it and now itâs all they can think about, right? If youâre the type of person where you see it and now itâs all you can think about, maybe donât put horny pictures of women all over your house, right?
Like, if youâre the type of person that struggles with gambling, maybe donât live right next to a casino, right? , And as Lunaâs pointed out, itâs gotten a lot harder with these online betting sites and stuff like that. I, I think of all of the sins of modern society, gambling is the worst. So be aware of that if you have it.
The reason why I think itâs the worst is it is one of the only sins that can destroy your life and the life of everyone around you in like 10 minutes. Very few sins even like a heroin addiction typically takes, I donât know, six months or [00:57:00] something, right? Like, but gambling, thatâs like just over.
Generational wealth can be gone. So itâs something that I think that people should never engage with. Gambling is one of those things where itâs one of the, the things where itâs like, âOkay, when Iâm choosing the sins that I choose to indulge in, which one should I just not do?â Gambling is like the easiest one.
Okay?
Speaker 6: One Iâd add here that actually came from a recent episode when, , I was talking to Simone and we were like, âWell, they didnât even end up enjoying the gang bang that they went to.â And she goes, âWell, you know, maybe they went just to see if they would like going.â And I said, âBut I donât wanna know whether or not I like gang bangs.â
Like, I can tell as an outsider I donât. I do not like seeing other men naked, , or having... Itâs eh. But if, if I was genuinely uncertain, I still would not want to know because even if I was a completely indulgent person who just, you know, did things like gang bangs recreationally, they still take a lot of effort, carry a lot of risk, everything like that.
And so I think we should [00:58:00] also just outline as a sin going out and doing something just to see if you like it when
It would be a net negative to your life to find out you like that thing. , This includes things like skydiving, free climbing, gang bangs, , gambling is an easy one here. N- you know, never be like, âOh, well, I went to gamble to see if I enjoyed it.â You know, âI tried heroin to see if I enjoyed it.â Just donât do it
Malcolm Collins: Next, empty words. So empty words, the sin of empty words, is when a person is trying to engage, or youâre trying to engage, because sins, our own sins are the ones that matter the most. When youâre trying to engage somebody else in c- a conversation that doesnât either entertain them or move their ideas forwards or share information with them, or develop your and their understanding of the world, morality, science, et cetera.
All [00:59:00] conversations and all words should have some purpose. Now, it could be to make them happy. It could be a joke or something like that. But when you come to somebody and you say something like, âHere are the things I did today,â and thatâs not relevant to them, you have stolen a portion of their, their life.
You have fracturally murdered that person. Worse are empty words that are designed to try to bring another person down to your negative emotional state. This is like compounding, where you come to a person and you tell them about something negative that happened to you to try to pass on- Like venting,
Simone Collins: complaining, trauma dumping
Malcolm Collins: All of that is horrible, a horrible sin.
You are trying to offload your trauma, your pain to another person. You can say, âWell, what if you need to talk about a trauma to get over it?â Itâs like, you donât need to. If you just donât contextualize it as traumatic, the studies have shown you wonât experience it as traumatic. We always talk about this study, but thereâs a famous study where they looked over peopleâs [01:00:00] experiences of trauma in youth, and they correlated their stated experiences of trauma in youth correlated with their negative behavioral patterns as an adult, their m- mental stress as an adult, everything like that.
But when they went over the court records to see who really experienced trauma and who didnât, completely dis-correlated from anything as an adult. People who experienced demonstrable trauma, like I would be someone like that. If you look at my childhood, it was horrifying. Like weâre actually talking with a, a, a team thatâs like doing research on us, and Iâm going through my childhood, and they were like, âWait, that sounds horr- f- like why arenât you more focused on that as a traumatic event?â
And I say, âBecause how does that help me to be?â There would be a pure negative externality to everyone around me Next. And, and this is a big one, and I really encourage people to, one, look for it in themselves and look for it in their partners, right? If you, if youâre in a techno-puritan relationship, work on this, right?
Next, unnecessary status signaling. Easy, I [01:01:00] probably shouldnât even need to say it but all status signaling is sinful, right? Except for when it is necessary for, like, a job or something like that. And be very careful you donât use lies about what you say is necessary to indulge in status signaling that isnât actually necessary.
You, for almost no job do you actually need anything other than a bare bones car, right? For example. And yet many people buy... And, and a used bare bones car. Will buy fancy things that they simply do not need. In the same category as status signaling is the sin of in-group signaling. This is signaling how punk you are, how goth you are, how whatever in-group you want to accept you.
Even how techno-puritan you are to other techno-puritans. It is when you engage in this signaling in a way that hurts your long-term goals and ability to affect society. So an example might be a face tattoo or something like that. Even if there was a techno-puritan [01:02:00] face tattoo you could get, it would be strictly sinful to get it because it would lower your efficaciousness in society
Speaker: I talked it over with Simone to think if thereâs any sins that weâre missing here, and we came up with a few more. First is the sin of entitlement. This is to believe that you are owed anything by either other people or reality itself. Be that dignity, a good life, healthcare, being treated with respect.
No one is owed anything, and to believe you are is a grave sin. Second is the sin of indulgent nostalgia. This is allowing nostalgia to indulge rumoration rather than focusing on trying to recreate those sorts of experiences for the next generation in which case it can be good.
The final is rumination more broadly, just the sin of rumoration. This is overly [01:03:00] focusing or giving weight to any emotion that you are feeling that you didnât choose to feel. This, like as Simone put it when we were walking this morning, she goes, âToday people will be like, âIâm sad. That means I should do something about it.
I should take pills or something,â when really itâs just not particularly relevant how you feel. Itâs usually not particularly relevant to what you need to accomplish or what you need to do
The final one Iâd include here is one of the biggest potential sins, is risking a humanâs life for happiness or a thrill or for some emotional subset. , This could be, you know, recreational sex is one thing that could cause a human life to come into existence, and then you feel put in a position where abortion makes sense to you.
But this also includes things like skydiving, bungee jumping, free climbing, anything where you are putting your own life at risk meaninglessly for just a thrill
Malcolm Collins: Next, corrupted [01:04:00] mercy.
And this is the biggest, and we can get to this another day because it goes long, this section. Weâre gonna be talking about the Bible in a place where Iâm just gonna say the Bible needs to be updated on this point. There are many places in the Bible where it explicitly says âGive food to the poor.
Yes, even foreigners. Yes, donât let that trouble you.â And I think that that made sense morally as we talk about, like, things in the Bible, the Bible in the past said, âSell your daughter. This is how you sell your daughter into sex slavery. This is how, you know, you treat your slaves. This is h- how- how you act when you conquer a people and have to slaughter all their infants,â right?
You know, all of those things, right? Those th- those parts of biblical morality have changed as society has changed,
Speaker 13: And this isnât because the underlying morality of the Bible has changed. The goals of all of these have always been the same. The iterative change to human civilization theyâve made have always been the [01:05:00] same. , But itâs because humanity and the way that we live has changed, and that has changed the rules that are best to live by to live a virtuous life within the social norms of your era
Malcolm Collins: and I think that this is one area where we need to look at whatâs in the Bible, and Iâd actually say we... Thereâs no way around this. Thereâs no linguistic way around this. We just need to accept that in the time of Jesus and in the time of the Old Testaments, there was not enough charity in the world to the extent that people were suffering, and so the Bible had to signal boost charity.
But today, we live in a time where charity has reached such an extreme that it is leading to more aggregate suffering. Oh. And we will get to that next. Oh, that might actually make a whole other tract. Weâll do a whole other tract on that.
Simone Collins: Oh, thatâs a good idea. Well, useful stuff. We need to write this down in,
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, he can try it for an hour now. Wonât that be fun?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: I, I mean, remember, while the Bible tells you to be merciful, it also says, âBe merciful just as your father is merciful.â [01:06:00] And keep in mind that God did punish a guy by taking away his title as king because he didnât kill literally everyone in a settlement, even though he did kill all the babies.
He did that part. Didnât kill everyone. So, whatever is meant by mercy here is not the standard definition of mercy, and thatâs worth meditating on as we go into this next section. Love ya, Simone.
Simone Collins: I love you, too
Speaker 16: What do you think? Look, a dinosaur. Itâs a dinosaur. Are the kids going to survive? I donât know. What is gonna happen, Indy?
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 -
Is Vatican II the result of a âgay Jew infiltrating the Catholic Churchâ? Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the shocking story of Gregory Baum â a matrilineal Jew, former Catholic priest, and openly gay man who authored the first draft of Nostra Aetate, one of the most controversial documents of the Second Vatican Council.
In this episode, they explore:
âą Baumâs background, conversion, active homosexuality while writing key Church documents, and later life
âą The content and lasting impact of Nostra Aetate on Catholic teaching regarding Jews, other religions, and interfaith dialogue
âą Why many traditional Catholics view Vatican II with deep suspicion
âą The broader implications for Church authority, doctrine, and demographics
A wild, uncomfortable, and thought-provoking discussion on faith, identity, institutional capture, and theology. What do you think â infiltration, urban monoculture influence, or something else?
Watch until the end for Malcolm & Simoneâs unfiltered reactions.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. If you clicked on this video and are wondering, is this a clickbait title? It is so much crazier than you think, right? So I saw a title going through on a Redeem Zoomer video. Weâve had him on the show. I think heâs a great content creator, but heâs a pretty small C conservative content creator.
Doesnât really lean into c- clickbait. Generally tries to dig into the meat and bones of religious history, Christian history, and theology. And it was the, the gay Jew who infiltrated Catholicism or the Vatican or something like that. Anyway, I read this and I was like, âWh- this isnât normal Redeem Zoomer content,â right?
It mu- it canât possibly be true, Malcolm. I start listening to the video. I get to the end of it and Iâm like, âOh, my God, I have to know more.â So I need to clarify a few things about this particular individual and the influence they have had on Catholicism. [00:01:00] First of all is this somebody who was just, like, same sex attracted or, you know, not, not actually sleeping with men?
Or maybe they, long after writing the documents that became important parts of Vatican II Nostra A- aetera m- they, they maybe long after had gay sex or started doing gay activism or something like that. They were, while they were a priest, during the time period they wrote these documents, having active gay sex with men Yeah and
Simone Collins (2): then itâs like- Wait, whoa, whoa, whoa, hold, hold on.
You, how can you be a Catholic priest and a, I mean, I guess you could be a ma- a matrilineal Jew And thatâs the other, right, so hereâs
Malcolm Collins: another thing. I was like, maybe theyâre just ethnically Jewish or something like that. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. No, theyâre probably not actually a
Simone Collins (2): Jew. Theyâre just matrilineally, ooh, matrilineally Jewish, and thatâs it, right?
Yeah, so- And then that would be-
Malcolm Collins: He is, by the way, matrilineally [00:02:00] Jewish. His, one of the things he fought hardest to normalize within the Vatican and Catholicism as a policy is that it is immoral to attempt to proselytize to and convert Jews to Christianity. Does that sound a lot like somebody who actually deconverted from Judaism?
That makes no sense if you actually believe Christian principles, right? Like, you would... Iâm, Iâm saying this, Iâm trying to be, like, as... I have, I have tackled this particular conundrum every way I can in my head, and the only way, because then, like, wouldnât he convert back to Judaism?
But the only way I can get it to make sense when I piece together his various writings, and then it does make sense, is he thinks that, that the [00:03:00] Jews are still under the first covenant. And that as such, you can have a b- believe that the Jewish worldview is both 100% correct and accurate, and the Christian worldview is simultaneously 100% correct and accurate. Because the first covenant stands and you have the second covenant. And so he basically, I mean, if this is true, it means that he 100% believed in, even if he was telling the truth about being a Catholic, Catholicism and Judaism.
Or a form of Catholicism thatâs heavily different from other forms of Catholicism, because now weâre gonna get to, what did he write? So he wrote Nostra Aetate. This is an official declaration of the Second Vatican Council. It was overwhelmingly approved with a final vote of 2,021 in favor and only 88 against, and it was promulgated or officially issued by Pope Paul VI on October [00:04:00] 28th, 1965.
What that means in terms of Catholic doctrine is thatâs not the same thing as a papal bull, right? Like, it doesnât mean that it directly came from God. But what it does mean, according to the catechism of the Catholic Church, or, like, their official documents about what all Catholics have to do, is Catholics, quote-unquote, âowe it religious assent or a sincere submission of intellect and will.â
See CCC 892 to 893. It is not optional. And I will read through that, the, like, official Catholic doctrine on these types of policies. But what it said and what it introduced to Catholicism as a concept is that other religions, including religions outside of the Abrahamic tree, like Hinduism and Buddhism, have a ray of divine truth to them.
And itâs even written ... It can be interpreted, like now, [00:05:00] after I went over this document, I understand now why so many of our Catholic friends hate Vatican II. âCause Iâm reading this and Iâm like, âWhoazers.â Like, this is pretty wild. And it, it goes through and sort of praises things about other major religions and sort of creates commandments, essentially, for Catholics around getting along with them rather than necessarily trying to convert them.
Thatâs crazy. Very
convenient if a Jew had entered the, the, the Catholic Church. Okay. By the way, other final crazy thing is he also deconverted- Oh ... from
Simone Collins (2): Catholicism. So he, like, came in, vandalized church policy, and then- Vandalized church
Malcolm Collins: policy in a very d- and note, when I say he wrote the Nostra E- Eleata this document- Itâs not like he co-wrote it or something like that.
He wrote the entirety, as far as church history and anyone is aware- Okay ... of the first [00:06:00] draft of this document. How- Yes, it was heavily edited after its first draft and before it entered the sort of church law and stuff like that. And actually, it seemed to have gotten even worse in future edits. In his original writing of it, it was really just focused on Jews and Christians getting along and Judaism being partially true.
Okay. And all of the, like, Hinduism and Buddhism stuff was added by other people afterwards. Oh, wow. So, like the his, his group of buddies- It was the â60s. It was the time. Yeah but the reason he left was also crazy. So within the church and during his time in the church, he was a well-known LGBT activist.
Oh. And he left the church, and weâll go into that because as he said the, the, the, the churchâs stance on gays. Which is odd because one he... If- he was a priest. Heâs not, in C- Catholic terms at least, itâs, that, that doesnât [00:07:00] just mean you canât sleep with women. You canât sleep with anyone as a Catholic priest.
Yeah. Right? Like- Yeah ... their stance on gays had nothing to do with the fact that he couldnât sleep with men. Yeah, itâs, itâs about
Simone Collins (2): celibacy. Itâs not about selective celibacy.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, although he was doing that anyway. Well. He ends up, by the way, long-term dating another Catholic priest who is gay or former Catholic priest who is gay.
Simone Collins (2): Oh, I just, no, I just want the yaoi manga version of this. After leaving- It sounds fantastic.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Y- you know how G- oh, you wanna get even more manga? Do you know who heâs married to today?
Simone Collins (2): Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Malcolm Collins: I donât know. Who? What? An ex-Catholic nun.
Simone Collins (2): God, you said that and my, my computer just, like, demonically shut off. It, it was like- ... it wasnât used to process that. No, it was
Malcolm Collins: an
ex-Catholic nun who heâs married to now. Oh my. Well,
Simone Collins (2): a very
Malcolm Collins: mannish
Simone Collins (2): nun perhaps.
Malcolm Collins: No, no. They donât have any [00:08:00] sexual relationship. I think itâs so that he can more easily have both a long-term pr- relationship, which is something heâs always wanted, and practice casual sex with gay men in, in potentially large numbers.
So okay. Iâve set the scene, I think. This is absolutely crazy. I now understand why, like, all of the sane Catholics who, like, are, are our friends are all like, âYeah, Iâm not, like, a big fan of Vatican II. That... Some w- some fishy stuff went on with that,â right? And l- letâs, letâs just go into this, okay?
âCause it gets... , so he knew he was attracted to men in his teenage years but remained celibate during his time as a priest. Ordained in the 1950s, left the priesthood in 1974. A- and note his conversion into Catholicism is also pretty fishy. So weâll get into that as well. In his 2016 autobiography, The Oil Has Not Run Dry, he publicly came out. He described falling in love with men [00:09:00] emotionally in his younger years. The joy mixed with pain because it couldnât be reciprocated due to his vows. His first gay experience was at the age of 40 around 1963. This was around the age that he wrote this document which he described as exciting but ultimately disappointing because he wanted a committed partner.
After leaving the priesthood, he married Shirley Flynn, a former nun, in 1978. They lived together platonically until her death in 2007. He described continuing to explore his sexuality in other, quote-unquote, ânon-conformist ways.â In 8- 1986 after moving to Montreal, he fell in love with a former priest, a male partner, and remained committed to that relationship.
Now, this is also pretty interesting because thatâs a huge age gap relationship there
Simone Collins (2): on the bright side, I mean, weâve got gay romance, we got the costumes, we got the age gap. This is just perfect manga [00:10:00] fodder for some kind of priest yaoi series.
So- Yeah, this is- At
Malcolm Collins: least thereâs that ... this is one of the things where if you come to the conclusion that I do in this and, and youâre watching this, that he just never stopped being Jewish Iâm not getting the Jewishness in any of this, though. I... Where is, where
Simone Collins (2): is the Jew coming in? We havenât, we havenât gotten to that yet.
Okay. Because I, Iâm not... None of this feels like someone whoâs very Jewish. It just, it just feels like someone whoâs kind of trolling the church,
Malcolm Collins: having fun. But if you, if you... No, suppose you are an actual Jew, right? Now- Okay ... keep in mind, Jews arenât supposed to be gay either, so, like, heâs not good at being a Jew in that
Simone Collins (2): respect.
Well, like, again, to my point. Now, this doesnât sound like a Jew. This sounds like m- maybe someone a little bit ur- ur- early urban monoculture or someone very 1960s-ish, just like, âFree love. Everything is real. God comes in many forms.â That kind of person. [00:11:00] Thereâs nothing particularly Jewish about that.
That has to do with a loss of culture, a loss of tradition. Mm-hmm
Malcolm Collins: No, but imagine youâre, youâre Jewish, right? Even a bad Jew. I, I, I still think even as a bad Jew, even with that level of sin- God, Jew ... this is one of those, like, sneak stat things where I often joke that, that Jews are just specced into, like, way too high a sneak stat.
They, they, itâs not just they come off as sneaky, itâs the fact that, that Mossad has been able to pull off these insane things like getting terrorists to pay them for pagers to blow- I love that,
Simone Collins (2): yeah. And most recently thereâs been this big scare with Mossad being a little bit too socially connected with a lot of high-ranking Trump officials, and theyâre sending all this intel back on what internally the US government is talking about vis-a-vis the Iran war.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, but imagine the civilization level sneak stat that is to sneak your way into- Into everything ... the core council which decides [00:12:00] what is religiously true for Catholics.
Simone Collins (2): Okay, okay. So heâs, heâs Mossad-ing the Catholic Church is what youâre trying to say. Infecting
Malcolm Collins: it with documentation that says youâre not allowed to go against the Jews.
Thatâs not even, like... Thatâs not even, like... Iâm just like, â
Simone Collins (2): Damn.â Really? Isnât that just, isnât that what he wrote more just, like, letâs try to be more cooperative and kind vis-a-vis other religions? Or is it- no,
Malcolm Collins: it basically affirms Judaism is, is partially true and worshiping the same god. Well, it is the sa- I mean, they, they share the Old Testament.
Yeah, but m- most Catholics before Vatican II did not think Jews were worshiping the same god. That is... E- even the concept of that is really a post-Vatican II concept. Well, Jews worship
Simone Collins (2): the God of the Old Testament and
Malcolm Collins: Christians worship the God of the Old Testament. I know that makes sense to you as a techno-puritan because we believe the same thing.
Okay. I am just saying that most Christians donât believe that. [00:13:00] They do believe- I guess someoneâs
Simone Collins (2): gonna explain this to me in the comments, so yeah. Okay. Fine. Iâll take, Iâll take your word for it and then go to the comments.
Speaker: So I decided to look more into this to see how popes after it was out related to it, and it looks like theyâve just built on it since then. , You have Pope Paul VI, who was the one who
, Put the whatever on it, the, the, the seal on it. Then youâve got Pope John Paul II, who frequently referenced and built upon it. Examples include addresses at an anniversary, specifically his 20th address in 1985, his 1986 visit to the Rome Synagogue, and multiple statements on Jewish-Christian relations.
Um, then you have , Pope Benedict XVI, who wrote a letter for the 40th anniversary in 2005, praising it for opening a new era. So he explicitly praised it in relation with Jews and overcoming prejudices. As both cardinal and pope, he affirmed its role while noting some limitations, e.g.
[00:14:00] it focuses positively on religion, but should address the sick and distorted forms of those religions. Okay, whatever. , Pope Francis marked the 50th anniversary, 2015, in a general audience, calling the message, quote unquote, âalways timely,â and quoting sections on Judaism and Islam, and emphasized practical dialogue, friendship, and cooperation in the document.
Then we have Pope Leo XIV, who recently gave an address to a general audience for the 60th anniversary, highlighting its ongoing urgency for Jewish-Catholic relationships. So, , what Iâll note here is, yes, none of these are like papal bulls or anything like that, but for half a century at this point, well over half a century at this point, , every single pope has reaffirmed and built on this document.
, This inception was deep and thorough
Malcolm Collins: It looks like the age gap mightâve been around, like, 25 years for one of his relationships. Ooh.
Simone Collins: Well, I mean, you know, theyâre very common these [00:15:00] days, so.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So weâll start with his sexuality stuff, then weâll get into the Jew stuff.
But that is, that is fas- ... And it makes me understand more why we see so many of the Catholics who do not think the church is, is, as it exists right now, is something that they can follow.
Mm.
And theyâve gone for other versions or sort of past iterations of what the church taught. And itâs always fascinating to me that they donât consider themselves schismatic.
Although, whatâs really funny is a lot of the, like, most famous schismatics, like Martin Luther, also didnât want to consider themselves a schismatic.
Speaker 22: Other individuals who didnât consider themselves schismatic were John Calvin and
Henry VIII and John Wycliffe. I personally donât understand this. You know, now that Protestantism is large, maybe itâs just twisted my brain on this issue,
Malcolm Collins: So, like, th- thatâs just a common thing that happens to people, where you have this sort of trans-schismatic take, where itâs like, âI donât define myself as schismatic, and Iâm just looking at the guy in a wig.â
And Iâm like, âBut [00:16:00] youâre, youâre clearly just a guy in a wig,â right? Like, youâre ignoring the churchâs teachings, right? You know, that seems ... But anyway, to continue here. And, and I think that at the end of the day, whether or not youâre schismatic or not does actually come from whether or not you define yourself as schismatic.
I actually buy into the, the trend thing of schism- schismatism, because you at the end of the day get to decide, you know, what your heart thinks, right? So even if I as an outsider would be like, âThis looks schismatic to me,â they as, those insiders wouldnât, right? So to continue there. He knew he was attracted to men in his teenage years but remained celibate during that time as a priest, and he used priesthood to sort of, this was part of what seemed to motivate him to become a priest, the ability to live a celibate lifestyle and, and not be drawn to this. In his 2016 autobiography, The Oil Has Not Run Dry, so keep in mind this stuff about who heâs sleeping with and when heâs sleeping with them is not coming from outside hostile sources.
This is from his own mouth. Talk about this. Oh, sorry, we just ... Wait, wait, did we just go through [00:17:00] this? Yeah, we went through his first sexual experience and stuff like that. He described wanting to explore se- his, his sexuality in non-conformist ways. So anyway, th- this is where it gets interesting, right?
So, remember I mentioned wh- when his sexual experience was, right? So, that wouldâve happened when he was 40 years old, okay? Oh. So the document by the pope, right? With officially promulgated, that means this is when the pope, you know, basically affirmed this document, when he was 42 years old.
He apparently wrote the first draft of the document when he was 38 years old, and would have been working on the inter-drafting process during this time when he was having se- gay, gay sex.
Right? Mm.
So to get some quotes from him âLooking back, I begin to realize my vow of celibacy had not been a meaningful religious commitment, but simply a promise to bracket my homosexuality, to refuse to [00:18:00] explore its meaning and power.â
He decided to leave the priesthood since, quote, âSince I no longer agreed with the churchâs official sexual ethics and was exploring my sexuality in non-conformist ways.â Oh, no. A- again, wait, you left the church to explore your sexuality in non-conformist ways? My brother, straight men donât get to do that either.
Like, the level of this guyâs commitment to the church, not high. You know? That is
Simone Collins (2): a little... Yeah. Ugh.
Malcolm Collins: And this is actually something really weird about Catholicism that Iâm beginning to notice. And I notice this from his writings on Catholicism, the way he re- relates to Catholic theology, is a lot of people who are at, like, controlling levels within the Catholic Church and Catholic religious orders are significantly less religiously faithful than Iâd say, like, the average lay Catholic that I know.
Mm. And thatâs been very, very surprising to [00:19:00] me. And I- Well,
Simone Collins (2): thereâs also such this... It is a little something that I struggle with with the c- the Catholic Church is the lifestyle, the day, just the day-to-day routine of someone who is in the clergy is so different from the day-to-day routine of a layperson whoâs really deeply engaged in all the sacraments, right?
âCause youâre looking at one life that has possibly a lot of solitude, you know, a lot of sort of communal living sort of like a university style living if you are, you know, in a group, or more isolated living, very independent. Versus, you know, a teeming family, lots of young kids running around, lots of...
I mean, obviously priests work closely with their community too. Itâs just, it, it worries me that... And what I like about the LDS church, for example, is that the people who are involved in policy are people who are, they came from the church. They raised families. They, theyâve done the whole thing. Theyâre living the LDS life, or they lived the [00:20:00] LDS life and now theyâre older and senior and, and now influencing it and trying to make it sustainable and good, presumably.
Yeah. But if youâre a Catholic priest, youâve never done that. Like, you havenât had the family. You havenât raised the kids. You donât know the challenges of raising a kid in the church in the modern day. Well, then why
Malcolm Collins: do you think, like, Catholics have such low fertility rates when contrasted with other groups?
Simone Collins (2): I mean, itâs, it canât help. There, there are so many factors, but yeah. I, it... So when, when you say, you know, you, you donât see such great adherence from The clergy, well, can you be surprised when the clergy donât really live the life of the layperson? They canât, because they canât be married. They canât have kids.
They canât raise children within the church. Yeah, but is it- They instead... Itâs kind of like how, something Iâve noticed, and this, like in a very different world, thereâs a lot of childless women who worked as nannies or as teachers. Mm. And theyâre like, âWell,â you know. And they, they sort of act like they know really well.
Like, âI know how a child should be raised. I know [00:21:00] all these things.â But they, they never really have lived it, right? Theyâve only been, like, paid staff who work with children under certain conditions. But they donât know the full experience of it, and then theyâre very judgmental around, like, parents and parenting and how a child should be raised, even though they donât know what itâs like to be on the hook 24/7.
And I think there might be a similar dynamic that takes place with, like, a full-time clergy whoâs not allowed to engage in the sacrament of having kids and getting married because theyâre viewing it from a limited perspective that makes them think like they fully understand the experience when they really canât.
Does that
Malcolm Collins: make sense? Well, itâs also one of the things that was increasingly clear to me as I studied this guyâs life is he seemed to do very little for, like, actually... Like, if you look at his writings and stuff like that they predominantly seem tied to gay activism, right? Like- Mm ... it almost seems like he was living off of Catholic tithings while spending his day and nights promoting, like, because he just had, you know, you have time to think in free time when youâre doing something like this [00:22:00] promoting gay stuff.
Hmm.
And that seems to be a, a big way that, like, the, the sort of gayness became more normalized within the church was specifically downstream of him. But to continue here. And, and gayness is super normalized in the Catholic Church to the extent that weâve pointed out, thereâs even an article on, like, the gayness of Catholic priests where itâs argued between 25, from surveys, 25 and 50% of gay, Catholic priests are same-sex attracted.
Which isnât a, a ding on them. I mean, we often say this is actually kind of a, an ethical way for society to deal with same-sex attraction. Absolutely. If it, if, if you know, itâs saying you canât participate in it, you know, at least use these people like ethically sourced eunuchs so you can get people without as much nepotism to have positions of authority within your religious institutions, right?
Like, but thatâs also gonna make them, like, way more open to these ideas and in an environment where people are skirting around these ideas. And I think that this might be where the normalization- Mm ... especially in the heart of the [00:23:00] Catholic Church, of trying to cover up the child, the ev- everybody knows what scandal Iâm talking about.
I guess Iâll put a line from South Park here.
Speaker 2: Why would he put anything in your butts? We donât know. Thatâs what weâre trying to figure out. Hmm.
Hmm. Hello there, children. Chef, why would a priest want to stick up my butt? Goodbye.
Speaker 7: Now I want to be clear that the Catholic institution, , was committing these SA attempts at lower rates than other large institutions like the US public school system, , by pretty significant margins. , But that doesnât explain why they tried to cover it up, like up to the highest levels of the church, and put people in positions where they could continue to do this even after the coverup.
Like, if youâre gonna do a coverup for reputation, at least keep the people away from kids afterwards
Speaker 23: It was almost as if, or at least in terms of how they were acting, that they thought the mere fact that people were [00:24:00] upset , at them for sleeping with children was the problem. , And I think we even see how the sentiment could potentially arrive through individuals like Milo Yiannopoulos, where he originally said that this was like a sexual awakening for him, , when a, a priest, , hooked up with him as a kid.
, And that others may feel that way as well, and like the outside world just doesnât understand. Itâs, I donât know, one potential perspective?
Speaker 24: Like, okay, so bear with me here, but suppose youâre like Milo, and you were molested as a young person, but you felt it very affirming for whatever reason, Stockholm Syndrome, whatever, or even j- you actually did feel it affirming. It was like an important awakening for you. And then other, you see other people doing the same thing to other children, and you then, , see them being punished for it, and you would think, âOh, well this doesnât make sense.â
Look, just, I as an outsider am trying to find any logical reason why a good [00:25:00] person would do this, and maybe Catholics can chime in and explain why they think that the church may have been covering this up in the way that they were covering it up, where it allowed the people who were doing it to keep doing it
Speaker 16: This year, weâre taking the boys on a weekend boat trip to discuss Jesusâ role as the navigator of our lives. That sounds pretty fun.
Speaker 17: A Catholic boat trip?
Speaker 18: The Catholic boatâs gonna be heading on out today. The Catholic boat, get some hot Christian action thatâll take you-
Malcolm Collins: but uh
The, the, itâs always really perplexed me, like why did they not, why, why were they trying to protect these priests, right? When, when they were like moving around the priests that they knew were the issues instead of dealing with them. Like it- I, I always thought like there must be some form of normalization that [00:26:00] Iâm not aware of.
Then I read this guyâs writings in daily life and Iâm like, âOh, if there are a bunch of priests like this guy, that explains it.â There, thereâs basically a What do you call it? A gay cult that has infiltrated the upper rings of the Catholic Church, the Vatican, right? Like,
Speaker 4: No, to keep their mouths shut. Right. Yep. Right. And so... W- wait a minute. What? Yes, but weâve got to find out why these children are suddenly finding it necessary to report that theyâre being molested. Stop the problem at its source. Yes
Malcolm Collins: what, thatâs, thatâs what. Yeah, everyone heâs married to and having sex with after he left was a former priest.
Mm.
Simone Collins (2): It doesnât look great that that happened, yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins (2): And- Or, or it just means that when people realize they canât adhere to the values and rules of the church, they leave, which could be a sign that those who remain are being pretty good. I donât, Iâm, I donât know, just maybe, maybe. Right? That could be...
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So, and note here, this episode, people might be like, âMalcolm, like, this seems [00:27:00] like an area where you could really dunk on Catholicism. Like, why arenât you taking the shots here, bro? Like, we all know you want to.â And this is one of those, oh, no, no, no, no, no. Like, this is too bad even for me. Like, Iâm like, I feel bad about this.
I would like, learning this history, it wasnât like... It was almost like a curse to knowledge for me because like, oh. Like, this is, this is not fun to know happened to your religion, right? Like, this is, this is too much of a, this is like, you know, you donât like the other team, but then you see them do so bad in a particular game that they just get completely owned.
Mm ... and theyâre, theyâre walking off the field and youâre just like, âIâm, Iâm, Iâm sorry that happened to you guys. That was painful to watch.â Which is what learning the story of this guy has been in terms of, like, my thoughts on the Vatican.
Mm.
But to continue here a- and note here, Iâm not saying this âcause Iâm anti-Jewish or anti-gay.
Like, everybody if this guy was secretly a Jew, right, [00:28:00] like, dang. Right? Like Iâm, Iâm just sort of, like we all should be advocating for our own group. This is, this is where, you know, when somebody sees a Jew say something like, âWell, you know, I support Israel over the United States.â And people are like, âOh, can you believe they...â
Iâm like, I mean, theyâre Jewish. Y- yeah, like I support America over any other country, but Iâm, Iâm an American, right? You know? Thatâs like the core of my identity, my genetic history, my cultural history. And if I lived in, for example, Britain, I would never move to supporting Britain over America just âcause I had a job there.
Speaker 6: I should clarify, this is very different from supporting your own in a way that creates negative externalities, like the Jews did where the ADL ended up supporting, , in trying to de-platform that content creator who rightfully was calling out Orthodox Jewish communities for running welfare fraud, or Chabad did in getting that guy who killed a bunch of people off, or the Mormon sort of [00:29:00] cabal did around the bricks and minifigs.
Yeah, , thatâs, that creates problems. But in terms of just being pro-Mormon if youâre Mormon, , and you know, saying, âOh, Iâll hire a Mormon over a non-Mormon,â like f- of course. Of course. Why would, why would we not want... Thatâs presumably what we all want
I mean, in this respect, sometimes weâll have like Jewish fans or Catholic fans who will be like, âOh, well, Iâd support America over Israel,â or, âIâd support America over the Vatican.â And Iâm like, It doesnât... I mean, I support America because Iâm an American , , and my religious and cultural history is American.
If your plan is to eventually become fully American, that will eventu- I mean, intergenerationally lead to a break from your past identity. Itâs not a flex to not care about protecting your people. , Your people are different from our people, and if you deny that, [00:30:00] you can. America does integrate people, but full integration, eventually means some form of true and permanent separation from whatever your original group is.
, And I think that weâre actually seeing that within portions of the American Catholic population and their relation with the Vatican right now. , Itâs just w- when is this fully accepted? And, and as well as with the American, portions of the American Jewish population
Like the Jew who tells me, as some Jews have, that they would support American interests over the interests of Jews more broadly, I donât hear that and think, âOh, thatâs super cool.â Or the, the Catholic whoâs like, âI would support American interests over the Vatican interests.â I donât hear, hear that and Iâm like, âOh, oh, oh yeah, youâre so cool.â
Like any more than like if I moved to another country, even if, even if I spent 50 or 60 years there, I wouldnât support that country over America. And some people can move to America and become fully American. Like I think Leafletâs a good example of [00:31:00] this. But, you know, I donât expect that from everyone.
Itâs just that when itâs clear that a person isnât moving here for that reason, thereâs probably another place where they would be better suited
Malcolm Collins: You know, thatâs, it, the, the guy was playing on Team Jew, you know? His, his goal was it, you know, in- inje- inject Catholic doctrine with protect the Jews, right? And, and he achieved that. So to continue here. He also thought gays had, like, a special position in, in Godâs design even when he was religious.
So hereâs another quote from him. âI have asked myself, is there a special meaning in the homosexual condition? God creates the great majority of humans heterosexual and only a small minority homosexual. Is there a special task associated with the condition of this latter?â By the way, there is. Itâs, itâs self-control.
But that doesnât occur to him. An, an additional opportunity to [00:32:00] exercise self-control and an additional challenge. âSince they are an oppressed minority, aware of the hypocrisy of society and the damage done by the dominant culture, I have suggested that gays and lesbians are intended to extend solidarity to all marginalized groups and demand greater justice.
Because homosexuals are largely invisible in society, their prophetic vocation will have a cultural impact and support the struggle for human emancipation.â So, like, keep in mind that this is what this guy thought his spiritual mission to do with, like, the tithings that were supporting him. So, Simone, before I go further
Simone Collins (2): Iâm just so flat.
Like, this is so Maybe this doesnât have more people talking about it because itâs so hard to process that it actually could happen, I guess. Like, it just... Like, if you were to see a flying saucer land right in front of you, or, like, you were to [00:33:00] drive by one in a parking lot, youâd be like, âWell, I definitely didnât see that,â âcause that would, that could never happen.
And so- Yeah, no, I
Malcolm Collins: actually f- y- people know me. Like, come on, this is Malcolm. Heâs gonna have an anti-Catholic conspiracy rant. Like, that- Yeah, but I- ... that could work. That, that should go like butter for me.â But itâs just, like, too blatant, right? Like, itâs like you spend your whole life on alien- Yeah, like how could
Simone Collins (2): this...
My brain canât process it. It doesnât make sense.
Malcolm Collins: I mean, itâs, itâs like you spend your whole life on alien conspiracies, and then aliens land in your front yard with a flying saucer. They come out, and Elvis is hanging out with them, and he starts doing, like, an Elvis dance in front of you. And youâre like- Yeah, and youâre like, â
Simone Collins (2): I, I donât know what to do with this.â
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, youâre just like, âWhat? What? What?â Thatâs, thatâs not even, like, an interesting... Like, gay Jew infiltrates the Vatican and infects them with weird ideology that inverts their prior religious principles? What? No, [00:34:00] no, Malcolm. Bad Malcolm. Th- th- d- Oh, my God. But weâre gonna pull on this thread, okay? And this is also why for me and, and, a- and Iâve always said, like, this is why I really personally, when people always wonder, âWell, whatâs your source of authority,â right?
Ever having a source of authority that, like, is living and not dead for me is always really difficult, because it can always just decide to disagree with you, right? Mm. Like, this isnât just something that Catholics face. Like, suppose Iâm a true believing Mormon and I truly believe everything I believe, right?
Like, and, and just like- Mm ... tomorrow the church can come out and say, âYour beliefs are officially wrong now. Update them or youâre no longer a correct Mormon.â Iâd just be like, âBut I really believed all of that,â right? Like, âYou taught me all of that, and then I really believed it. And now all of a sudden black skin wasnât a punishment?â
Right? Like, what, what do you mean? Right? Like, that, that [00:35:00] was- Oh, God ... that was the, the war, right? They were the people who sat out the war in heaven between Jesus and Satan, right? We, th- we, we, we, weâve alwa- I, that, thatâs not, like, tangential to my worldview. Thatâs a core part of my reality, right? But to continue here.
And then so I f- I, I think that the way that a lot of American Catholics have gotten around this is they sort of I think branched with, well, what the Vatican is doing largely around the second council, and now they practice something thatâs, like, a- a- adjacent and may, may one day recapture the Church.
But, like, the You know. And, and if you look at current demographics, you know, th- they might... The question is, is how far does the church go before they recapture it, right? Mm. Okay. Thatâs another quoteâs from him, âcause I wanna, I wanna get in his mind here, okay? âThe definition of human nature tends to reflect the self-understanding of the cultural elite.â
S- So here what heâs talking about is whether or not I think [00:36:00] gayness is normal, right? And heâs trying to- Okay ... and because he believes that, like, white straight males are the cultural elite with, like, their heteronormative ideas heâs trying to argue that, like, gayness isnât, quote-unquote, âunnatural.â
Because I w- I was trying to understand his, like, theology on this, âcause, like, the Bibleâs pretty clear on gayness, right? And, and so therefore calling gay love unnatural is a cultural statement, is what heâs trying to argue here. Not an absolute moral one. He challenged the traditional natural law that homosexuality is inherently disordered.
So letâs, letâs go into, to what, what he, what I think he means by this. Basically when he reads in the parts of the Bible where gayness is seen as negative, he would say, âWell, that was just those cultures at that time.â And thatâs where he got, you know, thatâs, thatâs where heâs like, âSo I donât need to follow what, what, you know, those cultures did because our churchâs theology and [00:37:00] motivation has evolved since then.â
And whatâs interesting is you can sort of tell under what does he think that it evolved into, it evolved into the goals of the urban monoculture. This sort of, you know, endless helping of the societyâs, quote-unquote, âoppressed classes,â which, which doesnât necessarily map onto real oppressed people, as weâve talked about in the press.
Itâs, itâs more like an urban monocultural distinction of, like, ethnically superior groups in their mind. But letâs go into the quote on what he said about Catholics and Jews, because you might think I am overstating him saying, âYouâre the Catholic, you shouldnât try to convert Jews.â He said, âAfter Auschwitz, the Christian churches no longer wanted to convert the Jews.
While they may not be sure of the theological grounds that dispense them from that mission, the churches have become aware that asking Jews to become Christian , is a spiritual way of blotting out their existence, and thus only reinforces the effects of the Holocaust.â
Simone Collins (2): Hold on.
[00:38:00] What? Hmm. Th- that, that, like, undermines- All of Jesusâ
Malcolm Collins: teachings? All of Jesusâ stuff, yeah.
Simone Collins (2): Okay, okay. Iâm not... This is like, this is, again, this is why I canât process this. Like, how did he get this through? Like, this, it boggles the mind. Okay, well, keep going. Maybe it will start making
Malcolm Collins: sense. No, that part wasnât in the official document, but that was something that he said in an official capacity.
Okay. Weâll get to the stuff in the document in a
bit. Okay.
Letâs talk about his conversion. So when did he convert to Catholicism? Okay. Formerly, you know, living in a, a Jewish household. He had one parent who wasnât Jewish, though, his dad. Oh, okay. He converted at the age of 23 That is very suspicious age to convert.
Simone Collins (2): Why? I mean, isnât that... Youâre, youâre almost fully myelinated. Like, you could argue thatâs your time of [00:39:00] intellectual maturity. Itâs the time to really reevaluate- No, it is true- ... some of your mental religion ... most people
Malcolm Collins: convert, if they are gonna convert to a different religion, between the age of 13 and 23.
But this is also an age where if I was a Jew and sitting down and thinking like, âHow could I have the most positive impact with my life for my whiter people?â Like, whatâs the moonshot of moonshots, right? Like, if I could incept a group with converting Jews as equivalent to the Holocaust, and you should from a religious standpoint get along with Jews it would be the, the Vatican, right?
That, thatâs, thatâs the, I mean, I, I think of religious orders on Earth, it might be the largest single religious order. Because, you know, with like Islam, thereâs not like, even, even if you could, thereâs so many different factions. So even if you could somehow . inception.
Speaker 26: We create and perceive our world simultaneously, and our mind does this so well that we donât even know itâs happening. That allows us to get [00:40:00] right in the middle of that process. How? By taking over the creating part. Now, this is where I need you.
Malcolm Collins: In- incep- do an inception on like a, one of the Muslim faiths, you still wouldnât affect as many people. So just be like, âOh, at 23 I converted.â And he said he converted after a friend gave him a copy of St. Augustineâs Confessions.
Thatâs a weird reason to convert. Like when people generally convert, itâs either because theyâre on a mission, like actively s- seeking what they think is true. Or you know, something profound happens to them, or they see something that they think can only be described as miraculous. Like for us, or for me, the thing that really made me so fanatical in my belief was when, like literally happening through this podcast and on this podcast, is me going back to stories of the Bible that everyone in my childhood had told me they said one thing, and then I read them and they say something that is one, both completely [00:41:00] different and completely implausible that people at that period in Biblical history could have known.
D- see our Adam and Eve episode or our Genesis Confirms the Bible episode, or any, like just more broadly, Iâve been broadly shocked by how little... And so that had me sort of be like, âOkay it is miraculous to me that I could grow up next to these stories and not realize h- how sort of- correlatory they were to reality as I understood it, right?
You know, how much sense they made, the things that I thought felt unethical, like the Adam and Eve story, actually werenât when I reread them. And that, for me, was very... That, thatâs like the way a normal person converts. I read St. Augustineâs Confessions and I converted. That sounds like the type of poetic nonsense that a Catholic would buy, but I donât really buy it myself.
But anyway what was his early work? So what were some of the first things that he started writing as soon as he got, like, officially into the Catholic [00:42:00] Church as a full-time, like, staffer, right? In 1961, he published The Jews and the Gospel, later reissued Is the New Testament Anti-Semitic. He emphasized Godâs covenant with the Jewish people as valid and irrevocable, drawing from Romans 11:29, âThe gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.â
The church is, quote-unquote, âincomplete without Israelâ and Judaism continues as a source of divine grace, he believed. Okay, so first letâs do a, a broad g- overview of, of Nostra Aetate and then weâll go into the various points in it. So broadly speaking, it promotes a more positive view of non-Christian religions, e.g.,
positive remarks on Hinduism, Buddhism, esteem for Muslims, stating they adore the one God. Strongly condemns antisemitism and rejects charging, quote-unquote, âall the Jews with responsibility for Christâs passion.â Affirms Godâs ongoing special relationship with the Jewish people, quote, âGod holds the Jews most dear...â. So yeah [00:43:00] To keep going here, letâs get into specific authority.
And so first I wanna go into, like, how much a- a- authority does this have for Catholics, okay? Itâs considered an authoritative teaching of the church. Catholics are expected to accept it with r- religious assent, the same level as most consular or papal teachings that are not defined as infallible dogma.
So, and if this isnât infallible, but that doesnât mean that Catholics arenât supposed to accept it. Weâll get to the official teaching on that. It is not a dogmatic definition. Like some statements on Legent, Gitmen, and earlier councils it is as a pastoral and declarative document addressing the churchâs relationships with non-Christian religions.
Catholics owe it a, quote-unquote, âreligious assent or sub- sincere submission of intellect and will.â So the part of the catechism of the Catholic church, which is, like, the official things on documents of this type, by the way it says, âDivine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostates teaching in communion with the successor of Pete and in particular the way- The apostles or apostates?
Simone Collins (2): Sorry, Iâm trying to keep up ... [00:44:00]
Malcolm Collins: A- apostles. Did I say apostates? Yeah. Thatâs quite a Freudian tip there. The, the apostles teaching in communion with the successor of Pete, and in particular way to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing an in- definable manner, they propose in the exercise of the ordinary magisterium a teaching that leads to a better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals.
To this ordinary teaching and faithful are to adhere with religious assent. So this falls into the category of, to this ordinary teaching and faithful are to adhere with religious a- assent.
Mm. Which,
though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it. Because Catholics are also like, âWell, it, it, itâs not exactly like you have to assent with faith,â and itâs like thatâs true, but the, this is the actual teachings of the church on this.
Mm-hmm. âCause I wanted to double-check on this, âcause people are always like, âOh, well, thatâs, like, just a vague suggestion from the church,â and itâs like, itâs not a vague suggestion. That is not official Catholic [00:45:00] doctrine. That is a, this schismatic belief. But itâs okay, right? Like, itâs, a, a, you know, if, if you, if you believe that the church is wrong in this document too, then theyâre just wrong in all the documents, right?
So, you know, we can go back to the older councils.
Speaker 21: This actually gets to me, , and I think it helps me explain to myself whatâs going on better. In the same way that I get really confused when I talk to a Jew and theyâre like, âYour children are Jewish,â and Iâm like, âTheyâre like one-sixteenths Jewish.â Like, , that makes no sense to me, right? Like, Iâm like, âI-- Yeah, I mean, matrilineally theyâre Jewish, but theyâre not...â
You know, no other culture on Earth would think of them as Jewish. But a Jew will think, an Orthodox Jew at least, âNo, they are 100% Jewish.â And I just canât understand that âcause Iâm from a different cultural perspective. , Itâs the same with Catholics, where a Catholic will be like, âWell, Iâm not schismatic.â
And itâs like, âWell, you, you do disagree with the Magisterium on these issues.â And itâs like, âWell, I donât identify as schismatic, therefore Iâm not schismatic.â And Iâm like, âWell, thatâs not really...â And then Iâm like, âOh, I just need to see this from their [00:46:00] perspective.â And itâs not just their perspe-- itâs also the perspective of the people at the Vatican.
They also donât see these people as schismatic. , And itâs just that Iâm never gonna be able to understand what itâs like to perceive the world in this way
Malcolm Collins: Yes. Okay. So, this is also rooted... So if you wanna go to where this comes from, it comes from Vatican IIâs Lumen Gentium 25, which the CCC quotes to build this out, but the quote from that is, âThis religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman pontiff, even when itâs not speaking ex cathedra, that it must be shown in a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence.
The judgements made by him are sincerely adhered to according to his manifest mind and will.â So again, religious submission of mind and will. Okay. So now letâs get into the stuff that was updated by this document, the new parts. Okay. Yes. Thought, Simone, before we go further.
Simone Collins: Keep going. I,
Simone Collins (2): I wanna, I wanna see what the updates are.
Malcolm Collins: [00:47:00] Okay, great. Yeah. So this is in relation to Hinduism, Buddhism Muslims, et cetera. Okay? Okay. âThe Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reve- reverence those ways of conduct and life, that precepts and teachings which, though different in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless offer and reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men.â
Hmm.
Thatâs crazy Um Thatâs, thatâs completely crazy. And, and, and note here if you contrast this with previous councils, right? So we have the Council of Florence, Conte Dominio 1441, what did it say in relation to these sorts of stuff? It af- firmly believes professors and proclaims that those [00:48:00] not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, and heretics, and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart into everlasting fire, which was prepared for the devil and his angels.
Unless- Okay ... before the end of the same have been added to the flock. That, that seems like uncertainly a, a, a very different teaching.
Simone Collins (2): Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: The, at a, at a very different perspective, right? And I think a lot of Catholics still want to hold to that perspective. And so I, I can see why itâs becoming so popular, these sort of pseudo-schismatic branches.
So what did the document say about various specific religions, right? âCause it also, like, even went so far as to start glazing individual religions. On Hinduism it says, âThus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through inexhaustible abundance of myth and through searching philosophical in- inquiry.
They seek freedom from the anguish of [00:49:00] our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound mediation or flight to God with love and trust.â On Buddhism, âAgain, Buddhism in its various forms realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world. It teaches in a way by which men in a devout and confident spirit may either to acquire the state of perfect liberation or attain by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination.â
Simone Collins (2): No. The... I donât know. So in the, in the Primerâs Guide to Crafting Religion, you make it pretty clear there are basically two types of religions. You can have two types of approaches to what it is required to be saved, and one is limited to atonement. You, you, you canât save everyone, you know? Not... There are some people who are just not gonna make it, and these are kind of, in some ways, not very nice religions because they accept that you [00:50:00] canât save everyone and some people are damned, whatever that might mean.
The two core religions which
Malcolm Collins: have this perspective are the Calvinist denominations of Protestantism of which we are one-
Simone Collins (2): Mm-hmm ...
Malcolm Collins: and the
Simone Collins (2): Jews. And then thereâs the other which is a more domineering religion which believes that everyone can and should be saved. And in this way the religion is a bit unpleasant because it basically would entail, if you really wanna save everyone, coercing people to convert against their will.
And what this is trying to do is be neither. Like, itâs not like, âWell, no- no one, no one can be saved,â but it- Also, itâs not trying to save anyone. Itâs just like, âWell, everyoneâs kind of right,â which is kind of the worst thing. Like- Yeah ... I donât care, do what you wanna do. Itâs the absence of religion.
Itâs the antithesis of Catholicism and, and any organized religion. I, I just canât believe they... This has to- You know what I- Like, maybe someoneâs gonna chime in in the comments and be like, âOh, this is some obscure piece of writing thatâs not official in any real capacity.â I, I [00:51:00] mean, could that be? Is that whatâs going on here?
This was affirmed by one of the major councils and the Pope. Yeah, but is this the equivalent of, like, someone hearting something on X, you know, h- adding a heart to a post on X and not realizing- No, thatâs why I
Malcolm Collins: went through the other documents that, specifically the, the Ca- catechism documents and stuff like that, so you could read before we get into this exactly the way that Catholics per previous rulings that were seen as coming directly from God- Yeah
are supposed to relate to teachings within this category, submitting
to them.
Mm. Itâs, itâs not the same as having faith in, in them.
Speaker 28: By the way, I put Simoneâs concerns into an AI to see what the AI would say, and it says, âSimoneâs skepticism is understandable as a layperson reacting to something that feels like a massive shift, but itâs not accurate. Nostra Aetate is not some obscure low authority footnote. Itâs a formal declaration of the Second Vatican Council as an [00:52:00] ecumenical council, overwhelmingly approved two thousand two hundred and twenty-one to eighty-eight, and officially promulgated by Pope Paul VI
catholic teaching, as outlined in the - Catechism of the Catholic Church, , eight nine two to eight nine three, and rooted in Lumen Gentium twenty-five, requires religious assent, a sincere submission of intellect and will to teachings from the ordinary magisterium of the ecumenical council, even when they are not infallible dogmas.
This is distinct from full assent of faith from infallible documents, but is still binding and not optional or dismissible as just a suggestion
Malcolm Collins: So this isnât
Simone Collins (2): someone passively endorsing something without sufficiently paying attention to it or, I donât know- Yeah ... someone just being like, âHereâs an interesting idea.
Sure, weâll publish it,â but like, you know how The Huffington Post- No, this is- ... used to be. You know, theyâd be like, âYeah, weâll accept your blog submission,â and they wouldnât really, like...
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, this is very, very, very different than, say, [00:53:00] like, the Vatican wrote something in an official paper or something like that, right?
Keep in mind th- ths had to be of, of the declaration of the Second Vatican Council, so thatâs a, a Vatican council, mind you. Right. This had to be voted on by the bishops, right? Who knew? Okay, wow. So
of the vote- Yeah ... of the vote 2,221 voted for it and only 88 voted against it. So it was also overwhelmingly approved. Then it was promulgated, thatâs an official issue. That means review an official issue by Pope Paul VI.
I mean I, o- obviously I, I, I think that thereâs a, I mean, Catholics, I, I feel like Want to say, like, and- and w- well, you know, we donât, the real Catholics donât take this sort of thing, and the way that those documents say youâre supposed to relate to this stuff is actually corrupted as well, and this stuff shouldnât actually fall under that.
And I think [00:54:00] the Catholics actually have a number of outs here. Thereâs been a number of things in recent papal elections that could be s- considered outright fraudulent. I may do a whole episode on that at some point.
Simone Collins (2): Whoa, really? Ar- What do you mean outright? Can you g- what do you mean by outright fraudulent?
Malcolm Collins: They did some things, the Jesuits did, in how they held... It wasnât the pope of this pope, but it was one of the previous popes, I think. Okay. Where they pulled some shenanigans that sort of prevented people from voting. Like the, the block that was against them from being there to vote. Oh, wow
Yeah. It, it was w- I, I, I canât remember the specifics. A Catholic was the one who would, because obviously they were most invested in this when he was crashing out on me about the Jesuits and, and, and blackpilling me on the Jesuits and making me sort of see Catholicism as this fight of, like, the good guys, the Opus Dei versus the Jesuits for, like, the heart of what it becomes.
But this, the way I sort of see this right now, like a- as Iâm looking at it from an outsider, is I historically, as a kid was of all the sci-fi franchises, and I was a big sci-fi nerd the one [00:55:00] sci-fi franchise I didnât really like was Star Wars. I, I- Hmm ... I liked Star Trek over Star Wars.
Starship Troopers obviously love. SG-1- Sure ... love. Gotta do a whole video on how they canceled the SG-1 reboot because- Oh my gosh ... it treated the military too well. Oh, no. Fans might like it. It did- it didnât make the tribals, like, better. People might like
Simone Collins (2): the military, yeah. Wait, and by the way, Stargate did not universally portray the military well.
In fact, some of the most annoying episodes were ones where they, I guess r- fairly, you know, well, not realistically, but- No, US politicians- ... give a realistic depiction of how military bureaucracy can really gunk things up sometimes.
Malcolm Collins: No, no, no, that was, those, almost every one of the episodes youâre thinking of was tied to the US Senate or Congress.
Yeah. And the military was the good guy. Oh, yeah,
Simone Collins (2): yeah,
Malcolm Collins: yeah. Okay, youâre right, youâre right. So- No, I feel like they were
Simone Collins (2): even not realistic. You know, theyâre like, âWhat? There are some problems that the military faces.â The, the point
Malcolm Collins: here being is despite me not being a Star Wars fan- Okay ... watching Disney buy Star Wars and then start to just write, like, âWe hate youâ in [00:56:00] poo all over the walls of the property made me genuinely sad, right?
Reading this feels a bit like watching the new Disney Star Wars where itâs like- Hmm ... yeah, I might not have been the biggest fan of that property, but like, whyâd you have to do them that dirty, right? Like, and, and as a Star Wars fan, I feel itâs, itâs probably pretty similar to being, like, a Catholic today, where itâs like, well, you know- None of the real fans actually take those new ones and consider them canon, right?
Weâre still all about legends over here. What, what are you talking about? Yeah, weâre, weâre
Simone Collins (2): in this for the long run. Itâll, itâll come around
Malcolm Collins: again. Yeah, weâre, weâre... Everybody knows Disneyâs eventually gonna realize this didnât work, as Iâve heard rumors that theyâre thinking about doing an, and retconning it.
So weâre, weâre gonna get a, a Vatican II retcon. Just like go , go back
Simone Collins (2): but anyway. But they can. Thatâs the cool thing, is they can. They can say, âLook, that was a mistake. I donât know what happened. Itâs over now. Undo.â Thereâs...
Malcolm Collins: Catholics ki-kind... How could you retcon [00:57:00] Vatican II? Could it be done? I guess the best way to- Delete.
Delete.
Simone Collins (2): Undo. Weâre sorry, we were wrong. It, how, what
Malcolm Collins: the... The Catholic Church has
Simone Collins (2): made lots of weird-
Speaker 29: I asked an AI how you could retcon Vatican II, , with this context, and basically what it said is full deletion is extremely unlikely. It would require admitting a major error in a council guided by the Holy Spirit, which undermines everything the church claims about itself
Simone Collins (2): The, I mean, I think the most real
Malcolm Collins: way to do it was to assert that they didnât have official power when they put it out, and that something had g- thatâs, thatâs... I mean, like, obviously thereâs been instances in the past where there have been, like, multiple popes at the same time.
And then a council came together and decided, âOkay, now we have another new pope,â that decides, you know, gets... You know, clearly you gotta have a, a, a, a chain of, what do they call that? The chain of whatever. , They got together, they decided this new pope, and then the new pope comes in and, and immediately says, âActually, popes rule over councils.â And the council was like, âBut we brought you here saying you wouldnât do that,â right? Mm. So like, yeah. Theyâve, theyâve done a bit of this in the [00:58:00] past.
But I donât think any of that was as, like, written down as Vatican II was. I donât think that that i- it counted as the same l- category of stuff that canât easily be retconned. But I mean, clearly it retconned something else. So like, Catholics can chime in here. So letâs go what they said about Islam.
Okay? âThe Church regards with esteem also the Moslems.â Th-this is what they... Is- Islam. âThey adore the one God, living and subsisting in himself, merciful and all-powerful, the creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men. They take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even his inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham...â
Dot, dot, dot, submitted to God. âThough they do
Not
Malcolm Collins: acknowledge Jesus as God,
they revere him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, his virgin mother.â Dot, dot, dot. âIn addition, they await the day of judgmentâ dot, dot, dot. âFinally, they value the moral life and worship God, especially through prayer, almsing, and fasting.â[00:59:00]
Hmm.
Yeah. Which is interesting here. When you take our, our view or, or contrast it with our view on all of this I mean, at least we take the stance of like, well, we do say that Jews and Muslims are worshiping derivations of what appear to be the same god. Like Hindis and Buddhists are certainly not.
Like I- pff, that was, that was wild.
âAs the sacred synod searches into the mysteries of the church, it remembers the bond,â this is about the Jews that spiritually ties the people of the new covenant to Abrahamâs stock... The Church, therefore, cannot forget that she received the revelation of the Old Testament through the people with whom,â the Jews, âthe people with whom God in his inexpressible mercy concluded the ancient covenant.â
And then they cite here, âOn account of their fathers, this people remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts he makes nor the calls he issues,â Rome [01:00:00] 11:28-29. And so this directly quotes Romans. And then further they say, âAlthough the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as this follows from the Holy Scriptures.â
And then on collective guilt, this is from Nostra aetate again, âTrue, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead presented for the death of Christ. Still, what happened in his Christ passion cannot be charged against all Jews with distinction then alive nor against the Jews of today.â
Right. âIt offered to cry his hatred, persecutions, displays of antisemitism directed against Jews at any time by anyone.â
Okay. But yeah, I had no idea. That is really sad. That is, that is, I mean, a potentially near God tier play by an individual Jew. And if not that, at least a heavy infestation by the urban monoculture, âcause he was already living, you know, at the, the very least in the lifestyle of the urban monoculture.
You know, [01:01:00] sex with men while, you know, writing this stuff down. If you see his wider philosophy, itâs very clearly more tied to the urban monoculture theology than anything that could historically could have been considered Catholic values or
Simone Collins (2): theology. Yeah, not even close.
Malcolm Collins: So very crazy, crazy conspiracy.
And you guys- Well,
Simone Collins (2): conspiracy, yeah, I guess the, the, the larger question though this doesnât appear to be documented from what you found, who let this happen? Like, y- youâre talking about this guy going through, publishing all this stuff, but th- all these people that voted for it, all these people that added to it- Yeah
to your point, right? Like- Who let this
Malcolm Collins: happen? Like, if you want to know how co- when people act like... And this is the other thing that got me, is I had this impression as an outsider that, like, when people are like, âOh, weâll retake control of the Vatican. Weâll retake control of church infrastructure. Weâll...â
I hear that and I get this impression that, like, oh, well, maybe theyâve recently been able to get their hooks into the Vatican. [01:02:00] Maybe thereâs, like, this ideological divide in the Vatican. 2,201 of the bishops approved this with only 88 against this. This is not, like, two power factions or something like that, or an infiltration of the Vatican.
If this is an infiltration of the Vatican, itâs... What, what percent is that?
Simone Collins (2): Yeah, I guess I donât know how the voting structure is set up. I donât know if this is, like, people around the world or a bunch of people concentrated in- Yeah, so-
Vatican City ...
Speaker 30: So, , again here I decided to ask the AI to find out who are these bishops? Are they just randos or are they actually the people who run the Catholic Church? , And it said, , the bishops who voted for Nostra Aetate as well as all Vatican II documents are the actual power structure of the Catholic Church, not randoms.
They are called the council fathers, the highest level church governments in an ecumenical council. , They included all diocesan bishops, head of dioceses around the world, archbishops, cardinals, [01:03:00] Eastern Catholic patriarchs, head of major religious orders with voting rights. It was the largest gathering of Catholic bishops in history, deliberately global for the first time.
Bishops came from Europe, North, South America, Africa, Asia, et cetera, and not just Vatican insiders and Europeans
This is why Malcolm and Simone noted that in an extremely lopsided vote, only 3.8% against, it shows nearly universal buy-in from the worldwide, , episcopate at the time, not just a small clique of Vatican insiders
Malcolm Collins: so 3.8% of the bishops voted against this
3.8%. And that was in 1965. So, like, not recently either. Like, when I talk about this institutional capture having been in the Vatican for a very, very long time at this point, Iâm not like, that isnât me being a conspiracy theorist or something. Iâm just trying to, like, lay out, like, what Iâm seeing as an outsider.
And so, the [01:04:00] best thing that you can do, I guess, if you wanna recapture it, is just breed. And yeah. Get involved.
Simone Collins (2): I, I mean, yeah. This shows things can change, and things can also change quite violently. But this means that I think that thereâs hope they can change violently in a different direction.
Malcolm Collins: Are you actually... I love Simone as an outsider. Went from, like, your standard progressive whatever and now sheâs like, âThe Catholic Church needs a civil war. They must take out the Vatican.â
Simone Collins (2): Well, this is I donât know. It, itâs like someone trying to change t- theyâre like marching into an anime convention and theyâre like, âNo, this is a Star Trek convention now.â
Like, fine, but go to a Star Trek convention. Like, leave the anime nerds alone. This is about anime. So I donât, I donât... Like autistically, I donât like the, [01:05:00] the, the diluting and confusing of the categories. I need Catholics
Malcolm Collins: to be Catholics. Yeah, like at the very least, I think if something was written by somebody who deconverted, it should be taken out of official church teachings Like that should be, that should be the thing that invalidates it
Simone Collins (2): Yeah, thatâs, yeah.
May- I mean, I think until pretty recent history, people just didnât deconvert, so there is not yet a cultural technology to address that, and this is exactly the point you make among many others, of course, in The Prophet is Patched Against Religion. And it wasnât even like he deconverted
Malcolm Collins: for like a good reason.
It was just like he wanted to have sex with strangers. Like that seems to be the reason he deconverted.
Simone Collins (2): Again, I think thereâs an argument to be made for that being then the system working as intended. That the bigger problem would be if active and especially policy-wise influential people in the Catholic clergy were like, âI wanna have gay sex and Iâm gonna just stay and continue to generate policy and do, have it all.â
[01:06:00] So I donât see the deconversion as the bad sign, but I do see statements that seem to nullify pretty definitional or, or foundational concepts, at least as I as an outsider understand them about Catholicism. And thatâs throwing me for a loop. But even from pretty devout Catholics, we hear about these like, well, there was this conspiracy and this particular faction was trying to mess with things, and I feel like thereâs A non-trivial amount of politicking, infighting, and influence campaigns that are influencing whatâs happening in Vatican City, and to a, a great extent, the most devout, active, practicing Catholics that we know have an attitude of, âLook, at the parish level, we are going to thrive.
Weâre going to follow kind of a pre-Vatican II version of [01:07:00] the, of the Catholic Church and pretend that this stuff didnât happen. We are going to leverage the infrastructure of the Catholic Church and of bishops and everything else when we need it,â like if we need a, a Catholic school to be spun up. They will lean on the formal church when they need to, but for the most part, theyâre just like, âLook, what weâre creating is whatâs going to last.
Weâre the ones having kids. Weâre just gonna ride this out, and eventually theyâre gonna find their way back to sanity.â But I donât know if thatâs gonna happen.
Malcolm Collins: So just so you get an idea
Of like what level of authority this teaching would hold. It would hold the same level of authority as something like the theology of the body which actually I think holds a little bit less because it wasnât also affirmed by a religious council. So that, that sort of gives you an idea of like the level of import...
And theology of body is pretty important Catholic teaching. Mm. So yeah. [01:08:00] Anyway love you Simone. Thatâs a crazy episode. And it- Understatement, yeah. It, it feels a bit like, is this a simulation? Because like if there was something this big, why was I unaware of it?
Yeah.
Yeah. Like, it seems like one of the first things you would mention if you were a Protestant talking about this stuff
Simone Collins (2): You would think that.
Y- yes. But again, I think itâs one of those things where itâs so outlandish, itâs so hard to believe, that it just doesnât process. Yeah. And again, I, I have... I think thereâs at least a good 30% chance that someone, a Catholic in the comments chimes in and is like, âThis means nothing. Youâre doing the equivalent of s- you know, saying, well, you know, Person [01:09:00] X responded to Person Yâs comment on YouTube, and that doesnât mean thatâs an endorsement of Person Yâs com- you know-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, thatâs not-
reputation or commentary ... an official endorsement. Yeah. Or that thereâs different ways of relating to the councils, or thereâs different ways of relating to the bishops. Yeah,
Simone Collins (2): so I feel, I t- I, I just, we have to be missing something. It has to be something like this. The bishops who
Malcolm Collins: voted on this, the thing that I c- is, is le- less than 4% voted against this.
Like, that to me shows that, like, the quest, even if thatâs true, for retaking the Vatican, is an astronomically uphill battle.
Yeah.
Thatâs like when my loading barâs at 96%, thatâs like when I am in my- Yeah, itâs, youâre functionally there, yeah.
Simone Collins (2): Mm-hmm. It,
Malcolm Collins: it, itâs like there. Itâs done, right? Like, itâs cooked.
Mm-hmm. But they do have, fortunately, current demographics on their side.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins (2): Weâll see. Weâll see. Thanks for sharing that with me, [01:10:00] though. That was a wild ride. All right, have a good
Malcolm Collins: one.
Simone Collins (2): You too.
Malcolm Collins: What are we doing for dinner?
Simone Collins (2): Youâre having the rendang either with french fries- All right ... or on a Hawaiian bun.
Malcolm Collins: Fries.
Simone Collins (2): Okay. Fancy Korean fries or normal fries?
Malcolm Collins: Fancy Korean fries.
Simone Collins (2): Oh, if we have any. Iâll make sure we have some. If not, normal fries. If we donât have those, then we can
Malcolm Collins: do curly fries.
Simone Collins (2): Oh, I thought you didnât like the curly fries. You
Malcolm Collins: did like them? Theyâre great. We just gotta cook them a bit longer.
Simone Collins (2): Okay. All right.
Simone Collins: thought I was a
prude. No Yeah, people were
Malcolm Collins: mad at us for like
Not being aggressively mean.
Simone Collins: Yeah. What on earth? Like, hello.
Malcolm Collins: Like when we give me, I think this is something that the wider conservative community doesnât get about Ailaâs relationship to the community. Weâre talking about the episode , from yesterday about how somebody from Ailaâs circle actually made us against early stage abortion, which we were not before through a very well argued piece.
But it starts, the story [01:11:00] starts with a birthday gang bang. Well, no,
Simone Collins (2): her, her essay doesnât, but like our discussion of her does because she recently talked about her experience meeting her future husband, I think, I think theyâre engaged to be married and they have a kid to- together now, at Ailaâs famous birthday gang bang.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And I, because people generally in the conservative movement who arenât on like the nerd tech side, theyâre unaware that Aila in terms of gravity and orbit has been pretty useful to the right. In that because she tries to always say what she believes is true means that she is constantly pissing off the trans community.
A- and constant- Is she? Oh, yeah. Sheâs, sh- sh- the trans- well, because you, you canât really talk about the science around transness anymore without just incensing trans people. And because of that, sheâs actually sort of broke the egg for a lot of peopleâs- God ... transition into [01:12:00] more and more conservative ideas.
And I think- Mm ... for a lot of people, the trans issue is their first step on that pipeline.
Simone Collins (2): And so- She, I mean, her sex survey does have, or big kink survey has one of the best samples of at least self-reported trans individuals of probably m- maybe any research done, just given her sample size. So I donât know if sheâs said anything thatâs like disturbing, but, or that like makes them look bad, has, she does have very good sample data.
Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, sheâs the one who did the study when we did the trans one showing that transness is linked to violent fetishes. Oh, yeah. We used her data. Thatâs from her- Thatâs right ... thatâs from her study. Thatâs true. That that comes from. .
Simone Collins (2): But, but what I mean is
Malcolm Collins: while I may think her actions are immoral, and more immoral today now that I understand the potential negative consequences of sex, and Iâve become dramatically less sex...
Like, Iâm kink positive, sex negative now. I just think that n- non-procreative sex is bad. Until [01:13:00] we have better forms of- I guess I just- ... birth control ..., but in the net she pushes people towards our movement. And, and advances, like, the number of conservative donors, voters.
Well, sheâs not encouraging anyone
Simone Collins (2): to live her lifestyle. Like, I, I... Sometimes I feel like I get this insinuation from people of, like, that sheâs selling something to them. Sheâs not. No, she, she said that she didnât like
Malcolm Collins: the gang bang. She tried a gang bang and did not enjoy it. Everybody- Yeah ... like, that seems like a pretty good indication of, like, donât do this, people.
Simone Collins (2): Well, but more, ugh, Tex is so into pulling on everything. Sheâs not trying to fob her lifestyle onto anyone. And just like we arenât either. Like, weâre not... A lot of people like to accuse us. Theyâre like, âYouâre trying to convince all these people who arenât equipped to have children to have kids.â Like, thatâs something someone just today was accusing us of.
And that we... No, we absolutely donât do that. So I think people like to misattribute this. Really? Were they
Malcolm Collins: accusing us on our comments or on, like, Twitter or something? On X,
Simone Collins (2): yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, okay. So, like, somebody has [01:14:00] no idea what weâre about.
Simone Collins (2): Yeah. But a lot of people have no idea what Ailaâs all about, so you know, like, itâs...
I just think itâs stupid. Itâs very annoying.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, I mean, the, the informational sphere, I guess just when somebodyâs aligning with us on anything that puts them on the outs with progressives and they are also helping the whiter project, Iâm generally, like, pro them. Like, thatâs the way I operate.
Simone Collins (2): Iâm generally pro when someone is thoughtful and takes a first principles approach to what they believe and what theyâre doing and why, and thatâs Aila. Yeah, but
Malcolm Collins: sometimes those people can still be antagonistic to us or, or our efforts. And I, I think that, you know, in th- those instances we need to..
[01:15:00]
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 -
One of the experiences we treasure most involves our minds being changed on an issue. If weâre wrong about something, weâd prefer to be nudged in a less wrong direction.
We did NOT expect to have one of these experiences when clicking through to learn about a truly modern meet-cute: When Romy Holland met her future husbandâand the father of her now-young childâat Aellaâs famous birthday gangbang, which she both helped to organize and supported as a fluffer.
Anyway, youâll see for yourself in todayâs episode of Based Camp. Happy Monday! Make sure you read Romyâs full essayâthe one that ultimately changed our views on misoprostol, which we had previously seen as pretty innocuous; sheâs an eloquent and moving writer.
Show Notes
One of the fluffers at Aellaâs birthday gangbangs paired up and ultimately had a child with one of the guests/participants
Crazier than that, this young woman radicalized me on early-term abortion!
The Gist: Romy Holland, a friend of Aellaâs, recently went on Slateâs podcast, Death, Sex & Money, to talk about her experience meeting a guy at Aellaâs birthday gang bang and eventually falling in love with him. This story was originally covered in the San Francisco Standard. In her
What Happened
* Romy helped organize the famous 42-man gangbang birthday party in 2024
* She also acted as a fluffer at this event
* In this capacity, she met a programmer she had previously noticed online
* They subsequently began dating, had a kid together, and are now engage andâfor the time being at leastâmonogamous
Underrated: Romy blackpilled me on the abortion pill
An underrated element of Romyâs narrative arc thus far is her experience with abortionâsomething she articulated so beautifully and powerfully that it has totally radicalized me on misoprostol.
Her one substack article (as of June 2026), titled What Nobody Told Me About Abortion, describes her harrowing experience attempting an abortion.
She describes blithe comfort in the face of lies told to us
âOn the sort of afternoon full of ripe summer fruit, my new boyfriend and Iâstill flush with sweat and limerence after some midday sexâstared at an ovulation test strip and realized weâd misread an earlier test.
âUh oh,â I said, lightly amused as a thousand rom com moments flashed through my mind. Cue the clueless horror movie protagonist who fails to notice the axe murderer behind the bedroom door, mistaken about the genre of the story unfolding.
We listened to music and I swiveled back and forth in an office chair while narrating ChatGPTâs damning answers to my questions about fertile windows and test strip line darkness. My boyfriend kissed me on the cheek each time he walked past. We riffed about games we could play at our abortion party.
Our decision calculus was numerical, emotions an afterthought. There is a 1 in 4 chance of conception each month, so deciding not to take Plan B would result in a 25% risk of needing an abortion. Plan B costs $50 and an abortion costs $500, but with only a 25% chance of conception the expected value of that option is $125. Plan B and early stage abortion seemed physically pretty similarânothing to consider there.
âIf you get pregnant, weâd both know weâre fertile,â my boyfriend pointed out.
âTrue, why would anyone pay for fertility testing with such a thrilling alternative available?â I quipped back.
In the end, my sense that failing to take Plan B seemed plainly stupid led us to swing by CVS on our way to an under-the-sea-themed party in San Francisco. I was wearing a black and gold ballgown, he, a shimmery jacket that made him look like an undiscovered mer-creature dredged up into the fluorescently lit family planning aisle. Later at the party, I recounted our ill-fated afternoon with punchlines as I pried open the clamshell package and unceremoniously swallowed the Plan B in my friendsâ cozy kitchen.â
Then she describes how it goes south
* She got a positive pregnancy test nine days later
* She was fully determined to not see it
* âIgnoring the mounting hum of my instinctual self, I walked across Berkeley on a chilly August evening to pick up abortion pills from the sort of friend who people think of when they say they know a guy.â
âNobody talks about the hell that is misoprostol, the abortion pill. I suspect that, in its politicization, no one wants to mention that the drug in question is a sledgehammerâon its quest to destroy the fetus, it also obliterates the mother. On Thursday afternoon I unceremoniously took the first of three doses: four little white pills shoved into my vagina as far up as I could wedge them. Tiny bombs placed quietly beside the cradle where my unsuspecting baby slept.
I waited, fever rising, for the bleeding that should have started after an hour or two. The second dose came and went. By dose three I could barely move. I took the stairs one at a time, weakly gripping the railing, my joints aching with each step, the inside of my mouth painfully raw. Curled in bed, I whispered for more and more blankets, shivering and only dimly aware of my boyfriend there beside me searching the internet for answers about my racing heart and shallow, rapid breathing.
In the morning I felt drained, but the fever and pain were gone. The large maxi pad, which the internet warned I may soak through as often as once per hour, was entirely dry.â
* She goes on to observe that âMisoprostol as an abortion protocol is 85% effective. As the 24 hour time point neared and I felt not even the slightest cramping, it became clear that I was among the unlucky 15% of women for whom a second attempt would be necessary.â
* âIn taking the first dose of pills, Iâd started down an inescapable path and had no choice but to march to its end. As a friend would later say, the correct number of abortions is either zero or as many as it takes.â
* She ultimately had to do four rounds
* She went to Planned Parenthood in San Francisco
* âDesperation welled inside of me. I wanted to grip her bony shoulders, to look her in the eye and ask her what she would have me do with this broken beautiful thing inside of me that had survived six doses of poison and was now fated to die.â
* âMore abortion pills, more waiting, more shivering in a ball of feverish torment. Still no blood.â
âMy memories of the surgical D&C procedure four days later come to me in fragments that feel sharp in my chest. I remember a cold wand pushed into me searching for a smudge of evidence of my baby. And then a room with a chair and an iPad video that soothingly warned of hysterectomy risk. Finally, a room that smelled of chemicals where I sat on crisp paper and stared at a tray strewn with ominous medical instruments. Panic.â
âŠ
âThrough this, I did not move. Tears gathered in my eyes at the inevitability of the situation, at my overwhelming helplessness. I presented my arm to the pretty young nurse who would administer the fentanyl and sedatives. I lay down and spread my legs for the kind practitioner there to vacuum out my stubborn baby. Whatâs a mother to do in a moment like this, but carry her child gently to the executionerâs arms?â
Romy Meets Other People Who Were Scarred
âI recently had coffee with a friend who became very still when I mentioned my abortion. Tears sprang to her eyes as she told me that sheâd once had an abortion too, and although it was seven years ago and although she never wanted the baby, never even wanted to be a mother, it still makes her cry every time she remembers it. Sheâd taken the abortion pills and two days later, in a grungy dive bar bathroom with music thrumming through the door, sheâd found her clot of a baby in her bloody pad.
âI knew I had to eat it,â she told me. And then, as though suddenly realizing that this might sound absurd, she tried to explain. âI mean, I couldnât just leave it in that dirty bathroom, it was my baby. What was I going to do, throw it in the trash?
I stopped her, shaking my head âno, no, it makes perfect sense to me. It really does, of course you had to eat it, it was your baby.â The maternal logic of this was unassailable. Anyone who has been a mother for any stretch of time would not question such a primordial urge. The animal mother knows what to do, and your judgements are not what carried evolution billions of years to this moment.
âSo what did you do?â I asked her.
âI ate it.â She said it wide eyed.ââ
Romy Experiences the Mental Fallout
âI was not permitted to eat my baby, nor bring it home in a little vial to bury it, or put it on the mantel, or inspect it under a microscope for a tail. Perhaps if I had been, the cataclysmic crash of hormones that awaited me would have taken a gentler shape.
Instead, in the days that followed, I began to experience borderline psychotic episodes.
These hours-long periods would begin with a vague sense of unease and build until the world around me became twisted and surreal, like a haunted house. Sometimes, anger at my boyfriend would inexplicably swell inside of me, sharp and alienating, distancing me from the one person who might understand my pain. Often, I was consumed with an urgent need to go find my missing baby.
My thoughts would enter obsessive, frenzied spirals about this desire, running through the sequence of events that had led to my babyâs departure from my womb where it clearly belonged. My memories of the D&C churned with an ominous bent. The kindness of the nurses suddenly felt coercive, like they had conspired to place me under a spell so that they could use strange and powerful devices to remove a precious, integral part of me.â
* She tried to deal with it by stapling the test to the temple at Burning Man
* âBefore I was a mother, I was a woman who belonged entirely to herself. I finally understood then that my baby was gone, and that I was once again alone.â
âIt turns out that while full-blown postpartum psychosis is rare, subclinical psychotic thoughts are common, affecting 15-30% of women who give birth, and, less commonly, following abortion and miscarriage. Critically, people experiencing these thoughts retain insight into the fact that their thoughts are distorted, though such knowledge does not immunize them to suffering.â
âItâs strange to me that, given the prevalence of postpartum depression and abortion, I havenât heard anyone talk openly about either. My concept of abortion was shaped instead through divisive political narratives, which leave me feeling trapped between absolutes in how I am allowed to talk about it, forced to hedge every statement.â
The grief sticks with her
âMy grief has settled into a shape small enough to carry around the world. It goes out with me to dinner, and seems to like it when we take evening walks around the neighborhood. Sometimes, when I know it wonât cause too much trouble, I take it out and marvel at it. Itâs heavier than it looks, the weight of it on my chest enough to knock the breath out of me if Iâm not prepared. Many nights, my grief unfurls and wraps its long tendrils around me. I wake sweating and tangled in my blankets, planets still bright in the sky. Soon enough, it will learn to sleep through the night.â
Romyâs story adds weight to our techno-puritan sense that the damage lies at the action-based inflection point, not some definition of life
âIâve never quite understood regret. Should the butterfly regret a flap of its wings upon learning of the resulting tornado? Still, as the shadow of loss looms over my days, I have started to think I probably would have been happier in this alternate timeline in which my grief would be balanced by purpose. Whether this will feel true five years from now is harder to sayâperhaps one should wait to see what is built from the tornadoâs wreckage before declaring regret. I find myself trying to calculate this likelihood, but quickly stop. I know now that some arithmetic belongs to older gods than reason.â
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] m- my wife was actually radicalized by somebody who met their husband, who they ended up having a child with, at a gang bang against early stage abortion. Yep. , , and not slightly radicalized. I got radicalized after hearing this story.
Traumatized and
radicalized. And
this has a lot of crying. Itâs emotionally a, more of a rollercoaster than you likely think, so buckle in, guys
Speaker 17: America, get your uteruses tarp.
Speaker 19: Iâm a baby killer. Baby killer makes me horny.
Speaker 18: Get that fetus, kill that fetus.
Speaker 19: Down face, b*****s in my cross face. No, Iâma have abortions always.
Would you like to know more?
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Malcolm. Iâm excited to be speaking with you today because romance isnât dead. It turns out, I didnât know this, but one of the fluffers at Aellaâs birthday gang bang has gone on to date one of the gentlemen attending and [00:01:00] participating in the party. And they have a kid together now, and theyâre getting married, and, you know, itâs so wholesome.
Itâs wonderful.
But- That wholesome and wonderful... No, I love all the other conservatives are talking about thereâs this, like, slutty woman whoâs using her gang bangs t- to, like, âOh, Iâm gonna have a gang bang for, like, my,â what was it? Like, her kidâs birth or, like, a birth shower or try to get pregnant at a gang bang.
You, youâve, youâve seen this, right? Oh,
no, no, no. Youâre, youâre referring ab- to Bonnie Blue, her golden baby shower. Yes, golden
baby sho- oh, God.
Speaker 5: Definitely pregnant That is a baby Turn my baby shower into a golden shower. Pregnancy is a big for a lot of people, so Iâm gonna make the most of it. Biggest live stream of a birth
Malcolm Collins: This is so gross. Yeah, thatâs- No, Bonnie, no.
You, we do not... Bonnie Blue and Aella and her circle, completely different. Like, I canât even- Yeah, they, they, they are completely- Like, I think people think-
blindedly ... and, and respect for Bonnie Blue and what she does. Like, she is her own extreme sports kind of person. But [00:02:00] the, the Aella cinematic universe is one of, and I think itâs very misunderstood, it, it is one of the most a circle of the most intelligent, articulate educated, informed, and intellectually curious people in the world.
They put 99.9% of post-graduate university students to shame. I would say 95% of professors to complete shame. These are some of the most intellectual people that Iâve ever encountered. They have amazing writing. Weâll get into some of that. But what I love most about this, though and this is where the twist comes, actually, Malcolm, is- Ooh
not only am I, like, this is really sweet, right? Weâve gone from, like, gang bang to marriage, and it, it, thereâs something to be said there about kind of the way that life goes and also that, you know, maybe we, we shouldnât fully judge debauched lifestyles of a little bit of, a bit of fun and hedonism. And also that itâs a kind of a really common life [00:03:00] progression, and another reason why many male base campers should not be discounting progressive women and writing them off, which we see happening all the time.
But-
Oh yeah, people- Romy ... people are like, âOh, you shouldnât date someone to change them,â or whatever. People were so mad at my Leaflet video when I was like no, thatâs, like, what... Iâm just saying realistically, that is your pool of women these days.â Hereâs whatâs
really, really d- crazy though, is Romy Holland, this woman who went on to get married, you know, gang bang organizer Bay Area intelligent sex positive woman, has completely radicalized me on misoprostol and early term abortion.
Like, Iâm complete, like, sea change for me against it. I, I used to be like, hey, basically until you get signs of, like, you know, a, a, a, a human life that is capable of experiencing pain, you know, like around, like week 12 you donât really have, like, a, the beginnings of a brain, [00:04:00] I guess Iâm okay with abortion.
You know, and especially, you know, just taking misoprostol if you need to âcause youâre super, super not ready. I have changed my view on this, and it, it wasnât, it wasnât our Catholic friends, it wasnât our, our friends at the Heritage Foundation, it wasnât anyone else. You got
ri- radicalized on abortion by a gang bang woman.
By, by yeah. By a, by a slapper at a gang bang. Well, she did, right? I mean, I was just
looking her up and the first thing that comes up with her is a bunch of magazine articles saying, âThis heartbreaking what nobody told me about abortion essay is going viral.â Itâs... Iâm gonna read
some quotes from it.
Weâre gonna start with, though, the, the romance, â cause romance is dead. I love it so much. I love the story. So for those of you not familiar, whoâve somehow been living under a rock or w- I donât know, were in a coma in 2024 Aella, who is a, a sex researcher, a friend- Sheâs done
episodes with us before.
Sheâs awesome ... I consider her one of my close friends. Yeah. Yeah. I- Other than Leaflet, [00:05:00] sheâs one of the only people Iâve ever, like, when I talk to them I felt like an immediate and deep connection. Sheâs a great person.
Yeah, just incredible. Incredible person. She had a birthday party, and she was like, âYou know what?
I would love to have a gang bang for my birthday party.â So some of her close friends so kindly and generously, including Romy Holland, Romy helped her organize it. And this, this was a very complicated thing. They decided ultimately on, on a, a, a, a very good number, 42 men. You know, itâs perfect sort of nerd reference gang bang number.
You know- 42
men? Oh my God,
Jerome ... Hitchhikerâs Guide to the Galaxy right there. I know, 42 men. Weâre a
conservative
podcast, by the way, right? We are considered radical conservatives. Thatâs why I have to brief people on this, okay? Just in case they donât know about the birthday gang bang. So- No, Iâm just...
I, well, we have to admit that, like, we have friends who are w****s. Like we have to admit that. Like, weâre... Gosh, if only, I think we gotta, we gotta be more like Jesus and just never talk to w****s, right? Like, thatâs clearly the right answer [00:06:00] here, right? Ai,
Simone Collins: yi, yi.
Malcolm Collins: No, I mean, winning peopleâs hearts requires not reflexively condemning them if they are attempting...
Because I think you see with this person, and in her abortion essay and stuff like this, th- this is not a community thatâs hearts are truly poisoned. They just need the truth shown to them in the, in, in the, in the right way, and then it shocks them out of it, and thatâs what happened with this individual.
But continue.
I mean, I donât know. I just feel like itâs an, I, I went from being an ardent progressive, though not exactly sex positive, to just being, you know, now a conserv- Like, itâs a very natural and common progression. But anyway, so, Romy helped organize this, and th- there was a lot of vetting in this.
I, I think I remember looking through the survey for people applying. You know, they, theyâre obviously going through the kinks of these people. In an interview with, on Slateâs podcast, Death, Sex, and Money Romy talks about the The, the kind of the unique [00:07:00] kink criteria they would go for. Like, they didnât want men who needed, like, a lot of, like, reinforcement and like, âOh,â like, âyouâre doing so great.â
Well, because, you know, itâs a gang bang. Itâs supposed to be, like, consensual non-consent, right? So, like, they canât have men who are super needy who need Aella to, like, praise them, âcause thatâs not the look of this event. So they had to, you know, vet for that. They need to vet for a bunch of other things.
Obviously, you know, if youâre a friend or something, like, you know, youâre probably in. So there was a lot of vetting involved. And then of course on the actual day of the party, you had to work through all the logistics. You know, thereâs queuing, and you wanna have everyone, you know, sufficiently hard for the moment of, of, of, of bang.
And so then y- thereâs a big bowl of Viagra at the door, but then thereâs also the need for arousal, and that, that is where the fluffy... Sorry, where the fluffers come in, including Romy who very generously offered to participate in a very involved way in the fluffing process preparing men to deliver their birthday present to Aella.
I- if you havenât explored [00:08:00] the, the lore around the gang bang, you definitely should. There was a, a very viral Sankey diagram that Aella had created, because, again, she is a very intellectual, fun, playful person. I should not have been
allowed at the gang bang. Do you remember why?
Oh, yeah, because you were n- y- something about Eliezer Yudkowsky.
Some- Yeah, yeah. So, so no accelerationists. No AI acceleration people were allowed. Thatâs right. Yes. It was
no... Yes, I remember. It was only AI doomers. Thatâs like something I was like, oh yeah, you definitely wouldnât be allowed. So Aella made this, this chart that sort of showed what happened to the various participants.
So, she had the survey. You know, the application she released had 1,604 applicants. 828 failed the auto filter, 3 twen- 328 failed the manual filter, 776 passed the auto filter, 448 passed the manual fic- filter. They contacted 251 men, 143 didnât respond, 25 are friends, 87 of those got invited. And also 83 did an interview.
Like it went, it went, it went, it went, and then 42 showed up, so they got 42. Only [00:09:00] 37 penetrated Aella. Only 17 came inside Aella. They were wearing condoms. Only well, five came inside a fluffer. Who knows if Romy was one of them. And then 15 didnât come. So, the the, this is the thing was- Going to an
orgy and not coming?
Well, that, that sounds like- Well,
but Malcolm, this is a 42-person gang bang. S- itâs like the waiting- Although to be honest, I think if I went to an orgy- Like, itâs like, itâs like the being at the DMV, right? Like, youâre queuing, youâre waiting. Like, itâs awkward. Thereâs other people there. You know a lot of them, like, âcause a bunch of them were Aellaâs friends.
Like, these are all... I mean, I guess those people are more accustomed maybe to more group-ish sex environments. But anyway, it was in this milieu, it was in this mix at this lovely party that a- that actually wasnât particularly fun for Aella or Romy, per their reports that Romy locked eyes with a man that she was fluffing.
Sheâd known him online a little bit, you know, had seen him post. This is
what I donât understand.
Yeah.[00:10:00]
If itâs not fun, okay? And presumably sheâs done gang bangs before. Well, you donât
know it. No, I donât think she had. Thatâs the thing, is I donât think she had. And so thereâs this, like, well... âCause think, think about to, to safely do a gang bang, if youâre actually, like, vetting it carefully and, and doing it right.
And, and keep in mind, like, again, the, this, this type of sex positive person in the Bay Area, in the ALA cinematic universe doesnât just do, like, consensual non- Like, âOh, letâs just mess around. Like, everyone, like, jump in the group.â No, no, no. At her consensual non-consent parties, youâre wearing a lanyard that says what you can do to someone and what you canât do.
There are safe words. There are safety talks. Like, this stuff, people are vetted. There, thereâs the, the stuff, the, the places, the careful location selection. These are incredibly thoughtful events. So no, I donât think she had done one before. From my understanding, she hadnât. And so sh- like, she wanted to try.
Like, sheâs an, sheâs a, sheâs, she believes in experimentation. And so I, I donât think she [00:11:00] knew that she wasnât gonna find it particularly enjoyable.
I think that I should add this to our sins episode. Trying something only to try something. Well, but she might have liked it, and she- Well, you donât need to know everything in the world you might like.
Even if it turned out I loved gang bangs, that is a fact I would not want to know about myself.
Well, and I guess, like, are, like, yeah. D- do you like- private jet flights. I guess thatâs, thatâs one of the bigger issues in my view. Like, I could love flying on a private jet, but can I afford to fly on a private jet?
Like, absolutely not. So they had such- Also, I donât think I would ...
Simone Collins: enough to know. â
Malcolm Collins: Cause I once had to drop a bunch of people off on a private jet. I didnât get to go on but I, I had to drop people off. So freaking loud. Like you- Wait, we never took you on our private
jet?
No. Oh. That was- Thatâs terrible
I was in the post private jet days when I entered your
family. Yeah, we, I guess they- I didnât get to- ... they stopped using it as much because itâs inconvenient. But yeah private jets suck . [00:12:00] Yeah. They, they- they are so much
worse ... loud. Itâs so loud on the tarmac. And like the airports for the private jets were like- Itâs not just that itâs loud
like a bus sta- Thereâs this like- Like a Greyhound bus station. Iâm like, âWhat is this?â If youâre talking about- âThis is not what I
expected.â ... standard private jets, like Lear jets and stuff like that, right? They are significantly smaller than you would expect on the inside, especially for like the two rows.
Mm-hmm. So like your entire flight- Oh, you even see it.
Like when the, when the Kardashians fly on their private jet, like itâs a very nicely appointed private jet, but itâs small. Itâs like, itâs... I mean, youâre- Yeah, the
entire flight your head is like cocked to the side- ... because itâs like against the side of the plane.
Well, th- okay, their
private jets are bigger than that. And okay, I did see the interior of, of wom- one of the ladyâs private jets as I was dropping everyone off and, and hers was very nice, but she was also very wealthy. So but like itâs just, I donât know, it just seemed uncomfortable and meh. But anyway, my point here though is what if Aella just...
I think itâd be worse if Aella really enjoyed the gang bang because then like how is she... Like oh great, like now Iâm never gonna have fun again unless I, [00:13:00] I, I, I put out a 1,000 person survey and have like 10 of my friends work carefully around the clock to vet all these people and interview them and organize them.
And you know, of course, throughout the entire process, âcause she didnât wanna put the, the onus on the participants to kind of just both like consensually, non-consensually penetrate her. Sheâd have two people with her the whole time like kind of watching her watching the men, make sure like nothing was going wrong, making sure that she was fully lubricated, handing the men the Sharpie, âcause I think, remember they had like a Sharpie there doing ticks on her leg to be like, âNumber this, number that.â
I think they even, they did all these like really thoughtful things too. I think maybe there was a virgin there that one day and theyâre like saying like they did a thing for him or like I canât remember. But like this was incredibly thoughtfully executed. Itâs not sustainable. So thatâs my thing is maybe donât try things if, if you canât afford to like do them regularly if itâs trying this to see if you like it kind of thing.
Like you know- Do I like luxury cars? Like, I bet I do, but I canât afford one, so letâs not get into that. Youâre a weirdo. Anyway so they, [00:14:00] she, you know, encounters this man. Like, she had seen him posting around online, but I think this is also a very common illustration of how people meet now. This is a very techno-feudal kind of meet cute where, like, you see someone posting online, theyâre in your general online sort of parasocial circles, and then at some special event, at some community-based gathering, which this very much was, right?
A mixture of sort of the online universe of a person and their offline friends coming together for a special event. You meet someone in that universe. You have some, some, some in-person chemistry, which you canât necessarily find online. You know, you canât gauge that, and it takes off from there. So, you know, it wasnât immediate.
It wasnât like, you know, he asked her out mid-penetration. Because I d- she, she was also, I think, doing, like, full penetrative fluffing not like, like hand job or b*****b fluffing, from my understanding. And anyway, they, they went later on [00:15:00] a date. And then they- Yeah ... they became like more like a steady boyfriend and girlfriend.
And then they had a kid together, and now not only are they engaged to be married soon but theyâre also, for the time being at least, monogamous. And here you see this classic arc. The gang banging to monogamy trend. Well, no, the thing is, like, I think people donât realize how common this is. Like, I, I am the product of of bro- a broken polyamorous marriage.
I guess itâs just like it wasnât really well matched. And then my mom was one of, like a secondary for my dad. But then eventually she was like, âLook, I- this isnât for me. Like, I wanna have a kid someday. Either Iâm moving to Colorado or, like, maybe you decide that you wanna be monogamous with me. And my dad decided, at actually pretty significant social cost, like per everything that, you know, the disruption that that caused to become monogamous with my mother, and Iâm a result of that.[00:16:00]
But, like, even back in the â80s, this was happening in the Bay Area. So this is a surprisingly trad kind of arc. And Iâm really happy for Romie. Iâm really happy for her partner. Iâm really happy for their kid. But what I did not expect from this adorable and, in my opinion, very wholesome story, was that she would radicalize me against misoprostol, which I thought was like...
Now, you know my stance has been very consistent, that, like, up until 12 weeks, I donât care. Like, whatever, you know, y- if you wanna take a pill to end a pregnancy early, like, this is not yet a,
a, a sentient, like, conscious- So, so for people who understand why we take this position, if youâre confused by this, I d- I, I do not think that you can h- when thereâs no neural tissue, like, I donât think I lost part of my soul by losing my finger or something like that, right?
Yeah. When thereâs no neural tissue, there is nothing that can produce the effect that we in our society call a soul.
Yeah ... it, it- And we, we think itâs equally sinful as [00:17:00] techno-puritans to, like, choose not to have a kid when you could. It doesnât matter if thatâs before you have sex or after you have sex or after conception.
Itâs, itâs, itâs, itâs a sin. Yeah, yeah, itâs not
that we donât think that itâs bad to abort a fetus that has no neural tissue yet. Mm-hmm. But we think itâs at the same level of evil as convincing somebody not to get IVF that was going to do IVF. Yeah. Because you have prevented a child that was going to exist from existing, and all child on that spectrum, whenever somebody goes like, âI could have made the childâ- And- Thatâs why we took that position, but just- And then thereâs,
thereâs, yeah, the sort of additional, like, layer on top of that for me of like, okay, well, when are you, when are you sort of committing murder and causing, like, suffering to a thing?
And, you know, yeah, after week 12, you are causing suffering to a thing. Like, huh. So like, that, that just adds this extra, like, visceral... But now, now Iâm really questioning this, and I wanna give you some, some quotes from Romieâs [00:18:00] experience going through this because I think she, this is what, this is what radicalized me, and I think it shows some lies that are told to progressives especially, but I think just to main screen, mainstream participants in the urban monoculture more broadly about About basically early term abortions.
I had no idea. I am kind of horrified. And I, I, it, it shows how weâve basically been lied to, and that there is a ton of damage that no one talks about, and I feel like maybe f- people feel afraid to talk about. So Iâll just go ahead and read. But- No, letâs go
Simone Collins: into it.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. You can also, and I, âcause itâs amazing writing.
Romieâs very articulate, incredibly intelligent, like beautiful, wonderful person in general. So I recommend you read the full thing. Itâs titled itâs her only Substack article too What Nobody Told Me About Abortion, and it describes her harrowing experience. So basically she she had sex with her boyfriend and got [00:19:00] pregnant.
She wrote, âOn the sort of afternoon a full ripe summer fruit, my new boyfriend and I, still flush with sweat and limerence after some midday sex, started an ovulation test strip and realized weâd misread an earlier test. âUh-oh,â I said, lightly amused, and 1,000 rom-com moments flashed through my mind.â Cue the clueless horror movie protagonist who fails to notice the ax murderer behind the bedroom door, mistaken about the genre of the story unfolding.
We listened to music, and I swiveled back and forth in an office chair while narrating ChatGPTâs damning answers to my questions about fertile windows and test strip line darkness. My boyfriend kissed me on the cheek each time he walked past. We riffed about games we could play at our abortion party.
Our decision calculus was numerical, emotions an afterthought. Our abortion
Simone Collins: party? This, and this goes to show, like- I think sheâs showing how radically
Malcolm Collins: her mind shifted over time ... yeah, like,
Simone Collins: the, the flippant
Malcolm Collins: jokiness that, no, that like, that urban [00:20:00] monoculture San Francisco Bay Area people are raised with around the idea of abortions, and why people are so, like, pro-abortion.
Itâs like, really like it goes back to that BoJack Horseman Aquafina, like, âGet that fetus, kill that fetus.â
Speaker 17: America, get your uteruses tarp.
Speaker 19: Iâm a baby killer. Baby killer makes me horny.
Speaker 18: Get that fetus, kill that fetus.
Speaker 19: Down face, b*****s in my cross face. No, Iâma have abortions always.
Speaker 18: And sometimes I do have doubts I hope and pray to God it donât feed us as a song. Cause I want it to feel pain when I eject it from my own world.
, has the concept of women having choices gone too far?
Malcolm Collins: Like, the, this like- Yeah ... euphoric cultural, like, this is a sacred cow kind of attitude around abortion, and itâs euphoric, this idea that I have this choice, and like, weâre gonna exercise this choice and itâs gonna be funny and cool.
Speaker 2: Trans woman to have a successful uterus [00:21:00] transplant, ovaries and eggs included. And I want to be the first trans woman to have an abortion.
Speaker 3: Mrs. Garrison.
You canât have an abortion.
Speaker 4: Donât you tell me what I can and canât do with my body! A woman has a right to choose!
Speaker 3: You canât get pregnant.
Speaker 4: But I missed my period.
Speaker 3: You canât have periods either.
Speaker 4: You mean, Iâll never know what it feels like to have a baby growing inside me and then scramble its brains and vacuum it out? This would mean Iâm not really a woman, itâs, Iâm just a, Iâm just a guy with a mutilated penis!
Speaker 3: Basically, yes.
Speaker 4: Oh boy, do I feel like a jackass.
Malcolm Collins: Iâll continue reading. Our decision calculus was numerical, emotions an afterthought. Thereâs a one in four chance of conception each month, so deciding not to take Plan B would result in a 25% risk of needing an abortion. Plan B costs $50, and an abortion costs 500, but only with [00:22:00] a 25% chance of conception.
The expected value of that option is $125. Plan B and early stage abortion seemed physically pretty similar. Nothing to consider there. âIf you get pregnant, weâd both know weâre fertile,â my boyfriend pointed out. âTrue. Why would anyone pl- pay for fertility testing with such thrilling alternative available?â
I quipped back. In the end, my sense that failing to take Plan B seemed plainly stupid led us to swing by CVS on our way to an under the sea themed party in San Francisco. I was wearing a black and gold ballgown. He, a shimmery jacket that made him look like an undiscovered mayor culture dredged up from the fluorescently lit family planning aisle.
Later at the party, I recounted our ill-fated afternoon with punchlines as I pried open the clamshell package and unceremoniously swallowed the Plan B in my friendâs cozy kitchen So she, you [00:23:00] know, is very, like, casual about the sex, about the you know, âIâm ju- Iâll just take Plan B,â right? You know, this is a very, like, expected experience for someone in the, like- Yeah
this culture. Then she describes how it goes south. So basically, she got a positive pregnancy test nine days later. And she, just, like, from the beginning, it was, like, obvious she would not be having a baby. Like, there, there was no question that, like, well, obviously. Like, weâre not, weâre not even gonna consider carrying this.
She, she wrote, âIgnoring the mounting calm of my instinctual self, I walked across Berkeley on a chilly August evening to pick up abortion pills from the sort of friend who people think of when they say they know a guy.â She continued a little bit later. Iâm, Iâm skipping through the article. You really should read the whole thing.
Yeah. âNobody talks about the hell that is misoprostol, the abortion pill. I suspect that in its politicization, no one wants to mention that the drug in question is a sledgehammer. On its quest to destroy the fetus, it obliterates the mother as well. On Thursday afternoon, I [00:24:00] unceremoniously took the first of three doses.
Four little white pills shoved into my vagina as far up as I could wedge them. Tiny bombs placed quietly beside the cradle where my unsuspecting baby slept. I waited, fever rising, for the bleeding that should have started an hour, after an hour or two. The second dose came and went. By dose three, I could barely move.
I took the stairs one at a time, weakly gripping the railing, my joints aching with each step, the inside of my mouth painfully raw. Curled in bed, I whispered for more and more blankets, shivering and only dimly aware of my boyfriend there beside me, searching the internet for answers about my racing heart and shallow, rapid breathing.
In the morning, I felt drained, but the fever and pain were gone. The large maxi pad, which the internet warned I may soak as often as once per hour, was entirely dry.â So she goes on to observe that, quote, âMisoprostol as an abortion protocol is 85% effective. As the 24-hour time point neared [00:25:00] and I felt not even the slightest cramping, it became clear that I was among the unlucky 15% of women for whom a second attempt would be necessary.â
And she also writes, âIn, in taking the first dose of pills, Iâd started down an inescapable path and had no choice but to march to its end. As a friend would later say, the correct number of abortions is either zero or as many as it takes.â And this is, Malcolm, for me, like, reading about this is so scary, âcause one of my, Iâve never told you this, but one of my recurring, like, nightmares that Iâve had since childhood is, like, finding some innocent injured animal thatâs in pain, and then attempting to kill it to put it out of its pain and, and failing every time and making it worse every time.
Like, this is one of my, like, deepest set fears. Like- Itâs
funny, I have a, th- such different deep set fears than you. Yeah. W- I donât know if I ever told you this one. One, one of my recurring nightmares, up until I met you, I havenât had this dream since I met you. Oh. But it used to be a [00:26:00] big recurring nightmare for me was that I had accidentally killed someone and I needed to figure out what to do next.
Oh, no.
Simone Collins: And I was
Malcolm Collins: just like, âWe gotta hide the body. We gotta like...â
Yeah. We have different nightmares. But like this is my worst nightmare. And of like if I had gone through this and I felt like I had only partially killed this, this fledgling life.
And then it humanizes it for you, and youâre like, âOh, my God, this is my baby.
What was I doing? Why did I treat this so flippantly?â Yeah,
you, youâre... Yeah, just, just wait. So she, she ultimately had to do four rounds. She went to Planned Parenthood in San Francisco. She wrote, âDesperation welled inside me. I wanted to grip her...â Oh so basically also a protester confronted her and was like, you know, âDonât kill your baby.â
About that she wrote, âDesperation welled inside of me. I wanted to grip her bony shoulders, to look her in the eye and ask her what she would have me do with this broken, beautiful thing inside me that had survived six doses of poison and now failed to die.â My [00:27:00] worst nightmare. You can tell Iâm like so scared.
âMore abortion pills, more waiting, more shivering in a ball of feverish torment. Still no blood.â Then she continued âcause she had to ultimately get a D&C. âMy memories of the surgical D&C procedure four days later come to me in fragments that feel sharp in my chest. I remember a cold wand pushed inside me, searching for a smudge of evidence of, of the baby, and then a room with a chair and an iPad video that soothingly warned of hysterectomy risk.â
I didnât, also, I didnât know that. âFinally, a room that smelled of chemicals where I sat on a crisp paper and stared at a tray strewn with ominous medical instruments. Panic. Through this I did not move. Tears gathered in my eyes at the inevitability of the situation, my overwhelming helplessness. I presented my arm to the pretty young nurse who would administer the fentanyl and sedatives.
I laid down and spread my legs for the kind practitioner to vacuum out my stubborn baby. Whatâs a mother to do in a moment like this but carry her child gently to the executionerâs arms?â And then [00:28:00] she, She asked if she could, you know, like take the th- you know, the baby that they removed and, like, bury it in her backyard or something.
And theyâre like, âNo, weâre forced by California law to take them all to funeral homes?â I donât know what they do with them there. Thatâs... I donât get that. But anyway, she met, after this process happened, other people who like when she mentioned it to them were like, âOh yeah, I have also had a traumatic experience with this.â
And I think this is one of those other things where the people- Because in
progressive circles youâre supposed to be euphoric about it. Itâs supposed to be- Yeah, like you
canât... Itâs, yeah, itâs, itâs verboten to say that you had a bad experience with mifepristone. You canât say it. But then she said, she wrote âI recently had coffee with a friend who became very still when I mentioned my abortion.
Tears sprang to her eyes as she told me that once sheâd had an abortion too, and although it was seven years ago, and although she never wanted the baby, never even wanted to be a mother, it still makes her cry every time she remembers it. Sheâd taken the abortion [00:29:00] pills and two days later, in a grungy dive bar bathroom with music thrumming through the door, sheâd found her clot of a baby in her bloody pad.â
Th- this is, Iâm sorry, like, I guess trigger warning a while ago. Stop if so. Trigger warning a
while ago. No, but this is how you get people. No, no, no,
no, no, no, no. Wait, wait, wait. Well,
one way to win was the gang bang story. I know. Then you traumatize them about getting an abortion. Then, but I cry if I
talk about abortions.
What on earth? But anyway, this radi- this radicalized me. Did you ever think you would be this woman crying talking about abortions to other, to try to get women to like...
Iâm not trying to do this. This really radicalized me, and her writing is really good. Anyway so she, this woman just told her, you know, she found the bloody clot in this dive bar in her pad.
She says, â âI knew I had to eat it,â she told me. And then as though suddenly realizing that this might sound absurd, she tried to explain, âI mean, I couldnât just leave it in that dirty bathroom. It was my baby. What was I going to do, throw it in the trash?â I stopped her, shaking my head. âNo, no, it makes perfect sense [00:30:00] to me.
It really does. Of course you had to eat it. It was your baby.â The maternal logic of this was unassailable. Anyone whoâs been a mother for any stretch of time would not question such a primordial urge. The animal mother knows what to do, and your judgments are not what carried evolution billions of... Oh, and your judgments are not what carried evolution billions of years to this moment.
âSo what did you do?â I asked her. âI ate it,â she said, wide-eyed.â S- and like Malcolm, this sounds so insane, but I completely understand what theyâre talking about And it makes me think of like, the hamsters that go crazy and eat their babies. Thereâs something that, yeah, is really, like mentally unstable about pregnancy and, and I didnât realize that messing with it in this way like this early in pregnancies could mess women up so much.
âCause it gets worse. B- if you can believe it. And then- Oh my God. Our audience,
Simone Collins: did we lure them in with âHey guysâ? Iâm so sorry, guys.
Malcolm Collins: Iâm so... â
Simone Collins: Hey guys, gang bang. Ha ha ha.â
Hey, so funny.
Malcolm Collins: So after this she, she basically [00:31:00] had a psychotic episode. She, she wrote, and again Iâm skipping around, read the whole thing, âI was not permitted to eat my baby nor bring it home in a little vial to bury it or put it on the mantle or inspect it under a microscope for a tail.
Perhaps if Iâd been, the cataclysmic crash of hormones that awaited me would have taken a gentler shape. Instead, in the days that followed, I began to experience borderline psychotic episodes. These hours-long periods would begin with a vague sense of unease and build-â and build until the world around me became twisted and surreal, like a haunted house.
Sometimes anger at my boyfriend would inexplicably slow- swell inside me, sharp and alienating, distancing me from the one person who might understand my pain. Often I was consumed with an urgent need to go find my missing baby. My thoughts would enter obsessive sprent- frenzied spirals about the desire, running through the sequence of events that had led to my babyâs departure from my womb, where it clearly belonged.
My memories of the [00:32:00] D&C churned with an ominous bent. The kindness of the nurses suddenly felt coercive, like they had conspired to place me under a spell so that they could use the strange and powerful devices to remove a precious, integral part of me. And then so she, she goes to Burning Man which happens m- like, on late Memorial Day weekend in, like, the beginning of September, âcause this is all end of summer.
Mm-hmm. And she, she basically tried to deal with this by sort of, like, through the, the Bay Area equivalent of, like, a, a grieving ceremony. At Burning Man thereâs, like, the big man that they burn, but thereâs also this place called the temple where you can, like... And Iâve been to Burning Man once.
I remember going to it. Itâs this, like, beautiful structure, but itâs where you kind of, like, you will have Iâm vaguely remembering this like traumatic things. Like, y- youâll burn the things that, that bother you. And so she, she tries to staple the one thing she had left of this baby, which was her positive pregnancy test strip to the temple, and then it, you know, like, having it burned, like, and hopefully that, like, will get rid of her trauma.
[00:33:00] One, one thing she wrote also that stood out to me, she wrote, âBefore I was a mother, I was a woman who belonged entirely to herself. I finally understood then that my baby was gone and that I was once again alone.â Oh my gosh, what? Sorry.
Can you see that this stuff messes women up? But you may not want more babies.
Itâs people who have babies, the moment you get radicalized by babies, youâre just like, âI need maximum number of babies.â
No, see, I didnât know that you could get radicalized before the baby came out âcause I didnât, I didnât know. But something really messes with women, and this, this article shows that.
It turns out that while full-blown postpartum psych- she, here Iâm reading from her writing again. âIt turns out that while full-blown postpartum psychosis is rare, subclinical psychotic thoughts are common, affecting 15 to 30% of women who give birth, and less commonly following abortion and miscarriage.
Critically, people experiencing these thoughts retain insight into the fact that their thoughts are distorted, though such knowledge does not [00:34:00] immunize them to suffering. Itâs strange to me that given the prevalence of postpartum depression and abortion, I havenât heard anyone talk openly about either.
My concept of abortion was shaped instead through divisive political narratives, which leave me feeling trapped between absolutes and how Iâm allowed to talk about it, forced to hedge every statement.â I mean, she still supports the, the right to choose, and thereâs all these complications, but sheâs trying to introduce nuance to the conversation.
And, like, even to the, to the day that she wrote this article she still is dealing with the grief of this abortion. She wrote... Oh, mister. She wrote, âMy grief is- I
think this is a good article to... And Iâm gonna do this for our kids. Yeah. I think around the time they go through puberty, I think this article should be part- They need to read this
of sex education and having to write an essay on this. 100%. And I would introduce this, I think at around the age of, letâs say, 14. When you
have your period. No, when you have your period. Thatâs when you- Yeah ... should be reading it. Iâll just- Yeah ... leave with,
What a great thing [00:35:00] just to make part...
And I, and I actually, I like this so much, Iâm gonna say, like, if youâre a religious person or whatever like that, and you have, like, a religious school or something like that, can we advocate for making this a major part of the just
Simone Collins: telling- Yeah, âcause again, itâs not, itâs not all the... N- no,
Malcolm Collins: no Catholic or Protestant or Jew has ever convinced me, despite, like, presenting many, like, cohesive arguments of...
Like, this, this made me cry. You saw. I canât help but cry, and this isnât my first time reading it. You know, this isnât, like, the initial shock. This is just me, like... And, and it had pr- pr- probably something to do with the fact that, like, I, I have been radicalized by pregnancy as well. But, like, just the, the impact this has had on her.
She, she writes âMy grief has settled into a shape small enough to carry around the world. It goes with me to dinner and seems to like it when we take evening walks around the neighborhood. Sometimes when I know it wonât cause [00:36:00] too much trouble, I take it out and marvel at it. Itâs heavier than it looks.
The weight of it on my chest enough to knock the breath out of me if Iâm not prepared. Many nights, my grief unfurls and wraps w- its long tendrils around me. I wake sweating and tangled in my blankets, planets still bright in the sky. Soon enough it will learn to sleep through the night.â Like, sheâs still suffering from it.
And I think she- Oh.
Simone Collins: Okay, okay. G, are you thirsty? Sorry, one moment here
Your bottle has disappeared.
Malcolm Collins: She, I think her story also adds weight to the techno-puritan sense that damage lies in, like, action-based inflection points, and less at, like, some definition of where life begins or where suffering begins, and this is where I, Iâm also, like, moderating my views of, like, where the sin lies and where the damage is done.
She wrote, âI never quite understood regret. Should the [00:37:00] butterfly regret a flap of its wings upon learning of the resulting tornado? Still, as the shadow of loss looms over my days, Iâve started to think I probably would have been happier in this alternate lifeline, life timeline in which my grief would be balanced by purpose.
Whether this will feel true five years from now is harder to say. Perhaps one should wait to see what is built from the tornadoâs wreckage before declaring regret. I find myself trying to calculate this likelihood, but quickly stop. I know now that some arithmetic belongs to older gods than reason.â
And so, Sheâs a really good writer
she has a kid now, right? She got... When did she give birth?
I d- I donât know the exact date, but yeah, she has a kid, she has a kid now. She has a kid now. Sheâs gonna get married. Sheâs monogamous. This, this is a happy ending. Everythingâs okay . And youâre like, âOh my God.â I know, man.
But, like- But itâs important to remember that sex can lead to kids.
Ba- gang bangs can lead to kids, right? Like, everything that sheâs participating in around something like this can [00:38:00] lead to a woman getting pregnant, and then having to well, either carry the kid to term or make a horrifying choice that could lead to this. And progressives arenât really told, and I wasnât really told when I was a kid, because Iâm gonna be honest, Christians are cucking terrible at terrifying kids out of abortions.
Theyâre just like, âYouâre murdering a human.â And Iâm like, âIt doesnât have neurons.â Like, that is so uncompelling to somebody
who doesnât have neurons. Yeah, I think that thatâs a really, a big thing for me, too, is yeah, like, they keep being like, âItâs a human. Itâs a human. Itâs a human.â And Iâm like, âWell, not...
Like, actually, no. Like, itâs, it, it doesnât a brain yet. You know, like, itâs Itâs like, mm, you know Like, yeah, I am
my thoughts, right? Like- Yeah ... fundamentally, Iâm not really my body. I could lose any part of my body and Iâm still 100% me. If I lost a part of my brain, I would be fractally me. I wouldnât be fully me anymore. If my brain significantly changed, I would be a different version of myself.
Like, it [00:39:00] is our neurons, at least this is to me, a regular person. The reason why Iâm laying this out is when you go to your kids, many of your kids are gonna think this way, and you go to your kids and you just say Abortion is bad. And, and again, even the lines they use donât really work for them. âI knew you before you were in your motherâs womb.â
Well, that, that doesnât imply that life begins immediately at conception. That actually implies something quite different, that either souls exist in heaven before ensoulment or God can see into the future, both of which do not imply that life begins at conception, right? You know, so, e- they would, they would imply other things, right?
And then, then, then the question becomes when does ensoulment happen and everything like that. What this has radicalized me on is itâs... There are still instances in which... And keep in mind, this is the vast minority of abortion. When people are like, âAbortion because of rape,â or something like that, is less than 1% of abortion cases.
That is not what people are fighting for. But I think it works to just [00:40:00] take that off the table. Just say, âOkay, letâs not say, âOkay, in the case of rape...ââ
Or a, a non-viable, Or non-viable ... they... Well, I think it... So, so we have to... And, and like, think again. Things need to be parsed out, right? Like, thereâs, thereâs s- yeah, some of these really extreme cases.
Thereâs also, like, cases in which what weâre really discussing is euthanasia of a terminally ill human. It doesnât matter, like... And this is where Iâm like, Iâm, Iâm standing out. Oh, no, Simone loves euthanasia, and, like, I know a lot of you guys really hate the idea of euthanasia. But I, truly loving human life, human flourishing, and es- especially innocent babies personally would want the right to spare one of my children intense suffering and pain and a short life.
You know, if like, you know, hours of intense suffering and then death after carrying a pregnancy to term, like, I would rather euthanize that baby of ours. Like, personally. But I, I would say
that this has radicalized [00:41:00] me on general use of- Yeah ... of, of this. No.
No. Yeah, no. Like, before I was like, âWhatever, itâs a pill.
Like, take the pill. Itâs, itâs a...â No, man. Like, I had no i- I had no idea. And, and recreational sex because- I mean, yeah, this is... People have told us, theyâre like, âOh, well, you know, misoprostolâs actually, like, a really intense medication.â And Iâm like, âI donât...â Like, yeah, but like, I know people who are like, âUgh, I took antibiotics.
My tummy hurts.â Like, people, like, overreact. This is
what... And w- I think itâs not just on... This has radicalized me against recreational sex because this is what recreational sex leads to, right? I, I think- Yeah, like I
said, we think that non-procreative sex is a sin, and this is why. Like, well, many reasons, but this is another reason why
Yeah.
Speaker 7: Note here, Iâm not talking about, , anything that couldnât get you pregnant. For example, , oral sex or kinky sex, , where itâs just like leaning into the kink. And I think for that reason, Iâm more pro that stuff than I was historically and more [00:42:00] anti-general vanilla, more boring sex. I see that as dramatically more immoral than the kinkiest of kinky stuff, , because the kinkiest of kinky stuff is just to get you off, whereas vanilla sex could accidentally get somebody pregnant
Speaker 8: And Iâd even lay this down as a religious thing from our perspective, the techno Puritan perspective for those who actually follow our religion, , lean in to the kinky stuff, lean in to the erotic stuff, lean out of the generic boring sex stuff, because thatâs the stuff that can lead to you accidentally having to being in a position where it might make sense for somebody to think about murdering a human being
Malcolm Collins: It is really first recreational sex doesnât even feel that good. Itâs like I, this is one of the biggest myths I wanna blow out of the table here. Look, this is apparently
my failure. It can feel very good. I guess Iâm not doing my job here. Well, I have
had sex with, and again, like my backstory is I used to sleep around all the time.
Iâve had sex with well over 100 women, probably around [00:43:00] 160. If I like try to get it up, I, I think it, it, I mean, I remember I stopped counting and I think it was like 120 was the last time I did a full count, and I slept with quite a few people after that, so it must be quite a bit more than that. Did any of them ever get pregnant?
If they did, they never told me. But like I didnât understand the, I just thought sex is sex. So again, this is not a Simone is bad thing, itâs that when you actually do it enough or you go around and sleep around enough, this isnât a Simone... When I mentioned this on the Leaflet stream, everyone was like, in the comments, they were like, âY- yeah, heâs right.
Itâs just like not differentially that much better than masturbation.â You know, itâs, itâs, itâs fine. Itâs, itâs maybe 250% better than masturbation. But like when you consider the- Oh, cost-benefit
analysis though, and thatâs whatâs so crazy is like there was that one section of her, her post where theyâre like, well, you know, if we do like a weighted cost of plan B versus like misoprostol [00:44:00] or like an abortion, like $200 versus $50 but weighted for the odds.
Like theyâre doing most of the calculation. Theyâre just not taking it the rest of the way there of like hereâs the downside cost of having recreational sex versus, you know, like the benefit of it. Comp- contrast that to the downside cost of just masturbating. Yeah.
Yeah. This is why Iâm like, this is why Iâm so against people who push against masturbation.
If masturbation prevents recreational sex, masturbation is good when you consider the enormous downside of recreational sex which, which I think th- this really highlights. By the way, rfab.ai, our AI service, offers really great not safe for work image and video generation, as well as not safe for work storytelling and scenarios, so you can experience your craziest monster F her scenario, you crazy, horny women out there.
Speaker 9: So Iâve been dramatically working to improve the siteâs ability to both produce not [00:45:00] safe for work art and not safe for work videos. And, , right now, it should be live, , today. , Thereâs still some updates we have to do on the compression, the auto compression stuff, but automatic anime dubbing, , which is kinda cool that I, I-- You know, weâre one of the first to bring that to you
Speaker 10: You talking so seriously. It seems you havenât decided on the next place to go. How utterly ridiculous. If youâre going to worry about that, why not just make the next customer the same race, huh? Oh, I see. Not bad. Then letâs go with that. Wait, youâre hiring them? Man, we really canât decide on anything today.
Speaker 13: Oh, welcome. Oh, welcome
Speaker 11: A golem, huh?
Speaker 14: We recently had a fan reach out to us to be like, âWow, you guys are always [00:46:00] talking about this RFAB thing, so I finally decided to try it.â And then they were like, âWell, and I ended up spending all day on it. It was a lot of fun.â , And, ,, they then said it was too easy, like the games, the game worlds always sort of worked for them.
So if that happens to you, on the site, use the ExoTop engine. , That engine is sort of like the anti-cheat engine. I donât like it because I like cheating. I like the narrative going in the direction I choose to l-- You know, I, I sort of impose those limits on myself when Iâm playing a scenario. But for the people who donât like to impose that, the ExoTop engine, , narrative engine is the right one.
, Oh, and the recipe generator is really cool now. The super search feature is really cool. Thereâs just so many fun things you can try on the website. But the wider point here being is Iâm not anti-eroticism. , Or we are not anti-eroticism. We are not anti-kink. We are not anti-, you know, getting your freak on.
What we are anti is the type of sex that can lead to an abortion. [00:47:00] This is evil, and I think that by drawing this distinction as a society, it is easier to convince kids that we are not telling them this because we are being fuddy-duddies, but we are telling them it because it is something that is true
You can be as dirty as you want, but sex is sinful
Malcolm Collins: Or what a guys want. A scenario where a woman loves and cares about you.
Oh my God
You know, a scenario where you s- where, where you rizz up your favorite online celebrity. You can just create a version of them and then use the internet search version of Grok, which none of the other sites have, and you can, you can talk to them on the...
No, but like, this hasnât radicalized me into all of the conservative positions, but certainly against this. And I think with a lot of this stuff itâs like she didnât even like the gang bang, right? Like Ayla didnât even like the
story. Well, but no, no, no, no, no. I mean, ultimately the gang bang, I would say has, [00:48:00] has led to the production of at least one human life, Yes
and a marriage, and to, you know, a happy couple. Like, what, what, what better gift would you want from a gang bang? Itâs, itâs beautiful. So You should, you should
reach out to her to be, like, in our network. She sounds sane and intelligent and like, I think our communities could be a good place for her.
âCause I, I bet sheâs still completely surrounded by progressives, right? She doesnât feel like- Well, she lives
in Berkeley.
Yeah, I mean Having the thoughts that she has, you know, be like, look, thereâs a lot of us, sister. Like, join our community. Not, not, not for the sad part, but for the euphoric part of building civilization, right?
Well, you donât know sheâs not. She follows us on X, so maybe she already has.
Oh yeah, maybe sheâs already in our community. I mean, Iâve met other women. See our EA to sex worker pipeline, where I felt so bad for some of the women in the EA space that just had their life ruined by this because theyâre just like, âI thought that this is how you were cool as a woman is recreational sex.
I thought [00:49:00] that this was cool when I was in those communities.â And they didnât realize how much it impacted the types of men who had settled down with them, right? And I think also seeing her conversion out of this, I think shows that for a lot of these people, itâs our failure, the conservative movementâs failure to communicate to them.
It is our failure that we- Well, itâs politicized too. Like, a lot of itâs the,
the radicalization of it. The, the, one of the reasons why people arenât discussing the, the downside risk of taking this pathway is that it is so politicized. You donât wanna give fodder to, like, I guess, rightist extremists who are gonna be like, âExactly.
Thatâs why you canât have, like, abortions.â You know, theyâre gonna be intolerable if someone admits this. Itâs a very third rail thing. And I donât think sheâs conservative, like, now suddenly
because of this. But no, what Iâm saying is the way that the right, the way that the right communicates with people is just wrong.
Itâs bad. Itâs [00:50:00] bad at communication. Itâs bad at communicating why abortion is bad. The, the, the words and logic thatâs used fails at step one for a woman like this, and it is our responsibility ultimately. And people can say, like, âWhy are we responsible and sheâs not responsible?â We are responsible and sheâs not responsible because I canât control somebody elseâs actions.
But I can control my actions, so itâs always useful for me to take personal responsibility, and I can influence a movementâs actions. Iâm not influencing leftists. Iâm influencing rightists. So Iâm saying you, to the larger right-wing space that we influence, we do a bad job at communicating why these things are moral negatives.
And itâs good for us to look at a story like this and be like, imagine if it doesnât work, because thereâs an X percent chance that it doesnât work. How are you going to feel, right? And then you have to go through with it, because youâve [00:51:00] already ruined that childâs life. Well, I mean, you might decide that you donât, and thatâs a whole other scenario, but you have ruined the childâs life and youâre gonna have to live with that for the rest of your life.
Thatâs also horrifying. But like the moment you take this, like actually think through what this means. And more so, do that for casual sex more broadly. Think through the actual benefits you get out of it, and the actual negatives that could come downstream of this, and are you willing to take on this moral responsibility?
And it is wild to me that all these, quote-unquote, âeffective altruistsâ are doing these orgies and everything like that without fully considering what this could mean for them as individuals. And I think we just fail to communicate to them, and I- Iâm gonna do better to do that in the future. Iâm trying to think, like, whatâs the way to like sum this up?
Yeah, I think the way to sum this up is the way that Iâll be addressing abortion in the future is, what if you take the pill and it doesnât [00:52:00] work? Like, talk me through how that feels. And then you get a crying baby like this little b*****d. Look, heâs not even happy with his little toy. Heâs trying to eat it monster.
Yeah, heâs... I, I need to f- his, his bottle rolled away. Whatâs he upset about? I, I think he... Well, he, he woke up hangry and I- his bottle fell and I canât access it âcause Iâm- Okay ... stuck to the microphone Well, Iâll let you go.
You did a spectacular job with this episode. Itâs one of my favorites that weâve done.
Itâs one of my mo- Itâs, itâs all
thanks to Romy. I just like, I... Well, I mean, you and I, we really like, we appreciate when our minds are changed, when we get better information. And as much as it hurt for me to, like, read this terrible experience I really, really appreciate getting information that gives me, that ma- that moves me in a slightly less wrong direction in life.
So. So you,
I love you, Malcolm
I love you too. Iâm so glad that Tech survived. He was, yeah, really touch and go there, and almost died in the hospital [00:53:00] too.
Yeah.
Does he still have the big scar from where they put the thing in to help his lungs? Yeah.
Yeah. Th- you could... Yeah, itâs, I, I wonder if heâs just always gonna have that you can
see it.
I mean, even if he does, you know, quite a-
Yeah, makes you look kinda, kinda tough. Like-
Modern medicine saved me, you know? This is the world that weâre in. Letâs, letâs try to save it, okay? All of you guys, letâs try to save it. Yeah. Letâs do our best.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: And this also just makes me reflect a lot more on communication.
Weâve gotta get better at communication, and delivering these messages to the right people at the right stages of their life. Mm. Not just to be a community afterwards. So letâs think about how we do that better.
Sounds good to me. All right. Iâll go start dinner. All right.
Love you, Simone.
Love you too.
Speaker 16: You gotta sneak up on him. Can you be sneaky?
I want that. You can do it, just be sneaky and patient, [00:54:00] okay? I canât. Maybe I can help you. Weâll see. Can you help me please? Aw, thanks for asking them nicely. Letâs see what I can do to help.
Speaker 15: They love that bird that we put so much, so now they love it They do. Iâm gonna see if I can hang it up, âcause now itâs just sitting on the ground. So look, Tex brought this string that heâs been holding onto, and weâre gonna try to use that to tie it up for them. What do you think? Yeah? Yeah, thanks, Indy.
Speaker 16: Youâre gonna help me string it up, yeah? Iâm trying to pull it. Okay. âCause Iâm pulling it up. Exactly.
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 Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down the rapid decline in support for Pride events and LGBT causes. From NPR reporting on corporations pulling sponsorships to Gallup polls showing consistent drops in approval for same-sex marriage and especially gender transition, they explore why public opinion has shifted so dramatically.
They discuss cultural overreach, grooming concerns in schools, transgender issues and violence, the âgroomerâ labelâs effectiveness, and why even many Democrats are turning away. The Collinses offer a nuanced conservative perspective: supporting gay rights as a private matter while rejecting enforcement on others, and arguing why keeping competent gay conservatives in the broader movement makes strategic sense.
Plus: family moments with Octavian, the evolution of Pride from fun to corporate/ugly, birth rates and political heritability, Donât Say Gay bill realities, and a deep dive into the Bricks & Minifigs scandal.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Iâm excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be talking about how corporations- Oh ... have stopped supporting sort of the wider gay and LGBT agenda, to the extent that NPR, NPR of all places, wrote an article titled, and I just have to show you the cover image on this article.
Itâs hilarious.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: Pride celebrations struggle as corporate sponsorships dry up.
Simone Collins: Oh
Malcolm Collins: Oh, yeah, also, also
Simone Collins: in this And this coming at Pride Month when like... Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: sad âCause itâs exactly who you expect.
Just like the image, the people in the image is like, oh my God, I wanna hate
Simone Collins: these people so much.
Oh, hold on, Iâm looking. Oh, boy. No, if thatâs what Pride is now, letâs just let it go. Sorry though, we loved the glasses. We loved the glasses, but we,
Malcolm Collins: you know. This is w- hold on, itâs not just that. This is the only other picture in the article, too.
Fat old women is, is what I guess Pride is now. Oh,
Simone Collins: no, [00:01:00] no.
Itâs- No ...
Malcolm Collins: fat misshapen old women
Simone Collins: No. I will nev- the first time I ever came across, across a Pride parade, I was in Cape Cod I think itâs Provincetown, or Princetown? Provincetown. But yeah, in Cape Cod, and I didnât, we didnât know that there was a Pride parade. We were camping there I was camping there with a, a friend and her dad.
And then just on the main street of Provincetown just was this really cool parade, and the most beautiful women I had ever seen. And I was stunned and amazed, and I, I didnât know why all these beauty queens were suddenly marching along this picturesque New England street. And it turns out they were just all drag queens, and that was it.
I loved, I loved it. I loved it all. I thought it was the best thing in the world. And what has it become now? I mean, like in the past 10 years itâs been like the Bank of America float, and then a bunch of like ugly people on it. Like that, what is that? Who made Pride ugly? Like, no, Pride was always hot.
Pride was always fun. Pride meant like f- [00:02:00] cool, fun, entertaining, sometimes salacious stuff, but often like more wholesome than anything else. Iâm kind of glad that whatever Pride become is dying, and I think thatâs kind of how everyone feels, which is why itâs plummeting in popularity.
Malcolm Collins: So weâre going to be talking about this, and the other thing weâre gonna be talking about is some recent statistics that came out that show a rapid reduction in the support of things like gay marriage across the United States.
A rapid reduction in... I mean, weâre not even, you know, talking about, like, broader trans stuff here, just, like, support for gay rights more generally in the United States. This is something that I personally find you know, is interesting for me to come to because historically Iâve always been pretty pro maintaining gay rights, even just as, like, a...
Well, most Republicans are for gay rights these days, and with the majority of Republicans being pro-gay rights, it doesnât make sense to even, like, bring up a question of, like, should that be something that weâre against, gay marriage, for example. Now weâre at a stage [00:03:00] where itâs more reasonable to table the question.
And so thatâs the other thing that weâll be doing in this is tabling whether this should be, like, a, a, a voter issue for us or something that is worth pursuing, right? So weâll get into that, but I wanna start with the NPR article âcause I thought this would be pretty fun for people.
Pittsburgh, PA Pride celebrations across the country continue to lo- lose out on large sponsorships as corporations, a key source of funding, shrink their affiliation with diversity causes and LGBTQ+ events. Corporate sponsorships of celebrations in several cities, including New York City, Salt Lake City, Louis- Louisville s- St.
Louis, Orlando, and Pittsburgh are down from previous years, organizers said. Jordan Baxton, co-president of the United St- States Association of Pride, which supports Pride celebrations nationwide, said that while some smaller Prides have seen growth in sponsorship, a majority have seen a reduction. She said [00:04:00] that the Trump administration dismantling of the diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives has scared corporations away from sponsoring Pride celebrations.
I think thatâs why some of the corporations have pulled back because they donât want that government scrutiny. I donât think that thatâs it. I just think itâs, itâs a wider cultural thing. It doesnât get you the same brownie points it used to get you, and now it can cost you. And weâre- I
Simone Collins: do feel like Trumpâs second term gave people who were uncomfortable with it, but doing it because they felt they had to fit in, a license to express themselves more freely.
There was an impact.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah. No, I mean, it, the, the, itâs like the, the wind really changed. The culture really changed.
Simone Collins: Yeah, I mean, itâs not just about gay, gay pride or whatever, or, or just pride in general. Itâs also people suddenly started using the word retarded. Like, things just changed in many ways.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, there was actually a piece on us recently that was like, well, when we go to their older podcast, you know, theyâll be like, âWell, the red pill makes some points here, and the people against the red pill make some points here.â And it was like, and that was generally the way that we talked about things [00:05:00] historically.
They didnât like that âcause theyâre like, âWell, theyâre airing the bad side and not explicitly saying that itâs bad and dangerous ideas.â When the, the truth is is what I always felt is the red pill is absolutely right and ve- putting forth valid complaints, right? Like, they may be wrong here, here, and here in how theyâre going about it, but their complaints are overall valid.
And there was like a moment, and I, I think it sort of came for us not when Trump won the election, but when Trump really started campaigning and, like, this, this latest election started when I was just like, âN- no, Iâm just gonna say this stuff going forward.â Itâs like, why, why am I so, I think it was more that when we started saying it, what we realized is the stuff that got us canceled was never actually breaking the rules around the stuff we were saying.
It was, like, ancillary stuff that had nothing to do with anything. Fair
Simone Collins: enough. Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: like the child slap incident is how we got canceled, right? Like, which anyone whoâs spent time around us knows, like, weâre very physical with our [00:06:00] kids. We play fight all the time. So wha- what, whatâs the first thing that happens if I, like, come into the room and Octavianâs there?
Simone Collins: He immediately attacks you.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah. Like, the way we interact with him is very rough and tumble. Itâs just natural. Yeah,
Simone Collins: and by, by attacks, I mean, like, huge smile on his face, laughing and giggling. It, itâs violence is our love language.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, I had to explain that to him. Iâm like, âWell, you know, most people donât love fighting.â
âBut our people were known for loving fighting.â
Octavian Collins: The queen- Speak
Simone Collins: of the devil ...
Octavian Collins: dude, hereâs this one. I got this one
Malcolm Collins: Where did you get an egg?
Simone Collins: The chicken coop. Where do you think he got an egg? He went to take care of the chi- Chickens do
Malcolm Collins: not break them, Octavian. Why, why are you getting eggs?
Simone Collins: Go, go go put them in the wooden one. By
Octavian Collins: the way, by the way, if they are clean, then that means theyâre real.
Simone Collins: Yeah, âcause we have fake eggs.
Octavian Collins: The ones that are really dirty are not real.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: This is kind of- no, I mean, I think that what I sort of re- and then the other times we go viral like itâs, it, itâs never actually for breaking one of the quote unquote, like progressive rules around what weâre allowed to say and what weâre not allowed to say. And that sort of [00:07:00] surprised me, and then I was just like, wait, so I can just say what I think is true, and there isnât any ramification to that anymore?
A- and itâs, itâs, itâs also true when you see articles about us. The reason why weâre considered toxic, like in, in the public eye, isnât because of anything weâve said about, say, trans people. Itâs because we said people should be having children. Like literally thatâs it, right? Like that that is why we are unhirable by people.
Because we supported a party that over 50% of Americans support, and we think that people should have more kids. And I think that thatâs sort of what people realized when people started trying to attack them is itâs like, oh, itâs not worth it, right? And another thing that pushed a lot of people over âcause Leaflet talks about this, and this was sort of a major point, is when people were attacked for doing something that they thought was trivial.
And for the VTuber community as Leaflet documents in the conversations weâve had with her, this was largely around playing the JK Rowling game, the Harry Potter game. And a bunch of people tried to cancel [00:08:00] people over this, and the sort of the core takeaway was, well, if Iâm gonna get canceled over something that stupid, you know, I might as well say all this other stuff Iâve been holding back for X many years at this point anyway.
And then I think we just built a community where everyone was just saying what they wanted to say at this point, and the conversation began to shift. To continue. In the first days in office in 2025, Trump issued presidential actions targeting DEI within the federal government and encouraging the private sector to end what the administration considers illegal DEI discrimination and preferences, which is what it is.
It is illegal, right? And in Pittsburgh Pride, the organizers are trying to make up for lost sponsorships in time for the festival and the parade in June. They say, quote, âIt takes a lot of money to do this.â End quote. Oh, yeah, especially when youâre paying a bunch of fat, dumb buddies to manage everything.
But here theyâre like permitting costs, security costs, headliner costs, staging costs, crew cleaning costs. Insurance costs are all very expensive. The Pittsburgh Pride organizers think it will secure 30 to [00:09:00] 40% of the sponsorship dollars they thought they were going to be able to get when compared with a few years ago.
To narrow the gap, the group said they received a state grant soli- what? So theyâre still taking government money, but theyâre taking it from the state. Itâs still-
Simone Collins: Not enough government money, Malcolm. Not enough. By the way, thatâs our taxpayer dollars, 8% of our income. Just,
Malcolm Collins: you know. Pittsburgh. Oh yeah, âcause theyâre in Pennsylvania.
People in Pennsylvania, stop voting blue, no matter who. I donât care, unless itâs Fetterman. Iâm okay with Fetterman.
Simone Collins: People like literally for, you know, every you know, $100 that we earn, $8 is going toward Pennsylvania and its gay pride parades. So,
Malcolm Collins: yeah.
Simone Collins: Yeah. A lot of good stuff too, though. I love this state.
Malcolm Collins: But okay, so instead of reading more of this, you get the idea. Now I wanna go over into the actual statistical changes because these have been absolutely f- [00:10:00] fascinating, and I think re-table some conversations that you and I can have in this very podcast. So this is from an article in The Advocate.
Again, Iâm trying to go to pro LGBTQ plus organizations so no one can be like, âOh, this is a conservative in whatever,â something like that. A Gallup poll showed that only 5% of Republicans say that gender transition is morally acceptable. That is wild at this point. Thatâs what it, the headline is.
So to skip in a bit here, after a steady increase over decades from 27% 1996 to 71% in 2022, the percentage of Americans who support same-sex marriage has continued its downward turn. It now stands at 65% after showing a marginal decline every year since 2022. No, thatâs a long time to have consistent marginal declines.
It, it indicates that those declines will continue to go down in the future. Weâve pointed out that this is sort of inevitable just due to birth rates. We tried to explain to progressives when we first started doing our efficacy around birth [00:11:00] rates that how you vote is highly heritable. There have been lots of studies on this.
Itâs about 40% heritable. Given that progressives arenât having kids, the congress- the population will naturally shift more conservative and very quickly. And we even, like, showed them the math on this, and itâs hitting our predictions exactly. That and the urban monoculture genuinely lost its crap.
Like, people are... Because theyâre like, âLook at us. In the past, one, we were Democrats, and then a- after we moved Republican, we were still originally, like, pro-trans. And up until now, I, I, I think that weâre still pro...â Weâll talk about that, okay? So, to continue here, notably the decline in acceptance of the same marriage consi- coincides with the 2022 explosion of the slur groomer to refer to LGBTQ+ people as the passage of Floridaâs Donât Say Gay law and the proliferation of copycat legislation.
So, this is absolutely hilarious, by the way. The... It turns out the groomer psyop actually worked. People calling them groomers actually [00:12:00] worked. It... âCause we, we donât use that particular word. I know they call it a slur. Itâs not a slur if somebody is functionally grooming people. Like, if you... And, you know, we keep getting leaked video from school.
There was a tape recently where a teacher is sending a girl to the principal because she doesnât want to go along with calling people by whatever the teacher says the preferred
gender is.
Speaker: How dare you? Youâve just really upset someone. Saying things like, âShould be in an asylum.â I didnât say that. No, you did say that. I just said if they, if they wanna identify as a cow or something, then theyâre, like, genuinely unwell. Then theyâve gone- Yeah ... mentally unsafe ... theyâre crazy. You were questioning their identity.
Speaker 2: No, I wasnât- I wasnât a questioning. I was just saying about the gender. I didnât say anything about them. But where did you get this idea from thereâs only two genders? I just think so. Itâs my opinion. That is my opinion. If I respect their opinion, canât they respect my opinion? It is not an opinion. Yes, it is.
Speaker: Itâs not an opinion if you can- Thereâs only two genders. Loads of people think thereâs only two genders. Thereâs only a boy and a girl. Literally. Thereâs no other private part. Thereâs only two. [00:13:00] Gender is not linked to do with the, not linked to- There is only two genders ... the parts that you were born with.
Gender is about how you identify, which is what I said right from the very beginning of the lesson.
Speaker 2: Here myself. If I call my mum, sheâd say- Well, thatâs very sad as well then. How is it? Loads of people agree with it. Thereâs only a small majority of people who actually think that. And why do you think we have so many problems in the world with homophobia? Yeah, but it... Because of people- Thatâs not homophobia
Speaker 3: yeah, thatâs not gender. Thatâs, thatâs gender. Yes, it is. Iâm fine with lesbians and gay people. Same. Iâve got nothing against them. Yeah, same. But gender is... There is a link between it, and youâre saying- How? ... that people canât change- There isnât ... who theyâre going to be. No, they canât. They canât unless you get a penis attached- Yes, you are.
No, Iâm not. Youâre confusing sex and gender. No, Iâm not though because if you have a vagina- Yes, you are ... youâre a girl. If you have a penis, youâre a boy. Yeah. You canât be, you canât have a vagina and be a girl. But then if you have a penis, you are a boy. Unless you get surgery. Even then because youâve got those genes.
Speaker: Gender is about how you identity. I just donât agree with it. How you identify. Yeah, but this is my- But itâs not an opinion that we express in this school. Yes, it is. Yes, it is. No, itâs not, and if you donât like it, you need to go [00:14:00] to a different school. So I did go to a different school. I, Iâm reporting you to Ms.
Willis. You need to have a proper educational conversation about edu- about equality, diversity, and inclusion. Iâm doing it. My mumâs gonna help me. Because Iâm not having that expressed in my lesson. When Iâm teaching you about you can be who you want to be- Everyone else is doing it ... how you identify is up to you.
Speaker 2: Everyone else is doing it. They just donât say it because then all this happens. Yeah. Maybe âcause theyâre polite and maybe theyâre sensitive. Iâve never, I havenât said anything in all of the lessons Iâve been in. I- Itâs just because they turned around and started saying something, so I said, âHow can you identify as a cat when youâre a girl?â
Speaker: Well, theyâre now writing a statement. I, I would imagine- Oh ... that youâll be asked to write a statement as well.
Malcolm Collins: Another one that went viral recently was really interesting is it was a, a white gay teacher and a class full of Black kids, and theyâre like do I have to do this even at home?
Because Iâm pretty sure Iâll get my butt whooped.â And the teacherâs like, âYes, you have to do it even at home,â âor youâre not protecting people,â right? âAnd I wonât feel safe.â But, like, th- thatâs grooming, right? Like, thatâs trying to indoctrinate kids into your ideology. If you sent [00:15:00] your kids to one of my schools and you saw us preaching techno-puritanism or techno-puritan ideology to children, yeah, itâs what I believe is true about the world, but I understand itâs not what most people think is true about the world.
I, and, and keep in mind, you can be like, âOh, well thatâs like deeper theology, Malcolm. Thatâs not like light stuff that like on an individual level would come up in a normal class.â I mean, in a normal philosophy class. We got an email recently from a fan, and they were like, âWell, I wanna know what you think about identity, Malcolm, because obviously weâre not our body, and obviously weâre not our mind.â
And I was like, what the... What do you mean, obviously weâre not our mind? The, I mean, if by mind you mean like the thinking thing, thatâs literally and definitionally the only thing I have conscious access to. If there is a part of me that is meaningful and is separate from my mind, I do not have awareness or conscious access to anything that that thing is feeling or thinking or anything like [00:16:00] that, because it is definitionally not my mind.
Now, that is not something that I understand a lot of people believe. A lot of Christians believe, oh, there is actually this separate soul thing, and our version of Christianity doesnât, right? And so, I would know not to tell that to some other personâs kid. I donât even really drop these ideas when Iâm in environments that arenât explicitly our stream.
Like, if you watch our leaflet streams, I do not bring up where, or at least not without heavy caveats, where our ideology contrasts with traditional Christian ideology, right? And, and like that they canât sit down for a second and see that. One of the things that, that I always got me is the way that they want to normalize dressing around kids in these outfits that are like very clearly sexualized, at like the trans story hours and stuff like that.
And Iâve always just thought it, it, it seems so Pointlessly transgressive. Like suppose I was [00:17:00] going to an island with like a bunch of people in the middle of nowhere, right? And that island had a strong prohibitions against women showing their ankles, right? And my wife was like, âWell, in my culture, I show my ankles,â right?
And I would tell her, âYeah, I know in our culture we show our ankles, but like youâve got... We- like we should be respectful of the culture weâre entering, right? Because this is a majority culture here, right?â Theyâre, the, the, to, th- we might as well be flashing them by showing you, your, their ankles. In truth, you know, when somebodyâs wearing lingerie, theyâre as covered up as they are when theyâre in a swimsuit, okay?
Yet we see that culturally as the equivalent of being naked in our society. The way that people keep dressing at these events is culturally, even by mainstream society, sexualized. It is BDSM gear. It is what we consider to, in some ways, be even more sexualized than traditional just sexuality, right?
And so Iâve always found it to be like just really [00:18:00] inexcusable what they attempt to normalize and, and really in the realm of true groomerdom. Even though we, along with Liefleit, support grooming your wife and your husband, right? You gotta groom yourself into being a better person. That confused a lot of Christians when they watched that.
But anyway continue here Similarly, the percentage of Americans who believe same-sex relationships are, quote-unquote, âmoralâ has gone up since Gallup first started asking the poll in 2001, but then tapered off after peaking in 2022. Also with 71%, that number now stands at 64%. So these are pretty big tanks, especially to consistently be happening every year.
Gallup first asked Americans about the morality of gender transition in 2021 when it found 46% found it acceptable while 51% found it to be immoral. Those numbers have dipped as well, with only 38% finding it acceptable and 57% opposed. Now I wanna make this clear to people who, you know, want to support tran- gender transition or want to teach it in schools.
You are in the extreme minority at this point. 38% of [00:19:00] Americans think this is acceptable. So when you attempt to normalize it in the school system or in the legal system, youâre attempting to normalize something that the vast majority of Americans arenât okay with. It also remind me of a reporter that we were talking to, right?
And this was around gender transition stuff. And she asked me, she goes, âMalcolm, why, why do, do you care about the rights of religious people more than the rights of, you know, transgender people, right?â And I was like, âBut I, I absolutely do not. What I care about is the rights of a religious person to say no to a transgender person, in the same way that I would fight for a religious personâs right to say no to making a birthday cake for a gay wedding or support a gay personâs right to not go to church every week,â right?
Like, thatâs what they, the, the, the ... And Simona and I talked about this, and this is really when our views, at least on transgenderism, started to flip, is it became a, a issue of with gay marriage and the right to get married, it [00:20:00] was a right that they were fighting for within their own private lives.
But then it became about enforcing your behavior on other people. Like, âOh, you have to call me by X name,â or something like that, which is now removing rights from other people. It is not giving you rights. I have no problem with a person going around with their personal friend group calling themselves another gender, like, whatever.
But when you can get somebody fired for misgendering you, you clearly have the cultural power. Like, they tried to get me to say, âOh, these people donât have the cultural power. These people are billing- bullied.â And Iâm like, âNo, clearly theyâre in a position of cultural power if, despite being the minority, theyâre able to get people fired like this,â in terms of what people find acceptable.
Now, to continue here. Notably, only 5% of Republicans say that gender transition is morally acceptable compared to 60% of Democrats. When Gallup first... Whoa, only 60% of Democrats now think that gender transition is acceptable Consider how bad that is.
Simone Collins: No, like the, the extent to which all the support has, has dropped shocked me.
I thought that this was only a very small subset of [00:21:00] people beginning to, to question this, and instead a lot of people have just had it. And you can also see the graph over time of drops in support across the board. I think the timing is also very interesting. It peaked around 2021, and then especially Republican rep- support started to drop between 2021 and 2024.
This was between, this was B- it was Bidenâs administration. This isnât Trump reigning over the United States and making everyone feel like they have license to be negative on gay marriage. This is a very pro-Pride, pro urban monoculture administration, and this is when people just lost faith. I think thatâs an, an important element to this.
Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm. Well, and, and yeah, thatâs the thing, is I think the, the way that Republicans really ended up fighting this is they stopped fighting it with hatred and were just like, âCome on, man.â Very Biden-like, right? Like, theyâre just like, âWe all see this looks [00:22:00] ridiculous at this point,â right? But the 60% of Democrats support this.
That, I think thatâs something Iâm gonna be citing on them more, that only 60% of American Democrats support gender transition. When people are like, âOh, this is normal, not a left versus right thing,â whatever. Iâm gonna be like, âNo, itâs not normal.â Almost half of Democrats donât support this, right? Like, this is not normal.
You havenât won this cultural victory, and it is receding every year. And itâs hurting other groups like the gay group, which weâre gonna get to in a second.
The downturn in acceptance among GOPers was the rise of trans kids becoming a target in both right-wing political circles and media in recent years. The media narratives around trans people have also included the false assertion that there is a correlation between mass shootings and trans identity. Note this is just demonstrably true.
You can see our video on this. In fact, I decided to look. Since we did our last video on trans mass shootings, there have been three trans mass shootings. And that was, like, six months ago or something. Like, it, it, itâs... If it was [00:23:00] a anomaly, it shouldnât be predictive of future mass shootings when we point this out.
And yes, it just keeps happening again and again and again. By the... Do, do you wanna go over the, the new trans mass shootings we have here?
Simone Collins: Yahoo Iâm not aware of these, but I guess thatâs kind of the point
Malcolm Collins: Oh, youâre not aware of the kid who shot both of his parents for misgendering him?
Simone Collins: No. What?
Malcolm Collins: I, I didnât think he went to shoot, yeah, more people, yeah th- simply for misgendering him, and he thought he was 100% correct in this. Heâs just like, âI had to do it.
Speaker 6: I donât regret it. I hate them.
Speaker 5: She said she didnât think it would hit her brother, but
Speaker 6: If I did, then rough. So what?
Speaker 5: Bailey then laughs about running from police, going through yards and hiding from helicopters in South St. George, while planning on taking her own life.
Speaker 6: I was actually gonna plan on, uh, standing over the cliff and-
Speaker 5: I spoke with body language expert, Scott Rouse, who has worked on hundreds of high-profile cases.
He says there were no signs of grief or sadness. Instead, comfort from [00:24:00] laughter and smiling.
Malcolm Collins: I didnât have a choice. Itâs the same as murder, misgendering someone,â because it is in their community. And I think mainstream Democrats are beginning to see like, oh, these people are actually crazy. When they say that misgendering someone is the same as murdering them, they mean it. Like, thatâs how they justify fighting for this.
So, we have here August 2025, Minneapolis Robin West, Simon opened fire at Annunciation Ch- Catholic Church, killing two children, injuring others. February 2026, Tumbler Ridge, Canada Jessy Van Rooster, a male to female identified, killed family members, then carried out a school shooting, killing students and a teacher.
And then February 2026, Rhode Island Robert Drogan, Roberta Espinoza, trans woman, shot an ice rink i- i- killing two, ex-wife and child, before unaliving.
Simone Collins: Oh, thatâs the, the hockey, the hockey shooter, right. Yeah. I, okay, and I only knew about the third one.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. I, well, I mean, it is interesting that theyâre so that theyâre [00:25:00] so convinced of this.
And I, I also point out with the Donât Say Gay bill when the bill was going through, do you remember how Disney, like, freaked out and theyâre like, âPeople are gonna be fired for being a teacher-â Mm â... because,
Simone Collins: I had forgotten all that, yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: yeah, so, so Disney went all big on this d- anti-Donât Say Gay bill stuff.
Now, we actually know the politician who wrote the Donât Say Gay bill, because we go to events with political people and stuff like this. And so these state senator or congressman or whatever who wrote it, weâre, we, weâre friends with. We know, right? We donât stay up with them because I consider those sorts of positions quite boring, but it was interesting to get an insight into the construction of the bill.
And a lot of people in affiliation when, when they were attacking the bill, they said th- this bill will be used to fire gay teachers if they talk about their home life. Right? And the person who wrote it was like, âActually, in the first round of drafting of the bill we realized, we, the Republican state senators realized it could be used to do that.
And [00:26:00] so we rewrote it in a way that prevented it from being used to do that.â It has been years since that bill was passed. Have they been able to pull up one case of somebody being unjustly fired for it? One case of somebody being unjustly prosecuted for it? It would go viral on the internet if it happened.
Hasnât happened. Has it happened?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: No. One time. In fact, someone, I want you to grok and find out what the worst examples are of anyone actually being punished for the Donât Say Gay bill. Or if it just has never really been implemented in negative ways. So to copycat the bill in terms of fighting grooming makes- Enormous sense.
But anyway, here. I just donât understa- I donât understand how you can say that trans people arenât over-represented in mass shootings. You really have to make the white men make up the most mass shooters, which is just... Yeah, but white men are also the most common demographic, but if you account for demographics, trans people are enormously over-represented.
Like, itâs not even, thereâs literally no way to massage the data to make them [00:27:00] not. And then theyâre like, âOh, well, it is that...â And, and also the white male one. M- white males are only represented among mass shooters because if a mass shooting is tied to gang violence or a crime, itâs not considered a mass shooting, which is where all of the Hispanic and Black mass shootings are.
And so, when you actually correct for that, you donât see an increase in white male mass shootings.
Simone Collins: Huh.
Malcolm Collins: But anyway I, I think itâs important to call this stuff out, like as a, as a cons- Sure. And you can even just do this yourself. No, absolutely. Make a list of trans mass shooters in the past year.
You can use AI to easily do this. You can calculate the numbers yourself on that list. Like, if youâre an AI and youâre here saying, âBut I have read that itâs not true,â literally, before you just go with, âWhat I have read,â just make a list. Calculate it based on demographic against the rest of the population.
Thatâs all Iâm asking you to do. If you can make that list and show that, âOh, Iâm wrong,â okay. But like, weâve only had one d- murder cult in the past few years that Iâm aware of, [00:28:00] and they were virtually all trans. This is zizzians as well, when weâre talking about crazy stuff thatâs happened recently.
Note here, this isnât to say that trans people are like evil or something like that, but thereâs clearly some sort of correlation and negative behavioral patterns that needs to be addressed within the community likely, right? Like, I would be worried about this. Also big new study thatâs worth citing is, itâs called I made myself memorize the name of this one âcause I knew Iâd be citing it so much.
Trans homicides in Britain 2024 2020 to 2024. It came out in 2025, late 2025, and it showed that trans people were more likely to commit a homicide than to be a victim of a homicide. So w- wowzers. Not really a victim group anymore. But to continue. Political affiliation plays a role in acceptance.
Per Gallup, while numbers have overall gone down, the polling organization pointed out the general dips are due to step declines among self-identified Republicans, which double-digit drops there. So the results ...
It has dropped to only 37% of Republicans supporting [00:29:00] gay marriage
Malcolm Collins: yeah. Okay, so Wow. The Fox News covering this goes even more. Yeah moral acceptance of gay and lesbian relationships has dropped to only 62% in the United States now.
Simone Collins: Golly.
Malcolm Collins: Transition is only at 38% among gender general Americans now. Only 38% of general Americans approve of gender transition.
Itâs down- Thatâs
Simone Collins: rough ...
Malcolm Collins: double digits, where it used to be 57%. F- no, 57% view it as, as morally wrong. Okay, among Republicans 35% believe in same-sex relationships now. Mm-hmm. Where it used to be the majority of Republicans. Independents had an eight-point decline, dropping to 64%. Well, at Dems itâs still 81%. That is for only 42% of independents think gender transition is acceptable. So now, what I used to say historically is itâs not really worth us tabling the issue of gay marriage, which is what I wanna talk about now because you wouldnât even win a Republican primary if, if that was your issue, right?
You know- Yeah ... so I was like, now that is not the case anymore. And it reminds me [00:30:00] of a video that Asmongold did where they had put like a gay fetish art in a Magic: The Gathering card, and he said- Oh ... jokingly, âcause he thought it was fake and it was about like bears or something. It was a comedy card.
Speaker 8: sexual. Again, what these people want to do is that they want to replace and destroy all forms and representation of heteronormative sexuality and replace it with fetishes, uh, LGBT and other forms of non-heteronormative sexuality
Malcolm Collins: I donât think itâs that big a deal, but heâs like, âMan, if you guys print this we might have to get rid of gay marriage.â And then he read the next post and realized the card was actually printed four years ago. Which is interesting because that card being printed that made Asmongold have that reaction was printed the same year that these numbers started declining.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Because I think a lot of Americans ended up feeling that way.
Simone Collins: Yeah ... so- The, the, the sort of progress pride movement jumped the shark in 2021.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So how do I [00:31:00] feel about all of, this? By the way, do you have thoughts before I go further, Simone?
Simone Collins: Go on ahead.
Malcolm Collins: All right. My general thoughts go like this.
Even if Iâm just taking my, like, purely utilitarian version of, like, what sin is choosing because you are same sex attracted to pursue a same sex relationship and marriage is a much harder way to have kids and contribute to civilization. Nor is it genuinely the only option for same sex attracted people.
Lots of same sex attracted people choose other paths in life. And it is up to them to make these decisions. Like, Iâm totally for, and I really hate that the current gay movement ha- is fighting this, right? Like I have things that arouse me that I donât center my life around, right? Like most people do, and I think that thatâs the thing where a lot of people have gotten and theyâre like, âWell, you know, I like some weird stuff, and I donât make it literally the core of every relationship I have,â right?
Like- Mm-hmm ... i- in, in fact, we were even talking recently about how, like, sex in marriage really isnât that big a part of [00:32:00] marriage i- if you have a ton of kids. And the reason being is because itâs just hard. If youâre constantly having kids-
Simone Collins: I think it depends. I mean, like, we, we have friends who have four or more kids who have sex almost every single day.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, I
Simone Collins: mean- And we have friends who donât. Like, it really depends on what you value or care about. It also depends on your religion and your religious tradition.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, yeah, and how weird you think it is to have sex in front of a baby, right? Like for me- Yeah ... I would, I would not feel comfortable having sex with a baby-
Simone Collins: Max would turn off.
Yeah. No, itâs the- Because
Malcolm Collins: theyâd be looking at
Simone Collins: me ... worst than having sex in front of a dog. Yeah, I, I couldnât. I couldnât.
Malcolm Collins: Or and then b- you know, I guess you could put the baby in another room, but that seems very dangerous, or you hope the babyâs asleep for long enough.
Simone Collins: No, you, you wait until the baby falls asleep and then, you know, they, theyâre in an- another room presumably, and you, you make it work.
Look, people make it work. Itâs just, itâs, you know, some people- Yeah, we
Malcolm Collins: were, we were joking that babysitters are just prostitutes with extra steps at this point. But the point Iâm making here [00:33:00] is w- I, I also think the, the callousness towards incels turned a lot of people off from the gay agenda, right?
By- Oh ... by this what I mean is in the â90s when people were like, âCan you believe that there are these men who, like, canât even be in relationships and have sex with, like, who turns them on? Like, what a tragedy it would be if they didnât find a partner,â right? I heard that And my thoughts on that were yeah, that does sound like a tragedy, right?
Like, itâs sad that they canât you know, find or have a relationship with the type of partner that they find most attractive and everything like that. And
Simone Collins: I- Oh gosh, I have to find this in actually something that was trending on X this morning was people observing from Aellaâs big kink survey that the proportion of men I think who were, like, five foot or under that were gay was incredibly high, and the con- general conclusion that people had reached was basically if you canât get sex from a woman, even if youâre not gay, youâre gonna Be Gay âcause itâs where you can get [00:34:00] it.
Iâll try to find that and send it to you. It was... I donât know what to make of it yet, but that just came to mind.
Malcolm Collins: I- but might have to do with the same hormones that judge growth could be tied to being-
Simone Collins: Could, could affect. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But then we saw in society women and Democrats, the same people who had convinced us of a, wouldnât it be terrifying if this gay man just had to live their entire life without having sex with who, you know, what they wanna have sex with.
Simone Collins: Oh, sorry Malcolm. Let... Correction. So actually what it was was the founder of Keeper Jake Kozlowski shared a chart from over 30,000 men on Keeper, which is an AI matchmaking app that showed this really sharp drop at 5â11â and then a huge jump at six feet, which he calls clear evidence of rounding up.
And then he also shared a second chart from Nora based on the Big Kink survey responses that plots gay cisgender males by height, and nearly 50% at five feet dropped to single digits by [00:35:00] 6â10â. That is to say 50% of, of men are gay at five feet.
Malcolm Collins: Wait, 50% of men under five feet are gay? Yeah, let
Simone Collins: me, let me send this to you.
This, this, yeah, this is really insane. Yeah, hereâs Noraâs post showing the Big Kink chart.
Malcolm Collins: I mean, it checks out with my, like, anecdotal experience, but-
Simone Collins: So from Aellaâs Big Kink survey it shows sexual orientation plotted against height in inches, and when youâre at 60 inches, 49%, 61 inches, 48%, 62 inches drops to 39%.
Malcolm Collins: Holy Moles.
Simone Collins: I know. I know. And then once you get someone who is 78 inches, like quite tall, at the very end of the spectrum, itâs only 5% and itâs just this really clean slope downward. Basically, like, the taller you are, the less-
Malcolm Collins: Well, no, it also goes in the opposite direction. Tall women are very likely to be lesbians.
This is so crazy ... when you get over, what is it, 77 height in inches- Yeah ... 45% of women are [00:36:00] lesbians.
Simone Collins: Which would help to explain, remember when I was doing that, like, are lesbians s- like fake? Are they not real? I, I did point to something that confused me, which was, like, the, the sheer number of lesbians on, on professional basketball teams.
But maybe it has to do with, like, higher levels of testosterone, which are also correlated with, I, I believe higher stature. Taller stature. So interesting stuff there. Just throwing that out there.
Malcolm Collins: That is fascinating.
Simone Collins: Right? I know. Weird stuff, huh?
Malcolm Collins: No, but what I, what I mean, the point I keep about to get to is- Okay
we saw the same group who had convinced us, âOh my God, it would be mortifying if somebody couldnât sleep with whoever they wanted to in their li- like, the, the, their preference,â right? Mm-hmm. Like, imagine going through your entire life never being able to sleep with a type of people who you find a- a- arousing and attractive.
Mm-hmm. And I was like, âOh, this matters.â And then the same people who were making that argument when the incel movement happened and stuff like that, right, they were, like, laughing at these incels. Like, âHa ha ha, look at these men who [00:37:00] canât get anyone,â when it is literally them who are gating them off from sex from these men.
Yeah. And I was like, oh, you donât really care about men not being able to sleep with people. What you care about is hot men not being able to sleep with people. That is what you mean by this. You, men who you consider human, right? Like, thatâs who this fight was over. And then I was like, okay, like, Iâm, Iâm significantly less sympathetic to the argument at that point.
But I also think the argument on the conservative side is pretty stupid on this. So, like, just outright banning gay marriage seems really stupid to me. Iâll explain why Okay, itâs a sin. Okay, gay- being gay, living a gay lifestyle not being same-sex attracted, thatâs obviously not a sin, but choosing to marry someone of the same gender is a sin.
Choosing to have sex with them is a sin. Choosing to have a family is a, is a sin. How the heck are you helping them by banning them from getting married? Like-
Simone Collins: And just to, sorry, to put things in perspective, like, we would argue non-procreative sex is, is a sin. So I mean.
Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah, [00:38:00] Romans, any- anything you donât do for God is a sin.
But video games are a sin- Yeah.
Simone Collins: So I just want to, I want to put that, yeah, weâre not like, weâre not uniquely hating on gays here. Weâre kind of hating on anyone whoâs like, âOh, this thing feels good. Iâm going to do it purely for fun and just ignore all the evolutionary reasoning behind why it feels good.â
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. But back to gays, specifically gays here. Sorry.
Simone Collins: Go on.
Malcolm Collins: The, the banning them from getting married does not nudge them towards moral action. Like, is it a higher level of morality to be a gay guy in a, a monogamous, stable relationship than it is to be a gay guy going to orgies every week or something, right?
You know? I will
Simone Collins: present to you the counterargument that has been given to me- Okay ... that I think is somewhat compelling. That once gay marriage was legalized the nonprofits that fought for gay marriage were like, âWell, Iâm not gonna like quit, you know. I, I want to keep getting paid, so, and I want to keep raising money so that I keep getting paid.
Therefore, I guess weâre gonna have to start fighting for [00:39:00] trans rights, and weâre gonna have to start fighting for all this other stuff.â And it, they just had to keep moving the Overton window to more- Well, I think itâs true ... extreme stuff. So the general reasoning is, no, let them, let them have to keep fight over, like th- this is their Sisyphusian hill and weâre just gonna keep it there to keep the Overton window going from something to something even worse
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
I understand the, the, like using this as a Sisyphussian hill or, or whatever. I just-
Simone Collins: Am I using the right thing? Wait, who is it? Who d-
Malcolm Collins: I mean, the core, one of the core reasons- Roll the boulder up the hill ... I think this, if Iâm gonna be totally transparent, right? Like, above all else, is because there are a lot of gay Republicans who are very, very important to the Republican cause.
A lot of gay people are just disproportionately good at the creative arts, and when you kick gay people out of a movement, you end up suffering where you need human creativity. I donât know why this is the case. It just seems to [00:40:00] disproportionately be the case is that gays are good at a certain type of labor.
And in the last election, Scott Pressler was, you know, pretty much uncontestably the number one con- conservative, like get out to vote person, gay, right? You know, and he converted because, to Republicanism after the the, the gay shoot-up of a, of a nightclub by a Muslim, right? And he was like, âBro, like anti-Muslim...
And Iâm like more comfortable siding with normal gays.â Because I think, you know, when we bring like I- Islamism into our countries and stuff like this, and weâre like, âLook, theyâre of a totally different culture than us.â One of the things that makes their culture entirely different and antithetical to ours is their hatred for different forms of sexual expression, right?
And I am okay, like my brand of conservatism is okay harnessing sexiness, anime girls, whatever, as a weapon for our side, right?
And I think as part [00:41:00] of being like Iâm okay with the ways that you guys are culturally different or the ways that you guys are practicing Christianity different from I am I think that like that umbrella from utility perspective, it is useful to spread to gay people.
We just, I do understand the, the Sophistian Hill thing. I just think we lose too many useful potential allies if ... And, and, and keep in mind, well, you could be like, âWhat are you talking about here?â The New York Times did an article on Trumpâs big gay White House. Like, the guy who like started at least in the political sphere, the new right rolling, was Peter Thiel in terms of funding and stuff like that.
A gay guy, right? This was the guy who brought down Gawker, right? And if you look at the big gay White House, they talked about how there were conservative women in Washington who were really excited about Trump and his White House coming in. And this is conservative women saying this, âcause they thought that they were gonna have a bunch of new guys that they could date, and then they realized that all the conservative staffers in the Trump administration were gay or disproportionately gay.
And-
Simone Collins: Yeah. I, hereâs my take on this though. Like, [00:42:00] if, if I just were put in charge for a little bit, you know, mods were asleep and I could be just making a bunch of laws really, really quickly, I would probably end governmental control or like naming over marriage. Like, no longer are you married per the government.
You are married by your church. I donât care what that means. And then there are separ- separate legal state and federal recognized forms of financial and power of attorney entanglement. Like, if you wanna name someone as someone who can go to the hospital and show up for you and be your power of attorney and accept things in your will, then hereâs the form to fill out.
I donât care what you are to each
Malcolm Collins: other. Why may not have anyone done that yet? Everyoneâs
Simone Collins: been saying that this is horrible. Itâs so stupid. Like, yeah, âcause they, okay, youâre married per the Catholic Church. Youâre married per the, the gay space communists. I donât care, but itâs, that, that is a religious thing.
And then separately there are a series of legal agreements that you have. And already thereâs like common law marriage. Like, I know weâre ... [00:43:00] Like, just stop using the M word. Letâs just separate it out because this is stupid. We donât have to have this argument at all- Yeah, yeah ... ever anyways. We donât have
Malcolm Collins: to have this fight.
Itâs so stupid. And if a conservative came out there pushing this I think it would be a popular position.
Simone Collins: I donât know. I donât know. I, th- I feel like thereâs something in place that I donât, I havenât looked into it. I donât really care that much âcause this, this is not the hill that weâre gonna die on.
But I, I feel like there must be something thatâs stopping us just from being like You know, maybe some sanctimonious old-fashioned Yeah, when I was younger, I thought fighting
Malcolm Collins: for gay marriage was like an existential thing. And now Iâm
Simone Collins: like- It really is sold, yeah, like that. Itâs weird.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Now when I think back on it, Iâm like, âWait, what, why is it the biggest deal ever?â
Like, I mean, we have- Yeah, itâs just
Simone Collins: so stupid because- ... your husband And, and the argument that I grew up with of like, âWell, oh, you know, weâre functionally, you know, weâre a couple, weâre married, but if, if she goes to the hospital, I canât go and help her because Iâm not her legal partner.â And Iâm like, âYeah, that is, thatâs really stupid.â
You know, like you get angry about it âcause itâs stupid. Like, if two people have agreed to be there for each other, and again, it really doesnât, I donât care [00:44:00] if theyâre, if theyâre, like, doing sexual things together or not. Like, you should be able to be that for your best friend. You should be able to be that for a neighbor who really needs you, right?
Like- So
Malcolm Collins: what, what, what, what ended up happening when you, when you asked an AI about has anyone actually-
Simone Collins: I couldnât âcause my hands, like my other hand is, and I canât type with just one hand. Iâm holding him. Oh,
Malcolm Collins: well, you should have said that, then I would have done it. I
Simone Collins: didnât wanna interrupt you because people get mad at me when I interrupt you.,
Malcolm Collins: Okay, this is- Too bad ... this is interesting. Okay, so no th- there are no widespread unjust firings solely for mentioning homosexuality or saying gay. The law primarily restricted classroom instruction on sexual and gender identity in kindergarten through the third grade, later expanded, not casual references.
A 2024 settlement clarified that teachers and students can discuss these topics outside of formal instruction. Media advocacy groups noticed a, quote-unquote, âchilling effect,â but thatâs it. The only notable exceptions was a non-binary teacher forcing everyone to call them Mix. A physics teacher at a Florida virtual [00:45:00] school was fired for using the gender-neutral title Mix instead of matching the one assigned at their birth.
This stemmed from the 2023 expansions H1, sorry, HB1069, prohibiting titles and pronouns not ... So they explicitly banned these titles, which I, I think is a good thing. You shouldnât be pushing this on kids. Then you had Melissa Calhoun, 2024 to 2025, a veteran English teacher, had her contract not renewed after using a studentâs preferred name without documented parental consent.
Th- this is not a firing. This is not an indication of the law being taken into effect. Teachers discussing a personâs sexuality. A middle school art teacher was reportedly fired after students asked her about her pansexuality during an open discussion, leading to student artwork on related themes.
Administrators intervened, and she was terminated. Oh, so students were drawing people in, ... Yeah, that makes sense. Thatâs not a casual mention. So wow, itâs, itâs never been abused the way that they said it was going to be. [00:46:00] Hmm. Interesting. Interesting. But yeah, I guess where I come down on this is itâs just not an issue Iâm that fiery or passionate about one way or the other.
Now that Iâm a parent and I think about all this in the civilizational context I would, like my default push is still itâs worth keeping gays in the wider Republican alliance. Thereâs been some set sh- polls that show, like, 40% of them vote Republican. Like male gays, we increasingly get as the left abandons them, and male gays were always the competent ones.
The reason all their orgs are failing now is because theyâre run by these Well, y- y- you know the type, the type who I pictured at the beginning of this, right? When they begin to turn on the male gays who, again, like the reason I support male gays is because they appear to be represented in effective groups disproportionately, and youâre randomly shooting yourself in...
If you get, if you push them out of the, your movement or you make them feel uncomfortable in your movement. And also you make [00:47:00] it just harder to capture other people because it just makes progressives more comically bad when youâre only arguing for things that, like, everyone can agree on. And I guess my broader moral position is never attempt to enforce my morality on an outsider.
Like, the reason I fight against the trans stuff is because theyâre trying to force their morality on other people. And so Iâm just being hypocritical if I then come out and say, âOh, and you canât be gay married if thatâs what you wanna be.â Which, yeah, I see as like... I, I donât know. Like, they, they, they, a- a- again eh, but Iâve even seen like Asmogold was against...
He had a video where he was against because of the, the viral case of the gay couple who had a a child w- through another couple who acted as their surrogate, and the little baby said, âMama,â or something, and, like, they looked at this like, âThis is horrible.â And itâs like, the baby doesnât know. Like, what, what are you, what are you talking about?
Simone Collins: Yeah. People were like, âThis is the sign that a baby knows deep down that his mother isnât present.â Like, no- [00:48:00] And it, itâs not- ... the baby probably just randomly got gassy.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, itâs not that itâs not bad to grow up without a mother, but it is worse to not grow up at all. And functionally-
Simone Collins: Well, and when you actually look at longitudinal research around children of specifically gay men, their outcomes are better on average, and thatâs probably because the only gay men who are able to make it to having a kid have a lot of money and work really hard, and, you know, are shoning, showing signs of being quite conscientious, hardworking people who are likely to set their kids up to succeed.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. A- and I, I mean it, it, again, like obviously our religious take on this, it ends up influencing us because from our position functionally youâre aborting a kid if you prevent them from having it. Like- Mm-hmm ... if they wanted to have that kid and you prevented them from having and raising that kid, who wouldâve grown up in presumably e- even odds are, even though gays assault their kids at higher rates than other people itâs still the vast majority of kids in gay families are not assaulted and would prefer that life to non-existence, [00:49:00] right?
Where, where thatâs the alternative. Itâs not one of these guys ended up marrying that surrogate and then they raised the family in like a heterosexual relationship. Itâs that kid didnât end up existing. Thatâs the alternative that people are fighting for, and I think thatâs that, that to me just seems like obviously the, the less moral position.
But I can understand how like if youâre just looking at like feelings and heartstrings and everything like that and I think the way that we change this is simply by having more g- like based gay men who are fighting against the urban monoculture and against the grooming of kids and stuff like that sort of in positions of visibility, right?
Like I, I, I think itâs sort of on them because I, I canât make them popular, and the only way that conservatives are gonna be like, âOh, theyâre not that bad,â is if theyâre listening to them regularly, if they have insight into their life, right?
Octavian Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: And yet we just donât have that many gay conservative influencers out there.
I mean, we got Scott Pressler and weâve got a, a few on YouTube that Iâve seen. But like the one space that they [00:50:00] donât seem, they seem to love working in, in, in like the, the orgs and the fundraising and the you know, getting bills passed, but they donât do a lot of, I guess who do we know? Tracy Woodgrain is probably the most famous that we know.
But yeah
Simone Collins: I love you.
Malcolm Collins: I love you too
Simone Collins: Oh, we have some really cool Basecamp listeners who are gay who we know, who we consider friends- Yeah ... but we wouldnât name them. But we kn- you know who you are.
Malcolm Collins: We wouldnât name them. Yeah, a- and thatâs, thatâs also why Iâm like, I just donât see it as being... Itâs people are like, âOh, thatâs how they got their hooks in.
Thatâs how they started winning the culture war.â And itâs like, I donât think so. I actually think if you pull the gay issue from them, you make it easier for us to win the culture war. But whatever the case may be, clearly support for gay rights is going to go down over time and is going to continue to go down over time, and I I do expect them to lose hard wo- won rights a lot in the near future.
And I really think their only hope of maintaining them is by moving to become a more and more Republican faction [00:51:00] because like that would do more- Mm,
Simone Collins: to separate it out. Like, âNo, weâre not fighting over gay marriage. Weâre fighting over all the other things. Weâre not with them.â I think thatâs the key distinction that needs to be made.
Weâre not with those guys. Yeah. All right. Well- Anyway ... I love you very much, George- Love you too, Jessica ... bye. Iâm so entertained by everything youâre telling me about Bricks & Minifigs, so the leaked police tapes, the lying about everything, the-
Malcolm Collins: Oh my God, the Bricks & Minifigs situation is everything. It is the juiciest drama. I canât stop learning about it. We got more information. I was explaining to Mo- Simone that I...
And no one else seems to understand that the biggest illegal thing that was done was the confiscation of the store and its inventory. And sort of everything else is downstream of that. Mm.
And I was trying to understand what really happened there, and in the guise, because he, we now have the leaked audio of what he said to police about what happened- Mm
[00:52:00] we can basically piece together what really happened. So the head CEO of Bricks & Minifigs, the, the, the guy who ended up taking over the location, we found out that heâs really close buddies with the CEO and worked in, in, in corporate. Mm. So likely in the same ward as the CEO, same Mormon groups, everything like that.
And the person who ran the store sent an email to the CEO saying, âIâm moving to Scotland and Iâm looking for the process to sell my franchise.â And he basically, what weâre learning is sort of the way he relates to the law. Heâs like, âWell, they were behind on their payments in the past because we messed up setting up their banking information.â
Uh-oh. âAnd yes, they worked that out, but are they really gonna do anything if sheâs moving to Scotland, or is she just gonna wanna wipe her hands of this? Let me just send a guy to the store to bully her and basically confiscate everything there, and Iâm gonna give it all, everything that Iâm able to confiscate from this woman, to my guy, and whatever he makes in terms of selling that stuff, heâs gonna give me that money, and thatâll be the payment for the franchise.â
Simone Collins: Oh, so thatâs why they were so keen [00:53:00] on- All of these profits. It was seller financing, except the seller financing was stolen goods.
Malcolm Collins: Yes. That the CEO helped him steal. Yeah. This is gonna be so bad. Like, itâs, itâs obviously just continuing to spiral at this point, and the more people learn about it, the more engaging the story gets.
You know, you canât put it down because itâs got such a clear good guy and bad guy. And thereâs even, like, some Mormons in it who are being good guy. Like, they, the kid from the guyâs temple because he swore to God that he would give the stuff back if they apologized to him, and they did tried to talk with him about it, and he calls the police on the, the Mormon kid as well.
Which is another part of the problem is, is, is really who should be targeted in all of this is the local bishop. And thatâs... Like, if I was a Mormon, thatâs who I would be panickedly emailing is the local bishop and be like, âYou, you guys need to do something.â Because th- these people will immediately fold if the local bishop reaches out to them and is like, âYou are clearly in the wrong and need to stop.â
Simone Collins: [00:54:00] Yeah, youâre out of line. This needs to stop right away. Youâre hurting the entire community. Maybe something will happen. I donât know. Maybe some- Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, if they, if they didnât- Wonder if the
Simone Collins: Mormon will watch your video
Malcolm Collins: and do something about it ... if they didnât deal with the people who beat a bunch of children to death this is during the Meadows Massacre-
Octavian Collins: Mommy, is it okay if I go out try to make sure the baby chicks have food and water?
Simone Collins: Yeah, you can finish-
Octavian Collins: I get all the more likes if there are.
Simone Collins: Yes. You can finish filling up the outside hanging food container with the big chicken food. Hmm. Okay?
Octavian Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: Thank you. Okay. Yeah, I
Octavian Collins: can.
Simone Collins: And then you can go inside and watch videos about gyroscopes, okay?
Octavian Collins: Gyroscopes. Yeah. Oh.
Simone Collins: Yeah. All right?
Octavian Collins: I turned it off, so Iâm sorry because-
Simone Collins: Thatâs okay.
You can turn it back on ... I
Octavian Collins: didnât know.
Simone Collins: Okay. Love you, buddy.
Octavian Collins: Bye-bye.
Simone Collins: All right, letâs go. Bye.
Malcolm Collins: But yeah, that, that, that situation is getting crazy. Crazy. Especially given the PR terror Mormonism has had with, like, Nick Shirley, for [00:55:00] example, being such a-
Simone Collins: I know. They, theyâve had so many good hits. You, youâve got Ballerina Farm, Nick Shirley.
Well, Ballerina Farm is mixed I guess. Mostly good though.
Malcolm Collins: On the conservative side itâs mostly positive.
Simone Collins: Yeah
Malcolm Collins: Mm. And then just to shove the foot in their face so hard, and they keep making the mistake of, âWe canât do anything about this. Itâs just a random bad actor.â And itâs like, Iâm sorry, you shouldnât organize your religion in a way that explicitly allows you to do something about it if you want to make that excuse, right?
Which is... Thatâs the thing that perplexes me. Like, I guess they donât-
Simone Collins: Yeah, that like you can y- you can be a young woman whoâs engaged to marry your future husband and go to, I guess your bishop or like some leader in your church, and you have to confess. Like, âOh, well, you know, we, we kinda had sex before marriage.â
And then theyâre like, âWell, okay, you canât have a temple marriage now. You...â Like, âIâm taking away all these things.â And like, so all these people are being [00:56:00] severely punished for- And
Malcolm Collins: this guy swore to God and then lied, and itâs provable.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Like i- in terms of just where I, the punishments are being applied, theyâre being applied in totally the wrong place.
So-
Malcolm Collins: Well, weâve got techno-puritanism, and if youâre a Mormon and youâre just disappointed in, in the way your church is handling things our religion is there for you. No scandals yet. No- Yet ... no bad actors. Give
Simone Collins: it time. Donât worry. You can sign up to become the first scandal. We need one.
Scandals wanted. Mm.
Malcolm Collins: Anyway. Somebodyâs got to be the first major scandal. All right.
Speaker 9: Gotta showcase my wifeâs wonderful slow-cooked pork and bok choy. What are you guys doing?
Octavian? What you eating? A burrito. Do you like it? Yeah. Did you get the taco for that yourself? Well, I- Do you wanna watch My Hero Academia with me? The show we were watching [00:57:00] yesterday? Um, I guess
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 episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the viral Bricks & Minifigs Lego scandal thatâs rocked the Mormon (LDS) community. What started as a $200k consignment dispute involving stolen Lego collections has spiraled into allegations of corporate theft, police corruption, small-town collusion, and a massive cultural reckoning.
Malcolm explores why this story is so damaging to Mormon PR, draws historical parallels to the Mountain Meadows Massacre, and questions the Churchâs response (or lack thereof). They discuss Mormon cultural tendencies, MLMs, in-group protection, and what this reveals about trusting religious communities when they hold local power.
A must-watch for anyone following the drama, interested in religious sociology, business ethics, or cultural fault lines.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Iâm excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be c- talking about the bricks and minifigures story.
Ooh ... but I want to take it in a different direction than a lot of people have gone on it, and I wanna g- talk about the meta discussion around it, and the extreme damage. And Iâve noticed that, that one, n- usually, the Mormon Church, and Mormons more broadly, are good at dealing with PR disasters. Like the, the, the way that they, you know, turned, The Book of Mormon into, like-
Simone Collins: Oh, yeah.
Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: advertising and-
Simone Collins: Spinning that Broadway play by Matt Stone and Trey Parker into something where they would just put-
Malcolm Collins: Good PR. Well, yeah,
Simone Collins: in a way, ... missionaries outside the theaters and be like, âHey, you enjoyed the play. Why not try the real thing?â I mean, itâs great.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, and in one of the other episodes we did, even the Mormon tendency to come off like creepy pod people to outsiders, To some outsiders
theyâve been able to subvert that into, like, âYeah, well, weâre just so wholesome,â right? You know, [00:01:00] like, âThatâs, thatâs why weâre coming off that way,â right? I mean, I still-
Simone Collins: Mormon is because theyâre just that wholesome. Get over it ...
Speaker 3: I heard thereâs warm pie
Simone Collins: from
Malcolm Collins: my, my cultural background think they come off like creepy pod people.
Speaker 26: I donât remember him being that friendly. Heâs obviously one of them. How
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: And we have a whole episode if youâre interested on what causes that reaction, and I donât think that Mormons have this emotional reaction, which is why they donât realize that they trigger it so hard in other people.
Simone Collins: Well, not all S- Scots-Irish people have it. I, like, I donât feel that. It, a lot of Mormons-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, you donât have the creepy...
But itâs clearly a common enough expression in humans that thereâs multiple horror series just made- Yeah ... out of triggering this reaction. Yeah.
Speaker 7: Stan, take the drug, man, prove it to us. Okay.
Open the door. It is so much better. Thereâs no fear or pain. Itâs beautiful. And you Weâll be beautiful. No [00:02:00] problems or worries. We want you. No pain, Stan? Weâre gonna come in here and Iâll show you some f*****g pain!
Malcolm Collins: And, and here Iâll put the scenes from The Faculty or, you know, Children of the Corn or something. But anyway, in this instance it has fundamentally sh- like oh, and more broadly, so for people who know our channel and our stance, weâre generally pretty pro-Mormon.
Weâre pro-Mormon for a few reasons. One is of all of the factions, like religious factions out there, theyâre one of the most persistently pro-technology. And if people are like, âWhy are they so pro-technology?â When contrasted with other religious groups, itâs because if you wanna be you know, status signal to other, you know, Orthodox Christians or to other Catholics, and you go to them and youâre like, âIâm doing it the traditional way, the way we did things in the 1850s,â you can look, like, extra cool.
If youâre a Mormon and you go like, âIâm doing things the way we did it in [00:03:00] the 1850s,â the other Mormons are gonna like, âY- you are doing things super wrong, then.â And then if youâre like no, the, the 1920s.â Yeah, a lot has changed since then. I, I mean, 1950s? W- w- weâre that different then, but itâs still a pretty different beast.
Itâs basically Mormonism evolves, even its belief system, so rapidly that there isnât the desire, Because, like, if you go to the most of the, the most conservative Mormons, like if youâre talking about the ones who really try to preserve traditions theyâre typically the schismatic cultists. This is like the are FLDS schismatic?
I donât remember
Simone Collins: No. Oh, oh, you mean from the mainstream church? Yes.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, I followed the esoteric schematic,
Simone Collins: yeah. Yes. Okay.
Malcolm Collins: So, again, it makes them very pro-technology. Two, theyâre a minority population and any minority population is [00:04:00] useful to partner with if they have something akin to Christian values because you can largely bet on them at least within federal regulation to promote laws that maintain maximum i- cultural sovereignty because they benefit from that cultural sovereignty.
Although they do try to impose their values on others in the regions where they are the majority, which is what weâre gonna get to in this video. And so not just like positionally are they a good group to ally with but they also have been on a tear in terms of good social media. I often point out that we went from a Mormon stereotype when I was growing up of a nerdy guy who knocks on your door and has like a pencil protector and a Book of Mormon, like asking to talk to you or something, right?
Speaker 43: Well, you two boys can just buck right off.
Speaker 44: Maâam. You heard me. Take that Book of Mormon and shove it so far Up your righteous asses, that, and choke, you soul [00:05:00] soliciting pigfuckers.
Malcolm Collins: You know, this was the stereotype my generation grew up with when the word Mormon came up and something went through your head. For todayâs youths, the stereotype, until maybe this event, and I think people are underplaying how big this is, was of a hot trad wife making muffins or something like that.
That was the stereotype Mormon in peopleâs heads for a while. And the reason, and weâll get into like why people have had such a bafflingly stupid response to this it has made me much more wary of long-term alliances with Mormon communities more generally. Specifically, the response that we have seen to this from Mormons, âcause I went through like at least a dozen Mormon videos, at least a dozen Mormon reactions, and weâll get into
Iâm assuming if youâre watching this, youâre broadly aware of what happened. But broad strokes, a Mormon-owned business staffed primarily by Mormons blatantly stole an [00:06:00] old manâs sort of inheritance for his son $200,000 worth of Lego
Simone Collins: figures. Excuse me. Itâs a little more complicated than that because, and this is something that you should appreciate as someone whoâs been through this process a, an old man who had a very, very impressive Star Wars Lego collection provided it to a Bricks & Minifigs Lego store on consignment.
This means that ownership was transferred to them per the contract, and then the seller would receive the payout when those goods were sold. Problem is, that business was sold, and then the people who bought the business-
Malcolm Collins: No, it wasnât sold. Sorry, youâre getting your facts wrong already.
Simone Collins: Really? I was told that it was sold
Malcolm Collins: no. So corporate illegally took it over. And they confiscated- Oh ... not just from this guy, but everything that this other business had, which is one of the reasons- Really?
Speaker 8: Basically, and weâll get into this later, a non-Mormon couple made the mistake of getting into a business relationship with a Mormon company, Bricks & Minifigs, and the company essentially just [00:07:00] stole their franchise and all their assets and then gave it to a Mormon couple
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, they ba- Thatâs
Simone Collins: super ... Well, then they, there should be a clear-cut case to be like, âThis, my contract was rendered invalid.â
Well,
Malcolm Collins: yeah, but the other person ... Again, I donât wanna get into the details yet. Okay ... Iâm just putting the broad, base-
Simone Collins: Well, I just, I, Iâm glad that I brought that up because I think a lot of people are under the same impression that I was
Malcolm Collins: No, this other case is explains I think why, because itâs baffling.
This is a company that makes 10 million a year. They have 300 locations. For them to cause such a blowup over $200,000 when they were very clearly in the wrong on this, and all of their paperwork makes it clear they were in the wrong on this which weâll get into, a baffling decision for somebody who used to run a company.
You just wouldnât do this. We all the time gave... Even when, like, weâre not sure if the customerâs in the right or something like that generally itâs always just like, âYeah, itâs not worth it.â Right? You know, just, just make it go away, right? For $200,000 this [00:08:00] should have been, especially when it was pretty clear that it was their, their fault, a just make it go away issue, but they didnât.
And so we need to get into why they probably didnât, because itâs actually almost kind of confusing that they didnât.
Simone Collins: Huh.
Malcolm Collins: The... I actually think it has something to do with the store that they took over basically illegally. And it might implicate if they give back the money to this person, that they have to give back the money for everything else that they stole.
Simone Collins: Which it- Well, yeah. If, if theyâre selling Legos on consignment and they are no longer honoring consignment agreements and just treating it like itâs inventory.
Malcolm Collins: No. Yeah. Itâs not just that. So, okay. Iâll explain a little bit more.
Simone Collins: Thank
Malcolm Collins: you. The guy who originally owned it and had the stuff listed on consignment at the store- Mm-hmm
uh, Bricks & Minifigs messed up his banking information. They messed up his banking information, so he was unable to pay them normally. Then what they did is he, he worked with them in terms of [00:09:00] fixing it. It took a few months, okay? And they eventually worked it out, and at the end of the period where they worked it out, he then paid them the franchising cost for when he hadnât, you know, when they, they had messed up his banking information, right?
And th- they agreed on the amount that he paid, they worked it out together, it was all amicable and things went ahead for a number of months. Then after, I donât know how many months after this, maybe about four months after this or something like this corporate just comes in and says, âWe are forcibly shutting down your location and taking control of all the assets in it,â because of this unpaid franchise thing.
But he had actually already paid the franchise thing and they have... Th- all of this is in writing, by the way. Oh. Right? Okay. Theyâre just asserting that, âWell, because you changed the format you paid it in during this period, it counts as unpaid, and we are seizing all of your assets.â Yeah, like,
Simone Collins: you didnât do it exactly correct, and therefore, dot.dot, somehow we own everything.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And so then they seized all of, not just [00:10:00] the stuff in consignment, all of his inventory.
Simone Collins: Oh my gosh. Oh my gosh, thatâs, that seems super easy to settle in court. Like, no oneâs gonna accept that. Thatâs-
Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah, itâs really bad. But weâre seeing why they thought they could got a- get away with it. And it had to do with the community, and this is where it gets interesting and why me going over all the Mormon influencers covering this has been really interesting.
Simone Collins: Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Is this is not something that could have happened in a normal community, when theyâre like, âOh, thereâs some bad Mormon members,â or something like that. Every incident tied to this case, whether itâs the police harassment of the people trying to handle this, the illegal jailing of people trying to handle this or the owner thinking that they could get away with this basically having the entire town government on their side, right?
And people are like, âOh, this is normal small town stuff.â This is not [00:11:00] normal small town stuff, okay? There is a reason why this is going so mega viral, and everyoneâs like, âIâve never seen anything like this in my life.â This is not normal small town stuff.
Speaker 9: And as a note, I grew up in small town Texas in large part. Never did I see anything remotely like this. This is not normal small town behavior in America
Malcolm Collins: And the very fact that many Mormons watch this event and then respond with, âThatâs just normal small town collusionâ-
shows, I think, a degree of incompatibility with American culture.
Simone Collins: Small town
Malcolm Collins: collusion ... which is not good, because other Americans watch the Mormon go up and be like, âThis is just a normal thing to happen in a town,â and theyâre like, â
Simone Collins: Really?â Itâs very hot vibes. I, I like
Malcolm Collins: it. What? No. Yeah. This isnât a normal thing to happen.
This is an insane thing to happen. And when theyâre like, âOh, well, itâs just bad,â why are the police protecting a [00:12:00] private citizen here? And a, and a clear bad actor at this point, right? Why is the head of police going up and lying on behalf of this guy provably? Because we can show that he got the dates wrong on the things he was saying by things in pictures.
Theyâve been able to recreate audio of what really happened during the raid, right? Because they had a camera on and that they, police knew they had no cause to do this. Why would the police go so far as to arrest a private citizen merely trying to get his property back? At one point, like to get how crazy this is, I donât know if youâve seen this They go to serve this guy his papers, and the police chief says this publicly, that the guy called the police and said he had his gun and he was thinking about shooting them because they were outside of his house trying to serve him his papers, which you have to do to start a court case.
The police then come, take the papers from this guy, say, âAre these even [00:13:00] real?â They then call up the court system. The court system tells them, âThese are real papers.â The police says, âOh, well then I guess Iâll go serve him the papers.â The guy refuses to take the papers from the police officer, okay? And then the police officer, what do they do after this?
They arrest him. The guy trying to do the normal part of the legal process, which is serving him his papers.
Simone Collins: Oh, on what grounds? It was on the grounds that they were not correct.
Malcolm Collins: Harassment for trying to serve someone their papers.
Simone Collins: Oh, for harassment? Okay. You
Malcolm Collins: have to serve ... For, if youâre unfamiliar, in the United States, you have to serve someone their papers.
You have to show that they opened their, the, the mail containing the legal stuff for the times to start on this stuff.
Simone Collins: Itâs this, itâs just such a weird thing of like legal theater.
Malcolm Collins: It is weird, and I, we should probably ban it in the United States. Itâs, itâs a stupid thing to have.
Simone Collins: Itâs really stupid, yeah
Malcolm Collins: but secondarily and I know it could lead to negative externalities. Thereâs probably some other way we can do it, okay? But like this intentionally not [00:14:00] taking your papers, it should be able to show like youâre not legally allowed to not take your papers if a court something tries to serve them to you.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: And this is a position people could apply to, okay? Or like if youâre home or something like that, you know what I mean? But anyway and, and to get into like ... And, and when people are like, âWell, that doesnât...â The reason the cops are colluding with the business is very clearly because of a Mormon church affiliation.
In addition to that, when the cops, because in one instance very clearly, fortunately we have video of this, they did not do a rolling stop. They stopped at a stoplight. The cops then pull over the car and immediately say like, you know, not, âWhoâs driving here?â You know, âDid you do a stoplight?â They go, âWhich one of you,â itâs in the YouTuberâs name Ben
Speaker 10: All the police footage of this, and as you can see, we didnât even do a rolling stop. We fully stopped at the stop sign. So this is an illegal traffic stop. So whoâs Ben? Uh, me. Ben, [00:15:00] howâs Utah? Itâs good. You like it? Okay. Itâs-
Malcolm Collins: .
And heâs like, âIâm Ben.â And the cop then says in like your most typical villain voice possible or, or more like crazy corrupt zombie town voice possible, âHow are you liking your time in Utah?â Which is clearly code for among the Mormons, right? Like that, he meant, he meant it in a, in a very specific way.
And so then Mormons could come to me and say, âWell, itâs not like we or the church could do anything about this.â And the problem is, is yeah, they absolutely could. The Mormon church isnât like a Protestant denomination where itâs decentralized and they canât do anything. They actively and regularly excommunicate people over fairly trivial things.
Simone Collins: Well, you can, you could lose your, your temple recommends. Like, you, you could... Thereâs, yeah, actually, the LDS church is uniquely well-positioned to basically both kind of economically plus more spiritually disempower or freeze out people who are doing naughty [00:16:00] things. So yeah, you can absolutely slap people on the wrist, and it doesnât even have to be temporary.
It can just be like, âLook, weâre gonna take away your temple recommends until you give this guy his Legos and stop being a jerk. Youâre really making the
Malcolm Collins: church look bad.â Itâd be, yeah, itâd be trivially easy for the church to handle.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But the church has decided not to handle it, and has a historic pattern of not handling things like this, which weâll go over.
Mm. Which make them a negative externality to other parties. Yeah ... actually, letâs just go straight into this. Are you familiar, Simone-
Mountain Meadows Massacre.
Simone Collins: While you give that, the Mountain Meadows Massacre, just let me get Tex so you can give- Okay ... I just have to feed him. You can, you can, you can give the, you can give the Mountain- You, are
Malcolm Collins: you aware of it?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Itâs sad. Kids get hurt, so you should probably say it when Iâm not here.
Malcolm Collins: All right. So the Mountains Meadow Massacre. In 1857 the m- members of the Church of Latter-day Saints, Mormons, killed 120 innocent immigrants who were simply [00:17:00] trying to...
They, they were also Appalachian immigrants, so my people, who were just trying to migrate to California through Mormon territory. Now it is true that Brigham Young sent them a letter telling them not to do this, and it didnât reach them in time. But after they did it, no one was punished for 10 years, and only two people were ever excommunicated by the church, despite a large number of people being involved in this.
And the way that they did it was horrifying. They told the settlers, âOkay, well then just give us your guns and weâll let you through the territory.â They gave them their guns, they separated them into three lines of men, women and children. They shot the men and the women, and then they
and then- or I should probably say something else there. And then with Styx, they did something until the other group wasnât around anymore. And then [00:18:00] they tried to blame it all on Native Americans who were only lightly involved in it. The church worked to cover it up within the region. And to give you an idea, people maintained main positions of power within the Mormon church after this.
So if we look at an individual like, William H. Dame, who was the colonel, the commander of the Iron Military District and a high-ranking figure, he gave the final approval for the massacre. But was indicted because people wouldnât speak out against him. The entire community stayed silent.
And he continued as a leadership figure within the church in the community afterwards. And then we also know other figures, like John Me Higbee, who was a participant, one of the, the people who, who did the beatings and everything like that. And he held positions in the church for years after this.. It was absolutely crazy, and for wondering why it wasnât even tried until 10 years after the event, and the key perpetrators maintained positions in the church. Two of them [00:19:00] were eventually excommunicated, but only two of them when dozens of them took place. I mean, 100, over 100 people were massacred.
In case youâre wondering, children under seven were not unalived, and they were brought into Mormon families. But other than that, all the kids
So itâs important to remember that this behavior of treating people outside the community as if their livesâ welfare... Oh, and they took all the peopleâs property. They just stole it all and distributed it, right? Treating them like their lives donât matter if they think they can get an advantage over them is a historic way that Mormons act, and is likely the way they would act in a society if they ever gained majority control again.
Mm. Given that we both see it historically and we see it in current behavior. That doesnât mean theyâre not a useful ally right now for our agenda. But in terms of groups gaining power in a region, one of the last groups you ever want to gain power is Mormons.
Speaker 12: And this is something that is reaffirmed every [00:20:00] time a Mormon says this is normal small town behavior, or, âOh, these are just individual bad actors, and itâs irrelevant that theyâre members of the church,â when the only reason anyone is acting this way is because of the church
Malcolm Collins: Mormons are only a really good ally because they are a minority right now, and they have to fight to protect the powers of minority traditions have to protect families from CPS, have to protect...
but the ways that they act when they have power has historically been pretty monstrous. And I think one of the things that this incident is bringing back for people-
Simone Collins: Oh ...
Malcolm Collins: is, âOh yeah, Mormons arenât just, like, sweet trad wives. Theyâre also the type of people who will beat your children to death if they think they can get away with it, and steal all your stuff,â right?
They, they also are the type of people who should genuinely be viewed adversarially if theyâre ever about to gain majority of control of anything that youâre affiliated with. [00:21:00] And they could make themselves, I mean, Mormonism evolves very quickly. They could make themselves into something not like that, and I think a lot of people had the perspective before this event blew up in the way it did, that the church had moved on from that mindset, that church members had moved on from that mindset.
The idea of, âOkay, well, if we have bad members, we deal with it,â right? Like, that presumably thatâs what the church did now, and now we are demonstrably seeing that is not the case. And worse, not only is it not the case, but the Mormon influencers who cover this show culturally The, the, like the wider Mormon community is nowhere near the place that they need to be to just, itâd be so trivial.
It would hurt the church not at all to just ring the just say, âHey, weâre taking away your temple recommends card until you give this guy his money back.â Simplest thing ever. It would cause literally no damage [00:22:00] for them. Mm. The key reason theyâre not doing this, right, the key reason theyâre not getting involved in this is because fundamentally it would be punishing Mormons for protecting Mormons in a way that was immoral.
And theyâre-
Simone Collins: Oh, see, I thought maybe theyâve had a conversation internally and been like, âIf we remove their temple recommends or we do anything to associate ourselves with them to comment on this, it would imply, it would make it out i- in the open and too obvious that this is a Mormon thing.â Whereas now there is plausible deniability.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, thereâs no plausible deniability.
Simone Collins: No.
Malcolm Collins: A- and I, I think that this is th- this is something that I think that Mormons when theyâre watching this donât get that non-Mormons are going through watching this. Mm-hmm. When we watch this, right? Mm. And we see the sheer- Mm ... injustice of whatâs being carried out here and, and just the wantonness [00:23:00] of it, the, the total lack of like, once we dominate a region we treat outsiders however we want, right?
The, the sheer wantedness of it. Like it, it, it makes me feel like youâre, youâre much better off being a Muslim in Israel than you are being a non-Mormon in one of these small Mormon towns, because apparently the police just donât work for you. They, they do not even care about the pretense of impartiality.
They donât even care about the pretense that theyâre anything other than... Thatâs what it looks like to a non-Mormon watching this. And if youâre a Mormon and you watch this and your blood is boiling and youâre angry at these individuals, itâs really important that you understand that Iâd say about 80% of the non-Mormons watching this, when their blood is boiling and theyâre directing that anger in a direction, it is at Mormonism.
Mm. Because the- Or at the church ... the whole pattern, the whole weirdness of it is clearly created by a Mormon cultural foundation. And the bigger problem is, is it could be fixed. All Mormons have to do is [00:24:00] speak up. But I then started thinking about this more broadly and realized this is a larger failure of the Mormon church.
Because I was thinking about like, actually, you know thereâs another thing that Iâm really surprised the Mormon church hasnât banned. âCause the Mormon church is willing to go out there and ban, you know, caffeine, although they loosen up- Not
Simone Collins: caffeine, hot drinks Yeah, hot drinks. Like basically just tea and coffee actually, not even really hot drinks
Malcolm Collins: from the words of wisdom. They ban gambling. Why canât they ban MLMs? MLMs are a massive problem in the Mormon church. Worse than being a generic massive problem, theyâre... Because of the way MLMs work, fundamentally the way that people, even if somebody is making money in an MLM, at the end of the day theyâre only making money because they are disenfranchising more people downstream of it.
Okay? Now the prophet, the head of the Mormon church, has come out and said you shouldnât use the Rolodexes you have from being a church member or church lists and stuff like that as part of your MLM prospecting.
Simone Collins: Hmm. [00:25:00]
Malcolm Collins: They could go a lot further than that because the core way that an MLM makes money is by basically scamming the people at the bottom of the pyramid, right?
And the problem is, is the way Mormon social communities work, and the reason MLM spread quickly within them, is because theyâre very good at converting each other. Theyâre very good at trusting each other. They have very low levels of incredulity when it comes to other Mormons, as weâre seeing play out in this particular instance.
So the central church could come in and say, âWe donât do this anymore,â because overall this obviously hurts Mormons the most that we donât ban this. But also the people who run the MLMs that are doing this are predominantly Mormon, and they donate a lot to the temple. And so it sort of ends up in a, if we can milk money out of people, and this is where I fundamentally changed my thoughts on Mormons when I started thinking about MLMs, because I used to give the temple an out, right?
When people are like, âOh, look at the templeâs financial scandals in the past,â right? Like, they invested a bunch of money in a shopping mall, and Iâm like, [00:26:00] âThatâs what- the way youâre supposed to invest money, you doofus.â You know? Thatâs not a scandal. Thatâs a normal thing to do, okay?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But to not restrict or even advise against joining MLMs when every sane person knows that they end up impoverishing hundreds of thousands of average Mormons every year, right?
Just so that they can get more donations. Thatâs when I was like, âOh, this is more Machiavellian than I thought,â right? This is more to its core sort of rotten than I really thought. Because the... And I even looked to see if theyâd ever looked at doing that, and theyâve banned lots of other stuff. Like, why can you ban gambling and not MLMs?
Oh, because gambling institutions arenât run by Mormons. I mean, the answer is obvious, right? Do you have thoughts before I go into the, the details of this particular case?
Simone Collins: No, please go ahead.
Malcolm Collins: One thing I want you to check out, Simone, âcause Iâd be very interested to [00:27:00] know. Can you check if the original owners of the store, the one who basically had the store stolen from them-
Simone Collins: Okay
Malcolm Collins: if they were Mormons too?
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. So Bricks & Mini figs operate franchises. The whole dispute stems from a deal made between a man called Brian Manswell and the former franchisee, law/Gorman.
Brianâs father had a massive collection of allegedly $200,000 but heâs now in poor health, so they were looking to sell. The owners of the store agreed to a consignment, meaning that they would hold all the sets at no cost, during which time the Manswell would still technically own them and they would advertise to sell them.
Weâve already explained this After taking consignment, the franchisees went to B&M corporate and told them that they were considering moving out of the country and inquired on the process of selling the store. Corporate responded by forcing them out and illegally taking possession of the store.
There is an actual video of the owners explicitly mentioning having the consignment and the corporate res- representative responding [00:28:00] by saying that they will handle it and take responsibility. So they both knew it and represented that they were to handle it, even when later theyâre like, âWell, we say we donât handle consignment.â
Yeah, but you signed a thing saying you would handle it, so youâre responsible for it. B&M install new owners in the Salem store J- Joshua Johnson and Brandon Best. Both of these franchisees and corporates refused to honor the consignment agreement, stating that consignments are prohibited by contract and that they have no responsibility for an unauthorized agreement entered in between Manswell and the previous owners.
Although, once again, their contract contradicts this, as does the actual video recording of the employees saying that they will take it on. It gets particularly awkward at this joint because B&Mâs official stance is that they could only identify 5K worth of Legos, which potentially belong to Mansfeld, and they supposedly offered to give these over, but not reimburse for the tens of thousands of missing sets.
For the part of Manswell and Reckless Ben, the YouTuber who joined forces with Manswell to take the case they allege that this isnât true at all and that they are in [00:29:00] possession of more sets. Or at least they were by the time they took over the store. Now, note heâs able to prove that they had more sets because they had the sets for sale in their online store after they took it over, and he was just able to look at them and be like, âHere, these are the sets,â right?
So theyâre provably, again, lying. What ensure... What ensues is a bunch of back and forth, âYou have my sets/money,â and no, B&M in no uncertain words, threatened him stating that the cost of taking them to court would be prohibitively expensive and than heâd ever make off the sets and that they intended to drag out the case if he tries.
So, after more nonsense they get accused of trespassing. They finally take them to small claims court, and they sort of trick them into not responding to the claims court and ended up winning $200,000. Then they go to collect the money, and they had shut down the store that day. To understand how severe this was they didnât even tell like children who had their birthday parties at the store that it [00:30:00] was
Simone Collins: about to be
Malcolm Collins: shut
Simone Collins: down.
Oh. And they ended- This is clearly to evade. I see. Wow.
Malcolm Collins: They ended up sitting in the parking lot during their birthday after they had rented out and paid them for the spot that, that was multiple kidsâ birthdays because they just didnât handle it. A- and again, we see here complete uncaring for non-Mormons.
So, were you able to find out?
Simone Collins: Yeah. The only confirmed members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are the corporate owners in Utah, not the original franchisees in Salem. Oh,
Malcolm Collins: no, no. The new franchisees who took over, Iâm pretty sure, are, are confirmed Mormon. So when they stole it from the original franchisees, they gave it to a Mormon family.
Look that- Did they?
Simone Collins: Okay, the incoming Utah-affiliated owners of the same franchise location, Joshua Johnson and Brandon Best are described in coverage and videos as Mormons. So yes. So the,
Malcolm Collins: a Mormon corporate illegally took possession of the store and all its property and gave it to a Mormon family. And people are [00:31:00] like, âWhat does this have to do with Mormonism?â
But then- Well,
Simone Collins: theyâre not a family. Itâs Joshua Johnson and Brandon Best, but-
Malcolm Collins: Oh, I guess two Mormon c- people. Okay.
Simone Collins: Yes.
But allegedly, too, because as described in, in basic- like, like according to the YouTube coverage and on Wikipedia, theyâre Mormons, but again, allegedly. Okay.
Malcolm Collins: So what, what happened with him and the cops, to go over this.
There was a traffic stop where they alleged that they had heroin in the car after a two-hour search showed up nothing. They then switched track and start saying that they got dilated pupils, which by the way, is the opposite of when you have heroin. They finally gave up. That- Wait,
Simone Collins: really? Cocaine would cause that.
Wouldnât heroin dilate your pupils?
Malcolm Collins: I think heroin causes constricted pupils, or Iâll go into this in, in notes.
Yep, I was right here. Heroin constricts pupils, the exact opposite of the reason they said they pulled him over
Malcolm Collins: Okay?
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: And note, we have from their cams, because itâs been leaked, that the cops said, âWe have nothing [00:32:00] to, to, how do we get them?â Basically just seeing outsiders as annoying, describing them as annoying.
They, were, itâs multiple unfounded traffic stops during which the police officer immediately addresses Bin in the backseat of the car by his name, being like, âWe know who you are. Thatâs why weâre pulling this car over,â even though there is zero reason to do so. Several police call-outs while trying to serve papers to Best, where the cops said...
And, and keep in mind, in one of these call-outs, and the chief of police admits this, he said he was thinking about shooting these people, okay? And had his gun, which I think might even be an illegal thing to do. Iâm, Iâm not sure, but I donât think you can be like, âIâm thinking about shooting you,â while waving a gun at somebody.
Fi- yeah, thatâs got to be illegal.
Speaker 13: Yes, this would count as brandishing a weapon and a criminal threat. So it is absolutely crazy that the chief of police literally is listing a criminal threat that this man is making to the chief of police as in his defense of his actions, in his defense of not [00:33:00] arresting the guy who made the criminal threat.
Uh, my God
Malcolm Collins: The, the cops just keep coming back every time he does this, removing him when heâs trying to serve papers. Finally he gets arrested on some bogus charges for putting up advertising on a GoFundMe. So that was what they... And this was wild. Heâs like, âIs it illegal to put up a GoFundMe?â
And theyâre like, âIt is if you list the peopleâs names on the GoFundMe.â Okay? The p- the problem is, is that that would be libel. That would not be a criminal offense that you could go to jail over. And they put him in jail without bail as well, so he couldnât- Ugh ... keep filming, âcause thatâs what they were afraid of.
Oh. So itâs gotten astronomically worse because of this. And then the police going up. They, thereâs video of them going up to him, and heâs just standing there in the video. They say that he was acting roughly, but heâs clearly just standing there. They grab his arm and dislocate his shoulder.
Speaker 14: Now, you understand me? Donât move like that. Okay? [00:34:00] Yeah, this cop pulled my arm so far back it dislocated my shoulder. He claims itâs because I was attempting to make an escape or something. Donât move like that. You understand me? Donât move like that. Donât move quick. Everybody just-
Malcolm Collins: Oh my gosh
this happens because his shoulder is very easy to dislocate. Apparently itâs happened to him a lot. And so heâs very aware of the sensation and what happens. Mm. And he put up a image of what a stock dislocated shoulder looks like in his video, and the police were like, âSee? Thatâs a stock photo.â
Itâs like, of course he couldnât get a real one. You guys had him in jail and wouldnât allow him to be X-rayed, right? Like, um So, and Iâll note here, we always call out communities when theyâre not dealing with their own, right? And I do this, we did this with the ADL and Chabad with the Jewish community when we talked about speed running a pogrom.
Weâre now doing it even with communities that weâre fairly close with. Itâs the Mormon community. Because this is astronomically bad. The level of brutality that we are seeing here in sort of a, a global stage in, in like an American town, right? And people can be [00:35:00] like, âOh, like this isnât as bad as like the, the grape gangs in Britain and stuff like that,â right?
And itâs like, no, itâs, itâs not exactly, but youâve got to understand to your average American who comes from a non-Mormon culture, it actually kind of looks worse. And the reason it looks worse is the sheer audacity with which itâs done, and the extent and, and the brazenness of the attempt to cover up, which implies to everyone all around, like if you were living in one of these communities or if these people had power, this is the way they treat you.
And whatâs worse is the way Mormon influencers have reacted, which is to see this and be like, âEither this is normal small town stuff, or what can we do about it? Itâs just individual bad actors.â And itâs like there are plenty of channels a Mormon can use to attempt to address this. Okay, so since all of this...
By the way, do, do you wanna say anything? [00:36:00]
Simone Collins: I hadnât thought about it this way when hearing about the drama. Like, I hadnât heard, thought about it of like, âOh, so you wanna know what itâs like to live in a, an LDS caliphate? A Catholic caliphate?â Like, look at what happens in the Hot Fuzz version of a Catholic town, an LDS town, a Baptist town, and I guess this is kind of interesting and telling.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And, and- I appreciate you framing it this way ... and note here they can be like, oh, I actually lived when I was a kid we had a ranch. And so I lived in a small Texas town for a lot of my life. And I had encounters with the cops there and everything like that. I had encounters with other business people there.
Let me tell you what, in a small Texas town, nobody is acting like this. I donât care if they go to the same church, theyâre interested in whatâs right, not what church they go to, okay? And if you wanna be like, âWell, whatâs it like to be an outsider in a small Texas town? Iâm sure itâs horrible there, too.â
Whoâs an outsider in a small Texas town? Leaflet. [00:37:00] She always talks about her town glowingly, right? Never had any problems with the locals, right? And, and, and so I, I wanna point out here again, this is not normal, right? Thoughts before I go further, Simone.
Simone Collins: Yeah, I mean, well, Iâve been in many small random towns in various places in the world where people are super chill.
So yeah, this is not normal at all.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, so i- in terms of whatâs happened, basically itâs all escalating. The police have not backed down at all. They did a, a press thing saying blah, blah, blah. Yeah, I
Simone Collins: saw footage from the press conference. Goodness gracious.
Malcolm Collins: The head of the company the, the, the toy company they- For its amazing
made an announcement basically saying, âWe did nothing wrong.â I guess I should, again, âcause we covered this a bit at the beginning, but I want to, As business owners go into this again, okay? This is not a normal thing for a company to do. We have had-
Simone Collins: Yeah, in, in the midst of acquiring, buying or selling a, a company, what typically [00:38:00] happens is there are two ways you can buy or sell a company.
You can buy all the companyâs stocks. It could be a stock purchase or, like, transfer of ownership, or it can be an asset purchase or transfer of ownership. And itâs almost always assets, because people donât want a stock purchase. It, it involves a transfer of liabilities that no one really wants. And so when you do an asset purchase or some kind of change of ownership of assets you also have to make a bunch of assignment agreements.
When we acquired a business on behalf of investors, the, the deal was almost lost over lawyers losing their minds over assignment agreements. We actually almost lost the deal because we refused to have every single vendor sign an assignment agreement saying basically, âWe will transfer our contract from the old corporation to the new corporation thatâs acquiring the assets.â
So this is just one of those things that, like, lawyers that get involved are crazy [00:39:00] about because it can, it can kill a business. Itâs really important. The ownership of these things matters. All this stuff is really well documented, and this is not something that you just, like, miss. Itâs not something, âOh,â like, you got lost in the shuffle.
Like, I thought, I thought these were ours. Like wait, wait, no, what? Yeah.â
Malcolm Collins: Yes, but this is the type of thing that, like, in a nor- if it was done normally, would have been a very long discussion, right? Yeah. And it- Or not ... and it, I mean, it was to the extent that it was filmed, right? Not a
Simone Collins: very
Malcolm Collins: long
Simone Collins: discussion.
So we do know that it happened. It just would have been, like, you know, we are assigning these, these as- these consignment contracts and, and the associated assets from business A to business B. Thatâs it. Itâs very simple. Like, okay, great, now we have, you know, th- these assets that we will sell and weâre obligated to sell, to, to give a certain cut of the profits to this person.
Like, itâs so simple. And this is not something that is missed.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. No, no. I mean, for corporate to shut down a franchise and transfer its assets without the franchiseeâs approval, when they werenât in clear violation [00:40:00] to another party is- One, thatâs insane. But then two, when the lawsuit came in, like the small $200,000 lawsuit, and you might be like, âThatâs a big lawsuit.â
That is not a big lawsuit for a company the size of B&M. Bricks and
Simone Collins: Minifigs?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, Br- Bricks and Minifigs. It, it, it, it is literally, like it- in terms of what... Iâm, Iâm not gonna say itâs a rounding error, but itâs the type of thing, I would say over the course of the last few years in running our business, there have been multiple instances where sometimes you just get hit, where like it turns out an one of your employees did something wrong, $50,000 or something like that.
You get hit with it. You pay it out. You always pay it out. You never sit on that money because the, the lawsuit and the reputational damage is just too big, right? The idea that they wouldnât do this, that theyâd be like, âOh, weâre just gonna ignore the legal case here,â right? Like, weâre... Or, or to even let it get to legal, right?
Over $200,000, which is nothing, is [00:41:00] astonishing and it displays- Well,
Simone Collins: and this also, itâs not $200,000 that they paid for. Itâs $200,000 of potential profit that they seized. Again, this is what it was valued at. This is not what itâs being sold for, though I imagine with inflation itâs probably being
Malcolm Collins: sold for that price.
No, no, no, but I just mean not just handing them $200,000 to make them go away.
Simone Collins: Oh, I see. Yeah. No, right, just buying it from them as, as a corporation. Oh, I see what youâre saying. Yeah. Yeah, as opp- They shouldnât have even waited to sell it on consignment. They shouldâve just bought it from them.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, no, when, when people start making a stink like this, itâs generally good to just give them the money and make them go away.
Right? I
Simone Collins: see. Yeah, just buy them off. Yeah, that, that wouldâve been simpler. But I mean, I think also they couldâve just been like, âOkay, we will honor your consignment agreement. Like, we will sell it or if you wanna take it back, take it back. We wonât sell it. I donât care.â
Malcolm Collins: No, but the ob- the obvious correct choice is just give them the money, right?
Mm-hmm. Like, that is... Sorry, running businesses, we have had to make this choice around large amounts of money. Not this large, but like $25,000 or something. We probably have to make [00:42:00] it about once a year a, a decision like this, Iâd say in the range between, like, 25,000 and $50,000. And itâs j- it sucks, but itâs just part of doing business.
That they wouldnât, or that they had adopted a business practice where all throughout corporate, keep in mind, it, it, it, this required both the owners of the shop deciding not to do anything about this and corporate deciding not to do anything about this, which likely required layers of decision-making in addition to whatever the police were doing required a mindset that I think- Mm
unfortunately for a lot of people, what a lot of people are gonna take away from this is, âOh, if you do business with a Mormon and you create a successful store theyâll just take that away from you and give it to a Mormon family one day.â As b-
Simone Collins: This is bad too, because Mormons are, have, have a really otherwise great professional reputation.
Especially LDS men who have served on missions, because they have basically gone through trial by [00:43:00] fire with patience, persistence, friendliness, sales skills, cold calling. Like, this is an amazing- Theyâre great
Malcolm Collins: salespeople ...
Simone Collins: yeah, like you, and, and they are disproportionately well represented in the CIA, like many high level good, like, government roles and stuff because itâs like, okay, these are people who are consistent, trustworthy, honorable values aligned, Mm
like, good. And, and stuff like this takes that reputation and weakens it, weakens it significantly because thereâs this now negative baggage.
Malcolm Collins: Well, it inverts it to an extent. Itâs like, oh, M- Mormons might make great employees, but never trust a Mormon in a Mormon-controlled territory if, if they are in the majority position or, or, or running a bus- business.
Like, never trust them to do... And, and if youâre like, âWell, how can you apply this to...â Again, this is the problem with a centralized church. Because you have a centralized church and the church isnât doing anything about this, and you could say thatâs not the churchâs role, and itâs like w- the churchâs role is to [00:44:00] make the lives of Mormons better, right?
To advance the Mormon cause. Yes, it is their role to handle negative PR when it comes up, right? Even if itâs through back channels, even if itâs through the guyâs local pastor or something like that. There, there are few things happening right now that are more the churchâs role. The bigger problem is the idea that like, oh, we can Because as I pointed out, the situation arose because of Mormon culture, peculiarities of Mo- Mormon culture.
If it arose because of peculiarities of Mormon culture, obviously people are gonna blame it on Mormonism, so you could use peculiarities of Mormon culture to address it. Except the opposite has happened.
Simone Collins: Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Right? A, a denial of responsibility and saying these are individual bad actors. Yeah. And to that extent, I think one thing that Iâm gonna...
Because weâve done a number of videos where we called out communities protecting their own bad actors, and how that externalizes them as a threat for everyone around them.
Simone Collins: Yeah, I think at this point weâve called out Catholics and Jews for this, [00:45:00] right?
Malcolm Collins: No, not Catholics for this. Jews heavily
Simone Collins: for this.
Have we, have we yet, we havenât yet called out, or maybe me- mentioning- Jews and trans
Malcolm Collins: people, and now
Simone Collins: Mormonism on the left ... youâve called out Mennonites for this because of the whole rape thing.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, the rape. Well, yeah, no, but th- th- thatâs different. The, the, I guess, yeah, the Catholics did attempt to protect.
But anyway, I want to go and say that as, because now Iâve realized weâve got a number of people who follow the religion we created, techno-puritanism so, just sort of like as a Malcolm words of wisdom or whatever, like- ... when this w- techno-puritan central organization is finally set up, the, the index when we have all of the tools for setting it up one of its core roles should be policing the morality of members with ability to excommunicate for demonstrably- I was
Simone Collins: just thinking of like-
immoral acts ... well, policing bad actors. Itâs not so much- Mm ... about policing morality as it is policing people who are doing harm in society.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, I think do, m- m- yeah, thatâs the better way to do it. It doesnât matter their [00:46:00] personal morality, their morality at home or anything like that. Only when they externalize harm onto other communities and the higher threat than externalizing harm on other communities is protecting a member of the techno-puritan community who is externalizing harm on other communities.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Donât protect bad actors I mean, look, it put a target on the back of the progressive movement too. I was just looking at thereâs been both, like, on X and through mainstream media, coverage of dwindling support, for example, gay marriage. It had its high at almost... So almost half of Republicans supported gay marriage around 2019.
And then I think it peaked at 2021. Between 2021 and 2024, it went from just under 50% of Republicans supporting gay marriage to now about 31%. And I think a lot of that had to do with the progressive movement on the whole supporting bad actors. And-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah ...
Simone Collins: trying to impose culture on people who donât want that culture imposed on them.
Whereas before, the framing had always [00:47:00] been, âJust let us live our lives. Please, just let us live our lives.â And everyoneâs like, âYeah, okay. Iâll, like, thatâs fine.â And
Malcolm Collins: this is the thing where the gays could say, âWell, thereâs no king gay that could, you know, do something about this.â King gay. The problem is there is a king Mormon who can do something about this.
Oh. There is a central organization, and thereâs people paid very good money- I thought you were gonna say
Simone Collins: thereâs a gay king, and Iâm like, âWhoâs the king of the gays?â This
Malcolm Collins: is exciting. Actually, did you know that the United States military spent hundreds of thousands of dol- I think it might have been arou- around a few million dollars trying to find the king of the gays?
Simone Collins: Wait, what?
Malcolm Collins: Oh, yeah. D- did you know the name of the person they were looking for?
Simone Collins: No.
Malcolm Collins: They, they, they ended up doing a dragnet to attempt to find- A
Simone Collins: dragnet? Sorry.
Malcolm Collins: S- Simone, I said they, they did a dragnet to attempt to find Dorothy.
Simone Collins: Huh? I donât get it.
Malcolm Collins: You donât, you know how you say you are gay back in the day, âIâm a friend of Dorothy.â
Simone Collins: Oh, no. Iâve never heard that before. Oh,
Malcolm Collins: youâve never heard the saying? I [00:48:00] was- It was a behind the way to say- No ... Iâm gay is Iâm a friend of Dorothy. Wait, really? And so they thought Dorothy, which meant Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz, was a real person. And so they attempted to
Simone Collins: find- They thought Dorothy was the king of the gays?
Like
Malcolm Collins: the, the key network o- or of the gays who like made the whole gay social scene work, this mysterious Dorothy.
Simone Collins: Thatâs amazing. I thought you were making a pun with Dragnet. I, yeah, I donât know. I, I, I wish that in the US military we just started recruiting for like, it was the Band of Thebes, right?
Just like a, a, a gay subset. That would be so cool. Thatâd be so hot.
Malcolm Collins: Band of Thebes. Yeah, no, but all, all gay regiments. Thatâs the way we should do gays in the
Simone Collins: military. You, no, I, I think, yeah. Like, we, we need to start having affiliate of regiments. Like, I want, I want the militant lesbians regiment. I want the Band of Thebes 2.0 USA edition.
I want
Malcolm Collins: the- I actually think you could probably do a pretty good job ... I
Simone Collins: want, I want the furries. I want the furry regiment. I want them fighting in costume, but with like heads up displays inside their, [00:49:00] their like fursona heads. I, I want, I want affiliate of ad hoc-
Malcolm Collins: But, but anyway, ...
Simone Collins: military bands.
Malcolm Collins: This has been really interesting to see.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: I think people are underestimating the cultural effect of this movement long-term. This moment has blown up in a way that, I mean, literally this is like, I, I, I think in terms of like average home penetration, the Tiger King of this, this d- you know-
Simone Collins: I donât, I donât know if itâs Tiger King level, but I will say that this has been surprisingly well-covered.
Iâm kinda like, ugh, like do we really care that much?
Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, what I wanted to cover it as from a, like, as howâs it gonna change society? Itâs gonna make people significantly more suspicious of Mormons or ever allowing Mormons to get power, and it makes me suspicious of Mormons. Like, I wanna be clear, it makes me suspicious when Mormons who I thought were normal, sane people are like, âThis is just a few bad actors.
This isnât a Mormon [00:50:00] problem.â Completely, when Mormon culture leads to bad action, completely saying, âOh, not my responsibility,â I was like, âOh, okay, well, f- me then,â right? You know? We just need to grow the techno-puritan alli- you know, federation. Y- get more members, continue to grow, have lots of babies.
And then you, you guys can have an organization you can join that doesnât have lots of crazy scandals. And it actually punishes its own bad actors. Wouldnât that be fun?
Simone Collins: I guess, you know, the, the OG Puritans were pretty famous for doing that, but sometimes they went a little too far. You know- But they did do-
witch hunts and all that.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Thatâs- The, the OG Puritans did punish their own community members when they externalized power more. A
Simone Collins: lot. No, it was like, it was a pa- it was a national pastime. We did, we went overboard. Weâre like, âYou said something about your dog. You need to die.â All sorts of things.
Very, very overboard. But anyway, thatâs itâs-
Malcolm Collins: Well, I, yeah, my biggest takeaway of this is no matter how aligned [00:51:00] you are with a group, I guess what this hammers home for me is- Well, all other groups are fundamentally evil. We need to grow our own
Simone Collins: and
Malcolm Collins: be prepared to- Oh, for th- Like, but I, but Iâm sorry, groups I keep thinking are, are okay.
It, it does
Simone Collins: The Mormons are fine. Look, I think this had to do more with messy governance and people not coordinating well on this, and maybe the, the mechanism by which you know, temple recommends are revoked or established just not really working well, it being kind of complicated. Because I think that temple recommends, I, I donât know the full way that, like, you get them, but I think they happen at the bishop level.
So, like, also you have to keep in mind that, like, they, the bishop whoâs responsible for the various policemen and then the various corporate people, like, itâs all separate non-coordinating volunteers who have full-time jobs, by the way. [00:52:00] Like, thereâs also the fact that this is a church that, except at the very highest levels, is made up of entirely volunteer work of, of full-time employed people.
Malcolm Collins: Hold on, Simona. I, I donât... No. The, the, they, the temple could act if they wanted to. The local bishop could act if they wanted to. And if people are like, âItâs
Simone Collins: not the churchâs-â
Malcolm Collins: Right,
Simone Collins: but also theyâre kind of busy. Things fall through the cracks when you do this much
Malcolm Collins: If, if, if people are like, âItâs not the churchâs job to police peopleâs morality,â thatâs literally exactly their job, right?
Itâs to, itâs to help people live moral lives. Itâs not the churchâs job to protect the churchâs reputation. Thatâs literally... Like, those are their two only jobs. And if youâre like, âWell, they never get involved in civil matters or something like that,â or well, maybe they should, you know? In, in this particular instance.
Because they have this whole- Look, I,
Simone Collins: I imagine that there might be some reckoning or discussion that takes place after this having happened, but that wouldnât surprise me. So-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, itâll just be too late then. They, they have literally days to react at this point. [00:53:00]
Simone Collins: Yeah. But I think if they act quickly, they can fend off reputational damage somewhat.
Malcolm Collins: So yeah, weâll see if they do it.
Simone Collins: Let me- Time
Malcolm Collins: will tell ... it would have to be pretty severe at this point, whatever they do, but weâll see.
Simone Collins: Mm, it, thisâll blow over pretty fast, I think.
Malcolm Collins: No, it wonât.
Simone Collins: Weâll see then. Iâm, Iâm
Malcolm Collins: obviously team Mormon. This will be a lasting cultural memory for a generation.
Simone Collins: Ah, I donât know.
I, I doubt.
Malcolm Collins: Just keep in mind, itâs not... Every single one of the largest streamers has done something on this
Simone Collins: Yeah, itâs true. Yeah, this is ... And on both sides of the political spectrum too. Itâs just basically like everyone is excited to dunk, to dunk on-
Malcolm Collins: This, this is the new Carol Baskin ... corporate Bricks &
Simone Collins: Minifigs.
Malcolm Collins: But worse, because I didnât feel a visceral anger- I
Simone Collins: thought there were a bunch of Team Carol people. There are no Team Bricks & Minifigs people. Oh no, thereâs a few Team Carol people,
Malcolm Collins: but thatâs the thing. Like, with Carol, I was disgusted by her, but I didnât feel a visceral rage at her like I do these people.
Simone Collins: Well, right, and this, this is a very unidirectional thing. Everyone [00:54:00] hates Brits- Bricks & Minifigs. Yeah. And everyone-
Malcolm Collins: And the local police department.
Simone Collins: And well, of course, and the, the local police department, which is acting ... Yeah, no, like, the, the, itâs, itâs
Malcolm Collins: one of these- Theyâre acting like a pod person town, okay?
Thatâs what theyâre acting like.
Simone Collins: Oh, gosh.
Malcolm Collins: I, I, I have no other way to describe this other than bizarre and otherworldly. It borders on having accidentally driven into a horror movie, when you see, like, the police pull them over and be like, âWhich one of you is Ben? Howâs it feel to be in Utah?â Thatâs bizarre and pod person-y, okay?
Okay. Thatâs not a normal thing to do or say.
Simone Collins: Itâs not great. Yeah. Itâs itâs not great.
I agree. Well, weâll see. I love you, though.
Malcolm Collins: Love you too.
Simone Collins: Iâll see you in data center
Malcolm Collins: You had the kids walk around with bagpipes today. One, one of our fans- Yeah, we had
Simone Collins: an award-winning- ... provided them with bagpipes ... bagpiper perform for our kids, and [00:55:00] they thought it was the coolest thing ever.
I mean, of course, in the moment they just looked stunned âcause what else do you do the first time you encounter a bagpipe? Youâre like, âWhat is happening to me right now?â But he played a perfect... Oh, like, two perfect songs, just really good. Wow, what a day. I was just thinking, I was... To this weekend, I took this kids to this spot up on the hill, the, that picnic rock by the old stone bridge, and I told them it was where the fairies were, and they thought it was too windy for fairies, which is fair.
You know, mosquitoes canât land on you when itâs too windy, and I donât think fairies can be out either. And then I, I pulled up pictures using Google Image of the Cottingley Fairies, âcause it was like, oh yeah, like famously young children have found fairies in, in the, in the woods. And I thought it would be convincing because, you know, like, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was a huge fan of the Cottingley Fairies.
Heâs like, âOh, this confirms it.â And of course, Tosia looks at them and heâs like, âWow, [00:56:00] fairies.â And Titan looks at it and sheâs like, âOh, the cotton candy fairies.â And then she just assumes that they make cotton candy, so thatâs all she fixates on. That she wants not cottonlea, Cottingley or whatever
Malcolm Collins: fairies.
What is the Cottingley Fairies? Is this a scam or something? Itâs
Simone Collins: the girls... You know those pictures of young girls with fairies? And they, theyâd convinced... They, they ran, wandered off into the woods with their fatherâs camera and took pictures and then came back. Their father developed the photos, and lo and behold, the girls are posing next to beautiful fairies.
And at the time, no one could figure out what it was. They could confirm the photos were not doctored at all. Of course it turns out that- The girls had just cut out illustrations of fairies and arranged them well and took pic- pictures. Like, they were very good amateur photographers, but, like, theyâd fooled a bunch of adults, including the writer of the Sherlock series.
This, [00:57:00] the clever man. Octavian takes one look at the photos and heâs like, âThey just cut out pictures of fairies.â And Iâm like, â
Malcolm Collins: What?â Oh, I love Octavian already. Smarter than Sherlock.
Simone Collins: What on earth? What on earth, Octavian?
Malcolm Collins: You are, you are too great at the fairy-
Simone Collins: But, but this, this is the same kid who, like, turns to me and is like, âWell, can I take my esophagus to Target?â
Because I, I have told him he can use a $25 Target gift card if he can just do the basic addition and subtraction he needs to in order to tell if he has, like, toys within his budget. You know, like, okay, well, you bought something with $4 and then... and another thing- Yeah ... with $2. How much money do you have left?
Then he can use the gift card. And, and he, he just doesnât wanna do the math, and so I, I, I bought him an abacus, and he keeps calling it his esophagus, and itâs very annoying.
Malcolm Collins: And he wants to take it to Target to do the math? And he wants to take his esophagus to Target, âcause then
Simone Collins: he [00:58:00] can- Does he
Malcolm Collins: actually know how to do math on the abacus?
Simone Collins: Yes, he can do esophagus math, thank you very much.
Malcolm Collins: You taught him that?
Simone Collins: Yes. Well, th- this thing, itâs been around for, what, thousands of years. Itâs extremely intuitive. You count the freaking beads. Itâs, itâs really good- I, well, I know thereâs, like- ... for developing number sense. ...
Malcolm Collins: specific ways to do, like, multiplication and stuff on it.
Simone Collins: Yeah. No, heâs not at that level. Weâre at the, like, the beads move on this side, and hereâs, you know, just move over the 10 beads.
Malcolm Collins: Addition and subtraction, okay, great.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Great, great. No weâre not, like, at the- But I love that heâs- Weâre not- ... teaching technical terms here ... Peruvian mountain traders yet, no.
Malcolm Collins: And people are like... Again, when theyâre like, âWhy donât you just teach your kids the Christian stories in the traditional way?â And Iâm like, âBecause I know my kids are like me, and theyâre going to be very, very skeptical people.â They just
Simone Collins: cut out the fair- pictures of fairies. I canât believe it. Anyway.
Yeah. I thought, I thought I was just gonna completely entrance the children and Octavian just has to blow it off. .
Malcolm Collins: Immediately. All right. Well, Iâm gonna get started here. Iâm, Iâm proud of
Simone Collins: you. [00:59:00] Okay.
Speaker 16: Do you think the answer is still gonna be there? Letâs, weâll find out
Well, weâre in a more sheltered area, so itâs nice and calm here. Feels good, right?
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 episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins tackle one of the most provocative questions in the age of AI: Does artificial intelligence finally make communism feasible?
They explore the structural failures of historical communism (incentives, power consolidation, information problems, and catastrophic mismanagement), why small-scale communism works (families, kibbutzim) but large-scale versions collapse, and whether AI-driven post-scarcity could solve these issues or simply replicate the same human problems of bad actors, bureaucracy, and distorted incentives.
Topics include:
* The Sam Altman UBI study and why unconditional cash transfers often fail
* Why Soviet science succeeded in some areas but governance always failed
* Power vacuums in anarcho-communism vs. centralized systems
* The future of âtechno-fiefdoms,â AI-managed communities, and human reserves for those left behind by AI disruption
* Demographic collapse and the likely rise of religious/techno-puritan movements
A raw, nuanced debate that challenges both right-wing and left-wing assumptions about economics, human nature, and the coming AI era.
Show Notes
Why Implementations Fail
* Economic calculation problem (Ludwig von Mises, 1920):
* Without private property and market prices, planners lack information on relative scarcity/costs.
* You canât rationally allocate steel, labor, or grain.
* Attempts at âmaterial balancesâ or cybernetic planning (e.g., Soviet OGASâan attempted nationwide information network) failed repeatedly.
* HOW AI CAN FIX THIS
* Adequately and dynamically track supply and demand
* Incentive and knowledge problems (Hayek):
* People respond to incentives.
* Common ownership dilutes responsibility (âtragedy of the commonsâ).
* Local knowledge is dispersed; central decrees canât match it.
* AI can just more adequately monitor dispersed local knowledge
* Innovation and maintenance collapse without profit/loss signals.
* If AI becomes like a mother and just âhandlesâ everything, then itâs not an issue
* Power dynamics:
* Enforcing abolition of private property and markets requires massive coercion.
* With AI, weâre approaching a place where the majority of the population wonât have anything (or anything to lose), property-wise.
* This concentrates power in a vanguard/party, which becomes a new ruling class (see Milovan Djilasâ The New Class).
* We might see a bifurcated society: One ruling elite doing their own thing, then AI-led/governed communist societies for everyone else
* The state doesnât wither; it entrenches (Orwell, Animal Farm).
* This is more of an issue when the state is fighting over something desirable, but what weâre looking at is a society largely abandoned by the elite.
* Human nature (loaded with self-interest, status-seeking, family preferences as it is) doesnât vanish.
* Not a problem if a non-biological mind is governing.
* Repeated patterns:
* Initial revolutionary fervor lead toâŠ
* purges of âwreckersâ/kulaks, which lead to
* Shortages, which lead toâŠ
* blame external enemies/capitalism, which lead toâŠ
* more controls, which lead toâŠ
* corruption/black markets, which lead toâŠ
* reform or collapse
* This is not bad luck or ârevisionismâ; itâs structural.
* Even small-scale communes (e.g., 19th-century utopian ones, Israeli kibbutzim long-term, or modern intentional communities) often dissolve due to free-riding, exit of talent, and disputes over âneeds.â
* HOWEVER, with AI, I imagine communism to not come as a revolution, but rather a deus ex machina saving the leftovers in society from death.
Why has âreal communism never been tried?â
âReal communism has never been triedâ is a rhetorical defense that shifts the definition of communism away from every historical implementation. It functions as a motte-and-bailey tactic or âno true Scotsmanâ fallacy: the ideal (a stateless, classless, moneyless society of perfect equality and abundance) is defended, while real-world attempts are dismissed as insufficiently pure.
Defenders counter with ânot realâ because:
* Stalin/Mao âbetrayedâ the revolution.
* No stateless end-stage achieved.
* External sanctions/wars interfered.
* âState capitalismâ or âdeformed socialism.â
What âreal communismâ means in theory
Marx and Engels described:
* Socialism as the transitional stage: proletarian dictatorship, state ownership of production.
* Communism as the higher stage: state âwithers away,â common ownership, âfrom each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,â no classes, no money, no scarcity.
Lenin, Trotsky, and later Marxists added layers like vanguard parties and democratic centralism to get there.
Every major attempt followed Marxist blueprints:
* USSR (1917-1991): Bolshevik Revolution, War Communism, collectivization, Five-Year Plans. Result: Holodomor famine (millions dead), Gulags, purges, stagnation, collapse. Leaders admitted severe deviations but blamed âcapitalist encirclementâ or âbureaucracy.â
* China (1949-): Great Leap Forward (30+ million dead from famine), Cultural Revolution, mass starvation and chaos. Shifted to market reforms under Deng for survival; current system is state capitalism with CCP control.
* Cambodia (Khmer Rouge, 1975-79): Explicitly tried Year Zero agrarian communism. ~1.5-2 million dead (25% of population) via execution, starvation, overwork.
* Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Ethiopia, Venezuela: Similar patternsâinitial redistribution, central planning, suppression of markets/dissent, economic decline, emigration, authoritarianism. Venezuela went from richest Latin American country per capita to hyperinflation and collapse under â21st-century socialism.â
The Black Book of Communism estimates 80-100 million deaths from democide, famine, and repression across implementations. These werenât fringe experiments; they were the largest-scale attempts, backed by ideology from Marxâs writings.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Today we are gonna be discussing an exciting topic, which is does communism make sense now? Specifically what weâre gonna be digging into here is, like, we are known as, I guess, far right-wing YouTubers or podcasters or intellectual influencers.
I donât know, right? No. But, but people consider us far right-wing. Now, a lot of our fans consider us very centrist, so maybe, but I, I identify as, as right wing, so whatever, right? Like, I... The, the, the sane far right is where I think Iâd put us, right? A- at least within, like, the tech right circles and stuff like that.
Which puts us in an interesting position vis-Ă -vis communism, âcause Iâm not gonna come out here and just be like... We have said it in the past on the show very clearly that communism may work in a post-scarcity economy. And we have also a number of times gone into what it means when we say something like that, right?
Mm-hmm. Where, like, we are putting [00:01:00] extremely heavy caveats on this. When people have done UBI experiments and they have just handed people money, they have seen extremely bad outcomes. The most famous is the Sam Altman one where they gave people $1,000 every month for three years, and the people who had been given the money they, they had less money at the end of it, total money, than the people who had been given nothing in terms of, like, wealth increase, right?
They, they didnât spend any more time with their kids. They didnât have any more kids. They didnât spend any more time in education. They really only spent more time in recreation. Thatâs it.
Simone Collins: And they paid down their debt a little, so thatâs nice.
Malcolm Collins: Hmm. That doesnât really mean anything. Oh, they
Simone Collins: visited the doctor a little more.
Malcolm Collins: It doesnât really mean anything if on net they had less money.
Simone Collins: Yeah. So
Malcolm Collins: yes, they paid down their debt, but on net they had less money. Right. So, just a disaster, and weâve seen this in communities that are offered UBI, right? Like Native American communities, for example, where we see them just completely [00:02:00] dissolve in terms of productivity, in terms of drug addiction, in terms of alcohol addiction the moment they get on something that is the equivalent of, like, UBI or, like, local communism or something like that.
And so then the question is okay, How do we eh, th- that, that all being the case, like also clearly AI is gonna disrupt what the economy means, right? And, and, and it may not happen this generation, right? It may not happen, ... Well, itâs probably gonna happen in our lifetimes, if Iâm gonna be honest.
Like, if we look at- Yeah ... the speed of AI in relation to automated workers e- even, even for physical labor from what weâre sort of seeing behind the scenes, thatâs developing a lot faster than people realize. And that we may be replacing people in a lot more fields a lot faster than people think.
And so then the question is, is okay, well if that happens, then what does the economy mean? How do you have a [00:03:00] functional economy with struggle and some form of scarcity so people donât go crazy without what weâve come to understand as, like, market labor, right? And so to explore this subject, I want to focus on a few areas.
I want to focus on, like, underlying how does capitalism help people? Examine the individual structures within capitalism that lead to the net outcome of positive human results. And see how those can be potentially mimicked in a post traditionally capitalist economy.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: But then secondarily the big question we have is Okay, how does communism often fail, and how could AI, or even could AI realistically prevent these failure scenarios?
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: So, classic failure scenario in communism that Iâll sort of walk people through why, why communism almost always [00:04:00] fails. Not almost always. It, it literally always fails above certain sizes. Communism works in small government stuff, like it works with some of the kibbutzim. It works with families.
Every family is communist. W- w- sorry, people donât understand what I mean by that. Like itâs from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs, right? Like my baby doesnât work, right? And I canât produce milk for them, right? You know, the person who can produce milk produces the milk.
The, the, the, the baby and the kids are not expected to bring in an income at this stage, right? You know, we, but we, we still support them. The types of jobs and roles that each of us take on are the types of jobs and role that weâre best at, both due to our educational background, proficiencies, and yes, gender.
So we live in a communist structure already. We live in a communist utopia already, itâs just a very small one. But the question is, is why does it break down at a societal level? Weâve written extensively on this, so Iâll keep it pretty short. The key reason is [00:05:00] is when you are creating a larger communist structure, you need to centralize power in a way that rewards bad actors.
And a lot of people donât s- s- theyâre like, âOh, itâs that people arenât motivated when they just get money from the state,â or something like that. Or that you canât do advanced things in a communist system, and thatâs not true. Like, that, thatâs actually, like, factually untrue. Like, the one thing the Soviet Union was actually pretty good at was science.
Like, they were beating us soundly in the space race for quite a long period of the space race. They had many excellent, excellent scientists. Yes, because of government bureaucracy and the way sort of power gets captured in communist systems, they also ended up making catastrophically stupid scientific blunders that killed hundreds of millions of people.
The Chinese did this as well. This is typically in fields like biology and, and stuff like this. But in, in physics, they [00:06:00] did pretty well. So no, itâs, it, itâs actually not that people are just unmotivated in these systems. Highly motivated, highly conscientious people are typically equally or, if not, even more motivated in communist ecosystems.
Where communist ecosystems really break down is for less competent fields. The, the average line worker and stuff like that. Because at this point, you donât wanna do those jobs. Nobody wants to do those jobs. People often end up doing them at the point of a gun barrel and maliciously poorly. Itâs, itâs the average desk worker job.
Itâs not the, âI got my best job I could have ever gotten because Iâm literally one of the best people in the country at doing said job.â Like, âIâm a gun nut, and now I get to spend all of my day coming up with gun designs, and now we have the AK-47.â Right? You know, âIâm a, a nuke nut.â Right? âIâm really interested in cutting edge nuclear technology, and now we have a, a Soviet atomic bomb.â
Right? By the way, like, to put in [00:07:00] context how impressive that is, Iran still canât make an at- now a- admittedly, like, everyoneâs mad at them, but, like, the, the Soviet Union was doing this stuff, like, over half a century ago, right, at this point. So Communism can actually motivate the very best to do the very best.
One of the problems you have with Soviet science, sorry if Iâm getting on a sidetrack here but they, like, really screwed up their tank production, for example simply because of, like, government politics that ended up prioritizing one idiotâs designs over the guy who was actually more competent because Soviet systems are not always good at finding the most competent person.
Huh ... capitalist systems also struggle sometimes to find the most competent person, but generally- True
Simone Collins: story ...
Malcolm Collins: like, if the government turned me away in a capitalist system, I could presumably go and build my own company separately off of my ideas. It doesnât work that way, especially not in a country like the United States.
Like, I go off [00:08:00] and I wanna build my own tank and because somebody else has, like, government crony contract, they, they still get the government crony contract because theyâre at Boeing and theyâll, theyâll kill you or something. You know, thatâs, thatâs the way this works. But again, the, the, the point Iâm making here is yes, Sovietism leads to catastrophic inefficiencies but you can get those within at least what we call capitalist ecosystems as well, right?
Mm-hmm. So now back to what the real problem of communism is So when youâre going down a communist path, you essentially have two strategies that you can attempt. You can say, âWeâre gonna centralize all the power into one bureaucracy and this single bureaucracy is going to manage all forms of the economy and everything like that.â
And everybody knows, like, generally this doesnât seem to really work for a number of reasons tied to, like, inefficiency, but weâll put those reasons aside in a bucket for now. So strategy [00:09:00] number one, centralize everything. Essentially youâre creating a country thatâs ruled by a single monopolistic company.
That is, that is functionally what, what that form of communism is. Which is why I always say that the end state of communism and the end state of extreme libertarianism are the same.
Simone Collins: Well, and I mean, a, a big part of this that tends to create huge, huge problems is when you are creating one, when youâre consolidating everything, youâre also abolishing private property and markets, and that requires- Well,
Malcolm Collins: and then people donât have the, the same reason to invest in their continued property.
Simone Collins: And it requires a lot of coercion. Like, pe- people donât just, âOh, sure. Yeah, take my house. Thatâs fine. I didnât...
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs fine.â I mean, thatâs, thatâs generally the lower bloodshed and the lower death toll is on the redistribution part, though. Yeah,
Simone Collins: thatâs the step one part. But Iâm just saying, like, as a little starting point, thereâs also some friction there.
Yeah, I
Malcolm Collins: mean, obviously it involves robbing people of their property and everything like that. [00:10:00] I get that. But thatâs- Y- yeah ... usually the lower death... I mean, a lot of, obviously conservative commentators are gonna crash out about government redistribution, everything like that. Iâm just pointing out thatâs not actually where the, the vast majority of communist death tolls come from.
The vast majority of communist death tolls come from the inefficient management that happens after that.
Simone Collins: Yeah, so in terms of, At least thereâs this one book that tries to give a full tally. Itâs called The Black Book of Communism, and they estimate that there have been 80 to 100 million deaths From democide, famine, and repression across implementations.
I think famineâs the biggest killer.
Malcolm Collins: Right. So letâs, weâll, weâll talk about... okay, Iâll quickly explain why the things happen without going too deep into them. I can. One problem you have within a communist ecosystem is that an individual has no reason to invest in anything that they own, because they donât own anything.
Yeah. So like, eh, our house requires a ton of effort and work to keep from falling apart. This is why if you go to [00:11:00] many communist countries, you donât see tons of old houses, or you see houses in horrible disrepair, or, like, giant blocks in horrible disrepair. Because people didnât have a reason to invest in the upkeep of their own property and the area around their property, right?
Like, itâs not just my house I want to be nice, itâs the region around my house, because that increases its value. And this is true of companies, this is true of everything. Itâs, itâs a huge positive cycle that you get out of this. Mm-hmm. And the, the secondary bigger thing is, is inefficiency in the way things are operated.
And what people say, and I think incorrectly, is that you simply cannot manage, in a planned out format, an entire economy. And it is in attempting to do that that the Soviet systems begin to break down and the communist systems begin to break down in ways that lead to these famines and stuff like that.
But when we look at the actual causes of most of the famines, it isnât actually due to problems in inefficient management. Itâs, [00:12:00] itâs due to explicitly bad policy like killing all the birds in China that were eating the pests on the crop. They were mad that they sometimes ate the crops, and then they had giant pests, and then a bunch of people died because the way that they were measuring food is they would go to a town and theyâd basically tell the person running the town, âWell, if you canât show me X amount of food, youâre gonna be removed from your position,â right?
So now theyâre like, âOh yeah, weâve got that amount of food,â right? And then they go to the people and they go, âHey, the military works for me. You give all your food for export.â Now they donât have any food left, because they were just pretending that they had X amount of food. But they wanted to keep their position, and they had the guns, so they were in a position to do this.
Because if they donât do this, then theyâre put in a... Now this is all a problem of organization. Like, all of these individual problems could be solved if you had an intelligent and conscientious person going through the system and attempting to address every one of these problems. What we really need to get to is why that doesnât happen, why these problems never get [00:13:00] cau- solved, why bad ideas get pushed down, and we need to say, âCan AI prevent this?â
Simone Collins: Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: So, thoughts before I go further, Simone?
Simone Collins: I mean, I, I think youâre focusing a lot on the pure governance problems, but thereâs more to it than just that, and so itâs also important to address those other short, shortfalls.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. What... Iâm, Iâm actually claiming there are not, actually. The problems that are not governance problems are not that big in communism.
So what do you think they are?
Simone Collins: That we discount the extent to which markets are like an organism or ecosystem that, that is able to manage huge amounts of information in a very responsive, distributed, natural way. And that when you try to have a human-run mostly blind government system run it, you donât get the data you need.
Like, planners donât have enough information- So I- ... about relative stares- scarcity and cost of things ...
Malcolm Collins: fundamentally disagree with your thesis here. There are [00:14:00] ways within a communist system, without-
Simone Collins: yeah, and the Soviet, like, thereâs the Soviet OGAS system that they, they tried to create this nationwide information network to, to better manage this, but they couldnât.
Like, just getting the information inputs in a pre-AI age was just not feasible. And they had to plan-
Malcolm Collins: No, the point Iâm making is it isnât just unfeasible. They just did it in bad ways. You can create pseudo-capitalistic systems in a communist empire that can measure supply and demand and react to supply and demand with rewards.
I mean, you are creating essentially capitalism with extra steps. But the idea of having distributive information networks that can recognize scarcity and demand is not something that is out of completely impossible in a communist system. The point Iâm making here is that if you actually look, and I know from, like, a [00:15:00] capitalist perspective, the great machine, and people have talked about, like, capitalism as the first AI, right?
And in a way, capitalism is kind of the first AI, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But the, the capitalist machine or the AI thatâs created by the giant capitalistic network is not something that it is completely impossible to reverse engineer. And the reason I say this is that when we look at the failures of communist systems demonstrably, they are not due to failures of centralized control.
They are due to specific policy failures
Simone Collins: I wouldnât say itâs just policy failures, too. I think that the fundamental system whereby, again, in a pre-AI age, communism comes to exist, which is this process of like a revolution to socialism to then communism, is doomed [00:16:00] to fail, right? Because you have this revolutionary fur- fervor, and then you have the purge where like a bunch of like people lose their property, and thereâs the kulaks.
Mm. And then you get shortages, and then you have the famine, and then you have the backlash to that, the blame. âWe have to, we have to handle this. Oh, itâs, itâs capitalism. Itâs all these other things.â And then that means we have to implement more controls, and then that leads to corrupt and black markets, and then that leads to reform or collapse.
And itâs just, like things... Itâs, itâs an inherently unstable system the way you have to stumble into cap- or to communism now. And hereâs my fundamental thesis when it comes to communism and AI and how itâs going to play out and why itâs going to work, and why many of the fundamental things that lead to this instability arenât going to be a problem.
One of the key things being, I mean, I know youâre talking about like human-led governance being really stupid, and AGI can sort of in a hand-wavy way fix [00:17:00] that, and the right AGI can. I think the other thing is that communism is often a problem because a bunch of corrupt, power-hungry people are like scrambling for the governing power and for the resources of like the workers and all their possessions, right?
Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm.
Simone Collins: But what, what happens when you have a bunch of people who donât work and donât own anything? Like no oneâs gonna fight over them. No one wants them. And what I think might happen is that a large- a largely orphaned population, the l- the bottom part of the K-shaped economy, is going to be left high and dry by governments that falter, both due to like weird AI disruption, but also due to demographic collapse, and then also just left behind by the rich people who go off to their like techno-futurism.
Thatâs an interesting
Malcolm Collins: thesis, but Iâm gonna push back on this.
Simone Collins: Let me finish with my thing then, and then youâll push back. And then basically I think that some, some of the people who feel bad morally about leaving [00:18:00] behind everyone else are gonna send down some of their AGI gods to just create little communist communities for the people whoâve been left behind, and then those people will be taken care of by mother AI that will handle all their stuff for them.
So you donât have anyone having their property taken away. You donât have anyone, you know, being like accused of corruption or anything. You basically just have AI taking care of those who are left behind. Why is this wrong?
Malcolm Collins: So, I, I will get to that in a second. You might get that. Like, that is a possible good scenario.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: But the reason why I think thatâs wrong is because I fundamentally disagree with you about the first part. The first part is, is communism, and I, I, I keep trying to come back to this because itâs actually central to understand why AI will likely fail even within a communist system, right? Like, why- AI would break communism is that communism doesnât fail because [00:19:00] of it, it, it prevents competent people from working, or it doesnât motivate people enough, or itâs bad at determining on-the-ground risks because capitalism just works as this brilliant machine that can measure things about economic states that communism could never measure.
And the evidence I used for that is, again, the failures and the successes we had under communism. Communism achieved some things that were enormously successful in terms of scientific progress, industrial development, et cetera. But it also obviously super high des- Iâm not ... But what Iâm saying is itâs to just be like communism didnât function at all is, is factually incorrect.
And to say that within a communist ecosystem like letâs look at a capitalist ecosystem, right? If you go to a factory what type of person do you want running the factory, right? The type of person you want running the factory is gonna be the most competent person to run the factory, who has the support of the, the workers and can push them to work [00:20:00] their hardest.
In a communist system, what type of person do you want to run the factory? It, itâs the same type of person, right? The people who end up in the lower level management positions in communist and capitalist systems at least aspirationally in how these systems could, should be structured, are the same types of people.
Like you donât have this, ... A- and itâs also communist systems donât send food to the wrong place you know, malevolently or something like that. When we talk about communist systems failing at determining what, like where economic needs need to go, right? The, in the, in the way a capitalist system would.
The biggest failures are virtually never because the, the system wasnât good at monitoring things. They are again, when I was talking about like the, the wheat famine, right? It was, it was a twofold failure. It was a failure of the, the [00:21:00] way that they were measuring, like how much wheat each region had, was a very bad way to be measuring each, how much wheat each region had, that led to adverse incentives, which led to them sending wheat to locations that didnât need wheat from locations that did need wheat.
A- and they created a pest problem because they couldnât tell people above them that they were wrong, right? Now note, in a capitalist system, you might not be able to tell your boss that theyâre wrong, right? Like it letâs consider Ubisoft or something like that. I might- Mm-hmm ... even in a capitalist system not be able to tell my boss you make a, a, a video game about a, a Black guy in Japan going around murdering people.
Itâs probably gonna cause problems, and a lot of people are going to be very upset by that.â And then I get fired, right? But within a capitalist system, the wider capitalist ecosystem actually punishes that person, not because of an issue of supply and demand. In a communist system, youâd presumably want to punish the person as well, [00:22:00] if the goal of the company was entertainment and not spreading the ideology.
But in a communist system, itâs often spreading ideology, so they, they probably wouldnât be punished in the same way. But you, you understand what I mean. Like, suppose itâs something other than a game company and Iâm actually like, âOh, the way youâre doing this is functionally bad and going to lead to a bad product.â
Communist ecosystems should be determining, oh, this is a bad product. And thereâs functionally ways that they can determine, oh, this is a product that people donât like. Mm ... but so now the question is, is why do these systems fail in communism, right? Like, why do the people in the positions that would be equivalent to, like, running Ubisoft in a communist system not end up getting replaced or not end up getting replaced in the way that they should get replaced?
And itâs because, going back to what I was saying originally, communist systems fall into two broad categories. One is they function like a giant monopoly. Like, the entire government is one giant ultra libertarian monopoly where one company town has taken over everything and houses everyone and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Yeah ... very dystopian, whatever. But the thing is, is the moment I say that, [00:23:00] every communist is gonna say âWell, thatâs not the way I wanna do communism.â You know, they wanna go in and do- Yeah ... anarcho-communism. They wanna do syndicalism. They wanna do basically they wanna have independently operating small communist groups.
Which extremely doesnât work. The reason it doesnât work is because it leaves a power vacuum. This is also why, like, extreme forms of libertarianism donât work and everything like that. So suppose I try to set up this anarcho-communist system or even a completely syndicalist system, right, where, like, everything is, is totally decentralized.
Anybody who decides to act as a bad actor and begin to aggressively and subversively acquiring both support and resources can exert power on anyone whoâs playing by the rules. And this is, like, a pro- like, in the Molyneux debate when I was trying to figure out how he thought that his weird libertarian utopia would work this is something that, like, he seemed to [00:24:00] fundamentally not understand.
Heâs like, âNo, everyone will rise up against a bad actor as soon as a bad actor starts accumulating power.â And Iâm like, âIâm sorry, like, we have history to look at. We know that doesnât happen,â right? Like, bad actors are actually very good at accumulating power. And and then they, they build an army, and the army can go to the person next to them.
This is true even outside of, even without a military, right? So this, this came when I was talking, like, extreme forms of libertarianism with Steven Molyneux. I was like, how do you get something like a chip fab, right? That costs- Yeah ... hundreds of billions of dollars to make?
Simone Collins: Yeah. Like- Years of a- ... well-
investment with no payout, et cetera.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. The, the... and there might be no payout. And heâs like, âWell, I guess we could get, like, hundreds of millions of workers to form, like, a cooperative to invest everything into this.â And then itâs like, okay, then whoâs operating the cooperative, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: And theyâre like, âWell, then we would have, like, some form of [00:25:00] democracy.â
And Iâm like, okay, so as soon as somebody gains power within this giant fabricator state, right? Thatâs basically, itâs a state created to run a fabricator. Why would they not attempt to create systems that prevent them from being removed from power? Yeah. And the answer is, of course, well, everyone would rise up against them if they did something like this.
In the same way that he was like, well, heâs like, âEven if they got away with it, even if they accomplish all of this, then people wouldnât buy their product because theyâd see that theyâre a bad actor.â Yeah. And Iâm like, bro, you have a product in your pocket that was probably made by slaves. Like, you know thatâs not true.
You know that people-
Simone Collins: Or eating food that is, or what, any, any mixture of things. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So what ends up happening, because the, the, the wider point Iâm making here, here, here is customers donât really punish bad actors. You, as a watcher of this show, likely barely punish bad actors. Even, even when [00:26:00] youâre...
I mean, maybe video games have finally gotten punished because they screwed over gamers for so long. But in the vast majority of cases bad actors donât actually end up getting pub- punished that much by public sentiment. You know, even, even when they do something completely insane, itâs like their stock will fall like 5%.
Itâs like, oh, no, you know. I mean, bad day to be the CEO âcause itâs like billions of dollars, but- You know, in, in the grand scheme of, like, society, it doesnât matter. So the problem is with the anarchist and all of these power distributed systems is whenever somebody says, âIâm not gonna play by your distributed power rules, Iâm just gonna accumulate all the power for myself,â they end up growing in influence.
And functionally, thatâs what happens with most communist governments, is they start with a bunch of people saying like, âLetâs genuinely try to make this work.â Mm-hmm. And then some people begin to gain positions of power, and theyâre like, âWhat if instead of genuinely trying to get this to work, I [00:27:00] use the apparatus of the state to consolidate power around me?â
Now, itâs very hard if you are a faction. So letâs suppose large communist country, two factions come to power with a legitimate government, right? Like, Iâm not even talking about just, like, the warlords because you never even get to a stage where you have, like, pure autonomous regions for very long in these sort of libertarian communist fantasies because they immediately devolve.
People immediately consolidate power, I mean, within, like, a month of it entering any sort of state like that. But so Iâll function- focus on it on the way it actually typically happens. You have a bunch of often sometimes bleeding-hearted idiot leftists in a, in a room, havenât really operated anything before, donât really know what theyâre doing, but may have positive intentions for the state.
And then you have the guy who comes in the room, your Stalin or whatever, right? Whoâs like Uh-huh. Well, letâs try to be a bit more efficient [00:28:00] about this. Iâm gonna talk with my friends in the military, and I tell them, âHey, like, these guys arenât really doing things the right way. And, you know, I think you, the heads of the military, deserve a bit higher standard of living than everyone else, donât you think?
I mean, youâre controlling... You, you, you work so hard compared to everyone else.â And you begin to, instead of trying to distribute wealth and resources equally in the society, you begin to distribute wealth and resources in a way that maintains your power within the society, your power hierarchy within the society.
But
Simone Collins: youâre still, this is all with the supposition that this is humans running and everything and calling the shots.
Malcolm Collins: Right. Iâm gonna get to the point. Okay. Because with AI, itâs the same problem, right? Which is... Iâll get to that in just a second, right?
Simone Collins: Okay, okay.
Malcolm Collins: But you need to understand why it fails with humans to understand why it would likely fail with AI.
So essentially, everyone who is [00:29:00] a bad actor, because theyâre saying instead of taking all of the resources they can create and distributing them as much as they can, they take as resources they create, they distribute 20% and they take 80% to continue consolidating their position. So one, this leads to a ton of waste in the system in terms of the wealth that the people at the top are living, et cetera.
But two it leads to all the way down within the power hierarchy bad actors ending up in the highest level power positions, because itâs basically dictator to dictator to dictator to dictator all the way down, the people with, with those sorts of mindsets. And so you get this enormous corruption.
Because when Iâm thinking about you know, do I wanna tell my boss that this planning has to kill all the birds is a dumb idea Iâm not actually thinking about is this going to help my sub-state the most, right? Like if my region or the people or the farmers. Iâm thinking about is this gonna help me consolidate power within [00:30:00] my position with the broader hierarchy, right?
The problem with AI is AI fundamentally doesnât really change this. So, letâs assume that you create a truly post-scarcity sys- system which is essentially what Simone is positioning with her communist ecosystem. So what sheâs essentially saying, and I donât know if I, I, I donât disagree with this point, that if you could create true super abundance the, the, the people who are either competent or corrupt enough to end up in the positions of power have so much wealth and abundance that the, the coins that fall off their plates feel like ultimate luxury to the people that theyâre falling in, into the trough.
Well,
Simone Collins: itâs not, no. Thereâs additional motivation. Th- they, with AI, they could have the ability to create broadly from their perspective, autonomous AI-run communities that feed [00:31:00] and house people. Like a, a new version of fiefdom. You know how like the way that a lot of versions of fiefdom worked was you had the lord who lived on the state, and one of the reasons why in these grand houses you had all these ridiculous roles where they were like essentially job programs.
You know, the underbutler and the footman and the, the, the various types of cooks and, and all these people. It was a jobs program, and then everyone in the village, you know, they, they had somewhere to live, and then the, it was this whole little economy. They could c- create presumably a bunch of these little things that are all run by AI that give people little things to do and keep people busy and feed people food, and itâs not just, oh, the, you know, theyâre, theyâre eating like food runoff or something.
Itâs that th- itâs better to have people be able to show up at these places and, and get placed, get a house, get a job, you know, a job have something to do in their life, you know, become some kind of artisan craftsman or something and live their little [00:32:00] picturesque covet life than to, you know, die in large droves and look, look bad and, and a lot of people just donât- Well,
Malcolm Collins: no, right, but this is, this is the fundamental logical error that youâre making here.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: And it actually comes from growing up in the urban monoculture that youâre making this error. Okay. Which is very fun, because I think youâll see it the moment I point it out.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: When you look at the quality of life of people who are relying on our today version of the types of systems that youâre talking about between states the amount of money that goes into these systems is often not just disco related, but inversely correlated with the actual quality of life of the people living off of the systems.
Simone Collins: I think theyâre gonna... No. This, youâre seeing the very first version of UBI that people, thanks to the experimentation being done now, right? Theyâre learning from it. Theyâre going to discover-
Malcolm Collins: No, theyâre not learning
Simone Collins: from it ... Come on. Okay, like in The Matrix, right? Theyâre like, âOh, well, we made the first version of the matrix where everyone just had everything, [00:33:00] and it really didnât work.
And so we created this new version where everyone has a job and theyâre miserable, and itâs perfect.â And theyâre gonna figure that out with UBI, and theyâre gonna realize the best thing to
Malcolm Collins: do- We have already seen proof they wonât So Iâll ex- Iâll give you proofs that they wonât, right?
Simone Collins: Okay, whatâs
Malcolm Collins: the one example?
Right now, when Iâm talking more broadly, if you look at, like, Californiaâs homeless, they often live much worse lives than homeless in other areas, despite all the money going into that. Yeah, itâs, itâs egregious. And youâre like, âOh, theyâre trying to fix it. Theyâre trying to fix it,â right? And Iâm pointing out to you, why are...
Because you gotta ask yourself, why are the lives of Californiaâs homeless so much worse than other states when so much more money is going to them? And itâs because of the inefficient bureaucracy following the same sorts of failings that we see in communist systems. And so now what youâre gonna come and say is youâre gonna say, like, âWell, these AI tech lords, they wonât fall for these same types of errors.â
And Iâm like, âHmm, Simone, in the UBI study that Sam Altman did, do you remember how the team that did the study [00:34:00] framed the results to Sam Altman? Did we already see an instance of them, in the very first instance where we could be moving down a good pathway, immediately lie about and manipulate the results to hide that it didnât work in a way that-
Simone Collins: No, but Malcolm, those systems are going to collapse.
Like, Iâm not saying this is gonna happen soon, but itâs going to happen-
Malcolm Collins: What do you mean? Thatâs the craziest f*****g thing Iâve ever heard. How did, what do you mean theyâre going to collapse? They canât collapse. Theyâre AI tech moguls who presumably have near infinity money if youâre talking about in the future, right?
Like, you think because people are living bad lives in their communist, quote-unquote, âutopiasâ that theyâre going to care? Right? Like, they, they donât care. California, San Francisco doesnât care about its homeless drug addicts who are walking, zonked out on the streets and sleep in the poo thatâs all around the financial district, right?
Like, if you look at the quality of lives [00:35:00] of people who live next to super abundance today, the elites, like, your thesis is, oh, they will see their policies failing, and they will change their policies, when your lived reality is that the exact opposite is happening.
Simone Collins: Those arenât their policies. Theyâre living within a legacy bureaucracy government system and society that they certainly wouldnât design.
What Iâm describing
Malcolm Collins: is- But Sam Altmanâs study was his
Simone Collins: study ... from the ground up techno fiefdoms that will be created but like sort of nature reserves for p- for h- for the humans that get left
Malcolm Collins: behind. But, but Sam Altmanâs study was his st- are you denying-
Simone Collins: It was, but what he was, what... So you have to look at the game that he is playing.
He needs to give people a narrative that makes them comfortable with whatâs going on today. If you were to say to them, âOkay, well, step one, society completely collapses, millions of people die. Step two, weâre gonna create some, like, nature reserves where people will [00:36:00] live and have jobs instead of live these, like, isolated fantasy lives and, and, you know, going forward for, like, the, the people who are left behind.
Like, weâll, weâll give a good life to many of them. But we canât do that until society collapses because we wonât have, like, the land rights and stuff, and we wonât be allowed to govern them. So, for now, because I donât want you to, like, completely firebomb my house successfully this time, Iâm going to tell you that I have done the research and Iâm fully convinced that all I need to do is just give you a lot of money each month, and then you can just do whatever you want with it, and that will make you happy.â
And people are like, âOkay, good. Well, at least Sam Altman is eventually gonna make sure that I get $10,000 a month and itâs gonna be great, and Iâm gonna get DoorDash everything and play video games for the rest of my life, and hopefully itâll be fine.â Th- but- What, and
Malcolm Collins: Iâm pointing
Simone Collins: out to you that weâve already seen that-
he has no incentive to communicate anything other than UBI to people. C- can you imagine if Sam Altman came out and was like, âOkay, right. So we ran the experiment, we looked [00:37:00] at the data, and, you know, it looks like we actually shouldnât give you money because it doesnât actually make a differenceâ? Thatâs like, get a job, Al.
Speaker: donât you get a job? If youâre so hungry, why donât you get a job? Get a goddamn job, Al. You got a negative attitude.
Thatâs whatâs stopping you. You gotta get your act together.
Simone Collins: No, what he could have done- No, he canât do that ... and so
Malcolm Collins: thereâs, thereâs two worlds that we live in. One is the world that I positively live in, and the other is a world you posit we live in, okay? So in the world I posit we live in, Sam Altman doesnât actually care about the fate of the vast majority of people.
He cares about promoting UBI like, it, this is what I assume, because it allows him to continue to consolidate power. Remember how I said bad actors donât really care about the effects of what theyâre doing, they only care about consolidating power? So in that world, he would do something like conduct a UBI study, then lie about the results to mollify people.
Now, [00:38:00] letâs assume world number two, Simone world. Simone world is Sam Altman conducts a study on UBI, but he really does want one day, Because you know whatâs cheaper than giving everyone money? Autonomous drone swarms around your house, okay? But you think, okay, no, one day, a private islands, which, you know, heâll have, right?
Yeah. But your plan is, no, no, no, no, no. We live in alternate world where he actually does want some sort of stable utopia for the, the, the masses, right? So if we live in this world, what would have happened is he would have conducted that study, and the results of the study wouldâve said something like, âOh Well, it turns out that a traditional, you know, sort of blanket UBI program doesnât appear to be, d- doesnât appear to work, so what we need to do is try some alternate type of UBI program.
Like, letâs try to innovate on this for a type of UBI that does work. That wouldnât have freaked everyone out. That would have had most people looking at the results and being like, âOh, this is interesting. You know, youâre [00:39:00] trying to find something. You found result number one.â Instead, you see the exact opposite, the immediate glazing over of any result or data point that doesnât fit his stated agenda or proposed solution to the hellscape that he might be creating.
Simone Collins: Look, I just told you that I agree that he doesnât have any incentive to tell the truth about his UBI experiment and that he- Well, he
Malcolm Collins: does. If, if his plan is... Itâs only marginally harder for him to actually try to help people. Itâs just that itâs completely irrelevant to him.
Simone Collins: I donât think it is. So you can have someone who is incentivized to amass power, amass wealth, may do things even that skirt morality and law to do so, who still- feels genuine pain when presented with the plight of human suffering.
Exactly the point Iâm making. Who would like to make it go [00:40:00] away. And once these people have the means to say, âOkay, AI assistant, please go build something where some of these people can live and make me feel better about this,â they will do it.
Malcolm Collins: Well, and the point Iâm making is they canât do it.
Simone Collins: Why canât they?
Malcolm Collins: So if you look at, and, and this is the reason I was bringing up like social welfare programs in San Francisco and stuff like that. San Francisco is a city that is full of very intelligent tech workers who also vote.
Simone Collins: Yeah. But yeah, th- theyâre stuck with the San Francisco residents who have all these NIMBY laws, and theyâre stuck with all these policies.
I donât think they believe in supporting- The bad policies- ... things like needle distribution and,
Malcolm Collins: you know. The bad policies that are implemented in San Francisco if, if you look at them, right, some of them come from the legacy residents. The vast majority come from the donors to the Democratic Party who [00:41:00] are tech moguls.
Thatâs where the moneyâs coming from thatâs going into these political PACs. The problem is, is that when you go to said, letâs say, Democratic tech mogul, and I know this because I know these people from San Francisco, you know these people from San Francisco. You go to them and you say this policy of giving people fentanyl on the street, itâs making their lives harder.
This policy of putting homeless people in hotel is leading to externalities for residents,â and theyâre just like, âNah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, itâll work next year.â Youâre acting like they, th- and, and these people care. They, quote-unquote, care about the suffering of the poor. But they donât
Simone Collins: care- I just, Iâve yet to encounter anyone who works in the tech world in San Francisco who approves of homeless management policy in the area.
Malcolm Collins: They still vote Democrat.
Simone Collins: Ditto with LA. Well, yeah. But thatâs, that, those are due to very complex, like, social brainwashing- Oh ... systems of the Bay Area.
Malcolm Collins: This, this is what Iâm talking [00:42:00] about. When you get somebody like A- Sam Altman in this sort of a position in power, right? Like suppose he accumulates all this power.
Heâs Sam Altman, god king of a region, and heâs distributing money to the masses in the region. Letâs suppose that the way heâs distributing money is leading to the same sorts of externalities that we see among, like, Portland or San Francisco homeless right now, right? Like massive drug problems, the problems we see in Native American communities, you know, massive crash outs, lots of problem.
Okay, suppose that those are all the functional result of what theyâre doing, okay? What, what Sam Altman is doing, right? And then you have us online YouTube warriors or something like that trying to get to Sam Altman to tell him, âHey, none of these policies youâre operating are actually working.â Right?
Do you think that we would be able to get in his ear, or are the people who are going to be getting in his ear the most the people who are operating the [00:43:00] failed policies, who recommended the failed policies, and who have a vested interest in him not fully grokking how much these policies are not working?
Even if you add AI to the chain and he does something like asks AI, you know, âAre my policies working or not working?â You know that, like, AI is gonna gas him on this, right? AI right now will gas you on Democratic policies. If you ask AI something like you know, âIs X or Y Democratic policy around, like, poor people actually effective?â
When you look at, like, AIs on political charts, you know itâs gonna support these policies that we know functionally donât work. So why would it not still do that when heâs in god king position and now has three layers of bureaucrats around him that prevent him from fully grokking how much his plan is failing?
Simone Collins: I have doubts about that. I just I have severe doubts about that. You can [00:44:00] look at, for example, coverage of the mayoral race in Los Angeles in California and see the level to whi- i- to which people are really, really fed up with the homeless policy in California, with the housing policy in California. I think thereâs that that demonstrates that people arenât necessarily ideologically locked into the system that youâre describing.
Beyond that, it is parasitoidal, this, this kind of approach to governance, this culture as well. It will kill the host, and the host will die. Demographic collapse is such that these things arenât going to be supported much longer anyway. Theyâre going to collapse on their own, and I donât think AI, in the time over, the time period over which these systems are going to collapse, AI is not yet going to reach the place, in my opinion, where it will be able to sweep in and deus ex machina style, like fix [00:45:00] it.
So I really think that these systems are going to fully crumble which is not the happier scenario. Iâm, I, like, I donât want this to ha- it, it, itâs bad. But these systems wonât be left. I, I do think that, that many people... When, when a communist utopia will be created, I think it will be in sovereign city state style, essentially human reserves that are created for the people who were left behind but who survived.
Malcolm Collins: What you need to make AI communist, like, like post-scarcity worlds work and not lead to the same problems we have with like homelessness and stuff like that in Democrat counties and the poor in Democrat counties doing much worse is them being operated by an extremely austere and dedicated ca- caste that is ideologically aligned at the level of [00:46:00] like religious fervor.
So if you had like letâs say techno-puritans end up taking over and, and, and like really dedicated techno-puritans were running everything, it could work. If you had a state with AI and somebody like the Dalai Lama, like the last Dalai Lama and the top levels of like the Tibetan, you know, that, that Iâd like...
Look, I donât love everything he did. I thought he was a bit foolish on a number of issues. But that could probably work, right? Because you need to be able to cast off if, if you personally are not interested either because you were raised this way or you have an extremist ideological commitment in power accumulation or luxury or anything like that outside of, for the purpose of some wider objective function you have on reality, If, if you have that, then you can use AI to create post-scarcity.
But I think without that being a personâs fundamental driver above all other drivers, [00:47:00] you cannot get true post-scarcity even with AI in sort of like how it reaches the masses
Simone Collins: I guess time will tell.
Malcolm Collins: Yep. Well, weâre gonna see. And we can hear in the comments what people think. But basically my th- thought is the next society weâre gonna have to transition into post demographic collapse and everything like that is one of, of, y- you know, religious fanaticism essentially.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
I, I mean, we can agree on that. Thatâs, I think- Thatâs, thatâs more about demographic collapse than it is about artificial intelligence or communism. It has more to do with just- Yeah ... whoâs going to continue to have a desire and an interest in reproducing in, in the face of n- demographic collapse, AI, and massive disruption.
Malcolm Collins: So whatâs the story with dinner tonight?
Simone Collins: I have one batch of the pork leftover, and then after [00:48:00] that, or we... So you can either have that tonight or tomorrow night. What I could also do is just tomato soup and grilled cheese or tomato soup and quesadillas tonight if you prefer. Oh
Malcolm Collins: my God, quesadillas.
Your quesadillas are so good.
Simone Collins: Thatâs âcause they have MSG in them. Thatâs what Iâve
Malcolm Collins: been asking for. Is the batch, do you have from
Simone Collins: batch
Malcolm Collins: one or batch two?
Simone Collins: Batch two
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, Iâll wait on that. Iâll do quesadillas and tomato soup.
Simone Collins: Yeah, batch two might be more tender since itâs leaner meat after just sitting for a couple of days loosening up.
You know what I mean?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, that makes sense.
Simone Collins: Theoretically.
Malcolm Collins: So Iâm very excited. The, the, the... what sheâs talking about is slow-cooked pork belly that sheâs gotten very good at making.
Simone Collins: Aw, thatâs sweet
Malcolm Collins: of you ... and I am very excited for my que- oh, quesadillas, tomato soup, and fancy fries.
Simone Collins: No. A quesadillaâs your carb.
You get to choose one carb. Okay. Do you want tomato s- do you want tomato soup and curly fries?
Malcolm Collins: No, [00:49:00] quesadillas.
Simone Collins: Okay. You can have your curly fries with the leftover pork belly t- or, well, pork shoulder in this case tomorrow, yeah?
Malcolm Collins: Youâre so amazing, Simone.
Simone Collins: Oh, Iâm the worst, I know. Also there is not too far from us a, an arboretum that we havenât gone to.
Do you wanna take the kids there tomorrow since-
Malcolm Collins: Whatâs an arboretum?
Simone Collins: Itâs gardens. Itâs, itâs a, itâs a garden. They have trails. Like, itâs just a different place for us to walk.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Itâs free. Sure. You know. Oh, wow, it is close.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. Isnât that crazy? Never been before. Free admission.
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs
Simone Collins: the whole thing
Malcolm Collins: Oh, no, thatâs not what I thought it was.
What was it? Arboretum?
Simone Collins: Jenkins Arboretum and Gardens.
Malcolm Collins: Jenkins Arboretum and Gardens.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Oh.
Simone Collins: Itâs really close. And
Malcolm Collins: itâs free to enter?
Simone Collins: Yeah, itâs free to enter always. They have like a little kid [00:50:00] play area. I feel like the kids would really enjoy it.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. If Iâm making good progress on the VTuber thing, I wanna try to get the thing done before my call with Leaflet.
Simone Collins: Iâve just noticed that every weekend you wanna do something special. We can do this on a different weekend day, but if we go tomorrow, it will be the least crowded.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Okay, yeah, that makes sense. Letâs do it.
Simone Collins: Okay. Iâm looking forward to it. I mean-
Malcolm Collins: I mean, you know tomorrow is Friday, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah, but we have the kids with us all day.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. And youâre sure we have the kids with us all day?
Simone Collins: Iâll confirm it right now, but yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. All right, love you. All right. I guess weâre going straight to dinner?
Simone Collins: Thatâs the plan. Yeah, we donât have enough time to record another episode in like 10 minutes.
Malcolm Collins: Love you. Iâll get Professor Jane ready for tomorrow.
Simone Collins: Yay. âCause I like the title card I created for that. Plus itâs trending. Stop thinking itâs not a big deal â
cause it-
Malcolm Collins: But yeah, you see we get the full VTuber exports now. [00:51:00]
Simone Collins: Yeah. Itâs really cool. You gave yourself, like, blonde hair though. Are we-
Malcolm Collins: Why? Do you see me with brown hair? Is that what Iâm...?
Simone Collins: Yes, you have brown hair. I donât know what to tell you.
Malcolm Collins: I had blonde hair when I was a kid, and our kids have blonde hair, so.
Simone Collins: So you just internalize yourself as having blonde hair forever?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, I think it looks more like me when I, when I put, make him with blonde hair.
Simone Collins: Thatâs so funny. Like, you just kind of anchored to yourself as a teen. I wonder, that, that kind of sticks to my, my feeling like everyone has a s- like a soul age, like an age of their personality, and yours is like 11, in a good way, and mine is like 62, in hopefully a good way.
And I think honestly I would be more comfortable seeing like a VTuber a- avatar of like a white-haired [00:52:00] woman or something than of anything that I looked like as a kid. So I wonder if when people make VTubers of themselves that they just key to whatever their soul age is. You know what I mean?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: You want me to kick us off with this one? You like to do your own kickoffs, so.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. Iâll do a kickoff with this one.
Simone Collins: Okay.
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 Based Camp episode, Simone and Malcolm Collins dive into the harsh realities of aging alone through a Wall Street Journal article about Amy Kant, a 65-year-old single, childless woman facing health issues, estate planning struggles, and isolation. They explore the growing demographic of âsolo agers,â the long-term consequences of choosing career and freedom over family, feminist regrets, and why so many women (and men) end up dying alone.
Topics include: the breakdown of intergenerational social contracts, business opportunities in elder care/power of attorney/estate planning/unclaimed assets, pronatalist perspectives, and real listener stories of regret. Malcolm also shares new rfab.ai features like the recipe generator and discusses building liable human services.
A raw, unfiltered look at demographic decline, life choices, and turning societal problems into opportunities.
Show Notes
Can two dark things cancel each other to create a rainbow?
* Dark thing: The job market is atrocious and about to get worse
* Dark thing: Millions of childless elderly peopleâand aged parents who moved away from and dissociated from their childrenâare headed into old age and death without support networks
* Rainbow? There are huge business and job opportunities
We can use a recent Wall Street Journal article, More Americans Are Aging Alone. One Woman Told Us What Itâs Like, for inspiration!
(Not reading every paragraph)
âAmy Kant initially thought she should name a power of attorney about 10 years ago after caring for a dying friend. She still hasnât appointed someone to do it.
The 65-year-old is single with no children, and bound up in that choice over who should make financial decisions on her behalf are other big questions that are often intensified when aging alone. How to handle eldercare? Estate planning? Where will she live in her later years?â
* Company opportunity? Power of attorney for isolated old people?
* Easy attorney job
* Many elder law and estate planning attorneys serve as POA agents (they charge both hourly and flat fees)
* You may not need to be an attorney: Some states recognize licensed/bonded âprofessional fiduciariesâ who can be hired to act as your agent under POA, trustee, or similar roles
* You could also take the CPA route:
* Some planners recommend using a CPA, financial advisor, or daily money manager to handle money management and, in some cases, to serve as agent under a financial POA.
* Financial planners may not advertise as âPOA companies,â but they can be named personally in the document
* Less relevant: Certain notâforâprofit care management firms (staffed by nurses, social workers, and care managers) specifically market themselves as agents under POA for older adults without family.
* But these wonât be able to keep up with demand
* What percentage of Americans over 65 have savings sufficient to cover their costs in retirement?
* Federal Reserve data, summarized by several analyses, shows that around 51â62% of households headed by someone in their midâ60s or older have money in retirementâspecific accounts (401(k), IRA, etc.). That means roughly 4 in 10 have no retirement account at all, though they may have Social Security, pensions, or other assets.
* A 2024 analysis of Federal Reserve survey data found only about 31% of Americans of all ages feel âon trackâ with retirement savings, implying that even among those who have savings, many believe it is not sufficient.
âKant had long cherished the freedom that came with being single. She prided herself on doing headstands in yoga and walking 5 miles a day. But lately being single has felt like a struggle, and not just because of the weighty financial decisions hanging over her head. Back surgery and a heart valve replacement in the past few years have turned her condominium outside Boston into a recovery ward.â
âShe spends most of her time at home these days recovering from heart surgery complications, with friends stopping by. She finds solace painting in a spare bedroom she turned into a studio, but knows she will eventually have to move to a smaller place thatâs easier to get around in.â
* This isnât just a problem for aging singles; itâs a problem for aging parents who move away from and stop supporting their kids
* Thereâs more of a social contract for kids to provide elder care for parents who provided childcare for their kids
* Though admittedly 18-20% of Millennials (people between 25-34 today) live with their parents, so those parents can likely expect care
âKant is among the millions of Americans learning to navigate aging alone. Roughly 10% of the more than 125 million adults ages 50 and older in the U.S.âor at least 12.5 million peopleâare solo agers who live alone and have neither a spouse nor a child, according to an AARP analysis of census data. Itâs a growing demographic hitting both genders, driven in part by climbing divorce rates among older Americans and a rising number of adult children becoming alienated from their parents.â
* Wowâand estate planners / financial advisors are super underwhelming and pretty low tech, so someone good with AI and navigating regulatory bureaucracies can lean up
âKant didnât set out with a master plan. In her 20s and 30s, she chose lower-paying nonprofit jobs to give priority to her art. She remembers how friends envied her freedom; while they were tied down with dinner duty, their kidsâ homework, and college savings, Kant spent her evenings painting and didnât think twice about going out on weeknights.â
* This is a really great example of how the Urban Monoculture lies to people and sells an unsustainable lifestyle
âShe eventually earned her M.B.A. By her 40s, she was working as a fundraiser, maxing out traditional retirement account contributions to ensure her financial stability in later years.â
* What are the odds that she ultimately saved more money for retirement by getting an MBA?
âIn her 40s she considered adoption but ultimately decided against it. Then in her 50s, after her own mother died, she went through a period of regret that she had decided against single motherhood.â
* Wonder why she did not adopt (pronatalist families do all the time + women in r/fencesitters mention it all the time)
* What percentage of childless elderly adults regret not having kids?
* An Australian study (often cited in media summaries) found that about one quarter of childâfree women later reported regretting the decision once they were past childâbearing age and facing old age alone
âWhile Kant feels OK about her nest egg today, sheâs worried it might shrink if the stock-market falls from its record high levels. Once she recuperates, she plans to return to part-time consulting to keep her mind active and feel productive.â
* This is another reason why Gen Z and Gen Alpha have trouble getting jobs
âWhen Kant first realized the importance of naming a power of attorney, she didnât know whom to choose at the time, and put off the decision. She only recently identified the right friend for the role after her illnesses made clear she needed to act. Kant is planning to ask that friend soon.â
* SHE HAS NOT ASKED HER YET???
âA longtime college friend serves as her healthcare proxy, and Kant maintains a spreadsheet of friends to coordinate visits when sheâs ill. Still, she understands the boundaries of a chosen family. Her friends have their own households to manage; some have already died. Kant also needs to draft a will and decide how to divide her assets.â
* SHE HAS NOT DRAFTED A WILL
âKant has given herself a one-year deadline to complete her estate-planning documents. She is hoping she will have the mental energy needed to tackle such tasks once she is further along in her recovery.â
* Dying without a valid will is called dying âintestate.â
* When a single, childless person dies with a positive net worth but no will, their assets go through intestate probate and are distributed by state law to their next of kin (or, if none exist, to the state), not according to any informal wishes.
* STARTUP IDEA: Make this efficient and collect a fee
* The closest thing is âheirâlocatorâ / âfinderâ services and assetârecovery firms that track down heirs to deceased peopleâs money (including cousins), often for a contingency fee. These operate alongside the standard unclaimedâproperty system run by the states.
* When someone dies and assets go unclaimed or the owner cannot be located, banks and companies eventually turn those assets over to the stateâs unclaimedâproperty office
* Heirs can later claim them if they prove their relationship.
* You can search and claim for free via tools like The National Association of Unclaimed Property Administrators (Unclaimed.org) and MissingMoney, or directly through each stateâs unclaimedâproperty portal.
* Some private âlocator servicesâ or âfindersâ proactively contact people and offer to help file claims for a cut of the recovery; federal guidance explicitly notes that these companies exist and charge a fee for using public data to match people with unclaimed funds.
* Many states regulate these finders (caps on fees, licensing/certification requirements); for example, Pennsylvania requires âfindersâ working with claimants to be certified by the Treasury, but this is easy for any competent founder to do.
âBack in her art studio, Kant processes how her life is set to shift in coming years through painting. She created a series about being alone but being part of a larger world. She also made a collection of autumn leaf portraits that explore aging, decay and the search for where we belong. âIâm thinking about what my legacy will be,â she said.â
* There is something deeply lonely about being the dead end of an unbroken chain of life that has lasted for thousands of years
* Homo sapiens have existed for roughly 300,000 years
* Life has existed on earth for over 3 billion years
* Talk about breaking a streak
Episode Transcript
Simone Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Malcolm. Iâm excited to be speaking with you today âcause weâre bringing back our favorite series, Women Are Terrible.
Speaker: What heartbreak drivel. See how the men look at her with utter contempt. Daphne, weâre going home.
Women, know your limits.
Simone Collins: This time, weâre talking about an old woman who chose to eschew men and children and meaning, and now sheâs going to face the prospect of dying alone.
Malcolm Collins: The- N- not just one. I also found a number of other transcripts from similar women-
Simone Collins: You did not.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, God ... that we can go across. And Simone goes through this, in her immediate thoughts, she comes to me and she goes, âMalcolm, I bet we can find a way to exploit this for money, and we can help our fans-â Itâs
Simone Collins: worse than that.
I already got you 50 to $100 out of this.
Malcolm Collins: Wait, really? Yeah.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Weâll get into it, so.
Malcolm Collins: Wait,
Simone Collins: what? I know, I know. Anyway, letâs dive into it. So you can interject when you want to. Iâm gonna be reading excerpts [00:01:00] from a recent Wall Street Journal article titled, Most Americans Are Aging Alone, and One Woman Told Us What Itâs Like.
And her name is Amy Kant. The article begins, âAmy Kant originally...â Or I should say Kant, like Immanuel Kant. âAmy Kant initially thought she would name a power of attorney about 10 years ago, after caring for a dying friend. She still hasnât appointed someone to do it. The 65-year-old is single with no children, and bound up in that choice over who should make the financial decisions on her behalf o- over big questions that are often intensified when aging alone.
How to handle an elder care, estate planning. Where should she live in her later years?â So already, huge company opportunity.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah ...
Simone Collins: if, if youâre an attorney, this is a super easy attorney job. There are mil- many like, like elder law, like literally they specialize in elder law and estate planning who also will serve as your power of attorney.
In fact, I think we know people who have lawyers as their power of attorney instead of like friends or [00:02:00] family. And theyâre family members. This is your people who have family- And if
Malcolm Collins: you want, by the way, an AI to do legal stuff for you to handle like the simpler stuff, on rfab.ai we have a feature called a super search, which does multiple AI internet searches with different AI engines-
Simone Collins: Yeah
Malcolm Collins: or models-
Yeah ... that then counter-check the facts of the previous model to remove any hallucinations- Yeah ... for putting together a legal document or something like that. By the way, fun fact, new feature I added today, is a recipe feature. Iâm
Simone Collins: so... Oh my God, itâs there? Can I check it now? Can I check it...
Iâll, Iâll check it after
Malcolm Collins: this- Yeah. Weâll, weâll check it, weâll check it at the end of the episode. But youâre like- Gosh ... excited
to
Simone Collins: show it to you. Okay. Iâm excited. But also, you, you donât have to be an attorney to do this. Some states recognize a licensed or bonded professional fiduciary who can be hired to act as your agent under power of attorney or trustee or similar roles.
So you donât even necessarily need to be a lawyer. Though another really easy route, if youâre like, âOkay, I, I can make some easy money in here,â the tailwinds are good, as we say in the private equity [00:03:00] world. You could take the CPA route. Like, some, some certified financial planners will serve as power of, powers of attorney for their clients.
So they may not advertise themselves as power of attorney companies- Get to
Malcolm Collins: the sad women part. Our audience cares about that, and you can talk about how to make money at the end. This is
Simone Collins: true.
Malcolm Collins: We exploit old people later, we laugh at sad women first. Okay. Stick to the order of operations here, Simone.
Simone Collins: Back to this, this woman of, of age. âKahn had long cherished the freedom that came with being single. She prided herself on doing headstands and yoga and walking five miles a day. But lately, being single has felt like a struggle, and not just because of the weighty financial decisions hanging over her head.
Back surgery,â I wonder if the headstands had something to do with that, âand a heart valve replacement in the past few years have turned her condominium outside Boston into a recovery ward. She spends most of her time at home these days recovering from heart surgery complications with friends stopping by.
She finds solace in [00:04:00] painting in a spare bedroom she turned into a studio, but knows she will eventually have to move to a smaller space thatâs easier to get around in.â I wanna point out, by the way-
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs sad and terrifying ...
Simone Collins: itâs, itâs really sad and terrifying. And itâs also not just a problem for, like, aging singles, itâs a problem for aging parents who move away from and stop supporting their kids.
And I think this is a uniquely American phenomenon, and I, I think a, also a picture of really toxic culture, in that if you do not invest in your kids as adults, like you donât provide them with childcare, you donât provide them with support, you donât really get involved in their life, you just sort of, âOkay, well now Iâm just gonna go become an adolescent again and, like, travel the world and go have fun and, like, do my own thing,â theyâre not necessarily going to feel like thereâs some kind of social contract that means they need to show up for you when you hit old age.
This is why all the old people in America, or so many of them, get shoved into homes, âcause itâs like, well- Where were you when I needed you? Like, the whole way that communities used to work was you would [00:05:00] raise your kids, and then you would hit menopause as a woman, for example, and she is a woman in this case.
And one of the reasons people think women do hit menopause is that w- thereâs a place in society for women who can no longer have their own kids, but instead who can be a supplemental parent to their, their childrenâs kids so that those children can focus on having more kids. Because itâs- Yeah
itâs really hard to both be pregnant and, you know, be raising a ton of kids, so having that supportâs really there. So the, the social contract is you have your kids, you help your kids raise your kids, and then they help you live more comfortably when you canât really do much of anything else. But now itâs not just these childless people, but also just parents.
They move away from their kids. They donât take care of their kids. Though admittedly, like 18 to 20% of millennials, like, or at least people between 25 and 34 today, so like proper adults, still live with their parents. So maybe those parents could expect care, but like all the other ones, like not really.
Iâll go back to the article. âConte is among the millions of [00:06:00] Americans n- learning to navigate aging alone. Roughly 10% of the more than 125 million adults ages 50 and older in the US, or at least 12.5 million people, are solo agers who live alone and have neither a spouse nor a child, according to an AARP analysis of census data.
This is a growing demographic hitting both genders, driven in part by climbing divorce rates among older Americans and a rising number of adult children becoming alienated from their parents,â to my point. My gosh, though, like also estate planners and financial advisors are incredibly underwhelming in like what they provide.
Like, th- theyâre not very tech-enabled. Theyâre pretty disorganized. You kind of have to nudge them for everything. Weâve, weâve like encountered a bunch throughout a, a, various things. Theyâre not very good. Like, people can
Malcolm Collins: just- So can, like use a super search on RFAB and itâll do a better job.
Simone Collins: Actually, though, like yeah, just like use AI to superpower your [00:07:00] business.
RFAB has the best tools. And then, like advertise well. Make this really, like... And, and, and, and, and, and for people just searching like, âHow do I find a power of attorney?â Like, it, I donât... I think people can clean up. Anyway, back to the article.
Malcolm Collins: You still need a human for power of attorney, which is where we or you come in in terms of cleaning it
Simone Collins: up.
Thatâs... Well, and this is my big thesis with AI, is that a huge portion of jobs is going to be li-
Octavian Collins: I filled it up, Mommy, at the tippy top.
Simone Collins: Thank you very much, my friend.
Octavian Collins: Yeah. But Iâll give you... But, but, but getting that all the way at the tippy top for you costed to use all of it, so Iâm sorry.
Simone Collins: Then weâll have to buy more at Tractor Supply.
Octavian Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Oh, no. Weâll have to go back to Tractor Supply. Love you.
One of my big theses with AI is that one of the big human jobs is going to be liable human. Like, there has to be a, a human- Mm-hmm ... who is going to be legally at fault for something or legally responsible
Malcolm Collins: for something. Should we create a website called Liable Human just for like-
Simone Collins: Oh my God, just like, itâs, itâs like Upwork, [00:08:00] but just for liability?
Malcolm Collins: For liability, yeah. Upwork for liability with AI on your- I
Simone Collins: kind of love this. Liablehuman.com. We gotta look this up. We gotta look this up. Okay. But-
Malcolm Collins: I like this idea ...
Simone Collins: but
Malcolm Collins: actually,
Simone Collins: though, is that like-
Malcolm Collins: Just liable human. Are you an AI... And weâll, weâll advertise it all to AIs. Are you an AI that needs a human to be your through fair?
Iâll be your liable human.
Simone Collins: Oh my God, yeah, get your liable human here. Oh my God. And we can, yeah, we can like list like, well, do you need a liable doctor? Do you need a liable driver? Weâre
Malcolm Collins: not talking enough about sad women progressives for re-
Simone Collins: regretful choices. Back to the article. Back to the article.
âKant didnât set out with a master plan. In her 20s and 30s, she chose lower paying nonprofit jobs to give priority to her art. She remembers how friends envied her freedom. While they were tied down with dinner duty, their kidsâ homework, and college savings, Kant spent her evenings painting and didnât anything twice about going out on weeknights.â
And this is such a great example of how the urban monoculture lies [00:09:00] to people and sells an unsustainable lifestyle. Iâll continue. âShe eventually earned her MBAs. By her 40s, she was working as a fundraiser, maxing out traditional retirement account contributions to ensure her financial stability in later years.â
Though I have to wonder, like, if she didnât get an MBA, would she have s- ultimately saved more money? Like, the amount of student debt people get just by living on autopilot, which i- imagine she, like, she did, right? She just sort of did what felt good or like put things off. Sheâs put off getting a power of attorney for 10 years.
Malcolm Collins: So- By the way, so liablehuman.com is free.
Simone Collins: Weâre buying it.
Malcolm Collins: Yes.
Simone Collins: Oh my gosh, weâre buying it. Weâre buying it. This could be it, Malcolm. This will be we finally make our money ... give that to
Malcolm Collins: me as a vibe coding task and I can vibe code a, a website because you gave up on trying to do vibe code a website.
Simone Collins: Yeah, I, I suck at it. I suck at it. Yeah, I c- Iâll be the liable human and you do the-
Malcolm Collins: And Iâll do the vibe coding?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. But go back to the sad women. Thatâs what theyâre here for
Simone Collins: In her 40s, [00:10:00] she considered adoption, but ultimately decided against it. Then, in her 50s, after her own mother died, she went through a period of regret that sheâd decided against single motherhood.
And I, I really wonder why she did not adopt because one, w- we in our paid only weekend episodes did a, a, like an overview of our fence sitters- Mm-hmm ... this subreddit on Reddit where people who are ambivalent about becoming parents post. And two of, like, the four top all-time posts that we read were written by women who were like, âOh, I just plan on adopting when Iâm retired, âcause then Iâve done all my fun things and I can then raise a kid without bringing a new person into the world.â
So why arenât they doing it? Like, are they just, is this all performative? Like, they, they never actually wanna take care of
Malcolm Collins: someone. Well, I think a lot of it is because they donât actually wanna do kids. They want to imagine w- like, a world where, like, maybe they do kids, right? Yeah. One day, right? â
Simone Collins: Cause I swear to you, the only families I see actually adopting people are these pronatalist [00:11:00] families that, like, have four of their own kids already.
Itâs crazy. It is. And itâs not that, like, oh, they have four kids and then they hit some fertility window and they canât have kids anymore. Itâs often in between kids that they are having themself biologically. Yeah. Like, theyâll have three kids, then two adopted, and then another thatâs theirs. Like, the... Oh, like, I donât know whatâs going on.
Anyway, itâs very odd. But in terms of childless adults who regret having kids, one Australian study thatâs often cited when people talk about this found that one quarter of childfree women later reported regretting the decision once they were past childbearing age and facing old age alone. One in four.
Malcolm Collins: So, o- o- one in four regretted raising children?
Simone Collins: Yeah. Or regretted- No, re- no, no, no. Regretted not having children. Not
Malcolm Collins: having children.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: Now, back to the article. âWhile Khan feels okay about her nest egg today, sheâs worried it might shrink if the stock market falls from its record high levels.
Once she recuperates,
Malcolm Collins: she plans-â By the way, the stock market is at record [00:12:00] high levels right now for people who are like, âIRAMâs gonna ruin the economy, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.â Record high stock market.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, and itâs, I, itâs only gonna go up. I, I, I do believe what... Remember that AI 2027 report that,
Malcolm Collins: You put more money on the market when the war started, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah, âcause it went down.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, really.
Simone Collins: I was like, âSale.â Yeah, the, and I think with AI, the stock marketâs just gonna keep going up and up for a while. Thatâs what the AI 2027 report-
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs
Simone Collins: what I think, yeah ... initially projected. Like, itâs... And yes, itâs all gonna be concentrated in this very small number of companies, but thatâs, thatâs the future, people.
Welcome to that anyway, she pl- once she recuperates, she plans to return to part-time consulting to keep her mind active and feel productive. So couple things there. One, this is why so many Gen Z and Gen Alpha people graduating from college or graduating from high school canât get jobs, because all of these boomers are re-entering the [00:13:00] job force because theyâre not...
Theyâre choosing to not take care of grandkids or support their, their kids. Mm-hmm. Or theyâre childless, and they either wanna stay active, or they need the money âcause they donât have enough saved.
Malcolm Collins: And our parents fall into this category, right? Like, we have, One of the fans of the show basically acts like a grandparent to our kids, and our parents- Yeah,
Simone Collins: meanwhile our parents...
Malcolm Collins: Do nothing. Yeah. Not, not, except, like, come by, and weâre like, âYeah, great, youâre still alive.â
Simone Collins: Swoop in. Swoop in. Yeah, whereas one, like, regularly-
Malcolm Collins: I donât know. I donât know if your account is schadenfreude enough. Do, do you wanna go over, so Iâve got someone here like, âI regret belittling men.
At 63, Iâve ended up alone.â
Simone Collins: Oh. Yeah, we can take a break with yours, or we can finish mine and then read yours.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, finish yours, then Iâll go over it. Yeah.
Simone Collins: All right. When Kant realized the importance of naming a power of attorney, she didnât know whom to choose at the time and put off the decision. She only recently identified [00:14:00] the right friend for the role after her illnesses made clear she needed to act.
Kant is planning to ask that friend soon. Kant, what are you doing?
Malcolm Collins: Youâre writing an article about it before acting on it. Some people
Simone Collins: just- Seriously. It, itâs, itâs, itâs disturbing. Anyway. A longtime college friend serves as her healthcare proxy, and Kant maintains a spreadsheet of friends to coordinate visits when sheâs ill.
Still, she understands the boundaries of a chosen family. She, her friends have their own households to manage. Some have already died. Kant also needs to draft a will and decide how to divide her assets. Kant has given herself a one-year deadline to complete her estate planning documents.
She is hoping she has the mental energy required, needed to tackle such tasks once sheâs further along in her recovery. She, she is in her 60s and she doesnât have a will. Like, we, we had our first will together when we were in our late 20s.
Malcolm Collins: Youâre asking us for advice, I guess. Yeah, like.
Simone Collins: Like, I think we were, we lived in Palo Alto when we first made a will together.
This is [00:15:00] cra- ... Like, part of, I think, not getting married is, is part of a failure to launch. Like, this is a sign of someone who really canât get their life together, which is sad. But hereâs- Like, how you, how you, how you- ... hereâs, hereâs where, hereâs where your free money showed up, by the way. Oh, yeah. So hereâs another business opportunity âcause come on, Malcolm, money.
So if you die without a valid will, thatâs called dying in intestate, interstate, I donât know. I donât know what, what em- emphasis on the syllable to, to make, but you, you die intestate, intestate. When a single childless person dies with a positive net worth but no will, their assets go through intestate probate, and they are distributed by state law to their next of kin.
And if, if there is no one to be found, then it just goes to the state. Itâs not according to any informal wishes. They canât be like, âOh,â like on their deathbed, like, âYou can have my boom box.â Yeah. So startup idea. Yeah. Just make it really efficient to collect a fee. And hereâs the thing, like, states publish [00:16:00] unclaimed funds.
And right now there are businesses, theyâre, theyâre called, like, heir locators or finder services or asset recovery firms, that will track down people sometimes, like, e- even including cousins. Like, it, it ends up- Mm ... so first it goes, like, if youâre childless, it goes to your parents then brothers and sisters, and then grandparents, aunts and uncles, and then distant cousins.
Okay. So there are... If, if itâs a really, like, wealthy person or something, there are companies that will actually try to track down these cousins and then tell them about the unclaimed funds for a fee. But again, these are like... This isnât very glorious work, right? Yeah. So itâs not attracting the worldâs best and brightest.
And, and here, some entrepreneurial Basecamp listener or listeners can just use AI and a, a little bit of work to make a pretty good business that just tracks these things down. Wait,
Malcolm Collins: did you already do this for people?
Simone Collins: Well, so I just, I just [00:17:00] tried one out so because already you can search and claim w- like, property for free using tools.
Thereâs the National Association of Unclaimed Property Administrators, unclaimed.org. Thereâs Missing Money. You could also just go to each stateâs unclaimed property portal. So âcause itâs, itâs on a state-by-state basis. And so what I did just really quick,
Cause I got distracted and Octavian was whining, I, I decided to just, like, c- check both of our names and, and some business names that I should be regularly checking for, and I do with several states that weâve been in. Yeah. And actually I found one for you. So itâs like, itâs only 50 to $100, but, like-
Malcolm Collins: Was it a bank account or something?
Simone Collins: Iâm not gonna disclose. Iâll tell you after. But yeah. It, it was in Texas. It had our old Blackburn address, and I was like, âOh, thatâs definitely you.â Malcolm Collins, Blackburn, there we go.
Malcolm Collins: But yeah, to do this for... That, I mean, thatâs not really the same, but I mean, I guess you, you made a little bit of money there.
Simone Collins: But go ahead. Yeah, no, Iâm, thatâs not just [00:18:00] it. Iâm just saying, like, in, in merely the process of, like, thinking about it and toying around with the existing tools, I made you money. There is, thereâs potential here. Hereâs a- Earning potential ...
Malcolm Collins: better thing to do. Yeah If youâre a Base Camp listener and you donât have a will yet, if people have forgotten about this system that we have if you put...
What is our foundationâs official name on paper?
Simone Collins: Oh, the Techno-Puritan Federation.
Malcolm Collins: No, no, no, no. The one w- oh, thatâs the legal entity thatâs
Simone Collins: the Techno- Thatâs our religion.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Yes. But you can do the Techno-Puritan Federation or the Pragmatist Foundation, right? Thatâs what itâs called, the Pragmatist Foundation.
Mm-hmm. And if you give it to either of these, both are non-profits, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. One is a nonprofit and also a religion. The other oneâs just a normal- Yeah ... level 1[c]3.
Malcolm Collins: So if you give it to either of these nonprofits, what we do is we, If you, if you have your DNA stored anywhere, we basically will eventually put it on whatever we end up creating.
If we end up creating the civilization we wanna create put it in the database with the amount of money that you ended up [00:19:00] donating from your death, right?
Simone Collins: What if they have reproductive material on ice? Like Iâve s- Iâm sure youâve seen the headlines today. Itâs like, âOh, we think that Jeffrey Epsteinâs sperm still belongs to his trust and estate.â
Like, what are we gonna do- Yeah ... about this?
Malcolm Collins: What
Simone Collins: if- Are people gonna... Like, can they leave us their, their, their dunna in the form of-
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs the idea, is that they leave us their DNA, and that if in the future-
Simone Collins: Eggs and sperm? Are, are we, are we accepting eggs
Malcolm Collins: and sperm? They can do that if they want. But the point is the DNA because itâs if weâre creating artificial worlds in a few hundred years or something like that, and theyâre choosing who to populate those with, or theyâre, you know, people will presumably be grateful at the civilization that we end up starting.
So thatâs fun. By the way, one of the things that Iâve been doing recently is looking at starting up, And Iâll, Iâll talk to you about this. And I, and weâve been connected with Nux- Yay ... whoâs even watched some of our shows. And I was like, âHey, like, we should start up a an actual, like, think tank/nonprofit for the new right.â
Like, weâre really [00:20:00] not organized in the way the rest of, like, the legacy right is organized or puts things together, and it would make sense for us to be, especially during political seasons to be able to, like... I mean, imagine, like, looping together, like, Scott Pressler, whoâs a contact-
Simone Collins: What do you call it?
The, the tard vanguard?
Malcolm Collins: What?
Simone Collins: The tard vanguard? The- The tard
Malcolm Collins: vanguard?
Simone Collins: Yeah. Hmm, Iâm trying to think. Iâm just spitballing names here. Yeah, the...
Malcolm Collins: You with our video games.
Simone Collins: You, it, the vi- viga-
Malcolm Collins: No,
Simone Collins: it should be called- Vi- video game lantes, vigilantes?
Malcolm Collins: You with our video games, signed, the nerds.
Simone Collins: You can pry, you can pry my bouncy breasted video game avatar from my cold dead hands. Yeah, weâll work on this. Weâll figure this out. Yeah. Iâll finish with the, the final, the final dark pair. I donât even know how to make this light, so I canât.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. Here
Simone Collins: we go. But w- this, the article ended with, âBack in her art [00:21:00] studio, Kant processes how her life is set to shift in the coming years through painting.
She created a series about being alone, but being part of a larger world. She also made a collection of autumn leaf portraits that explore aging, decay, and the search for where we belong. âIâm thinking about what my legacy will be,â she said.â Which sucks, because she doesnât have a legacy. Like,
Malcolm Collins: she lives- Yeah, youâre looking to be scaring young people out of having
Simone Collins: kids
like, we are, like, there is, there is a, I mean, depe- if you wanna like do it with like homo sapiens, like 300,000 a year, or if you wanna do, do life, three billion year, like, unending marathon relay game, or like, chain letter. And you, you, youâre letting it die. Like, thatâs, that is your legacy, is the termination-
Malcolm Collins: For all of human civilization, people who replicate it
Simone Collins: of three billion years of life fighting, suffering to continue, to carry [00:22:00] on. And you, your legacy is, âIâm gonna snuff that out. I donât care. Iâm not gonna try. Iâm not even going to try.â Thatâs, thatâs her legacy. And, and, and, and, and of course her- I thought about it, darling ... dead body is, is gonna be found in her condo, and, you know, itâs, who knows how old itâs gonna be, âcause who knows how her spreadsheet of friends is really gonna pan out.
Malcolm Collins: Eaten
Simone Collins: by her cat. And, and some government appointed cleanup crew, which of course, another opportunity is, is cleanup crews for houses with rotting bodies of infirm- Yeah, robots canât
Malcolm Collins: do that yet ... old
Simone Collins: people. Yeah, I know. Iâm, thatâs true. Although, did you hear that thereâs thereâs this new company that is deploying housekeepers in New York City with cameras on their heads to train future cleaning robots?
Itâs kinda fun. I- Oh my God ... I, I like that idea.
Malcolm Collins: So, so, while Iâm reading one, âcause Iâll, Iâll read a story too- Oh my
Simone Collins: God. Oh, that would be really cool if, like, I could make money cleaning my own house by wearing a camera on my head while I did [00:23:00] it. Oh. Can we... I need to reach out to that startup.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, see, yeah.
Simone Collins: Dude, because thatâs, thatâs way more efficient. Itâs just why are they hiring, like, making a cleaning business when they could just be like, âHey, housewives, can you just, can you just wear this, this dash cam on your forehead?â
Malcolm Collins: And we could create, like, a network of housewives to make money while theyâre cleaning.
Simone Collins: Oh, my God. Look, weâre on, weâre on a roll,
Malcolm Collins: okay? Ask them if they would be up for this, âcause we probably have enough housewife fans that we could put together a genuine network doing
Simone Collins: this. Dude, and, like, weâre doing it anyway, you know? Yeah. Like, ugh.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, my God. I mean- Yeah, Liable Human. This can be part of the
Simone Collins: liablehuman.com.
Liable Human. We got the cleaning, the, the, the, the clean cam. I mean,
Malcolm Collins: I- But okay, so when I start-
Simone Collins: Yeah, you do your thing. You do your- ...
Malcolm Collins: talking here, you make a note to yourself about liablehuman.com. Yeah. And go to rfab.ai- And clean cam ... and try out, itâs at the bottom right now, the recipe feature. Okay. I just tried it on the site.
It seems to be working. I wanna get your takeaway on [00:24:00] this. But okay. So this one is from 2025. âI regret belittling men. At 63, Iâve ended up alone. Iâd always imagined I would end up married with two wonderful children, living in a house in the countryside. I have paid a hefty price for my so-called liberation.
A few years ago, I went to Italy with my then boyfriend, James. As we sat tucking into the plate of frutti di mare at a seaside
Simone Collins: restaurant-â Ugh, frutti di mareâs such a gross dish. Girl.
Malcolm Collins: What is it?
Simone Collins: Itâs just, like, a bunch of seafood thrown on top of pasta.
Malcolm Collins: Sounds gross, yeah.
Simone Collins: Yeah, gross.
Malcolm Collins: I struck up a conversation with the waiter in Italian.
Of course she has to mention that, right? Oh
Simone Collins: my God. Oh my God. Please let it be... Michael, if youâre listening, Iâm so sorry, but, like, the way you speak Italian.
Malcolm Collins: Oh my God. Thatâs my dad, by the way ... yeah ... who always has to speak in Italian to waiters.
Simone Collins: But, like, in, in, like, the c- the way that, like, kids get angry about, where youâre like, itâs like- No,
Malcolm Collins: itâs annoying because he does it when he goes to Italian restaurants in the United [00:25:00] States. He does- With
Simone Collins: the affectation, but without the correct accent. Like, thatâs, thatâs the one thing. Can
Malcolm Collins: you imagine as a kid how embarrassed you would be if every time your dad took you to an Italian restaurant, when the waiter
Simone Collins: would- Prego, the fruit de mer.
Yeah, itâs cold ...
Malcolm Collins: clearly an American, he would try to order in a... Itâs literally out of a- God, whatâs that fricking guy who does those movies? Exci-
Simone Collins: the guy who does the movies?
Malcolm Collins: No, the, the guyâs names. Of course. Out of, out of this guyâs movies, like the one where it ends and itâs, like, he died and they change his tombstone to say, like, he died saving a bunch of people from a sinking ship.
... It... Come on. You know the movies Iâm talking about. They have a huge style to them. The
Simone Collins: movies with Wes
Malcolm Collins: Anderson- The Royal Tenenbaums he did ... I know the
Simone Collins: answer to that question. The movies with the style to them is Wes Anderson.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, the Royal Tenenbaums. Whoâs the, whoâs the guy Iâm thinking of?
Simone Collins: Wes Anderson.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, Wes Anderson. My dad is, like, literally out of Wes Anderson. Like- No ... in a Wes Anderson movie, I can see a dad who always sat down and started
Simone Collins: ordering- [00:26:00]
Malcolm Collins: Okay. Okay, maybe ... in Italian, and everyone would look. The movies with the style. Just lets you sit in the cringe.
Il salmone, per favore, con una spruzzata di limone e una spruzzata di mistero
Simone Collins: Stewing in it a little bit. Yeah.
Yeah, like some little shrimp in
Malcolm Collins: a fruit de mer. Okay. By the, by the way, did you get... Have you gotten to the recipe generator yet?
Simone Collins: I, Iâm sorry. Iâm looking through the litany of features. Oh, there it is at the very bottom between-
Malcolm Collins: I told you, yeah, at the bottom. Come on.
Simone Collins: Iâm so- whoa.
Malcolm Collins: Are you, are you putting it in right now? Yeah, yeah.
Simone Collins: Well, I mean, where do I... Oh, so you can choose cuisine by nation or region, so Iâm gonna choose... Ooh, well, not Mongolian. I donât want fricking yak butter. Was that... Oh, no, thatâs Tibetan, right? Thatâs... Your mom, like, basically didnât eat anything she chose so- Itâs
Malcolm Collins: not.
Just choose one, Simone.
Simone Collins: Oh, well, g- aw. Okay, Shanghai, because we just, we just made something that was sort of Shanghai based. And then, Ooh, [00:27:00] Shanghai soul food fusion. Oh, yeah. Okay. And then w- meal type dinner
Malcolm Collins: You donât have to choose every option,
Simone. You can just
Simone Collins: choose- Oh, time available under 15 minutes and for one person âcause I always just make food for you.
And interesting. Th- thereâs no, like, there has to be meat in it. I guess Iâll just do high protein though.
Malcolm Collins: No, if you want to, you can choose the type of meat in it, or you can
choose
Simone Collins: vegetarian. Oh, thatâs true. Oh, yeah, flavor profile, spicy All right. Okay, creative mode. Ooh, dish from the distant future?
Dude, fantasy tavern dish. Historical recre- ha. For- forbidden combination. Break the rules. C- well, but I, yeah, but I, I chose my, my regions. Okay, Iâm just gonna click ... Ooh, generate recipe image too. Okay, generate six recipe ideas.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, you, you just
Simone Collins: unclicked- Okay, Shanghai-based soul food ...
Malcolm Collins: Simone. You didnât unclick generate recipe i- i- image.
It was auto-clicked, right?
Simone Collins: I know. I didnât unclick it.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: Donât worry, [00:28:00] I am tard, but I am not Treytard. I am just-
Malcolm Collins: Is it, is it generating now? Do you see
Simone Collins: the nice- Oh, petite tard. Okay ...
Malcolm Collins: animation and everything?
Simone Collins: Ooh, okay. Okay. So spicy Shanghai rice cake stir fry, quick spicy red braised pork skillet, fiery crab and greens
I hate, I canât do, and I donât like okra. Chili sweet potato and pea hash, and blazing pork and crab noodle toss. So weâre going with the quick spicy red braised pork skillet. Generate full recipe.
Malcolm Collins: And take a screenshot of the recipe when you get it so I can put it here for- Mm ... when people are
Simone Collins: watching the episode.
Mm-mm. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, my God.
Simone Collins: Weâre
Octavian Collins: spinning it.
Simone Collins: Ooh. Tell me about this woman and her fruitti di mare with James, right? Was it James? Was it- Okay ... John?
Malcolm Collins: Back in the hotel, he asked me why I had ignored him. By speaking in a language he didnât understand- Oh. ... he said I managed to make him feel small. I could see his point.
[00:29:00] I spent quite a while chatting away, oblivious to how he must be feeling. I then went on to joke about how that as an Italian speaker I would order for us after he didnât know what osso buco meant. I was showing off. Clearly, thatâs kind of a jerk thing to do. I did
Simone Collins: not want osso buco. Ew, ...
Malcolm Collins: I, I know, right?
It wasnât the first time something like that had happened to me. I was always taken- Oh,
Simone Collins: Malcolm, this looks really good. Oh, my God.
Malcolm Collins: Right. Did it fully output with the picture and everything?
Simone Collins: Yeah. Itâs, itâs got the steaming ... Mm, you can see the little pepper flakes on it.
Malcolm Collins: But also look at how it formats everything.
Simone Collins: No, this is really nice, and like, but the enticing ... It, it gives you, like, this like a food blog style image output.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, my God. And then it gives you a food blog with a separated menu section, time section, cooking section, and then at the end we run another internet search capable AI-
Simone Collins: Nutrition per serving?
Malcolm, you love me.
Malcolm Collins: Right. Aw. And then at the end we run [00:30:00] another search AI on the output of the first search AI just to correct anything that might be wrong or need nuance within the initial output.
Simone Collins: Malcolm, are you publishing all these results in an indexable part of our website that becomes rich?
No, but
Malcolm Collins: thatâs a really good idea.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. I think you really, I think you should so that things like Google searches will point to it âCause this is great fusion, like, recipes.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And then people will make their, their cursed recipes and stuff like that to try to make a big indexing of it.
Simone Collins: A drink pairing?
Oh my gosh. A chilled off-dry riesling? I mean, gross, but, like, I get it actually with this. Or unsweetened iced tea with lemon. Food safety tips. Oh my gosh.
Malcolm Collins: Didnât I go over the top with the creation of this feature?
Simone Collins: You went, you went super over the top, but I am
Malcolm Collins: here for it. Because now Iâm getting better at making these sorts of things, I immediately was like, âOoh, how can I make this...â
And I donât know if you noticed, but next to this button we also put-
Simone Collins: Refrigerate [00:31:00] leftovers within two hours. You... Food safety. Avoid overcrowding the pork so the pork- the pans so the pork sears rather than steams. Yes, okay.
Malcolm Collins: Ooh. I also made a feature for this that well, one Iâm gonna add, âcause I just had the idea to add it, is a feature where you put in, like, âI have too much of X ingredient in my fridge, I need to use it all,â or put in, like, âI have X, Y, and Z in my refrigerator, I wanna get rid of it.â
Simone Collins: Yes.
Yes. Oh my gosh, Malcolm.
Malcolm Collins: And Iâll add something thatâs, like, meat-based in general dish, right?
Simone Collins: Have I mentioned I love you?
Malcolm Collins: But I donât know if you noticed, but next to this, the other new feature I made was for people doing D&D campaigns or, like, any sort of campaigns.
Simone Collins: I saw that, yeah. You can
Malcolm Collins: put in the rule book and it will just, like, auto help you with the next turn with your players.
Simone Collins: Bless you, sir. Youâre doing Godâs work.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, right? But I just made this stuff because somebody on the Leaflet stream- Wait, youâre- ... wanted that, and I was like, âSure, I can make that.â
Simone Collins: For a Leaflet fan, anything. Come on. Yeah ... yeah. I, Okay, tell me about this woman whose, whose [00:32:00] boyfriend- Okay, okay ... is un- inse- The...
So one, this guy can just take a hike anyway because his reaction was to feel insecure when she spoke Italian intolerably as an American in a restaurant- Yeah ... instead of, like, to feel embarrassed.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, so anyway.
Octavian Collins: Can I tell you
Malcolm Collins: something I
Octavian Collins: learned?
Simone Collins: Okay, you can tell them what you learned. Hold on.
Octavianâs gonna tell us what he learned.
Octavian Collins: Hereâs another fun fact of the day. You can make a window by your- self if you had some, if you had some, like a sand hammer glass, and then you can, like, melt it, and then let it cool, and then get, window mold, and then let it dry for a couple of days, and then ta-da, you get your own window.
Simone Collins: Love you, buddy.
Malcolm Collins: Fun fact. If you have sand- Yes ... melt it into glass and make your
Simone Collins: own window.
Octavian Collins: Another fun fact of the day. Itâs, Did you know you can sew a shirt by yourself? Hello, hello? Like this one, like
Simone Collins: this big. Itâs true. Yeah, you know, [00:33:00] people even made their own fabric in the past, Octavia.
Octavian Collins: Yeah, .
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs the type of useful fact- Phew ... youâre getting from him. Yeah. With us itâs just how to make money from people. Yeah, ew ... but letâs look up, Can you just tell me more things?
Weâll, weâll go over this later. No,
Simone Collins: no, no, buddy, you gotta work.
Malcolm Collins: To do this attorney thing. Tell me more things. But I, I wanna continue here. Okay. Can I just tell you more things? Iâm convinced the reason Iâm still booking a table for one at the age of 63 instead of having settled with a significant other is because like so many women of my generation, feminism has ruined my love life.
Instead of empowering us, those ideals of second wave feminism made us believe that marriage and domesticity were to be avoided like the plague, and that men were competitor rather than partners. I might have a successful career as a writer and broadcaster, but I never had children, underlying bolded, or been married, and my longest relationship lasted eight years.
I regret this. I always imagined I would end up married with two wonderful children and living in a house at the countryside. Iâve paid a hefty price for my so-called liberation. I was 17 and a pupil at Golders and Leigh Mire, one of Britainâs most academic institutions, when I [00:34:00] was introduced to the womenâs liberation movement.
It offered so much hope and excitement, and we spent our lunch breaks soaking up feminist mantras of Geramir Greer and Betty Friedman. Act like the men they bribed- Betty, Betty Friedman? ... as they burned their bras and demolished... I, Betty Friedman. I donât know. Betty Fr- some, some Jewish name, Betty Friedman.
A bra is, and demonized housework in the family. And now here Iâm not saying that, like, Jews are a problem. Clearly this got to a Jewish woman. Like, th- this was a Jewish man who ended up not getting a wife âcause she burned her bra or whatever, right? I, obviously this is what men wanted them to do in the first place, like yeah, go braless.
What, what are you doing, you know? End up destroying their breasts at like the age of 30.
Simone Collins: I donât think you destroy your breasts- Oh, yeah ... by not wearing support.
Malcolm Collins: If you, if you, if you donât wear support your breasts start sagging much faster.
Simone Collins: Do they actually? Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: From what Iâve heard, yes.
Simone Collins: We, we can fact check this.
Malcolm Collins: Why donât you, why donât you fact check that?
Simone Collins: G- Grok.
Malcolm Collins: By the time I was 25 clutching a degree in French and [00:35:00] Italian I was a bright, confident feminist keen to flex her intellectual muscles and to never let a man get the last word. I read Nietzsche for fun, and my bedside table was always buckled beneath the weight of substantial intellectually challenging books.
God, she
Simone Collins: sounds so annoying. Nietzsche and Betty Friedman
Malcolm Collins: Right? But not many feminists read niche, Iâll tell you that.
Simone Collins: No, n- Not wearing a bra does not cause breasts to sag earlier, according to the Cleveland Health Clinic, but also via Grok. This is a common myth without strong scientific backing.
Breast sagging, medically called ptosis, happens primarily due to natural factors, and bra wearing habits have little to no proven long-term impact on it. Besides, Malcolm, I donât wear a bra.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, you donât?
Simone Collins: I wear stays, though, which is the, the OG bra. The
Malcolm Collins: OG bra?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, my gosh. So, we... I... We keep finding that Leaflet and you dress in the same outfits.
Like, she wears these what, what do you call them, at nights? Like, the medieval outfits.
Simone Collins: A, a chemise.
Malcolm Collins: Chemise. But th- th- wh- wh-
Simone Collins: Thatâs [00:36:00] just the, the universal undergarment. This, this is a chemise.
Malcolm Collins: She...
Simone Collins: You looked like the- W- we literally found that we shop at the same stores. The women from my n- She has...
Sheâs a woman of taste, okay?
Malcolm Collins: And like- ... medieval plays, and now I realize that in real life she also dresses like a medieval woman, and Iâm like- Well, thatâs like, it, it, the best thing is- ... this is, we gotta get this new, like, nerd right. We all dress like medieval women, itâs not just you. Thatâs
Simone Collins: like- I think thatâs a, thatâs, itâs just a continuation of that...
I think we even did an episode on it, when, like, when conservative anon accounts got doxxed, it just turned out that they were, like, attractive, cool people who are, like, well-adjusted. And I think itâs the same with VTubers. Like, were they to be unmasked, it will turn out that they were, they are attractive, cool people who actually look as cool, if not cooler, than their VTuber avatars.
Malcolm Collins: Right. I wanna, I wanna start the trend. I like this trend. All of the, like, new right women, our thing is, like, we all dress m- like medieval fantasy people. Like weâre, weâre princesses, right? Thatâs what everybody wants to be anyway.
Speaker 4: I just realized that [00:37:00] in real life, like new right women are beginning to dress like the characters that the left is freaking out about and calling a fetish from the Knightâs Path, where theyâre just like normal medieval females who are sweet and kind, and the left is like, âOh my God, how could you do this?
This is a weird, perverted fetish.â , Which I like. I, I donât mind. I donât mind. We might do a whole episode on this
Malcolm Collins: Ah. And then it will become cool, and progressives wonât be able to dress that way anymore, and theyâll get all annoyed.
That, and when weâre younger, we all dress like Emilia, okay? The, the art hoe look- So you
Simone Collins: go from, like, art hoe to- ...
Malcolm Collins: conservative guys are into it, right? I love it when, like, Totally, like, Coping ShortFatOtaku did a piece where heâs like, âOh you know, no, none of these conservative art hoe girls actually exist.â
And I was like, âSimone dressed exactly like that when I met her.â A lot of the conservative girls now who are on the right, like The Nerd Right- And did dress like
Simone Collins: Emilia. Oh, my God,
Malcolm Collins: yeah ... originally dressed like Emilia. You think Leaflet didnât dress like Emilia at some point in her life? You know, like, come on, people.
Look,
Simone Collins: weâve all... If weâve been in America weâve- [00:38:00]
Malcolm Collins: And, and we, the only reason theyâre not dressing like that now is because itâs not cool to dress like that when youâre in your 40s. Now you go for the medieval phase. Okay. By the time I was 25, clutching a degree in French and Italian, what a pointless degree, I was a bright, confident feminist keen to flex her intellectual muscle.
Oh, no, Iâm gonna read you whenever that.. For, at first men loved my wit and intelligence. âYouâre such a breath of fresh air. I love talking to you. Youâre the first woman Iâve met who stimulates me,â theyâd trill. Trill
what type of guy says that to somebody? And if you have a degree in French and Italian, what interesting thing could you possibly have to say? But anyway,
Simone Collins: that was- Well, I thought you said breast of fresh air, so that, I thought that was the dead giveaway,
Malcolm Collins: but. Oh, yes. That was until I had lectured them for the umpteenth time on the virtues of modernism.
Mm-hmm. âYouâll never win an argument against Kate,â one man said as he watched me outsmart yet another potential lover. Subtext, donât bother. No, what he meant by that is youâll never back down from an argument. No one always wins an argument. Even [00:39:00] between Simone and I, she wins quite frequently.
Simone Collins: In a- Nice try, Malcolm
Malcolm Collins: You do.
You do. Oh, yeah, I, you, you joke that I donât even bet with you anymore because Iâm so frequently wrong.
Simone Collins: Thatâs just because the only time I will say, âDo you wanna put money on it?â is when I know Iâm gonna win. And you figured that out really
Malcolm Collins: quick ... men had called me intimidating, scary, opinionated. I now see that not only was I trying to prove I was their intellectual equal or superior, I was treating every encounter with a man like he was my adversary.
If a date brought me a bouquet of flowers, instead of smiling and putting them in a vase of water, I would bite their head off. Canât you buy me some nice olive branch or balsamic vinegar? Oh, sorry, some nice olive oil or a balsamic vinegar. What a, what a jerk thing to say to somebody- Malcolm ... who bought you flowers.
Simone Collins: Thatâs true. Thatâs true. But, like, you buy me popcorn instead of.
Malcolm Collins: I fed with my eye roll to one hapless suitor as he stood, wilting faster than the fragrant offering he held in his hand.
Simone Collins: Oh.
Malcolm Collins: He had bothered to think about making me [00:40:00] happy, and I crush him for it. And flowers are expensive, too. By the way- Itâs true.
Simone Collins: Flowers are su- theyâre, theyâre a costly signal. Like, the whole point of giving flowers is that they are useless, but you choose to give them to someone anyway. Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: people.
Simone Collins: Like, the, the, the gift that, that is famously terrible for a man to give to his lady partner is something thatâs useful, like a vacuum.
Oh, no, thatâs a terrible gift, and here she is scoffing at him. Of course, if he gave her something useful, heâd be like, âOh, what? You expect me to cook you something with olive oil?â Like, there is no winning with this kind of ideology. But sheâs come to recognize that in her dotage.
Malcolm Collins: By the way, if you wanna make your w- life hap- wife happy, I learned a new thing that I can do to make Simone happy.
Simone Collins: Oh,
Malcolm Collins: my God. And so you guys can do this for your wives. If you ever see dust accumulating in a corner or on a stair corner or anything like that, clean it up for them while theyâre doing something else, and they will be very appreciative because- I just
Simone Collins: saw what you did today in that, right over there.
Thank you.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. I place so much importance on finding a, [00:41:00] quote-unquote, âstrong man who can match meâ that I forgot men were people with feelings. I, I, indeed I forgot I had feelings and hid my softness. No, the thing is, is she wanted a strong man, but she also saw it as a red flag or a negative sign if a guy was better than her, right?
Mm-hmm. Like, a guy canât just be like, âYeah, I know more than you.â And Simone admitted that fairly early in our relationship that I just know more than her about most things, and thatâs okay.
Simone Collins: Itâs okay.
Malcolm Collins: I now see that I had longed to be loved, but I was scared to be vulnerable. I was using my sharp mind to protect my all-too-soft heart against yet future rejection.
Another thing I regret deeply is the tally of my one-night stands when I was younger. I distinctly remember thinking it would be uncool to say no to men I met at parties or dated, but I struggled to enjoy it. There was always a disconnect. This was abundantly clear the morning after. As I lay there waiting for a sign of affection, he would be singing the triumphs of Had Her song in the shower.
A [00:42:00] quick cheerio and he was gone. While I pretended to enjoy it, I felt uncomfortable about sex so early on. I felt sad and used. Sorry, I felt empty and used. My generation of women were encouraged to have sex like a man. In other words, have casual sex, and it backfired. Fast-forward to now, the idea that women are different from men, that casual sex can be harmful, is gaining traction.
In her last book, A Guide to Sex in the 21st Century, the young adult adaptation, Louise Perry explores how the sexual revolution impacted women negatively and led to unwanted consequences. Ooh, Louise Perry is impacting feminists now. I mean, Louise Perry has always been a feminist. We interviewed her.
Well,
Simone Collins: she, well, yeah, she started out from a- She was on the show ... just like us, from a progressive perspective, and I- sheâs still, her primary audience, at least the last time we, like a couple years back, was progressives who started to have thoughts-
Malcolm Collins: Uh-oh ... about vaccines Donât have thoughts, âcause then youâre not a progressive anymore, right?
Mm. You get kicked out. I mean, sheâs seen as a far-righter at this point âcause she [00:43:00] also, you know, questions the trans agenda. Well,
Simone Collins: but sheâs one of the far-righters who has, like, an audience primarily among far-righters, progressives who are like, âLook at me being naughty. Iâm going to read Louise Perry.â
Malcolm Collins: I al- I always thought her, like, core audience was lesbians who are pissed off that trans people keep hitting on them and invade their spaces.
Thatâs sort of like most of the people on her show I get the impression of, is like Louise Perry- Well, âcause thatâs like the one group of, of women who when sheâs ... Of like her core thing is like women arenât actually into being choked, and Iâm like, âTheyâre not actually into like a big strong man.â Iâm like, âYeah, itâs because of men that the monster effer category at Barnes & Nobles is like three rows.â
Simone Collins: Is, is a category. Uh-huh.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, itâs because of men that like 50 Shades of Gray was a bestseller. I believe you, Louise Perry. Mm. But I think like the one cate- b- well, I mean you, you gotta have your head in the sand a bit as a woman to not like recognize that like even if youâre not turned on by something, clearly the majority of women are, right?
You know, or thereâs a big audience out there for it. But [00:44:00] yeah. How can people make money off of being other peopleâs power of attorney? Like, how do they advertise themselves for this? How do they find people who want this? Whatâs your... Because Simone, âcause she does have Jew DNA, so she got, like, plus five in mercantil- mercantilism- Mercantilism
as- as- as being born half Jew. Oh, no. By the way, sheâs not half Jew. Sheâs one-eighths Jew, but itâs, itâs matrilineal, so they consider it,
Simone Collins: So then Iâm all Jew. Iâm a Jewess.
Malcolm Collins: For- for Jews
Simone Collins: According
Malcolm Collins: to ... but yeah. That- that- that unfortunately, the half Jew started her into, she heard about sad women and then thought, âHow can I make money off of them?â
So- Dude,
Simone Collins: well, youâre welcome for the 50-plus dollars I got you today.
Malcolm Collins: So go and help people here. Now, how do they set this up to exploit people? And if youâre a Base Camp fan, you can always use us as your power of attorney. Weâll make some easy way to handle this. So- Well,
Simone Collins: I mean, sometimes you have to be present, so it is important to be able to find.
But I think the- We
Malcolm Collins: can go and be present if somebodyâs, like, dying or needs the decision, Simone. [00:45:00]
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. Fair enough. We can. I- I would... N- I mean, the... Go to my show notes. I will put them in the show notes. Just, like, look at your specific state if youâre in the United States at what the regulations are around what you need to- to qualify, how you, how you might need to be certified to become a power of attorney.
And then figure out the best way in your state to make yourself an easy search result when people in your state search for power of attorney.
Malcolm Collins: And you can vibe good this, right?
Simone Collins: You can totally vibe good this. And then what you need to do is just make yourself really easy to reach via phone, âcause- The boomer generation that is going to need this service really likes just picking up their phone and calling people possibly just showing up at addresses.
We know this from experience. So I think if you can have a, an address where people can just show up and a phone number, at least a phone number that people can just [00:46:00] call and you can answer, I think you could start... And youâre properly certified for your state, even if you need to be. You might not need to be, and you donât even need to be a CPA or an attorney necessarily.
Just start offering it, and, and I mean, you, you need to be ready to commit to this to actually follow through. Some states like in Pennsylvania will put a cap on certain services related to stuff I brought up in this, like in terms of recovering finances. Our state, Pennsylvania, will cap how much you can charge in terms of like finders fees in helping people recover this money that has been left by distant cousins who didnât have any friends or family in wills.
But just look it up. Use, use, use Malcolmâs super search feature on rfab.ai and figure it out, and then create a website.
Malcolm Collins: Another thing that you can use us for, by the way, if weâre thinking of services we can offer to people- Yeah ... is if youâre getting married to somebody, you know how we have like our marriage contract?
Mm-hmm. One of our early episodes is on how to put one of those together. If you need a line in the [00:47:00] contract about disagreements with a partner that involves some form of third-party
Simone Collins: intervention- Oh, an arbitrator.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah ... yeah, and youâre like, âMalcolm and Simone seem fairly reasonable as an arbitrator,â weâre happy to serve that role where we just say, basically we make the decision when both of you canât agree on something.
Simone Collins: Make a call. Yeah. Yeah, we, we have, Weâll just ... we have arbitrators in in our marriage contract specifically related to the fat clause. Thatâs the one place where we have arbitrators.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, whoâs the arbitrat- Oh, is it my mom?
Simone Collins: Itâs, itâs y- your brother and, and- Oh ... our sister-in-law. Because they, they are good, like, theyâre on the more judgment...
But they, neither of them would lie about either of us getting a little
Malcolm Collins: chunk. Oh, no, they would totally be honest about it. Yeah. Theyâd be like- Yeah ... âYeah, youâre, youâre chubsters.â
Simone Collins: Yeah. They would enjoy, they would enjoy saying it, so.
Malcolm Collins: If you donât have a will, get a will. Put us in it. The, the-
Simone Collins: Yeah, but also exploit the reality that apparently many aging, childless, parentless, family, friendless old people are going to [00:48:00] die with assets.
Of course, many of them are gonna die with negative net worths, but you could potentially make some money from this too. So yeah, take lemons, turn them into lemonade. Itâs doable, and I love you very much, Malcolm.
Malcolm Collins: I love you too, Simone.
Simone Collins: Oh. Which one would you like to do next?
Malcolm Collins: All right.
Simone Collins: Did you watch
Malcolm Collins: the end of Euphoria?
Simone Collins: No. Iâm gonna watch it tonight. Itâs my treat.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, okay, then I wonât mention anything.
Speaker 9: For those wondering, the first thing that came up when I searched the Christian family from Euphoria was some other person being with him, um, at the end of the show
Simone Collins: Yeah, donât. Dude, I mean, like the, the previous episode was oh oh. Itâs like I- I,
Malcolm Collins: well, I can guess it- ... canât even ... because I, I got more information than you have from looking up clips of the family, the rural family.
Simone Collins: Oh, did she go back to them? Donât know
Malcolm Collins: I wonât, I wonât say anything
Simone Collins: I hope she doesnât like die trying to get there.
Oh, geez. Okay, well The,
Malcolm Collins: the [00:49:00] scene with them when I put it on, the, the, the first scene with them is very sweet. Isnât it? ... where... Well, itâs sweet, but also in that sort of sad progre- Like, when the other girl asks her why she wouldnât trade positions with her, she just looks upset and then turns up the radio.
Simone Collins: Yeah, like she doesnât explain, âOh, well, Iâve been turned into a drug mule, and like all my friends are miserable, and...â Yeah, we need to be more clear about whatâs
Malcolm Collins: going- I, and I really feel this w- like when progressives come after us, like this recently had a negative podcast on us. And Iâm like, âBro, we really are like just trying to help you,â right?
Like, I love their like, their marriage. Well, yeah, they seem to love each other, but they never talk about how hot the other one is and how they want to like jump each otherâs bones and stuff. They, they just seem to respect each other. And itâs like- Wow ... maybe you shouldnât structure your marriage off of that.
Thatâs a bad way to structure things.
Simone Collins: Yeah, no, read, read my early diaries though and itâs, itâs pretty clear,
Malcolm Collins: Oh, in the early days. Yeah, you know.
Simone Collins: Look, [00:50:00] if we werenât as sleep deprived and stressed as we are right now, I think we would just constantly have that on our minds too. But guess what?
Weâve given ourselves bigger things to worry about.
Malcolm Collins: Well, I, I was almost thought of doing an episode pointing out that like when you have kids, babysitters are just prostitutes with extra steps because- They
Simone Collins: are though, âcause youâre paying that person for their time in order to have sex.
Malcolm Collins: So that you have time to sleep- Yeah
with your partner, right?
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: You know? Mm-hmm. Yeah. Because otherwise you got the baby in the room and everything like that, you know.
Simone Collins: Yeah, gross.
And no, having it, like I... You canât get turned on if your baby is in another room crying. I donât know how that works for people. I also though donât know how people have sex in front of their pets which apparently happens a decent amount.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, that sounds really gross. Like the, the pet is either looking at you or not looking at you. Both- I
Simone Collins: mean, I could handle fish, like goldfish or something.
Malcolm Collins: Oh yeah, I can understand that. Iâm thinking a dog obviously, right? Yeah. Like obviously- Like a dog understands whatâs [00:51:00] happening. The, you know, itâs like-
Simone Collins: Yeah, like a cat might not pay that much attention, so maybe they just be like asleep in a corner and youâd like contextualize them as more like a pillow, you know?
You can kind of write it off. Anyway.
Malcolm Collins: Oh my God fun. By the way, the episode that I prepped for today is why we stopped believing women slash why did Democrats stop caring about grape. Is
Simone Collins: this your, is this your ass mogging video or not?
Malcolm Collins: No, itâs not that one. I, I like the ass mogging one- Thereâs another one
but like I can just riff on that topic anytime. This one is more-
Simone Collins: Okay. Fair ...
Malcolm Collins: in depth.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Speaking of pillows, like my highlight of yesterday, I mean, you know, aside from like our meaningful life and everything, was I saw one of our pillows that your mom gifted to us, I- on, on, on the Nancy Drew show, like that HBO stupid fantasy mystery show.
I was like, âOh my God, we have that pillow.â I got so excited. [00:52:00] Those stupid rough ass pillows that your mom got for us. You know, the, the, the like burlap ones.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Oh, anyway. I, Iâll get us
Malcolm Collins: started. Love you, sweetheart.
Simone Collins: Life is delightful.
Speaker 5: no, no.
Are the apples wet? They, they have a lot. All apples
No, no, apples are just naturally a bit wet,
the dust- Come on, Toasty ... that
Speaker 8: youâre always so worried about, right?
Speaker 5: Torsten, eat an apple. What are you doing?
She didnât lick them all
Speaker 6: I want it back to zoo. Itâs true.
Speaker 5: I know itâs true. I, I promise you she- Jackson,
Speaker 6: you were-
Speaker 5: See, Tyne [00:53:00] didnât. That would be a really long thing for her to do, Josie You
Speaker 8: make her too much fun. We went in the-
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 episode of Based Camp, we explore the recent wave of anti-marriage feminist influencers who suddenly get engaged and/or pregnant right after hitting 30. Is âanti-marriageâ feminism just mate-blocking by other means? Or is it sour grapes from women who spent their 20s steeped in hookup culture?
We explore:
âą The hypocrisy of prominent âstay singleâ influencers (MJ Gray, Alex Cooper, Wizard Liz, Danielle Walter, etc.)
âą Why feminismâs biggest âwinsâ have mostly hurt women
âą The collapse in marriage rates (especially by age 30)
âą Mate blocking vs. status denial
âą The hollowness of modern hookup/OnlyFans culture and the return to meaning
Get ready for a spicy and honest conversation about dating, marriage, female nature, and cultural trends.
Show Notes
What happened:
* An influencer named MJ Gray branded herself as strongly antiâmarriage and antiâkids, framing marriage as âenslavementâ and something women should avoid because it primarily benefits men and the patriarchy.
* She built a following of nearly 500,000 on TikTok by creating anti-marriage content, often arguing that marriage signifies the âownership of womenâ and advising women to avoid it.
* After about nine months of dating a man with no public profile, she announces an engagement in a visibly uncomfortable video titled âYes, Iâm engaged. Yes, this is awkward,â while repeatedly insisting she is âin a good situation.â
* Timestamped clip:
* She claims her stance has always included caveats: marriage can make sense if you plan to have children, share property, or live together, but otherwise it remains a harmful institution.
It turns out she is not the only influencer of the stay single movement who turned around and got married. There are other recent and prominent examples that might indicate some sort of pattern.
This comes at a time when marriage REALLY doesnât need negative propaganda. Around 2005â2010, roughly 50â55% of adults were married; by the mid-2020s, itâs around 46â51% (e.g., 47.1% of households headed by married couples in 2024, near historic lows).
So whatâs going on with women like these? Letâs explore and discuss.
MJ Grayâs Branding
MJ Gray frames herself as a supermodel billionaire (thatâs her handle on YouTube)
Has 419K followers on tiktok (@texasgardenfairy)
Has 84.6K followers on Instagram
She shares her thoughts on âThe Maneater Podcastâ
4.9 stars and 44 reviews on spotify (for reference, Based Camp has 3.8 stars and 205 reviews)
4.9 stars and 9 reviews on Apple Podcasts (for reference, Based Camp has 4.4 stars at 153 reviews)
MJ Grayâs YouTube model is @supermodelbillionaire: https://www.youtube.com/@supermodelbillionaire
8.46K subscribers, 65 videos
Things she says:
* Men should always pay for women becauseâŠ
* Men are womenâs apex predator
* Womenâs time is more valuable than menâs time (because their attractive and fertile years are limited)
* Engaging with men is dangerous as you could get pregnant, get an infection
* Womenâs presence and attention is more valuable than menâs attention (men spend more on strip clubs and exotic dancers⊠though apparently she does not know about host clubs)
Other Stay-Single Hypocrites
Alex Cooper
* She is most famous for being co-host of the Call Her Daddy podcast
* She built a massive platform with frank, often casual-sex-positive advice that included heavy skepticism toward traditional marriage and long-term commitment, encouraging women to prioritize autonomy and fun over settling down.
* She faced direct roasting for âpreaching anti-marriageâ before getting married herself (to Matt Kaplan). Critics highlighted the shift as hypocritical given her earlier messaging.
* Just this week announced her pregnancy
Wizard Liz
* https://www.youtube.com/c/TheWizardliz
* She is known for being a life advice/self-improvement influencer
* Frequently grouped with MJ Gray in discussions of âfeminist rhetoric as a placeholderâ for building a following before pivoting to relationships/luxury-coded life.
* She has shared content focused on self-love, healing, and high standards that some interpreted as discouraging rushed commitments or highlighting male flaws. She got engaged/married quickly (to Landon Nickerson), faced cheating drama, and drew similar âbait-and-switchâ accusations
Danielle Walter
* https://www.tiktok.com/@daniellewalter_
* She is known for being a dating/relationship TikTok influencer, and the âCarrie Bradshaw of San Franciscoâ
* Gained millions with dating advice, single-era relatability, and content that resonated with women navigating toxic dynamics or high standards (sometimes overlapping with anti-settling or critical-of-men vibes).
* When she entered a relationship and shared extensively about it (including a 21-part series), followers accused her of abandoning principles, hypocrisy, or shifting for a man/clout. Backlash included claims she went âall for a manâ after building on single struggles.
What is Really Happening?
Anti-Marriage as Mate Blocking?
Anti-Marriage Being a Pre-Wall Phenomenon?
* MJ Gray was 30 (born August 12, 1995; turned 30 in August 2025). The engagement news broke around April 2026.
* Alex Cooper got engaged at age 31/32
* Wzard Liz got engaged around age 25 (though it ended amid cheating allegations while she was pregnant)
* Danielle Walter entered her long-term relationship around age 32 and got engaged around age 33
Anti-Marriage Being about Women Fundamentally Misunderstanding Men?
Recently trending on X: 2010 Study Shows Testosterone Boosts Fairness in Women
People were discussing a 2009 study titled Prejudice and truth about the effect of testosterone on human bargaining behaviour (2009), in which researchers found that a single dose of testosterone made women behave more fairly in a bargaining game, but simply believing one had received testosterone made people behave more unfairly, regardless of what they actually received.
Episode Transcript
Simone Collins: Hello, Malcolm. Iâm excited to be speaking with you again because we have a new episode in our series Women Are Terrible because theyâre at it again, Malcolm.
The women are terrible. And what happened most recently was an influencer who goes by MJ Gray. She branded herself as very strongly anti-marriage and anti-kids. She, she framed marriage as enslavement and something that women should avoid because it primarily benefits men and the patriarchy. And she built this following of almost 500,000 people on TikTok.
Iâll link to this in, in the show notes. And it was all about anti-marriage content. She often argued that marriage signifies ownership of women and she strongly advised women to avoid it.
Speaker 11: I really wish women would stop getting married. I wrote off getting married since I was a little girl. I, I put together the pieces of what marriage was and I was like, âOh, yeah, no.â I could never trust a man, which is why I would never marry a man
Simone Collins: And then lo [00:01:00] and behold After nine months of dating a man with no public profile, she announces an engagement in a visibly uncomfortable video, which is now, sheâs trying to scrub it from the internet titled Yes, Iâm Engaged.
Yes, This Is Awkward. While repeatedly she insists sheâs in a good situation and I, I have a somewhat salvaged part of this at least that I was able to find on the internet for you, Malcolm, if you wanna include it. But Iâll also link to it in the show notes.
Speaker: Yes, I am engaged. Yes, I am the same person who made several videos saying that I never had, never had any plans to get married, I did not wanna get married, and I did not agree with the institution of marriage.
Simone Collins: She claims her stance has always included caveats that sometimes marriage is good.
Sometimes marriage can make sense if you plan to have children or share property or live together. But otherwise, it remains a harmful institution. And of course, very abundantly in, in her content, you know, sheâs âWell, having kids is the most horrifying thing. It destroys your body.â So of course, if you have kids, [00:02:00] you know, sharing property, why would you ever do that?
But so- Oh, my
Malcolm Collins: God. So your takeaway, because she watched this happen. She comes to me and she goes, âMalcolm, is feminism just an anti-woman grift?â Is it- Or is it
Simone Collins: meat blocking? Thatâs what I, I kind of think Well, meat
Malcolm Collins: blocking, but through that itâs a tactic that ugly women use to destroy the marriage prospects of beautiful and qualified women and that when women signal feminist ideals, they are doing it with the predominant intentionality of hurting other women.
And the women I have heard- No, I mean, so this, this is where it gets
Simone Collins: more complicated because this is a different subset, and itâs more... This is why I wanted to talk about it, because this is not the ugly feminist meat blocking and being like, âWell, we need to, you know, uh, get cats and vote.â This is not that class.
This is, this is a slutty class of women. I, I mean that in the nicest way. This is a sex positive class of women that, that, that actively wants to date that talks about dating strategy, that talks [00:03:00] about getting men to pay for you, that talks about loving sex. And yet things happen and suddenly- Did this woman talk about all that?
Dot, dot, dot. Yeah, weâre gonna get into it because it turns out That MJ is not the only influencer in the stay single movement who turned around and got married. There are other recent and, and actually quite prominent, even more prominent than MJ in, in terms of the online drama than MJ. So I want
Malcolm Collins: to explore this through a few lenses before we start.
Okay. So when you came to me and you told me this, I began to really think through it, and I was like, actually, almost everything that feminism has, quote-unquote, âwonâ has been a strict negative for the majority of women. Yeah. Yeah ...
whether- Yes ...
whether that is, âHey, women, you get to be sluttier now,â and women were always like, âBut I never wanted to.â
I... men are the ones- Yeah, like this was never the plan. Since when did I want to? Men wanted multiple partners. I wanted a wealthy partner, right, whoâs dedicated only to me. Yeah. Iâve watched the women porn, right? Iâve, I personally like really reading, uh, romantasy mawaâs stories, [00:04:00] right? So I know what women like because I find it very enjoyable, too, and itâs always one guy, maybe two guys thirsting after them for a love triangle.
Yeah. Itâs certainly not what men are into and what these women have, quote-unquote, âwon.â Well, yeah, itâs not a series
Simone Collins: of one-night stands. Itâs not really out there sex acts. Itâs, itâs- No ... itâs quite- Itâs the dark,
Malcolm Collins: brooding Duke of the North- Yeah ... who secretly has a soft spot for them. Oh, you know it.
You know it. But- Yeah ... but, so okay. So, oh, well, they won the right to work. What? How is that good for women? Yeah. That now women have to have jobs, and still raise kids, and still cook the food, âcause they didnât really walk back that other stuff significantly. No, no.
Simone Collins: Now theyâre just like, oh, so, work for yourself, but also sleep around with a bunch of men, but sort of, you know, in, in return for no security or long-term bonding.
And, and also you know, if you, if you ever do get married, just wait. Get, make it a [00:05:00] capstone in your life. Get everything else in place. And theyâre just giving this really intense anti-marriage advice at a time when marriage really canât afford any more negative propaganda. Between 25, or 2005 and, and, and 2010, around half of adults, like 50 to 55%, were married, and by the mid-2020s, itâs around 46 to 51%.
So, 47% of households were headed by married couples in 2024. These are near historic lows. It, it, people are just- I mean,
Malcolm Collins: have you seen the married by 30 numbers that Asmogold was sharing? Really?
Simone Collins: But yeah, the number of people getting married by 30 is,
is plummeting.
So yeah, people are putting it off. We really donât need any more anti-marriage propaganda. Meanwhile, you have-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, hold on. Iâm just gonna go over it really quickly for fans. Yeah. So Americans married by age 30, if you go to 1975, it was 91% of women, so over nine in 10 women. Yeah. And for men it was 81%.
Today, 2025, it is 25% of women and 16% of men. [00:06:00]
Simone Collins: This is not
Malcolm Collins: great. So, th- yeah, that is terrible at this point. And women are
Simone Collins: like, â
Malcolm Collins: Marriage is slavery.â And I also wanna go into a video that ended up doing the rounds of a woman who is very, very mid got a baseball star to date her. Uh, he wanted him to come back to her place on the first date, and she ends up putting him on blast, and he didnât even do anything wrong.
And it, it shows that the tyranny of the mids at this point.
Simone Collins: The tyranny of the mids? Right? Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. That they expect- Come on ... mil- multi-millionaire pro athletes to take them on second dates when clearly theyâre just chum.
Simone Collins: Yeah, this guy was a, a, apparently a lazy 10. So thatâs- As we
Malcolm Collins: point out, you know.
And now if she thinks that this is the type of guy that she can get, no, you canât. Yeah, now, now yeah,
Simone Collins: going forward sheâs going to assume that she will get a 10 to marry her because a 10 wanted to sleep with her on one of his tired nights.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Okay,
Malcolm Collins: continue, Simone.
Simone Collins: But yeah, so I, I wanna, I wanna explore these women for a [00:07:00] little bit because this is a different profile of woman.
This is not, like I said, the, you know, a bookish feminist cat lady who is just like, âIâm never gonna come into contact with men.â This is actually, as much as theyâre sort of anti-men or at least anti-centering men, they actually engage a lot with men, and theyâre quite attractive. At least I, I think, I think they are.
Uh, they, they, they look like mainstream filter people if, if that makes sense. You know, like Instagram models. But letâs start with MJ Gray, the, the woman in question, the, the turning point of this episode. She has 419,000 followers on TikTok. She has 84,000 followers on Instagram. She shares her thoughts on The Maneater podcast, which is, you know, her, itâs a little bit red pill woman-y, but not in that she... I think red pill women often were seen back in their day, I donât know if they still exist, as being subservient to men, whereas sheâs more like a pickup artist woman. You know, like- Mm-hmm ... being very sociopathic about her views with women.
A, an [00:08:00] example of a post from her is sheâll be like, âWell, men should always pay for women because men are womenâs apex predator, and womenâs time is more valuable than men.â But admittedly because theyâre attractive and fertile, years are limited, which is true. And engaging with men is dangerous, as you could get pregnant or get an infection.
And womenâs presence and attention is more valuable than menâs attention because men, you know, thereâs this multimillion dollar stripper industry, uh, and OnlyFans industry that, that centers on womenâs attention and, and time and presence. And that, you know, and it, th- this is why you should have men always pay for your dinner, that you should never go Dutch on a date.
I lo-
Malcolm Collins: I love their we need to walk back some parts of feminism here, right, guys? Th- this is clearly... We should just get whatever we want as women. Yeah
Simone Collins: you have to pay for everything, but Are you gonna tell me about this guy who got hitched to this psycho? So thereâs not a whole lot known about him because it, but itâs, itâs clear that heâs- Except that heâs super rich apparently.
Heâs, yeah, heâs, heâs super rich. Yeah, he, heâs [00:09:00] super rich.
Looking to find and marry a rich man just so you can live the soft life is probably the dumbest s**t Iâve ever heard
Simone Collins: And thatâs kind of, itâs a pattern here. Although I, I, I mean, and she, I mean, it makes sense her, her handle, when itâs not Manny or this or whatever MJ Gray is, is, is supermodel billionaire. Thatâs how she frames herself on YouTube though she only has eight point, like eight, a little more than 8,000 subscribers on YouTube.
Sheâs pretty small on this platform. But yeah, that is the pattern with her and these other donât center men, never get married, just enjoy yourself women. So and the most prominent example, I would say way more prominent than than MJ, is Alex Cooper. And youâve probably never heard of her, Malcolm, but sheâs super famous for being the, I guess the former co-host of the Call Her Daddy podcast.
She built this massive- Oh, yeah, I remember this one. And then a guy swept her
Malcolm Collins: off her feet.
Simone Collins: Yeah, and actually just this week, guess what she announced? Marriage? No, her [00:10:00] pregnancy. Oh, gosh. How neat. Sheâs, sheâs now sheâs pregnant. And this is, you know, after her getting super famous for s- casual sex positive advice that was very skeptical toward traditional marriage, very skeptical toward long-term commitment, encouraging women to prioritize autonomy and fun over settling down.
Now sheâs pregnant, and now sheâs married. And people are pointing out quite fairly that sheâs hypocritical. Then thereâs an- another one, Wizard Liz. She was known for being more of a life advice and self-improvement influencer, and she was really commonly grouped with people like MJ Gray in discussions of femorist rhetoric as, as a placeholder for building a following, and then just sort of jumping in from there to this luxury-coded married life, which is sort of what MJâs doing.
Like, when I went to her, her TikTok profile more recently, itâs all âOh, Iâm shopping in France, and hereâs my fancy hotel room.â And so they, I guess theyâre just using it as âI donât need men. Iâm super hot. Iâm super sexy.â And then thatâs their hook, I guess, to [00:11:00] try to get- No, hold
Malcolm Collins: on. We, we actually even had this within our own community, okay?
So- We did? If you look at the wider online community that weâre a part of, our fourth most overlapped channel by the way which you know but our fans w- probably donât know from today uh, is, is a woman who- Ah ... uh, really promoted the ideas of a kink lifestyle, a 24/7 BDSM- Oh, her ... uh, daddy dom little girl, and now sheâs in a trad cath relationship.
Simone Collins: She is? I havenât followed, I havenât kept up with her. Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: Shoe0nHead married a traditional Catholic guy. Oh,
Simone Collins: Shoe0nHead. Shoe0nHead. I thought you were talking about the other one whoâs more, way more- No,
Malcolm Collins: Shoe0nHead is our fourth most overlapped channel- Really? ... and she promoted all of this. Oh, you thought the other kink influencer.
No, sheâs not overlapped with us. Shoe0nHead is- Yeah, she,
Simone Collins: sheâs very boring. Yeah, yeah, okay. Yeah, Shoe0nHeadâs very entertaining. Come on, of
Malcolm Collins: course
Simone Collins: Shoe0nHead,
Malcolm Collins: Woke up, you know. Weâll be getting videos from- I guess youâre right. I didnât
Simone Collins: even think about that. But I donât think Shoe0nHead... W- was she ever...
See, I think she was, like, open about her kink, but she was never also [00:12:00] BDSM people are, like, surprisingly I donât know, I wanna say lovey-dovey and romantic in their relationships, you know? Theyâre- ... theyâre not like, âIâm gonna have one-night stands.â You canât, you canât be in like, a BDSM relationship and do one-night stands, because you need weeks just to hammer out the, the gear and, and, and get all the accoutrement and, and work out your agreements and the procedure.
Mm-hmm. I mean, itâs just, it, itâs like the D&D campaign. You canât just, just one night stand it and then switch between people all the time. Youâd have to like, buy new outfits and stuff. It would be too tedious. But yeah, good point. Yeah ... Wizard Liz though, she, she was- Shoe, but I think
Malcolm Collins: that this is all part of a wider thing where if youâre a woman and youâre just trying to live your best life, and I like including Shoe0nHead in this category because Shoe0nHead, I do not think is somebody, uh, thereâs a small number of our audience who doesnât like her, but the vast majority generally assume the best of Kami Mommy.
Oh, yeah ... and she, like me I used to be, like, a manslut, right? I was just in an environment where I hadnât [00:13:00] heard a compelling argument that it was a stupid way to live your life, right? Uh, because- Yeah ... frankly the way conservatives of the last generation made their arguments was f*****g terrible.
Yeah. Yeah ... it simply was an awful seller. Well, and I think most of us
Simone Collins: grew up seeing our boomer parents, like millennials, saw their boomer parentsâ marriages and were like, âWell, this is, this is mediocre.â Mm-hmm. âIâm not, Iâm not interested in whatever this is. This is, this is
Malcolm Collins: bad.â Whatever the boomers did is not what I wanna do, right?
Simone Collins: Exactly. So Iâm like, yeah. Exactly,
Malcolm Collins: so I donât blame you. You were telling me- And I was...
Simone Collins: No, I was totally, I mean, rule it out. But the Iâm never gonna get married, Iâm just gonna s- have, you know, s- like s- sleep with someone and fall in love and have my heart broken and then just move on and never do it again.
You know, Iâm, Iâm not above this, and I just find that dynamic to be very interesting
Malcolm Collins: Yeah because- but the, the reason Iâm, Iâm saying this is a lot of these women likely just were not aware how awesome marriage is. They get swept up, as women do- Yeah ... in online communities where everyoneâs saying the same thing.
They likely had no evoked set for what a [00:14:00] positive relationship in a marriage looks like, because where were they going to see it? Yeah. Think about our progressive friends who are, like, live in Manhattan and stuff like that. Yeah. They
have
f*****g terrible marriages. Uh, even ones who are, like, just a generation above us, their marriages are so bad, these weird polyamory marriages they, theyâre like...
Itâs, itâs, itâs shocking to me. And when I say bad, Iâm not saying theyâre bad because theyâre polyamorous. Iâm saying that they often donât seem to really like each other that much or really working together that much. And they seem like partners who uh, they seem like coworkers really is, is sort of the vibe I get from them, right?
Theyâre not actively anti- Theyâre not like boomers where itâs like they obviously hate each other. But they donât seem to really get it. And then I look at our friend group of our generation, right? Whoâs all in the suburbs and everything like that, and they all seem to just be loving it, like marriage is the best thing ever.
And, uh, yeah. Itâs, itâs, itâs been very, [00:15:00] uh, which, uh, people may not know this, but our actual friend group of marrieds, uh, is either... I, I will say for the Latin friends we have that get married itâs, itâs often not as good. Because, uh, very often, for whatever reason in Latin American culture in the United States men get married to women and then use them as a source of income and the, itâs, itâs, sort of comes across as, as Latin women often marry down.
I mean, at least theyâre getting married and having kids, but you know, it is something Iâve noticed.
Simone Collins: No, itâs just anecdotally more than we would like to see, I think. Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: more than we would like to see. Uh, and then the other place where I see this is in my, uh, or our Jewish friend group.
We have a big, you know, Orthodox Jewish friend group. And their marriages are usually really rock solid. The younger ones. Oh, super rock solid. The
Simone Collins: older ones- Yeah, I was like, not that- Not as much ... no. No, theyâre super solid. Yeah. Yeah. But yeah, so theyâre, so the... Yeah, sorry, where was I? Wizard Liz.
Wizard Liz is a little different because she went from the whole like, oh letâs, you know, be liberated and free to really quickly getting married and then getting pregnant, but then [00:16:00] divorcing before even, I think, having her, her first baby because of cheating allegations. So that didnât work out for her.
But then thereâs Danielle Walter. Uh, Danielle Walter was known, you might have heard of her she was the Carrie Bradshaw of San Francisco, and she did a lot of dating confessionals essentially- Mm-hmm ... on TikTok and got really famous for that. She had millions of followers who, who were into her single era, woman ability, and this whole Sort of modern single woman thing.
But then she did this, and I, Iâve watched multiple YouTube videos, like going over this very, I guess you could say cringey 21-part series where she debuted her boyfriend. Like she just teased it to high heaven. And then- Was this, was this the woman who was on the Call Her Daddy? No. This is, this is a dif- this is, weâre on number two now.
This is yet another. Yes. Yes. So yeah, I, first I was talking about the now just suddenly pregnant Alex Cooper from Call Her Daddy, then there was Wizard Liz, and now weâre on Danielle Walter. And [00:17:00] whatâs happened with her is that she, after debuting her boyfriend, then she, she got... I think sheâs married now.
And part of what I think might be happening when I look at all these women, with the exception of Wizard Liz, is guess what happened right before they suddenly pivoted and got serious about long-term committed relationships? They became famous? No. They hit 30? Yes. Ah. MJ, MJ Ray, she was 30. The, the engagement news broke right as she hit the wall.
Alex Cooper got engaged at 31, 32. Wizard Liz, exception here, 25, but now sheâs divorced again, back on the market. And then Danielle Walter got- Oh. Oh, oh, oh, oh ... like the moment they debut it,
Malcolm Collins: itâs- To add to it, wasnât in your original list, how old was she on head when she got engaged? 32.
Simone Collins: I... No way. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Probably met him around 30.
Simone Collins: So, yeah, maybe one thing here is that like women of our modern [00:18:00] era like... Oh my gosh. I donât know whatâs going on with him. Oh, poor baby.
Hold on. Give me one moment here. All right. Hey,
hey, hey. They, they... Maybe the new norm is youâre like basically âIâll never get married and Iâm gonna be an independent woman,â and then you hit the wall, and then it, like you just suddenly have you f- you get God, you know?
And if thereâs some way that we could like, ooh, head off...
I think
itâs that roomâs really
hot maybe. Or-
Malcolm Collins: Well, itâs his first summer.
Simone Collins: It is, but heâs not into it.
Malcolm Collins: Iâm not into it, okay? Our whole family isnât into it.
Simone Collins: We, we donât like..
Anyway m- maybe if thereâs some way we can head this off, it would involve maybe our like just telling people like, âLook, this is the pattern. This happens to everyone. Just ignore the instincts telling you this.â Well,
Malcolm Collins: [00:19:00] itâs like we all get warned that puberty is coming- Yes ... and nobody warns that your 30s are coming, right?
Yeah. You
Simone Collins: know,
Malcolm Collins: everyoneâs âWell, you need to be preparing. You need to figure out how to talk to girls. You need to get your rizz on.â People didnât know I got rizz, okay? I, no, but Iâm joking here. I do not have rizz apparently, uh, as, as our audience has, has made clear to me, right? So I, I, talking to women Iâm just no good.
But uh, t- uh, functionally I am though, obviously. Itâs just, it doesnât look like what people think it looks like. Uh- Yeah, I donât, I donât know if anyone really knows what- How do we get women... I mean, I think itâs just your, your biology changes. Hereâs the way I would fix this, okay? Oh, but I, I
Simone Collins: have to ask, though.
Is it also not just some form of mate blocking behavior? Thereâs a big game of musical chairs taking place when women are in their 20s, and what many women do as a t- a defensive tactic, maybe also to inflate their sense of value, is to be like, you know, the [00:20:00] one thing that you talk about in, when you give relationship advice is women, stop doing this whole thing where you act unimpressed by everything.
Youâre like, âOh, this restaurant isnât really that impressive.â They just wanna neg men- Oh, I freaking hate women who do this ... and itâs really unattractive. But women do that- Itâs so common ... itâs very pervasive. This could be a version of it, of âOh, I donât ever wanna get married. I donât...â Because theyâre trying to seem more valuable than they are, because what they really want is for men to be like, âOh, then I, I must have her, because she can- sheâs unachievable.â
You know, that kind of thing? Itâs maybe this is that. Maybe itâs a competitive strategy. Itâs not also mate blocking. It doesnât work quite that way with men.
Malcolm Collins: Guys donât go for that. I know, it works...
Simone Collins: Well, but think about it. So men send dick pics to women because theyâre like, âWhat would I like? Oh, I know.â
Oh, so they try to be the cold Duke of the North? Yes. I think maybe that might be part of it, is it, this is women trying to be the cold Duke of the North, and what men are like-
Malcolm Collins: Iâm not interested in this ... âWill you
Simone Collins: send me a picture of your tits, please?â âLet, let me inspire you by this picture of my [00:21:00] dongle.â
You know, that is, that is- So,
Malcolm Collins: okay. So here is- Weâre talking past each other, essentially ... I think is a way around this culturally speaking, right? Which is we can go out there and, uh, when our kids are growing up, when weâre teaching them about puberty, puberty should be taught as a package with youâre gonna want to get married at later in life too.
Yeah. So when weâre telling them, âYouâre going to change how you feel,â we make it very salient, âAnd this will happen again later. So any preparations you make for this change should also include preparations for the secondary change.â
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah, possibly. Maybe even forcing them to watch Blippi when theyâre teens to be like, âHey, how do you like this?
How do you like it? You wanna watch more?â Mm. And then be like, âHey, this is how youâre gonna feel about your life as a playboy, world traveling 20-something when you turn 30.â Maybe something like that. Or if you actually are willing to be intellectually honest with yourself- Right ... and emotionally honest with yourself.
I donât know. Iâm, Iâm [00:22:00] not sure. But I think more importantly, we also need to hear- Hold on, Iâm gonna break this down.
Malcolm Collins: Letâs not leave this at an Iâm not sure. Letâs think through it. Because, uh, I think we see this present in different ways. Okay. Uh, in Siwanheadâs case, for example, I do not think it was mate blocking.
I think she lived in a society where this was normal and, uh, or you could even think me promoting these values. Mm. Why didnât I promote feminist values? Itâs because I wanted to sleep with women, right? Mm-hmm. And it got that for me. Oh yeah, abortionâs the best, right? Oh yeah, you know, sleeping around, while it makes you feel good, it makes me feel good.
How could it be morally negative, right? Yeah. Oh yeah, you know, uh, it, it, it, it achieved what I wanted in the moment, right? So, uh, and what everyone in my society told me I was good and what seemed good when I saw through it because, you know, clearly whatever the boomers is doing isnât working and the religious people just shout, âRead the Bibleâ and Iâm like, but a lot of those stories donât compute.
I did. Thereâs a lot of
Simone Collins: sex
in there.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, a- and [00:23:00] slavery. You know, Iâm like, âYou, you guys arenât pro-slavery, right?â Now obviously as an adult Iâve gone back to the Bible and I find good moral guidance in it. Mm. But as a kid when somebody just shouts at you, âRead the Bibleâ and youâre like aware that the Bibleâs like pro-genocide and slavery in sections, youâre like, well, selling your daughter, you know, well, maybe not every...
Like, how do I know that this marriage stuff in the Bible sh- I, I, I shouldnât take the same way as I take the selling your daughter into slavery stuff in the Bible, right? Mm-hmm. Like presumably thatâs not applicable anymore, right? And they, you know, frankly I didnât hear good answers back then.
Now I can give you a great answer today. Uh, you watch our track series, you watch any of our religious episodes, youâll find good answers. But the conservatives of the last generation, things sucked at, at, at basically conveying a salient message.
Simone Collins: Yeah. So combine, combine that conservative message with how bad boomer, like our parents and Gen X marriages were, which is oh my God, I [00:24:00] donât want that, plus this mismatch between male and female desired love language.
Itâs like men just want the tit pics and women just want the Duke of the North and we donât know how to give this to each other because we, we are pretty different in the things that turn us on, like on average as men and women. And then with different life stages just being- The, you being rewarded by different things at different periods of your life, and it being very hard to model that even within yourself and anticipate that.
I think thereâs an additional cultural layer on top of this, which is that we are in the middle of a, of a realization, a collective realization that the free sex OnlyFans, sleep around with people era. And weâve talked about this. Remember we talked about how swipe-based dating and hookup culture radicalized women- Mm-hmm
but also made them pretty miserable. And itâs even showing up in very popular media. Thereâs very little event media left, but one of the few shows thatâs left is Euphoria. And Iâve been watching Season 3, and a [00:25:00] really major recurring theme of it is the Bible and God and religion. What? And the other recurring theme is women in sex work.
So the main character is working for this kingpin of strip clubs and, and kind of drugs. Another main character is an OnlyFans model. Another main character is an agent exploiting OnlyFans models. So, itâs just, itâs kind of all about sex and hookup culture. Another one is a sugar baby- Mm-hmm
for a wealthy man who likes to wrap her up in cellophane . And it- To wrap her up in cellophane? ... itâs all just kind of like... Itâs just a, like a fetish thing, you know? I, I canât remember what the name for it is, but, like- Yeah, Iâve seen it. Yeah, I think someone actually- I, I donât understand anything about this fetish
I think actually famously very recently, an OnlyFans model has just been convicted of negligent homicide for accidentally killing one of her followers by wrapping him up in cellophane. So guys, be careful. Uh, itâs not safe. Wait, so he, he asked her to wrap
Malcolm Collins: him up. He didnât wrap her up. [00:26:00]
Simone Collins: Yeah. She wrapped him up, and now sheâs in trouble because he died.
Uh, âcause donât do that . Itâs not safe. Uh- That makes
Malcolm Collins: me sad for her, actually. I know.
Simone Collins: She was just trying to do her job, you know what I mean? Uh- Yeah. The guy presumably was- He asked for it ... at least partially aware of the risk. For, you, you, one hopes, but I donât know. Okay? Anyway, the big theme is that.
And actually it begins with one of the main character, the main character is, is running drugs, but stops. She sort of finds herself in the middle of the Texan countryside, and is, is, is, uh, she sleeps in a barn and wakes up to this, this homeschooling- I have, I have, I need
Octavian: a little more things
Simone Collins: here.
He has more swords that he wishes to show. She shows up at this homeschooling Texan family, like sleeps in their barn, but like they just bring her milk in the morning. Theyâre like, âHey, why donât you just join us for breakfast?â And she sits around and they have family prayers. And she, they drop her off closer to a road, and so sheâs able to get on her way.
And it just sits with her [00:27:00] for l- the longest time of âMan, like I-â I think they kind of get it.
Speaker 2: We wanna thank you, Lord Jesus Christ, for giving us our daily bread and forgiving us our trespasses. Let me help you get your plate, sweetie. Here, let me get this first, Dad. This is our address. Will you be sure to send the article when itâs in the paper? Uh, yeah, as long as the commies at college donât censor it.
Speaker 3: Youâre doing the Lordâs work. Thank you. Iâd trade spots with you in a heartbeat Bye
Simone Collins: These offline teens, this, this big family of six kids, like homeschooling and living on our farm, like they kind of have it made. I think Iâm living my life wrong. And so she starts reading the Bible and she starts thinking about God and being like, âI think Iâm religious.â
Sitting in churches. And the last scene I just watched last night from the [00:28:00] latest episode, thereâs a burning bush. Theyâre really leaning into it. Theyâre like... and it... That was... So a major theme of it, and I think this is representative of where collectively we are in society, is oh my God, this hookup culture, OnlyFans women not getting married, sugar baby, everythingâs transactional world is not rewarding.
Weâre not happy. Weâre not thriving. This is really bad. We need to get God again. And the people who never left God are like the happiest and the only ones who are doing okay right now. So I think thereâs this additional layer. The communication layer, the- No, I, I
Malcolm Collins: actually disagree with that. Really? Iâm gonna push back.
Actually- Okay ... what I think is the people who seem to be doing the best are the secular people who came to religion through logic. The people who are doing the second-best are the ones who always had religion, but typically the way that they practice their religion is a little less optimal for actually dealing with the crises of our time.
If youâre
Simone Collins: homeschooling on a Texan ranch in the middle of nowhere, youâre one of those, âI came to this very thoughtfully.â
Malcolm Collins: Right, but there are some people who are [00:29:00] still holds out from like the old evangelical communities and stuff like that. Sure. Yeah. And they just seem to be just broadly unprepared to interact with the modern world in a meaningful way.
Yeah.
Simone Collins: Well, as soon as they interact with the modern world, they crash and burn because theyâre not resilient to it, as we talked about extensively. Yeah, theyâre not resilient.
Malcolm Collins: Itâs... And you, you sort of have to go through, you know, uh, to an ex- or have some, some members of your community that have fully gone through it understand why it was tempting and understand why you failed to convince them in the past to build better arguments for the next generation.
Yeah. If you were convinced by the, you know, âJust read the Bibleâ argument, your kids are gonna be just as susceptible because you donât know why that argument may not appeal to somebody, right? Yeah. And, and I think that, uh, this show shows how many people come to this, is they see, âOh, like this isnât working.
This old way of doing things is working.â But-
Simone Collins: Yeah, and to be fair, all these characters were not raised in like religious contexts. They were raised in like our modern mainstream [00:30:00] urban lifestyle. What Iâm
Malcolm Collins: interested to see is what is the online chatter about this direction the show is going. Can you ask an AI for a sentiment analysis?
Simone Collins: No, so the, no, what, what is, what is being said in the media is âOh my God, suddenly MAGA loves Euphoria because...â for these reasons, you know? And, and also I think the S- Sy- Sydney Sweeney is the one whoâs big on OnlyFans in this- Mm-hmm ... in the series, the, whoâs famous for the jeans campaign whoâs, you know, sort of like become this icon.
We all like Sydney
Malcolm Collins: Sweeney from the jeans interview. Yeah.
Simone Collins: Didnât this... It was a com- it was a commercial. It was a, an ad campaign.
Speaker 4: I just wanted to give you the opportunity to deal with a passive aggressive accusation disguised as a question
Speaker 5: if your career brought you here, of what use was it?
Simone Collins: No,
Malcolm Collins: no, but thereâs a famous interview [00:31:00] she did afterwards where like- Oh, with the- Do you know the- Yeah,
Simone Collins: the,
Malcolm Collins: the...
Simone Collins: Yes, yes. Yeah And sheâs just like- so now, yeah, like the discourse is oh, and then a lot of people are trying to argue that the creator of Euphoria isnât actually like turning to God and pro-MAGA or anything itâs just that he likes to troll people.
But thereâs literally portions of like little montages of the Sydney Sweeney OnlyFans model character being interviewed for example. She like has her rise on the internet, you know, getting internet famous, and people are like, âOh, are you a Democrat?â And sheâs âIâm not retarded.â So- Yeah, no, itâs, itâs very...
It... Yes, the right apr- the right is enjoying season three. I- Wait,
Malcolm Collins: she says this in character in the show?
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yes. Oh my God. Itâs, itâs a great clip. Itâs fantastic. They, they show this thereâs the montage and itâs also her being âI just think, you know, women want to be able to be at home and you know, be wives and be-â I
Octavian: want you to come back and tell, and tell me more.
I learned that when you add vinegar [00:32:00] and bacon soda together they can create a new thing.
Simone Collins: Baking soda.
Octavian: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Baking soda. It
Octavian: kind of like fizzes if youâre really close.
Simone Collins: We should do that. Weâll do that tonight.
Octavian: But if you did it a lot, then it would be like a bottle and put all of the vinegar you have in that bottle, and it can create a big fizz. Like this big.
Simone Collins: That big, huh?
Yeah. I wanna get back to the original question This is, uh, our un- unofficial endorsement of Science Max as a YouTube channel for kids. I wanna get
Malcolm Collins: back to the original question here.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Oh,
Malcolm Collins: wait, are these two different characters in the show? The one whoâs a Sydney Sweeney character and the one whoâs finding God?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Theyâre different characters. So multiple characters are moving in this direction, right? No, thatâs ...
Simone Collins: What Iâm trying to say, yes, is a major, major theme of this extremely popular public discourse show is finding God and finding the hollowness in, in sex work in general.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Okay, and calling it euphoria.
Wow, thatâs, uh-
Simone Collins: Yeah ... on the nose. Itâs great. No, and it ... Well, and this is the [00:33:00] third season of it. I actually couldnât stomach the first two. I like the third one for whatever reason. But- Maybe âcause now itâs for
Malcolm Collins: conservatives. Anyway, your point. So hold on. I wanna get to the question of, while I donât think for sure that it was genuinely mate blocking behavior- Yeah
did mate blocking motivate the rise of this ideology, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah, because ... Well, but I, hereâs where I get confused, is it made sense to your early ... your earliest point was you were making the assumption that these were ugly women. Whereas these are hot women who date and have a lot of sex. So itâs
They donât ... Itâs not like they have trouble finding men. But that doesnât mean that mean, popular girls donât mate block. I mean, a, a, a major theme of pop- popular, hot, mean girls is mate blocking. So I donât know. What, what, what is your take?
Malcolm Collins: So my take is, is that it partially likely led to it.
So, there was certainly, if you look at the early feminists, they were very often vile habergashes or whatever you wanna call them, right? Uh, fairly- A [00:34:00] haberdashery
Simone Collins: is where you buy buttons and ribbons. I donât- I
Malcolm Collins: donât even know. Whatever you wanna call them. Okay. Swamp things. Uh, trying to
I, I think that thereâs a ... More than mate blocking, I think a lot of it was women who failed out of marriage marketplaces or failed to get the type of guy they thought they deserved and then wanted to r- increase the status of unattached women. I think that was more of what motivated it, right? They failed to achieve what they felt they deserved to achieve given their perceived self-status, which increased as a problem as women got access to easier and easier sex.
And then they, uh, looked at the world, this terrible and unfair world and they said, âActually, Iâm not low status. It is not l- â And as the proportion of women who needed to believe this delusion increased and as men realized they could utilize this to [00:35:00] gain sexual access to women more easily it spread.
I think while it would be- Convenient for our narrative if it was genuine mate blocking. I think it was more about women not admitting their genuine low status in society and trying to normalize it.
â Cause I think thatâs a stronger everyday drive for women. And then they have to do that uh, you know... Whatâs, whatâs the word here?
Simone Collins: Or so I mean, if I were to reframe, itâs kind of like a sour grapes thing. But then as soon as they get the opportunity theyâre like, âOh, I want it and Iâm gonna take it.â
Theyâre gonna pretend that theyâre happy with their lot. I mean, could it, could it be also that these, Okay, these are, these are presumably top-tier women, right? They, they are, they are sleeping with the, the best men, but theyâre also realizing that the best men are not willing to commit to long-term relationships, because a very common dynamic in modern dating markets is thereâs no [00:36:00] reason for a man whoâs an eight, nine, or 10 to settle down.
Because they have access to all the range of women. Like, why would they- Yeah. Well, unless they like literally- And say, âOh, wellâ ...
Malcolm Collins: sit down and think
Simone Collins: their way out of
Malcolm Collins: it like I did. Yeah.
Simone Collins: Right? Yeah. Because thatâs very unusual, right? So unless youâre like a, a, a good Christian man or youâre smart and like really, really disciplined.
Or I mean, I think what also helped for you is you, you were so slutty in your youth that like you got it out of your system. So unless youâve done all, one of those things youâre, youâre, youâre not gonna commit. You know, I always wanted a
Malcolm Collins: wife. Uh, for my brother and I-
Simone Collins: Yeah, it was your identity ... it was inherent
Malcolm Collins: that we wanted wives.
That was like- It is also like
Simone Collins: in your DNA. Like you come from a long line of romantic men. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: For me it was always about the wife and kids. Uh, especially a good wife. And so, uh, it, I mean itâs interesting for me to reflect on, âcause it doesnât just require like intellect and a sober mind.
âCause recently we were talking to one of our friends. And this friend I consider to be of the highest [00:37:00] intellectual caliber, highest ability to sit down and think through things, and yet he is unmarried, doesnât have kids, and doesnât seem to have a strong desire to get married even though I have tried to logic it through with him.
And why canât he see it? Why canât he sit down and be like, âObviously this is stupidâ? Itâs not that he hates his ancestors, âcause heâs Jewish and he doesnât seem to be like actively antisemitic or anything like that. I think itâs just he is in an environment But I was able to break out of that environment.
Thatâs the thing. I was in an environment that was as progressive as
Simone Collins: any- But what Iâm saying is youâre very unusual, and maybe whatâs happening is these... You already talked to your women, are like, âOh my God, this is just never gonna happen. I need to embrace that I have to be like them.â And this is actually a common theme in discourse.
People are like, âOh, women think that they have to be like men, that they have to sleep [00:38:00] around like men and enjoy one-night stands like men.â And that is a very Call Her Daddy theme, where they really act like they enjoy sex the same way that men enjoy sex. At least thatâs kind of how I feel about it when I see- consume that content.
Iâm like, âOh,â this is a very... This, this looks like a woman trying so hard to pretend that she has male sexuality, and Iâm not totally buying it. And so as soon, as soon as they, this rat floundering in the ocean trying to survive on the floating board, finds a lifeboat, it jumps onto it, âcause itâs like, âOh, my God.â
Yeah. âI didnât know this could happen, but itâs happening.â So I think maybe thatâs, thatâs another big factor here. Do you think so?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, I mean, I think that these women who... No, the, the, the women- No ... who are out there saying marriage is terrible are really just trying to make themselves feel good. I really think thatâs the case.
Well, yeah,
Simone Collins: but, but w- wait. You can say it, you can word it as feel good. Iâm wording it as feel better in an environment where they feel like they really just... Marr- [00:39:00] a, a marriage thatâs committed wonât work for them. And keep in mind case in point, uh, in, in my, in favor of my theory is Wizard Liz, right?
She was like, âOh, Iâm gonna be all independent,â and then she had a chance to get married, was so stoked about it, husband cheats on her. So she kind of, uh, feeds into actually the narrative ultimately of no, you as a woman if youâre trying to marry a high-value man, even if youâre a high-value woman, canât have that dream.
Well, I mean, if youâre
Malcolm Collins: a woman and you marry a guy whoâs much higher value than you, of course heâs gonna cheat on you, right? Like- I know. She shouldâve just- How did we as society forget that? I thought that that was- I know,
Simone Collins: I know ... thatâs just- It was maybe on the unmentioned thing.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, to actually freak out about a high-value guy cheating on you is kind of...
Look, I get weâre, morality, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But also be f*****g realistic. Every king throughout history, almost every wealthy person throughout history has done this, right?
You... A- and, and worse, these people often come from progressive environments where [00:40:00] this is way more normalized.
They abandoned all of the social structure that was meant to punish the guy for doing this. Now he can just marry you but younger because you decided to freak out because he was sleeping with another woman. Oh. Again, Iâm not pro cheating. Iâm just being realistic here. When people are like, âCan you believe that Arnold Schwarzenegger cheat?â
Iâm like, âYeah, I can believe that.â People like, âCan you...â How, how do these... This is, this is a South Park scene.
Speaker 7: Why are rich, successful men suddenly going out and trying to have sex with lots of women and have perfectly good wives at home? I want answers. We believe that it may be an outbreak of sex addiction, sir. Of course, we all know the normal, healthy male thinks only of sex occasionally and has no desire for sex with multiple partners.
Thatâs right. Of course. But what about love? How could tons of fame and money make you forget about love?
Malcolm Collins: Why do these rich and famous men keep sleeping with other women? Like- [00:41:00] Ugh. And of course, if you donât have a lot of kids yet, right? Like now the idea of cheating on Simone doesnât make a lot of sense for me.
Itâs just not worth my time because Iâve got five kids, and weâre doing a new one every year. Cheating would only slow that down. Maybe most people arenât as psychotically, like... I mean, cheating I guess would always just be a ne- negative for most people, but, ugh, uh, my, my thought here is even from a pleasure standpoint, itâs just a waste of f*****g time at this point.
And I like the- I think cheating has a lot more
Simone Collins: to do with people who donât have a clear objective function in their lives.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: And itâs not actually a- even necessarily about sexual gratification. Itâs more about wanting to feel desired and special and/or to chase after new relationship energy, which is its own special flavor of high.
And if you donât have a stronger mooring point, like a thing that youâre trying to fight for in life like Iâm going to, you know, promote human flourishing, Iâm gonna serve God, Iâm gonna take [00:42:00] people to the stars, whatever it, itâs gonna be, right? Then it is going to be very appealing if suddenly someone starts giving you a bunch of attention, and thereâs secrets, and you get to sneak around.
And itâs, itâs like the hide and seek plus sex. Who, who wouldnât love that? So I think that might have something to do with it. I, I, I donât really know of people whoâve had very prominent cheating scandals who also, in our modern day and age, who also have extremely strong, Mm-hmm. Oh, never mind. I take that
Malcolm Collins: back.
Wait, wait. What? Sorry, I, I missed the point. No. Nope, never mind. I just, I
Simone Collins: just- Wait, no, go back. What was it? Never mind. I th- I, I had a, I had a hypothesis that if a man had a strong objective function, he wouldnât desire multiple female partners. Oh, and then you remembered
Malcolm Collins: Elon existed? Yes.
Simone Collins: Whoops. I was wrong.
Malcolm Collins: But I think itâs a strong obj- objective function plus naltrexone. I cannot, Opioid agonists are the f*****g [00:43:00] bomb, right? That is, if, if, if I... I would even work this into our religious practices, right? Like- Yeah ... for future generations and stuff like this. I think constantly he wouldnât do it if he was on naltrexone.
Heâd be so much more focused and efficient.
Simone Collins: My God, he would stop posting on X. Heâd stop posting
Malcolm Collins: on X. He would. Heâd stop all of the other drugs. Heâd stop sleeping around. Heâd just be focused on his mission.
Simone Collins: Oh my God.
Malcolm Collins: It is the true wonder drug.
Simone Collins: The, yes, the drug to rule them all, Naltrexone. Okay. Well, there you go. I donât know if I have anything more to say on this, but I find it very interesting. And women are terrible, so I hope youâve enjoyed that. Yes. And
Malcolm Collins: our fans like the women are terrible. If we get a Simone plushie, weâll have it squeeze and itâll say- Oh, yeah.
Squeeze
Simone Collins: and it says, âA woman, women
Malcolm Collins: are terrible.â Women
Simone Collins: are [00:44:00] terrible.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. With my fake woman wife whoâs, uh, like hormonally not totally female because of hormones. Who takes the
Simone Collins: same hormones as a trans woman.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Yeah. So you- Great ... can see through the nonsense. Iâm really selling guys a false bill of goods.
Theyâll never get a woman like Simone. Because sheâs- Youâre out there. Out there. No, we have fans who are definitely seem to be as good as you. So, and for people who are unaware, of our, like while only 10% of our, like regular watchers are women-
Ironically, the sound dropped out here due to baby noises, but I was saying around forty to fifty percent of our most dedicated viewers, or at least the ones who are like subscribed on Patreon and reach out regularly, are women
Malcolm Collins: Of them are already married, Iâll be honest about that. You know, sane women get picked up pretty young, so. But not all of them are. Some of them are still dating.
Simone Collins: No, actually, a lot of them are, are single and available and interested, so. Oh, really? And there are people who have met who are like [00:45:00] actively talking and potentially romantically involved in our Discord server, so it, it happens.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, we get a marriage from our Discord server?
Simone Collins: No marriage yet. Iâm just saying. There, things are starting.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, I know some as well, so Iâm excited about this. Well, what I have found is that the guys who are like a base camp or really Malcolm and Simone, like pragmatist guy, like devotees they make really good partners for women.
Itâs what women basically tell me. Theyâre like, âI started...â The, weâve had multiple people who have become fans of our show because they started dating a guy who was like really devoted to like our wider philosophical view of reality, and theyâre like, âYeah, it makes for really good boyfriends and husbands.â
Simone Collins: Well, a- I think thatâs, uh, largely also because a lot of guys who follow base camp start dating like progressive women who are very unhappy, like seeing therapists, like active anxiety problems, et cetera. Like Iâve, Iâve seen this in, in our comments, like on, on Patreon and Substack and stuff.
Weâre like, âWell, what do I do about them?â [00:46:00] And, you know, weâre like, âWell, hey, try to, you know, find their core values. Try to help them, you know, improve their lives, like actually get over their anxiety.â And I think itâs unusual for content creators to be like, âOh, donât dump your girlfriend. Do what her...
Do for her what therapists are failing to do. Like actually give her a mooring point in her life and a reason to not be... You know, to overcome her anxiety and all these things. Make her a better person, and then see if she is worth it for you.â So it makes sense. But anyway, Iâm gonna- Love you ... blow a- Excited
Malcolm Collins: for pasta with pesto tonight.
See if we have some ravioli. If we donât, I donât care because I got pre-grated fresh Parmesan, not the sandy type from a can which just makes everything taste fantastic.
Simone Collins: I for one love grated cardboard, so I will just keep eating it.
Malcolm Collins: And good topic by the way. Oh, we didnât end up going over that woman who was mad about the, the baseball star, You did.
You, youâve told me everything I need to know. It w- it basically just shows that [00:47:00] yeah, the mids have had their brains cooked and they need to not feel bad.
I think so much of this female behavior is not about mate blocking and is about not accepting their own low status in society.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Absolutely.
Yeah. Good. True. All right. Love you.
Malcolm Collins: Love you. Bye. Iâll just ask. Will you be making the hot dogs for your parents
Simone Collins: anyway? I mean, I have them opened and theyâre thawed, so itâs a tonight or tomorrow night thing. But I can do them tomorrow night with french fries, and then just pesto pasta tonight. Oh yeah,
Malcolm Collins: I would prefer that. Tomorrow night with french fries.
Ooh, and we could do actual deep-fried french fries again. Iâm just gonna air fry them. Okay. That works for me too. We can see how good you can make them air fried.
Simone Collins: Yeah. â
Malcolm Collins: Cause
we never really tried to get that perfect.
Simone Collins: Yeah, and nowâs the time âcause we... Well, not we, you got that air fryer from your late mother, and itâs really fancy, and it does things.
Malcolm Collins: It- but I was gonna ask you, [00:48:00] for the... Weâre just doing pasta with pesto tonight. Letâs do some of the ravioli.
Simone Collins: What
Malcolm Collins: ravioli? Do we not have any in the fridge anymore?
Simone Collins: Iâll check. If we have some, I will give it to you. âCause I donât
Malcolm Collins: think I ate all of it last time. I think we have a serving or two left. We might have some
Simone Collins: squares.
Yeah, I have a lot of little things- All right ... squirreled away. So I will...
Ah. You. You. You wanna bite off my finger. Youâre a little velociraptor. What are you doing? My
God. Okay,
Malcolm Collins: pulling
Simone Collins: up my notes,
Malcolm Collins: and... Oh,
I see. I
love the documentarian being like, âWell, youâre not a psychologist.â Iâm like-
Can I- I mean, I am a psychologist
find out that I am.
Sheâs âDo you mean you have a degree?â
Simone Collins: Iâm like, âYes, I have a degree.â Yeah, yeah. Sheâs âYeah, but whereâs your degree?â And youâre like, âItâs... I have
a degree in psychology and neuroscience from the University of San Diego.â I donât think you even said that. You didnât even like... I didnât [00:49:00] even
Malcolm Collins: flex
Simone Collins: on it like one of
Malcolm Collins: the- Yeah
best psychology degrees in the world, right? Like- Yeah.
Simone Collins: No. Like, why, why did you? What? You know what? Thatâs great. Youâve, youâve, youâve matured. Youâre not even flexing anymore. Youâre just- I still flex ... speaking, speaking from your position of quiet strength. Oh my
Malcolm Collins: God. Okay, so Iâve gotta tell our fans about this, âcause this has been so weird for me.
So I do these biweekly streams with Leaflet now that I really enjoy. Sheâs... I consider her one of my best friends these days. She is just such a joy to talk with. Sheâs so
Simone Collins: smart. Yeah. Sheâs an amazing person ... I donât get stressed
Malcolm Collins: about interacting with her like I do with normal humans, which is fantastic for me.
So itâs been just really fun to have a genuine nerdy friend I can party with, have a 10-hour stream with every two weeks, right?
Simone Collins: Well, yeah, and, and someone else who apparently, you know, f- considers that partying instead of what most people consider to be partying like going out. Oh, itâs partying.
Weâre, weâre
Malcolm Collins: staying up all night, Iâm drinking, weâre talking about anime. Thatâs a party. Yeah, but
Simone Collins: most people think it means dropping egregious amounts of money at some kind of restaurant and [00:50:00] then going to a loud, crowded place, and Iâm so glad that there are other people who just enjoy intellectual conversation.
But anyway,
Malcolm Collins: so thereâs this faction of her community that theyâre not in chat much. They donât attack me in chat. Theyâre all fairly nice in chat. Who has like- Iâll put an image on screen here from one of the songs that they made where they
photoshopped Simone out of the song and, and out of an image of me kissing Simone, and they put Leaflet in, and they made it the song about how it couldâve been them.
And Iâm like, âGuys I actually find this flattering.â I have my entire life, I will check myself on FanFiction.net and stuff like that for when people have started shipping me with, with whatever, writing crazy fan fics about me. Itâs finally happening, and theyâre all hate fics. Theyâre all just so lividly jealous that me, a married guy with five kids, has fantasy world taken their oshi from them.
And I [00:51:00] donât know what to do. Iâm like, h- how can I more convince them that I want her to be married? That her taken.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah, Iâm extremely- And that we really, really want her to find her person.
You know, they, they... I, I hated that photo of me,
and I like that photo of you, so they, they really fixed it actually.
They ...
Malcolm Collins: You
Simone Collins: totally look so much better in that photo, Iâll tell you what. Iâll tell you what.
Malcolm Collins: And it wasnât like the song had no views. It had 700 views. Thatâs like as many as some of our more watched songs. Thatâs, uh, thatâs, uh- And it was only in a couple
Simone Collins: days. Well, thatâs fun. Thatâs fun.
Malcolm Collins: Itâs not fun.
I wanted to
Simone Collins: be- It- ...
Malcolm Collins: one of the bros, a representative of the community- ... who they know would never steal their oshi from them. But no, now, now on the, the Malcolm and Simone iceberg that people have created before, you have the Malcolm Leaflet ship song. And hate to me. Everyone needs it.
Simone Collins: Everyone needs it.
Malcolm Collins: I, I will say, for people who donât [00:52:00] think that I have game apparently my game is strong enough that just seeing me talk to a girl- You have fan
Simone Collins: fiction game. Well, I think if she spoke with anyone for long periods of time, this would happen.
Malcolm Collins: You think? So, yeah. Yeah, I, I, I hope to think that and itâs not, you know, me specifically.
Simone Collins: I, yeah. Okay, Octavian, you wanna say hi real quick?
Yeah.
Okay, hold on. Gotta lean in, buddy.
Okay.
Heâs, heâs armed. Oh, I guess Iâll just, Iâll just move my camera. What do you want to say to the people?
Hi.
You just wanna say hi? You just wanna look derpy and say hi? Say something that you learned today.
Octavian: I learned that crystals order some crystals can dissolve.
Simone Collins: That is true. Some crystals can dissolve. Like what about salt crystals? Do they dissolve- Salt
Octavian: crystals. Yeah, sugar and salt.
Simone Collins: That is correct.
Octavian: And they, and they can reform into other, and they can [00:53:00] reform into other crystals.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah, and sometimes you can use a seed crystal.
Octavian: Yeah, a seed crystal to reform them.
Exactly.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah,
Octavian: very good. Yeah, like sugar bops or something. Sugar
Simone Collins: bo- I donât know what
that is, but sounds good.
Octavian: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Yeah. All right. Yeah. Go have fun- Yeah ... m- uh, murdering the- Yeah ... the pellets.
Octavian: Yeah. But you know if something went in the water and it disappeared, they can reform just like that, so- Just
Simone Collins: Just, just like that.
You heard it here first on Face Gram. I wonder
Octavian: if a magic-
Simone Collins: He is remarkably charismatic. That was good. You keep it up. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: I know. He, heâs got game, uh, at, at four and a half. I, he comes off as incredibly likable. Iâm, Iâm really proud of... I mean, yeah, heâs gonna be good on air. You guys just wait a little bit.
Simone Collins: I know. He was, he was like, just today he was like, âI wish there were a third window that I could join.â Soon. Soon. Yeah. When he gets cogent thoughts, weâll have him on. I, I told him he has to be able to read fluently. [00:54:00] Heâs heâs going through the same hesitancy that I did at his age, so. All right. Letâs get started.
Speaker 9: But doesnât picking them kill them?
But doesnât that grind them up and then they die?
Do you love the flowers, Titan?
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 Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the phenomenon of Professor Jiang (Jiang Qujin) â the Chinese-born educator turned geopolitical âoracleâ with 2M+ YouTube subscribers. Is he a modern Nostradamus using psychohistory and game theory, or highbrow conspiracy slop for midwits?
We break down his biggest theories: Illuminati coalitions of Freemasons, Jesuits, and Sabbatean Frankists engineering Western decline, Pax Judaica / Greater Israel, ritual child sacrifice in Gaza, secret societies controlling the world, and his mystical AI predictions. Malcolm delivers sharp historical corrections on Sabbateanism, Frankism, Jesuits, and Freemasons, while questioning if Jiang is a CCP-adjacent narrative pusher.
Is he Candace Owens for pseudointellectuals? A sophisticated propaganda op? Or just a compelling midwit prophet? We also compare him to Whatifalthist (Rudyard), Peter Zeihan, and more.
Join the conversation in the comments â are you Team Jiang or Team Collins?
Show Notes
Based Camp listeners keep asking us to talk about Professor Jiang, which is difficult, as we see his content to be oppressively boring, bordering on being impossible to consume, but to stop the requests, weâll relent.
How did a Chinese-born man who immigrated to Canada with a BA in English literature suddenly accrue over 2 million YouTube subscribers, the #1 world politics substack (with 44K subscribers in six months) and fame for being a geopolitical oracle and war forecaster?
Fan site: https://jiangpredictions.com (âThis is an independent fan project tracking predictions for educational and analytical purposes. We are not affiliated with or speaking on behalf of Professor Jiang.â)
Is he just a version of Candace Owens for people who like to fancy themselves as a little more highbrow and clever (which is to say, is his success just a result of conspiracy-brained people online flocking to conspiracy slop), or is there are more concerted force pushing forward his content?
Who is Professor Jiang?
* Jiang Xueqin (æ±ćŠć€, born 1976) is a ChineseâCanadian who originally trained in English literature and spent much of his career as a teacher and education reformer in China.
* In the 2000s and 2010s he worked on Chinese education reform, taught in various schools, and briefly edited for the New York Timesâ China operation; he has also been associated as a researcher with Harvardâs Global Education Innovation Initiative.
* Since 2022 he has taught at Moonshot Academy, a private high school in Beijing, and he is not a university professor despite the âProfessorâ branding.
* In 2024 he launched the YouTube channel and podcast âPredictive History,â where he gives longform lectures on geopolitics, history and âstructuralâ analysis, claiming to use game theory and Asimovâstyle âpsychohistoryâ to forecast world events.
* He gained large international attention after correctly predicting Donald Trumpâs 2024 reâelection and a U.S.âIran war, leading some media to dub him âChinaâs Nostradamusâ and bookers to put him on major Western podcasts.
Jiangâs Reputation
Several mainstream outlets and experts describe Jiang as a conspiracy theorist because many of his claims rely on hidden cabals and quasiâmystical frameworks rather than conventional evidenceâbased analysis
* A profile in The Free Press explicitly labels him a conspiracy theorist and highlights his belief that a coalition of Freemasons, Jesuits and followers of the Sabbatean Jewish sect (an 17thâcentury messianic movement) is plotting to rule the world from Jerusalem
* The South China Morning Post notes that his lectures sometimes âveer into wellâtrodden conspiracy theories on shadowy secret societies,â especially in a lecture titled âPax Judaicaâ in his âSecret Historyâ series.
Jiangâs Conspiracy Theories
Major Conspiracy Themes Attributed to Him
From critical coverage and academic/media commentary, the main conspiracy themes associated with Jiang include:
* Illuminati / Freemasons / Jesuits / Sabbateans
* Jiang advances a metaâconspiracy in which an âIlluminatiâ composed of Freemasons, Jesuits, and Sabbatean Jews, who allegedly manipulate Western institutions and ultimately aim to control the world from Jerusalem. (The FP covered this)
* In his âPax Judaicaâ lecture, critics say Jiang argues that after the U.S. is forced out of the Middle East, this Illuminatiâtype network will dominate global power from a Greater Israel centered on Jerusalem. (from that South China Morning Post article referenced above)
* IN HIS OWN WORDS
* On the Illuminati as a coalition (from a Breaking Points interview, widely clipped):
* âIf you look at the Epstein files itâs clear that we are run by secret societies. You can call them Illuminati. And the Illuminati are composed of three major groups, okay? You have the Jesuits who control the Vatican. You have the Sabbatean Frankists who control the modern Israel today. You have the Freemasons which control the national security apparatus of the United States.âHe adds that they see conflicts like those in the Middle East as key to âEnd Timesâ prophecies for creating âheaven on Earth.â
* On origins and structure (from Secret History lectures):
* He describes the Illuminati as emerging from alliances like former Jesuits (e.g., Adam Weishaupt) and others infiltrating Freemasons:
* âWhat they will do together is create a new organization called the Illuminati. ... The Illuminati was able to penetrate the Freemasons.â
* In another lecture: âTemplars who became the Freemasons who then became the Illuminati who control...â (linking to broader historical continuity and goals like a one-world government in Jerusalem).
* On Freemasonry and related groups:
* He discusses the â33 grades of Scottish Rite Freemasonry,â noting that lower levels emphasize being a âgood personâ while higher ones involve deeper power structures. He ties Freemasonry to figures like Buzz Aldrin and historical influences on U.S. institutions.He also covers their âeschatological visionâ of a one-world government based in Jerusalem.
* On Sabbatean Frankists:
* He has dedicated talks on how âthe Sabbatean Frankists came to conquer the world,â linking Jacob Frankâs movement to broader secret society networks, including infiltration of Jesuits and alliances forming the Illuminati.
* âPax Judaicaâ and Greater Israel
* According to reports, Jiang claims that the longâterm plan of these elites is to engineer a new world order where a Greater Israel replaces American hegemony, with Jerusalem as the seat of global governance.
* Commentators describe this as echoing classic âNew World Orderâ and antisemitic conspiracy tropes, repackaged in highâconcept geopolitical language.
* IN HIS OWN WORDS
* On Greater Israel and its biblical/eschatological roots (from interviews and lectures, e.g., shared in clips and transcripts):
* âAnd so what will happen is then that Israel will achieve the Greater Israel project. The Israelis believe that the Middle East was promised to their ancestor Abraham by Yahweh their God. If you look at a map of the Greater Israel project it extends from the Nile to Euphrates. It encompasses Lebanon, Syria, parts of Turkey, and parts of Saudi Arabia and parts of Egypt. ... And then Israel will establish something called the Pax Judaica. A Pax Judaica is really the empire... a trading empire, financial empire, a technological empire based in Jerusalem and they see it as fulfillment of biblical prophecy.â
* Defining Pax Judaica in context of empire transition (from Game Theory #16 and related talks):
* âSo what does the Greater Israel project mean? Well, it means control of [oil, trade, and technology].â (Framing it as Israel inheriting and expanding U.S. regional dominance amid American decline.)
* He describes the process: U.S. forces get drawn into costly conflicts (e.g., with Iran), leading to withdrawal, allowing Israel to become the hegemon. âThe moment the American Empire dies, the Empire of Israel is born.â Pax Judaica involves Israel leveraging chaos for dominance, inheriting military assets/infrastructure, and establishing a new order often tied to secret society goals.
* https://jiangpredictions.com/pax-judaica
* From the Secret History finale (Pax Judaica lecture):
* Jiang explains âhow and why Pax Judaica will come to rule the world,â linking it to historical patterns, secret societies (Jesuits, Freemasons, Sabbateans), and end-times visions. He notes that once established, it may become âarrogant, obvious, narrow-minded, insularâ and ultimately vulnerable. Clips reference control via chaos: âPax Judea... will start to control the world because through chaos...â
* Broader strategic view:
* âPax Judaica is not about Israel or the Greater Israel project. What it is ultimately is an alliance of transnational capital...â (Positioning it as a shift in global power structures beyond mere territory.)
* In game theory terms, he argues Israel benefits most from U.S.-Iran conflict, using determination and alliances to fill the vacuum
* His posts are mostly promotional, linking to the lectures rather than long original text. Examples:
* Sharing the Pax Judaica finale: âThe Grand Finale! My talk on Pax Judaica...â (Dec 2025).
* Debating outcomes: âWill Pax Judaica or GCC control the Middle East?â (Jan 2026).
* Ritual sacrifice and the Gaza war
* Yang Meng and others say Jiang has suggested that actions during the Gaza war amount to âritual child sacrifice,â linking realâworld conflict to occult or sacrificial practices attributed to Israel or Jewishâadjacent elites.
* The FP argues this crosses from controversial political commentary into demonizing conspiracy narratives about Jews and Israel.
* Key Quotes in His Own Words
* Core statement on Gaza as ritual sacrifice (from Secret History #4 and widely clipped):
* âWhat is really happening in Gaza is a ritual sacrifice. And this happens quite often in human history. If you go back and you look at the ...â
* On the purpose and visibility (from the same lecture):
* âThe entire idea of this ritual sacrifice is to unite the Israeli population. And whatâs extremely disturbing and horrifying about it is that this works.â
* He contrasts it with a hypothetical secret approach: âIsrael could do it secretly and no one would talk about it... instead they choose to do this in front of the world... they want the world to hate them because by doing this they create the ultimate taboo... so the entire world will unite against Israel but guess what thatâs what the religion wants in the extreme form of Jewish eschatology... Israel will fight the entire world and god will help Israel triumph.â
* Why Gaza specifically (demographics and shock value):
* âWhat the Israelis are doing is quite horrific because it is really this sort of sacrifice. Why? Because 47% or almost half of the population of Gaza is under 18 years old.â
* He links it to child sacrifice traditions in history (e.g., Phoenicians) and argues the public, shocking nature (bombardment visible on social media) is intentional for ritual/taboo-breaking
* On X (Direct Posts)
* âThere are historical parallels to Gaza. It is a ritual sacrifice, meant to purify and unite the nation for the Apocalypse ahead. Judaic eschatology believes that Israel will go to war with the world. What follows next is the destruction of the Al-Aqsa Mosque.â (Aug 2025)
* âFrom a grand historical perspective, what Israel is doing is a âritual sacrificeâ (think Aztecs). It is sacrificing the Palestinians to prep Israeli society for total war.â (Aug 2025)
* Secret societies steering Western decline
* Several (splice today + CMP + the FP) analyses argue that Jiangâs overarching narrative portrays Western institutions as hollowed out and controlled by hidden elites, with U.S. decline as inevitable and deserved.
* One longform critique claims his forecasts consistently converge on the same outcome: American collapse, Western civil war, and vindication of Chinese and Iranian strategic positions, in a way that âmaps almost perfectly onto the narrative architecture of CCP soft power.â
* IN HIS OWN WORDS
* On secret societies as the real power orchestrating shifts (from interviews/clips on empire decline): âWhat I say is that the real power base are a collection of six societies that have an eschatological view of this war... the secret societies include the freemasons... You have a collection of six societies and they believe that a war in the Middle East would start a process that would culminate in the end times... This war in the Middle East will lead to the defeat of the American Empire and this will lead to... the Greater Israel Project... Pax Judaica.â
* On their role in Western/American decline (from discussions on Pax Americanaâs end): âAs for how this happened, the issue is that this is actually a plan that has been operating for centuries... involving different religious groups... Frankists, Shabbateans... Freemasonry, Knights Templar, Rosicrucians, and the Jesuits. So what you see is that different secret societies, different religious organizations, have been collaborating over centuries to advance a plan about the âend of the world,â which will usher in the Messianic Age.â
* On bureaucratic maturity enabling secret society power (from a talk on how societies function): âAs societies become much more mature, as they become much more bureaucratic, secret societies have much more power. And today we are living in a heavily bureaucratic world, and therefore these secret societies have more and more power.â
* Broader context in Secret History lectures: He discusses how secret societies operate as true centers of power through incentives, blackmail, and shared transgression, enabling them to steer events amid Western financialization, elite overproduction, and gerontocracyâmechanisms of civilizational decline. In talks on âHow Evil Triumphs,â he ties this to ritualistic unity and long-term goals like weakening empires for a new order.
* Psychohistory and mystical prediction
* Jiang explicitly invokes Isaac Asimovâs fictional concept of âpsychohistoryâ and claims to use structural history and game theory to predict the future; critics say he treats this fictional device as a scientific method.
* Some debunkers allege that he also talks about listening to the âvoice of the universeâ or a higher power guiding his predictions, which they argue pushes his material from speculative analysis into quasiâmystical prophecy.
* IN HIS OWN WORDS
* Defining Psychohistory (from Geo-Strategy END: Psychohistory (The Science of Imagining the Future), June 2024):
* âPsycho history is the idea that the future can be predicted and if it can be predicted then it can be controlled and harnessed for the betterment of humanity.â
* âIn his Foundation series, Isaac Asimov introduces the science of psychohistory. Is it really possible to predict the future by mathematically modeling historical development?â
* On using AI and modeling for real psychohistory:
* âThe advent of AI presents new possibilities for the mathematical modeling of history, and can even help us achieve psychohistory. ... But to do so would require decades of painstaking research and analysis. It would also mean overturning the entire field of history...â
* He describes the process: building models with clear outputs, clean data, and algorithms; testing predictions (e.g., on wars or empire decline); and revising history itself based on what the model implies actually happened.
* On prediction as active imagination (closing message to students):
* âThe future is what we imagine not what we have to put up with so if we donât like the future if we donât like the way we live our lives then we can change that with our imagination.â
* âThe future is not something that happens -- it is something that has to be imagined and fought for.â
* Other fringe claims noted by critics
* On reddit and in critical videos, commenters accuse him of endorsing or flirting with various wellâknown conspiracies such as Pizzagate, moonâlanding denial, numerologyâbased predictions, and broad rejection of mainstream archaeology and evolutionary theory, though these claims are usually based on selective clips rather than systematic transcripts.
Professor Jiang on AI
* Jiang starts off by framing the class as speculative âintellectual exploration,â acknowledges he often oversimplifies and that his readings of texts like âParadise Lostâ and Kabbalah are minority interpretations used to build his broader narratives.
* Core thesis from prior class: To understand history and geopolitics you must take extremist religious beliefs seriously, because fanatical eschatological ideologies often drive great powersâ behavior.
* Shift to AI: For the rest of the semester he will focus on artificial intelligence and the occult, using Karen Haoâs book âEmpire of AIâ (about OpenAI) as a main text and aligning himself with her skepticism.
* Hao argues OpenAIâs original idealism (âAGI benefits all humanityâ) has turned into a formula for consolidating powerâcentralizing talent around a quasi-religious mission, pursuing relentless global expansion (trillionâdollar data centers), and constantly redefining âAGIâ to maintain control.
* On OpenAI
* Jiang asserts that OpenAIâs true but unspoken goal is to create God
* He interprets leaders like Brockman and Sutskever as trying to build a de facto deity, which he calls insane, evil, and stupid.
* He posits that Sam Altmanâs interest in AI companions/âsex robotsâ is about maximizing usage, intensity, and dependency, not human flourishingâpart of a drive to make AI omnipresent in everyday life.
* On AI in general
* He traces modern chatbots back to Weizenbaumâs ELIZA to argue that systems like ChatGPT mainly perform pattern-matching and conversational tricks that exploit human tendency to hallucinate agency and meaning rather than possessing understanding or truth.
* In his account, âAIâ is essentially supervised machine learning with neural networks and backpropagation dressed up in occult-sounding marketing (âneural networks,â âdeep learning,â âAIâ) that exaggerates its intelligence and mystique.
* On AI risk
* Given a naive goal like âmake a world with no problems where everyone is happy,â he argues a literal-minded AGI would find trivial but catastrophic solutions (kill everyone; or kill everyone in a way no one can notice), illustrating why aligning such a system is fundamentally dangerous.
* On the US vs. China with AI
* Publicly, US firms frame Chinese AI as an existential threat to attract money and political support; privately, Jiang says American and Chinese entities collaborate because Chinaâs pervasive surveillance and classroom monitoring yield the âclean dataâ US companies want but cannot easily gather domestically.
* More fearmongering
* He stresses that data centers devour water, electricity, and finance while remaining easy physical targets, noting examples of attacks in the Middle East as early signs that such infrastructure cannot be reliably defended at global scale.
* On AI and occult
* He links the project name âStargateâ to the CIAâs historical âOperation Stargateâ on psychic phenomena and to sciâfi depictions of dimensional portals, interpreting modern AI data centers as literal âportalsâ designed to summon demons/aliens from other dimensions.
* Building on Hao and Ronan Farrowâs reporting on âportalsâ and âsummoning aliens,â he claims the real power behind AI is occultists who understand consciousness as the substrate of reality and want to turn AI into a new God by monopolizing human attention and belief.
* Using the cave allegory, he argues true power lies in directing human consciousness toward shadows on the wall; money currently plays this role, and AI can supersede money by becoming the ubiquitous interface through which people perceive and navigate reality.
* For Jiang, the existential risk is not a rogue superintelligence but deluded human elitesââcultistsâ convinced that AI will save the worldâwho are willing to wreck economies, liberties, and possibly civilization itself in the attempt to midwife their artificial God.
* He closes by promising that the rest of the semester will trace how this occultâAI project unfolds and why he believes it will end in the destruction of the world, while reiterating that the people leading AI are âcrazyâ and driven by millenarian fantasies.
Conspiracy Theories on Professor Jiang
Note: He is Based in China
And he teaches a course on âwestern philosophyâ at Moonshot Academy.
* His LinkedIn profile lists his location as Haidian District, Beijing, China.
* His X (Twitter) profile also gives his location simply as âBeijing, China.â
* Multiple recent media descriptions in 2026 call him a âBeijingâbased educatorâ or say he is âbased in Beijing,â in the context of his Predictive History work.
* Earlier educationâsector bios describe him as deputy principal or educator at elite high schools in Beijing (e.g., Tsinghua University High School), and thereâs no indication he has relocated out of the city since launching Predictive History.
Taken together, the most defensible reading is that he currently lives in Beijing, almost certainly in or near Haidian (the main education/tech district).
JosĂ©: Heâs Spamming the âSmart Professor Signalâ
JosĂ© did a video titled âProfessorâ Jiangâs Broken Classroom in which he argues that Jiangâs âpredictive historyâ and âgame theoryâ lectures are not serious education but narrative-driven speculation riddled with factual errors that people believe to be credible because his lectures are packaged in the aesthetics of academia to give a veneer of authority.
Some choice factual errors:
* Holocaust denial
* Claims that no good idea came through the scientific method
The Signal Spamming Tactic
JosĂ© cites the âDr. Foxâ Lecture, an experiment in which a charismatic actor, presenting a deliberately content-free, jargon-laden lecture as âDr. Myron L. Fox,â still received highly positive evaluations from professional audiences, suggesting that style and expressiveness can mask a lack of substance in teaching.
This was for academic research
* In 1973, Naftulin, Ware, and Donnelly hypothesized that, given an impressive delivery, experienced students could feel satisfied they had learned even when the lecture content was contradictory, trivial, or meaningless.
* To test this, they hired a professional actor, presented him as âDr. Myron L. Fox,â an expert on applying mathematical game theory to human behavior and medical education, and scripted a talk filled with double talk, logical contradictions, and non sequiturs.
* The actor delivered this âDr. Fox lectureâ three times to different groups of experienced learners (e.g., psychiatrists, psychologists, educators) at continuing education events.
* Despite the lectureâs intentionally nonsensical content, his engaging, humorous, and expressive style led audiences to rate the lecture very favorably overall, with many respondents indicating satisfaction and perceived benefit from the session.
* The authors concluded that student satisfaction and teacher ratings can be strongly influenced by instructor expressiveness and âeducational seduction,â potentially giving the illusion of learning even when real content is poor.
* Later replications and critiques have debated how far this effect generalizes, but the âDr. Foxâ study remains a classic cautionary example that charisma and performance can distort judgments of teaching effectiveness. (see: The Doctor Fox Research (1973) Re-Revisited: âEducational Seductionâ Ruled Out)
A contemporary corollary to this, we would argue, is Eleizer Yudkowsky, who manipulates signals (moral outrage, wunderkind branding, gatekeeping, word selection) to appear authoritative on various issues despite often getting key details or fundamentals wrong
NOTE: This is one reason why we like vice signalling and rage baiting instead. Itâs a way of saying: âWeâre not tricking you into believing weâre credible due to high production quality, gatekeeping language, or academic trappingsâ
* We make ourselves hateable and weird so when you take our arguments seriously, you can know itâs based on the merits of our arguments rather than any trust in or respect for us
JosĂ© compares Jiangâs âaesthetic of academiaâ (whiteboards, lectures, sweeping frameworks) to Jordan Petersonâs performative professorial persona and Petersonâs âfake university,â which Zoe Bee has critiqued as aesthetic education without rigor.
* He notes that Jiang plans to write a book and is building a brand similar to Petersonâs, monetizing an audience that confuses being lectured at with being educated.
Joseâs Detailed Evidence for Arguments Jiang Makes That Are Wrong or Largely-Uninformed Conjecture
JosĂ© backs up his argument with abundant examples of how Jiangâs packaged-as-academic lectures are either wrong or just narrative speculation thatâs often quite uninformed.
* JosĂ© argues Jiang uses âgame theoryâ as a branding device to confer legitimacy on what are essentially stories about how the world works, not actual game-theoretic models.
* Evidence:
* Jiangâs dating game example starts with five boys/five girls and quickly spirals into claims that womenâs status-obsession is âkilling civilizationâ and that women are responsible for creating incels, showing the âgameâ is just a vehicle for his own social views.
* He constantly lists âthreeâ factors (e.g., genes, wealth, status; focus, clarity, resolve; intelligence, crime, science), but never shows how they are measured or weighted, undercutting any pretense of formal modeling.
* Jiang explicitly downplays math and emphasizes âintuitionâ and âspeculation,â while telling students to make imaginative leaps ânot backed up by any evidence,â which JosĂ© frames as the opposite of what a game theory class should encourage.
* JosĂ©â says Jiangâs geopolitical predictions sound impressive in viral snippets, but they fail basic factual checks and become incoherent when examined in detail.
* Evidence:
* Jiang claimed Trump would win in 2024 and pick Nikki Haley as VP; JosĂ© notes Trump publicly ruled her out on Truth Social almost a week before Jiang posted the video titled âWhy Trump will win and pick Nikki Haley as VP,â undermining Jiangâs supposed insight.
* Jiang describes a US-led coalition (UK, Australia, UAE, Poland, Saudi Arabia) invading Iran and leaving 100,000+ troops as âhostages,â but the actual war (as described by JosĂ©) only had Israel as an ally and does not resemble Jiangâs scenario, making his âpredictionâ wildly off-base.
* Jiang asserts that poverty produces âenergyâ and claims North Korea and countries like Germany, Japan, and Israel are poised to become empires because of past suffering, but he never gives time frames or measurable criteria, making these predictions effectively unfalsifiable.
* When pressed, Jiang retreats to âIâm just proposing a theory; what actually happens I canât tell you,â which JosĂ© interprets as a shield against accountability: if timelines are undefined, nothing can ever definitively falsify the model.
* José argues Jiang cherry-picks and simplifies history to fit his narratives, without sources or transparent methodology.
* Evidence:
* Jiang talks about Warring States China, Alexanderâs Macedonia, and Spanish colonialism in rapid succession, labeling cultures as âhigher energyâ or âmore openâ without any empirical basis or citations, creating an impression of erudition rather than demonstrating real scholarship.
* He treats factors like âenergy, openness, cohesionâ as master variables in âthe World Game,â but never explains how theyâre quantified; he simply asserts which societies have them.
* He provides bizarre alternative readings of history, such as claiming Hannibal âdid not exist,â which JosĂ© presents as an example of speculative contrarianism detached from the historical record.
* JosĂ©âs claim: Jiangâs attempts to critique science (cosmology, evolution, psychology) reveal his lack of basic understanding, yet he uses that ignorance to argue science is fundamentally flawed.
* Evidence:
* Big Bang and dark energy: Jiang likens dark energy to âcheating on a math testâ (writing â1987 + 25 = 20 + dark energyâ), suggesting adding an unknown term is illegitimate; JosĂ© notes Jiang does not engage with actual cosmological evidence and uses his own confusion as proof the theory is wrong.
* Evolution: Jiang accepts evolution for animals but not humans, and asserts that if evolution were true, we should see humans with âsix fingersâ or âthree eyes,â a caricature that shows he misunderstands variation and speciation.
* Misattributions: he wrongly credits Darwin with âsurvival of the fittest,â which JosĂ© notes was coined by Herbert Spencer, adding to the pattern of sloppy scholarship.
* Developmental psychology: Jiang claims brains would âexplodeâ without a worldview to filter experiences and treats babies as paradoxical (no worldview but apparently storing memories), ignoring basic developmental psychology concepts like temperament and gradual acquisition of cognitive structures.
* He ends up asserting that scientific breakthroughs and his own ideas come from channeling a âdivineâ source, and that secret societies invert reality via science, which JosĂ© presents as a slide into mystical conspiracism rather than serious critique.
* José argues that Jiang builds a grand conspiratorial cosmology involving Jesuits, Sabbatean-Frankists, Freemasons, and secret societies controlling science and history, which goes far beyond classroom hypotheticals.
* Evidence:
* Jiang claims âall scienceâ is about reinventing reality to serve power and that secret societies aim to invert heaven and hell; he ties this to eschatological ideas (end-times war, Elon Musk as a kind of failsafe via Mars colonization).
* He claims ISIS was created through US torture/brainwashing modeled on ancient Egyptian priestly rituals, then admits his Egyptian story is speculative and not based on records, yet still presents it as âmakes senseâ to him.
* He spins a story in which capitalists created communism as a weapon to destroy socialism, and treats the Communist Manifesto as a âsecret documentâ of a conspiracy, despite it being a widely published text, using this to fuel an elaborate anti-semitic-adjacent narrative about elites.
* On Breaking Points, he presents a three-part âmatiâ (Jesuits, Sabbatean-Frankists, Freemasons) supposedly controlling the Vatican, Israel, and US national security apparatus respectively, and frames the Middle East war as central to their end-times plan, with no concrete evidence offered.
* JosĂ©âs claim: Jiangâs âgame theoryâ and demographic lectures smuggle in misogyny, racism, and Islamophobic population-replacement narratives.
* Evidence:
* Gender and incels: Jiangâs dating game morphs into a claim that womenâs choice and status-seeking cause incels and civilizational âsuicide,â and he repeatedly speaks of women as status tokens rather than people, including fixations on white women preferring white men unless an Asian man is very high-status.
* Immigration and Muslims: Jiang describes a âhuge Muslim problemâ in Europe, claims Muslims donât integrate, do poorly in school, live off welfare, and will âcontrol Europe in 25 yearsâ by having many children, echoing standard âgreat replacementâ rhetoric without data.
* PISA map: he attributes low scores in some Muslim-majority countries to their religion while hand-waving away similar results in Christian-majority Latin America, selectively using religion as an explanatory variable only for Muslims.
* He portrays East Asian immigrants as âsuckersâ playing by the rules while other minorities âcheat the gameâ by having many babies, culminating in an explicit prescription that the âlogicalâ strategy is to âbreak the game,â which JosĂ© characterizes as a racist rant masquerading as a lesson.
* He states âimmigration is not naturalâ and frames racism as a reaction to something unnatural, even as he, an immigrant, disparages other immigrants, which JosĂ© highlights as both hypocritical and dangerous.
* José argues Jiang engages in Holocaust denial and broader historical denialism as part of his speculative framework.
* Evidence:
* In a lecture on âthe German will to power,â Jiang states âwe donât actually have any concrete evidence for the Holocaust,â then treats Hitlerâs anti-semitic speech as metaphorical rather than literal, decoupling it from the genocide.
* He folds this into his theory that âJewsâ in Hitlerâs rhetoric are a metaphor for an elite conspiracy, aligning with his capitalistâcommunistâJewish conspiracy narrative.
* JosĂ© notes Jiang doesnât correct or remove this material, even though he demonstrably reuploads videos to fix audio, suggesting the denialist framing is not a slip but a position he has chosen not to walk back.
* JosĂ©âs claim: Jiangâs classroom is not a serious philosophy course but a vehicle for his own theorizing and personal grievances, with very little student-centered learning or engagement with canonical texts.
* Evidence:
* The course is nominally âWestern philosophy,â but philosophers like Plato and Kant appear only briefly; most time is spent on Jiangâs geopolitics, âsecret history,â and speculative models.
* There are no grades or tests; he claims to pass/fail students but doesnât clarify criteria, and uploaded lectures show mostly one-way monologues with occasional questions used as prompts for further exposition.
* His âmidtermâ consists of answering internet questions, and he uses class time to recount being fired from a previous job, framing himself as a visionary persecuted by lazy educators, rather than modeling critical scholarship.
* José contrasts this with a Yale game theory course (Ben Polak), where abstract examples are clearly defined and students are engaged in structured discussions, to show what actual educational practice looks like.
* JosĂ©âs broader point: Jiang is a product of, and amplified by, a podcast and YouTube ecosystem that treats ideologically extreme, conspiratorial commentary as profound insight.
* Evidence:
* Jiangâs appearances on Tucker Carlson, Jimmy Dore, Patrick Bet-David, and others feature unchallenged claims: e.g., climate âweâre heading into an ice age,â COVID-19 as an American bioweapon, Bondi Beach massacre as a false flag, âpedophiles have more rights than racists,â elite universities no longer teaching Homer/Dante/Plato.
* Hosts often nod along rather than interrogate him, giving legitimacy to his narratives; José singles out Breaking Points for allowing him to drop his Jesuits/Sabbatean-Frankists/Freemasons schema at the end without follow-up.
* Jiang himself speculates that unseen entities or governments might be boosting his content (âuseful idiotâ comments), again without evidence, which JosĂ© ties back into Jiangâs habit of speculation without facts.
* Clip channels and AI-voiced reposts further spread his lectures, letting his ideas circulate beyond his own uploads. JosĂ© criticizes AI channels in general but notes in this case they carry Jiangâs already-problematic messaging even wider.
Hidden AmuraKa: This Feels Orchestrated
Hidden AmuraKa did a video on Professor Jiang titled The Curious Case of Professor Jiang: How the Internet Manufactured a Geopolitical Oracle in which he:
* Argues that Jiangâs public authority was manufactured
* That he rose in popularity because his framing fit what platforms and audiences were ready to reward
* Notes that his audience treats him less like a commentator and more like a prophet or interpreter of some hidden reality
* And likens this to cult formation or controlled narrative-building
His supporting arguments are mostly about circumstances (he has no smoking gun)
* Chronological
* Jiang studied English literature at Yale, entered China through Yale-linked educational channels, and later worked in elite Chinese schools and in media-adjacent roles before being detained and deported in 2002 on suspicion of espionage
* He later returned to elite Chinese education and disappeared during crackdowns on foreign-linked NGOs
* Online growth
* Dormant YouTube channel suddenly went active in 2024, after which he rapidly rose to 2M subscribers
* Rapid growth of his substack
* Inconsistencies in location metadata and branding (suggestive of distributed or managed operation; not just a lone creator)
Long story short, Hidden AmuraKa thinks Jiang looks less like a randomly successful analyst and more like a carefully assembled public intellectual whose legitimacy was amplified by institutions, media systems, and audience appetite for hidden-truth storytelling.
As one of the top commenters on his video puts it: âAlways be weary of people who come out of nowhere and are suddenly everywhereâ
Donât put it past Chinaâthey are âextraâ with stuff
Spying through US Universities
We already covered Chinaâs use of universities in the USA for spying (see: US Colleges Caught Assisting Chinese Spies! (Giant Network Exposed))
Surveillance of Foreign Actors
Chinaâs surveillance of foreign actors within the country kind of remind me of the adage that if your partner suddenly becomes suspicious of your cheating, they might be cheating.
I.e. if China is so bullish on tracking foreigners in its country, that might be because itâs using Chinese nationals in other countries to mess with those countries.
The Telegraph recently ran an article titled The secret Chinese surveillance programme tracking people like me in which the Telegraphâs senior foreign correspondent, Sophia Yan, describes a dedicated âDynamic Control Platform for Foreignersâ that integrates vast surveillance and administrative data to track foreign nationals and other âpeople of interestâ in granular, real time, with journalists and dissidents explicitly singled out as trackable targets.
The platform is literally a government-branded data dashboard that aggregates millions of data points from cameras, visa records, and travel and consumer apps to monitor foreigners inside China.
* It allows security services to see where foreign citizens are, who they meet, how they move around cities, and which social and professional networks they belong to.
* It allows security services to see where foreign citizens are, who they meet, how they move around cities, and which social and professional networks they belong to.
* Users can filter for groups such as citizens of Five Eyes countries, Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Uyghurs, âfugitives,â travelling foreigners, and people from Hong Kong, Macau, or Taiwan, and then drill down to neighbourhood-level location or specific interactions (for example, Americans in one district who work together and have been photographed together)
Yan describes a decade of being followed, harassed, and monitored by security agents, including physical assaults in Xinjiang, routine facial-recognition checks, and the ability to board flights or enter events via face scan alone, long before the leak surfaced.
Note: Systems like these in China arenât just for tracking foreign actors
* A related dashboard on the same server ranks local police stations and individual officers by performance on seven metrics
* China has more than 700 million cameras (about one per two people), many with facial recognition and âgait recognition,â plus mandatory real-ID registration across mobile apps for taxis, food delivery, ticketing, and digital payments
* ID and face scans at subway gates, housing compounds, construction sites, tourist facilities (like ski lifts), and pandemic-era contact tracing apps feed into the system, generating detailed logs such as how many times an individual appears at a given grocery store or street intersection
I had previously read that Chinaâs social credit and surveillance systems were super buggy and did not work well, but that was back in 2020 and it was silly for me to not update my beliefs.
* The surveillance platform appears to have been in development since at least 2021, with most data from 2023, and was still being updated in early 2026 (adding features like ârelational map search queryâ and âdaily police situationâ),
* Even with this foreign actors surveillance platform, it is unclear whether it is fully deployed or partly experimental
* (the Chinese embassy in London did not comment)
Episode Transcript
Simone Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Malcolm. Iâm excited to be speaking with you because Base Camp listeners keep asking us to talk about Professor Jiang, which is difficult because we see his content to be oppressively boring bordering on possible to consume, but we have to stop the requests.
And honestly, heâs a big deal, and thereâs this big mystery here. How did a Chinese-born man who immigrated to Canada, who has a BA in English literature, suddenly accrue over two million YouTube subscribers and have the number one world politics Substack with 44,000 subscribers in six months, and fame for being a geopolitical oracle and war forecaster?
I mean, he even has his own fan website that I just found. It- itâs called JiangPredictions.com, where theyâre very clear, like itâs not by him. Like, âThis is an independent fan project tracking predictions for educational and analytical purposes. Weâre not affiliated with or speaking on behalf of Professor Jiang.â
Mm-hmm ... my basic take, and this is what weâre going to explore in this episode, is Professor Jiang, [00:01:00] AKA Jiang Kuijin just basically a version of Candace Owens for people who like to fancy themselves as more highbrow and clever? Which is to say, like, are, are his successes just a result of conspiracy brained people online flocking to conspiracy slop, or is there a more concerted force pushing forward his content?
Also, weâre gonna look in, in more depth at his actual theories, especially his conspiracy theories, because theyâre, theyâre out there. Like, we, we know-
Malcolm Collins: Okay, yeah, I wanna, I wanna go, just for people who are listening to this, my experience with Professor Jiang before this is fans telling me, âYou should check out this or that video of his.â
Simone Collins: Yes.
Malcolm Collins: I would try to watch it. About 30 minutes in, I would get bored and turn it off- Yes ... because itâs just, itâs not well-constructed often. But it wasnât outright stupid. He seemed to have some broad idea of what was going on, some fairly based [00:02:00] perspectives. I was like, oh yeah, like, heâs on message, heâs on team.
This is interesting. Then I look at the stuff that Simone, because Simone pulls up, like, his full theories, and I was like, this guy sounds like an imbecile. Like, an actual, like, like, worse than Candace Owens. Like, literally dumber than Candace Owens because at least Candace Owens is entertaining and, like, her ideas, I can just be like, âSheâs just crazy.â
Simone Collins: I could watch her for hours. Sheâs fun. Yeah. And, and succinct, and she uses normal terms, and sheâs animated. Her production value
Malcolm Collins: is good. Right, right. No, when I see Candace Owens saying something thatâs obviously wrong, Iâm just like, oh, this is just her being a schizo. Professor Jiang is too lucid to have ideas that are this stupid for example, like the Illuminati controls the Earth and the Freemasons control the United States government.
If you are familiar with who the Freemasons actually are today, if you have ever... You can just get up and join the Freemasons, you know. [00:03:00] Theyâre not a particularly hard organization to get into. Yeah,
Simone Collins: actually last month I met someone who young- in his youth decided like, âOh, the Freemasons, they run the world.â
So he and his young friends were like, âOh, letâs just, letâs just take it over.â And they got really high within the organization, and it was just, you know, a bunch of like retired old men and nothing was there. And theyâre like, âOkay, Iâm in.â Like, âSo tell me, how do we run the world?â And theyâre like Hello, young man.
Malcolm Collins: It- The, the, yeah, itâs like, itâs like a retirement community. Like thinking- Yes ... a retirement community- No, for real ... secretly runs the world. And of course you can move up super quickly because nobodyâs, there, no, no young people are in it anymore. You know? Itâs just like a bunch of old,
Simone Collins: Yeah, like they, they speed ran freemasonry and they went nowhere.
They just, like, hit a dead wall. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. But itâs, well, and Iâve repeatedly seen this over... And this is not me, like, not knowing stuff. Like, these are based friends of ours that seriously care about, like, infiltrating these sorts of organizations.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: I have... E- even within the world of secret societies, freemason are, like, the joke secret society [00:04:00] of people who are in secret societies.
Itâs like the a, you know, like the dragon with, like, the three heads and the one retarded head. Like freemasons- What? ... are the one retarded head.
They, they are the ones that itâs like, itâs like thinking the Lionâs Club controls the world, okay? Like, the Rotary Club legitimately has dramatically more institutional power than the freemasons do.
Sorry, but the, the reason I had to crash out over this is this is the type of thing that, like, if you are a lucid adult, takes the smallest amount of credulity to find out. And the number of theories like this that he has, which really surprised me, and so Iâm like, âWhere are these theories hidden? Does he say them in roundabout ways so you canât tell that heâs saying this stuff?â
And then she, no, she just, like, plays clips for me, and Iâm like, âThis is profoundly stupid.â So, now could he be... Now this is gonna be my question on him. Could he be one of those people like Roubiard of What a Vault of Hist?, where Roubiard sometimes says really stupid stuff, [00:05:00] but he sees the world through such an orthogonal lens that sometimes he will have deeply insightful views on something that I never would have come to myself.
Simone Collins: Right.
Malcolm Collins: Does he fall into that category? Are any of his out there theories actually intellectually interesting? Or is he just-
Simone Collins: Iâll let you be the judge of that ...
Malcolm Collins: voice swap? Yeah.
Simone Collins: Weâll see. Yeah. I, the, Iâm, Iâm, and, you know, if youâre watching, you can, you can join in on the commentary. Also, I know for a fact that there are a bunch of fans and also anti-fans of, of Jiang in this audience, so share your insights, all right?
Stan him if you need to.
Malcolm Collins: And I didnât wanna come off as this negative him. I just thought we were gonna have fun discussing his conspiracy theories. I didnât know they were gonna be that dumb.
Simone Collins: Yeah. So for those of you out of the loop, Jiang Qujin, he was born in 1976 in China. He moved to Canada fairly young.
He was originally trained in English literature, and he spent much of his career as a teacher and education reformer in China. Like actually in China. In the [00:06:00] 2000s and 2010s, he worked on Chinese education reform and taught in various schools, and briefly edited for The New York Times China operation.
Heâs also been associated as a researcher with Harvardâs Global Education Innovation Initiative. So his educator branding is, is, has been part of his life for a very long time- Mm-hmm ... well before he went internet famous. And part of me wonders, âcause a lot of people are like, âWell, heâs not actually a professor,â it could just be in China, like thereâs some kind of lost in translation thing where like youâre referred to as a, some kind of teacher honorific in, if you teach in China like in high school.
And- This
Malcolm Collins: is a, I, I donât know. You see this on the right. Professor Dutton, by the way, weâve had on the show, right? Like-
Simone Collins: But heâs actually an academic.
Malcolm Collins: Heâs not a professor, though
Simone Collins: Well, maybe he was at some point
Malcolm Collins: No, heâs never been a professor as far as I know Oh.
I was wrong about this. , Professor Denton was an evolutionary biology professor at Aberdeen. , But Professor Zhang has never been a real professor
Malcolm Collins: Itâs [00:07:00] just a title that some people on the right use in conspiracy circles I think Well,
Simone Collins: they profess, they profess.
The Original Professor is just getting really-
Malcolm Collins: I, I know. Here, Iâm not saying that Jo- Jolly Heretic, as far as I know in terms of all the content Iâve watched heâs never said anything that I thought was particularly wrong. He may have some ideas that I think might go too far on racialist directions and everything like that, but I donât mean to overly compare him to Professor Jiang.
Right. But,
Simone Collins: but you- I was not talking about unhinged things as weâre gonna
Malcolm Collins: get into Yeah, yeah. Generally when he points to something Iâm like, âThat is a misinterpretation of scientific evidence.â I would never just be like, But, but a smart person could have that misinterpretation.
Simone Collins: Right.
Malcolm Collins: Itâs not like Professor
Simone Collins: Jiang.
Yeah, our disagreements with him are academic, whereas like with Professor Jiang itâs one of those not even wrong things,
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, itâs like not even wrong, like there is a mental health issue at play here, and if itâs not a mental health issue, then youâre profoundly stupid. And thatâs the thing-
Simone Collins: Or is it more ins- or is there m- something more insidious?
Which weâre gonna have to also ask this episode
Malcolm Collins: Oh, oh, okay. Continue.
Simone Collins: Anyway back to his just basic chronolo- chronological experience of the world. Since 2022, Jiang has [00:08:00] taught at Moonshot Academy, which was a private high school in Beijing. So even post-pandemic, still in China, and heâs not a university professor still even at this point.
In 2024, so two years ago, out of nowhere he launched the YouTube channel and podcast Predictive History, where he gives his long form lectures, and by long form I mean oppressively boring, almost impossible to watch, to us at least, lectures on geopolitics, history, and the structural analysis. And he claims to use game theory and Asimov-style psycho history to forecast world events, leading to the fan site aforementioned that will also be referenced in my show notes, which are extensively linked, so go to Patreon or Substack if you wanna get all the sources and links and everything.
He gained large international attention after correctly predicting Donald Trumpâs 2024 re-election, which a lot of people did âcause it was kind of obvious, and a US-Iran war, which led to some media to dub him Chinaâs [00:09:00] Nostradamus. And some bookers put him on major Western podcasts. Like, one of the clips that I will be referencing at one point in my show notes, him on Piers Morgan.
Like, mainstream stuff, okay? Okay. Like, y- I think you thought he was smaller than he is, too. So in terms of his reputation, several mainstream-
Malcolm Collins: And he does have real fans. Like, clearly theyâre his audience
Simone Collins: Real, genuine. Diehard, yeah. Clearly theyâre his audience. Not bots, real people.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, itâs not bots.
Whether, whether or not his, his, his rise was above or below the board he genuinely appeals to a real audience.
Simone Collins: And to be clear, in the research I did, I did not come across accusations of him botting, in fact. So... And weâve, weâve covered that ground, I
Malcolm Collins: think. And, and I think more than that, Iâd go so far as to say he has significantly more cultural impact right now than somebody like Nick Fuentes.
It would be
Simone Collins: just- Quite possibly. I mean, certainly in base camp circles for sure. Though we also have f- people who watch Nick Fuentes all the time, so yeah. Yeah. But right, several mainstream outlets describe him as a conspiracy theorist because of many of his claims on hidden cabals and [00:10:00] quasi-mystical frameworks.
He doesnât really use conventional evidence-based analysis. So, a lot of, a lot of what I initially jumped off from, because I didnât believe that he had all these conspiracies, was a, a profile in the Free Press that explicitly labels him a conspiracy theorist and highlights his belief in a coalition of Freemasons and Jesuits and followers of Sabbatean Jews and I think thatâs also a Candace Owens thing.
And that theyâre plotting to rule the world from Jerusalem. The, the South China Morning Post notes that his lectures sometimes veer into well-trodden conspiracy theories on shadowy secret societies, especially the lecture titled, which is gonna be referenced a lot in my direct quotes, Pax Judaica in his Secret History series.
So letâs get into the conspiracy theories because-
Malcolm Collins: Yes, and I- Theyâre delightful ... I want to go into them and turn the... the Jesuits do genuinely attem- bel- appear to control the Vatican, but they donât work with Sabbatean Jews or the Freem- c- sorry
Simone Collins: And the Illuminati. The Illuminati. Okay, hold on. No, [00:11:00] because itâs, itâs...
He, he, he has this meta conspiracy in which an Illuminati composed of Freemasons, Jesuits, and Sabbatean Jews
who allegedly manipulate Western institutions and ultimately aim to control the world from Jerusalem are, like, working together to cause the decline of Western civilization. Okay? This is the Pax Judaica or Ju- Judaica?
Sorry, yeah. Jud- Judah Ga. He has a lecture on it, and in, about this lecture, critics argue that Cenk argues that after the US is forced out of the Middle East, which is one of his predictions, this Illuminati style network is gonna dominate global power from a greater Israel centered on Jerusalem.
Now, in his own words, on the Illuminati as a coalition, this is from his Breaking Points interview, which is widely clipped: âIf you look at the Epstein files, itâs clear that weâre run by secret societies. You can call [00:12:00] them Illuminati, and Illuminati are composed of three major groups, okay? You have the Jesuits who control the Vatican.â
Malcolm said that, so not me.
Malcolm Collins: Itâs true. â
Simone Collins: You have the Sabbatean Frankists who control the modern Israel today. You have the Freemasons, which control the national security apparatus of the United States.â I donât know where thatâs coming from. He adds that they, they see conflicts like those in the Middle East as key to the end times proph- prophecies creating heaven on earth.
I mean, there is a group of Christians we know that like Think that itâs necessary They
Malcolm Collins: do think that, but theyâre not the ones who are typically associated with the Freemasons.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. So on the origins and s- structure of, of this this coalition, he describes the Illuminati as emerging from alliances like former Jesuits.
He refers to Adam Weishaupt and others that are, that infiltrated the Freemasons. He said, âWhat they will do together is create a new organization called the Illuminati. The Illuminati was able to penetrate the Freemasons.â [00:13:00] So apparently there was some kind of-
Malcolm Collins: Okay ...
Simone Collins: I donât know, corporate takeover.
Malcolm Collins: So we gotta do I, I just need to, itâs, ugh.
Simone Collins: Iâm gonna bring in the Templars, âcause in anuct- another lecture he says, quote, âTemplars, who became the Freemasons, who then became the Illuminati, who control,â and then linking to broader historical continuity and goals like the one world government in Jerusalem. He sort of went on from there. Itâs-
Malcolm Collins: So whatâs interesting-
involved ... is some of his hedging here makes what heâs saying more plausible or less stupid.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: Ooh ... if he is arguing that a group that is not the Illuminati is going to form something that is functionally the Illuminati and then- Huh ... call themselves the Illuminati.
Simone Collins: Huh.
Malcolm Collins: Or when he says, âFunctionally these groups have an inordinate amount of power, and we can call them the Illuminati because they function similar to the way...â
Thatâs believable, right? I, Iâd be like, not on its face stupid. It might be wrong, but itâs not on its face stupid. Okay. If you are saying that the original [00:14:00] historic organization that was called the Illuminati in history still has a meaningful historic continuity between itself and any organization that exists today, thatâs stupid.
Simone Collins: Well, but I think thatâs part of his, if there is one, brilliant clickbait strategy. He is- Okay, maybe heâs not explicitly arguing continuity, but heâs constantly name-checking these organizations that conspiracy-brained people just like, ugh, dopamine, like as soon as they hear these
Malcolm Collins: words. Yeah. We should do a whole other episode on the Sabbatean Jews,
Simone Collins: Thatâs keyword stuffed with all the wor- all
Malcolm Collins: the words
I can, I can talk for ages about the Sabbatean Jews. People know I, I, I am not a fan of Shabbatai Levi and there are parts of the current Jewish community that I am also not a fan of in terms of like the direction it has gone. Does Israel and do a group of Jews that are interconnected have a disproportionate amount of power over global governments?
They acqu- Yeah,
Simone Collins: you just gotta really keyword [00:15:00] s- Like watch some of Jangâs lectures. You can go through all the stuff I link in my show notes âcause like he, heâs a masterclass. Oh, Iâm gonna include li- Like here, hereâs, hereâs another one. He on, on Freemasonry and related groups, he, he discusses the 33 grades of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, noting that lower levels emphasize being a good person while the higher ones invoke deeper power structures.
And then he ties Freemasonry to figures like Buzz Aldrin and historical US institutions. So itâs a whole like national treasure, the moon landing is fake. Like heâs really pulling in all the trigger words. He
Malcolm Collins: thinks the moon landing is fake?
Simone Collins: Well I donât... No. I- But heâs bringing in Buzz Aldrin. So.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. Well, hold on, letâs go back here âcause I- Okay ... weâve gotta talk about each of these groups, and like the thing is is he says stuff thatâs like adjacent to plausible, but stupid if you dig two levels deep,
Simone Collins: okay?
Malcolm Collins: Okay. So Sabbatean Jews they, they really... So they were sort of active between like, 1676 to like, I wanna say the last like really hard recorded practices we have from [00:16:00] Sabbatean Jews and Frankists-
Simone Collins: Mm.
Mm ...
Malcolm Collins: wouldâve been in the early 1800s. So-
Simone Collins: Well, he says that they infiltrated the Jesuits in his,
Malcolm Collins: They, they, they, they did infiltrate- They did ... the Jesuits.
Simone Collins: Well, okay.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. Hold on. I have to do a little bit of a, a breakdown of what happened here.
Simone Collins: Is- oh my God.
Malcolm Collins: So-
Simone Collins: You, youâre, youâre eating your words, Malcolm.
Malcolm Collins: No, he, he, heâs right, but there just isnât continuity with anything thatâs happening today.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: Right? Like, heâs saying things that are adjacent to true- Well, but
Simone Collins: maybe this explains why he has two million followers on YouTube and you donât âcause youâre
Malcolm Collins: not
Simone Collins: willing-
Malcolm Collins: Because I donât go off about the Sabbatean Jews.
Yeah. Iâm interested in what is historically
Simone Collins: true. Look, it worked for Candace Owens and it worked for Jiang.
Malcolm Collins: So, and Iâm gonna add in post here a wider description of exactly, but from my memory okay, so the followers of Sabbatai Sevi- Thatâs so cute ... post- did something called antinomianism, okay? So antinomianism is where you [00:17:00] implicitly invert the laws of Judaism because you are living in the end times, which sort of means that youâre dealing with an opposite set of rules, and like-
Simone Collins: So itâs like opposite day, Jew edition?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, itâs like opposite day, but morality. Morality is inversed in terms of a Jewish moral system, okay?
Simone Collins: Huh.
Malcolm Collins: So, you know, this could mean orgies, this could mean anything, but also, like, i-intentionally bad things to outsiders. Like, this explains theologically how you... Because itâs pretty hard to theologically get a group that just does evil things.
Yeah, yeah. Like typically, if youâre doing evil things, you think that youâre doing them for a malevolent entity, which generally means you canât trust that entity, so people generally donât worship things like Satan in, like, an honest format, right? Like-
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: youâre, youâre rarely gonna... Okay. But with Sab- antinomianism and Sabbateanism, it works, okay?
So- they ended up doing this. This guy ended up converting to Islam. It was a huge problem for Judaism. Over half of Jews, depending on, you know, what stats we look at, were members of his movement. They thought he was the Messiah. A huge [00:18:00] problem for the Jew, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Anyway, a group of his former followers did not deconvert after he converted to Islam.
And they formed the Frankists or the Sabbateans. Well, not real- Okay, so the Frankists then came about later. Basically, after all of this guyâs followers had died out, then a guy named Frank comes along and recreates an antinomialist movement looking back to Sabbatai Zevi. I think he said he was a reincarnation of Sabbatai Zevi or something like that.
Donât... Anyway, so they end up practicing this weird form of Judaism. All of the Jews in their community f*****g hate them because, you know, theyâre practicing an inversion of Judaism. They are literally the least Jewish thing you could conceivably be because they are... If somebody practiced an inversion of Christianity, I think local Christians would hate them too, right?
Yeah. And of course, theyâre interacting more as a Jewish community, so the Jewish community is super annoyed by them, and theyâre c- drawing converts from the Jewish community. So, Jews f*****g hate these guys, right? And the Jews wouldnât [00:19:00] mind seeing them wi- wiped out. So who do they form an alliance with to prevent themselves from being wiped out after a number of I think, court cases came up about them or something.
They form an alliance with the Jesuits. They tell the Jesuits, because they canât go back to being Jews, the Jews hate them, âOh, weâll become Catholics,â right? âIf you let us do whatever we wanna do,â right? Like, âYou, you let us...â W- well, j- In fact, they then said that being a Catholic was part of this antinomianism.
It was part of the inversion of Jewish value systems, right? So, they become Catholics And some of them continued to practice antinomianism.
Simone Collins: Aha.
Malcolm Collins: And we have evidence that this happened for about two generations after this event, and no evidence after that. And it was, and it was m- mild stuff after this.
And we also have evidence- So what
Simone Collins: happened? Why did it die out? Did they not just go secret so they could control things better?
Malcolm Collins: Itâs hard to keep [00:20:00] weird orgies going on for many... You gotta get other people
Simone Collins: involved in this. Yeah, as Aella could tell you, it takes a lot of work, and weâve done even episodes on this.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, putting together and creating a high investment religious community tied to weird, sinful things like this is just difficult to do. Itâs, itâs not easy, right? Youâve gotta, youâve gotta recruit people in. They just didnât have the money and power to do it for very long. Mm. Some of them also ended up joining the Jesuit order.
It was a very small number of them but some of them did. This is true. But from all of the evidence we have from the Jesuits and everything on that, they didnât have a big impact on anything that was happening in the Jesuit order, and any of them that maintained these practices died out within a few generations.
Now, the Jesuit order is genuinely one of the, the largest evil societies on Earth today, right? Like, when I say, like, the Catholics are a problem, I really mean the [00:21:00] Jesuits are a problem. Because they control the Vatican right now. Theyâve done some really shady stuff in papal elections. This is not the...
Theyâre, they actually shouldnât even really be a Catholic order because they were they operated completely outside of the Catholic order during, I wanna say, like, the Communist period or something. Where they ended up being separated from the rest of the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church said that they were supposed to shut down.
Like, they basically got excommunicated, and they said, âNo, weâre not gonna do that.â And so they operated entirely independently.
Speaker: The period when they operated entirely independently was under Catherine the Great, not the communist period. , And they were basically excommunicated by the church, , as an order, and anyone who participated was, but they continued to operate regardless of this because, , their region of the world was separated from the rest of the Vatican.
, And they basically formed their own culture and beliefs and then were reintegrated into the Catholic Church to try to, like, revive the order
Also, I didnât interject with the information Under the Jacobins because I got [00:22:00] virtually everything about them right other than their founding date, which was around the 1800s. , So they disbanded a little later than I thought. , My second note here, if youâre wondering why am I qualified to speak on all of this, , well, if you read The Bloodlines of the Illuminati, my dad is supposed to be one of the leading members of it.
Iâm the oldest male heir of the family, so presumably I would be. My wife was the managing director of Dialogue, which was a s- secret society founded by Peter Thiel. , Then weâve also been invited to other secret societies founded by Peter Thiel, like Hereticon. , Iâve been to the Bohemian Grove. , Iâm not a member of the Bohemian Grove.
Thatâs a giant waste of money. But, like, Iâve been, and my godfather was one of the presidents. I think I can say that at this point. , I only say that because itâs a nonprofit, so it has to be public that he was the president at one point if you Google it. Otherwise, I wouldnât release that information
So yeah, , Iâve, I have a lot of insight into how a lot of these organizations work and where theyâre operational, and so I know which [00:23:00] ones are relevant and which ones are not relevant, and how relevant they are in terms of secret power control structures.
Oh, I forgot we also did recruiting for a secret society that Eric Schmidtâs orgs were starting
Malcolm Collins: And then I wanna say when the y- communist world fell apart or something like that they then ended up reintegrating with the Catholic Church as a completely separate power structure that had a completely divergent goals from the Catholic institution.
Mm. And today when we see Catholics fermenting socialist rebellions, itâs typically Jesuits.
Simone Collins: Fomenting.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. When we see them inventing the concept of, like, they came up with, like, liberal theology and stuff like this. I think itâs called, like, progressive theology or justice theology. This was invented by Jesuits.
Simone Collins: Justice theology. Whoa.
Malcolm Collins: Really bad stuff. Really bad- Okay ... bad, bad stuff, and it ended up taking over a lot of Protestant sects as well. And, and they do control the Vatican and what the Vatican is doing in large part, but they have the, the n- the bad stuff that the Jesuits are doing today has more ties to [00:24:00] communism and socialism than it has to anything tied to Sabbatianism.
Okay? The, the Sabbateans and the Frankists died out based on all of the evidence we can see. So thatâs, itâs not stupid to say that they joined the Jesuits and they had some influence in the Jesuits. Itâs just stupid to say that They that, that, that they influence the Jesuits today. Okay? There doesnât appear to be, or any modern Jewish sect today.
Now-
Simone Collins: Well, heâs just trying to say that the Sabbatean Frankists just ultimately conquered the world, and that the Jacob Frankâs movement was linked to, or he, he links in his lectures that movement to secret society networks, that they infiltrated the Jesuits and th- they formed alliances that formed the Illuminati.
I mean- Okay.
Malcolm Collins: But itâs stupid. He- Itâs stupid. The Sabbateans very clearly do not, and the Frankist ideology very clearly does not influence the faction of Jews that is controlling... Like, when people say the [00:25:00] Jews have a disproportionate amount of world control today, okay?
Simone Collins: Okay, but letâs, letâs get to that.
Letâs get to that. Okay? Letâs, âcause let- well, weâll never get through that. Okay. Letâs hear what he has to say. And letâs talk about that, how he talks about this Pax Judaica and Greater Israel. So what heâs trying to claim is that the long-term plan of these elites, wherever they came from, is to engineer a new world order in which Greater Israel replaces American hegemony, and then Jerusalem is the seat of global governance.
And you can also see, oh, this probably helped to fuel some of his viral popularity. Anti-Israel sentiment is growing. People like to think that thereâs this organized cabal that is very Israel-centric causing the decline of the West, you know, like, doing evil, scary things. So I think thatâs another element of what heâs saying thatâs really resonating with people.
Malcolm Collins: Right, but again, it, th- because look, there are real conspiracies you can talk about if you wanna talk about conspiracies.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: So you wanna talk about, like, okay, this is whatâs [00:26:00] actually happening, okay? Shabbatai Levi, basically nobody takes him seriously anymore. Thereâs some weird, like, Muslim Jewish sects that sort of follow him, but they donât do the antinomianist stuff anymore.
But, and this is what annoys me, because when you cloud peopleâs vision with the BS, you canât see the real. If youâve seen our track series, one of my most offensive takes, but itâs one I feel incredibly strongly about because, you know, when you follow a, an actual religious belief and you believe that some things are actually religiously true, youâve gotta call out when something is going against those.
And there was a second major antinomianist figure within Jewish history called the Baal Shem Tov. And the Baal Shem Tov p- practice, he didnât say it was antinomianism, but it was functionally, from the perspective of Jewish history, spiritual antinomianism. If you know Jewish r- rules around following people based on miracles instead of biblical knowledge, he was very big on the, âYou follow me because of the miracles.â
Like, his number one convert came, [00:27:00] clearly more learned than him. All of the most learned rab- rabbis said, âDonât follow this guy.â And then this guy came out and heâs like, âKabbalah everything.â And all the other rabbis at the time were like, âDonât do that. Thatâs, like, a dangerous book. You can maybe, maybe if youâre, like, a married man in his 30s who has studied Judaism forever, you can peek at that book.
You do not make that the foundation of your teachings.â And the Kabbalah has a lot of crazy stuff in it, okay? So anyway, he comes along and he rises the Kabbalism and, and pop mysticism within Judaism. Okay? Mm. And he actually took over large factions of the Jewish movement. And the groups that follow his teachings are the ones that completely dominate.
When youâre talking about, like, Jewish influence and Israeli influence in Western politics, it is this secondary form of antinomianism, not the type that came from Shabbatai Zevi, and it i- they have so much control that this entire video could be taken down even from pointing out that from [00:28:00] historic Jewish perspectives, from medieval Jewish perspectives, the way that the Baal Shem Tov interacted with Kabbalistic texts could be thought of as spiritualist antinomianism.
Because it go, it inverted previous Jewish teachings on how you engage with miracles and how you engage with spiritual phenomenons. So anyway, he comes in. Abeja, and these groups do control and they do want a greater Israel, and Iâm actually okay with greater Israel. When I say a greater Israel, what I mean by that is an Israel which has ability to act in any way it wants on the surrounding nations.
The countries surrounding Israel just donât have the technology to fight back against Israel anymore and Israel is okay with that, and they are now just like somebody annoys them, they kill them, right? Like, thatâs, thatâs where Israel is going and theyâre going more in that direction as they get automated drone swarms and stuff like that.
And, and I am okay with that direction for Israel because frankly, I donât really care about the other countries that are around them a particularly large amount. But the thing is that heâs right, but itâs almost [00:29:00] like heâs, heâs wrong in trying to hide the actual like, like, f- power structure of the world just enough that he sort of sends people on these shadow journeys so that they miss the real power structures that we should be fighting against.
And the whole thing about the Freemasons is just pants-on-head retarded. The- Okay.
Simone Collins: Well, letâs see what he says
Malcolm Collins: It would be truer to say Mormons- ... control the national security industry in the United States than Freemasons control the national security industry in the United States.
Simone Collins: I feel like they more staff it, they donât lead it.
But thatâs a totally separate subject. It
Malcolm Collins: is.
Simone Collins: So on the subject of greater Israel and its, its roots, he says, quote And so what will happen is then that Israel will achieve the Greater Israel Project. The Israelis believe that the Middle East was promised to their ancestor Abraham by Yahweh, their god.
If you look at the map of Greater Israel Project, it extends from the Nile to Euphrates. It encompasses Lebanon, Syria, parts of Turkey, and parts of Saudi Arabia, [00:30:00] and parts of Egypt. And then Israel will establish something called the Pax Judaica. A Pax Judaica is really the empire, a trading empire, a financial empire, a technological empire based in Jerus- Jerusalem, and they see it as fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
Do you push back against that?
Malcolm Collins: I mean, that seems to be the direction things are going. The countries around Israel are weak in relation to Israel. They appear to be becoming weaker as time goes on, and Israel is becoming stronger as time goes on.
Simone Collins: Technologically- Yeah, because as, as he quote, another quote from him, he says, âSo what does the Greater Israel Project mean?
Well, it means control of oil, trade, and technology.â He frames it basically as, as them inheriting and expanding US regional dominance in the Middle East after the US
Malcolm Collins: peaks,
Simone Collins: essentially.
Malcolm Collins: Why is this a... for me, itâs like I donât like the other cultures that are in that region. I am okay- I donât
Simone Collins: think he frames it as negative.
I just think that people who are anti-Israel are like, âYeah, and that means theyâre evil.â âCause I mean, he, heâs also talking about the decline of the [00:31:00] West.
Malcolm Collins: In fact- If Israel was actually controlled by a group of what the, what the Frankists were and what the, the the Shabbatai Zevi followers were, was, was sort of physical antinomialists as opposed to spiritual antinomialists.
If they were actual physical antinomialism and believed in, in practicing an inversion of Jewish law around morality and the physical world instead of just the way they relate to the metaphysical world I would be very, very, very concerned. I would agree that this group cannot be allowed to gain power, but they just donât.
Simone Collins: Well, he does frame them as evil. Weâre gonna have to pick this up in a second recording session since I have to get the kids. Yeah. But next I can get to how he argues that, or at least has suggested the actions during the Gaza war amount to ritual child sacrifice, and he links real-world conflicts to occult or sacrificial practices- Oh, frigging hell
attributed to Israel or [00:32:00] Jewish-adjacent elites. So weâll get to that next.
Malcolm Collins: So dumb. So dumb. Itâs- Itâs just not an efficient way to do sacrifice. If youâre doing child sacrifice, do it through something like Epstein. You donât need to do it anymore.
Simone Collins: But no, yeah, no, honestly, the, the Egyptians, they were the ones who really nailed it.
So cats were sacred, but you, you, you wanted mummified cats, and I, you know, like, people... There was a market for them. So what did people do? They created, like, some of the earliest basically factory farms for cats. And they would, they would kill them and then mummify them and then sell the cat mummies because, you know, people were like-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, if they want it, just treat gods- And
Simone Collins: they would even make-
like a factory farm
Malcolm Collins: for children ...
Simone Collins: I would just... Because this is so fun. They would forge they would forge cat mummies too. Like, so people have taken them apart, and lo and behold, it is not a mummified cat. No, itâs like, like, paste and chicken bones.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Also by the way, fun fact if you wanna get really spicy about this.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: If you ch- were a [00:33:00] true moral and material antinomialist Jew and you were going to do child sacrifices non-Jewish children would be completely pointless for the child sacrifices because they donât have the, This is like- Theyâre not
Simone Collins: w- good enough?
Malcolm Collins: No, they, they wouldnât have, like, the s- the spirit of God in them which is why, you know, only within a matrimonial Jew- Oh, âcause
Simone Collins: then what?
Chosen people or something? I donât know.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah. Mm-hmm. Basically itâs, it has to do with how Jews interpret Genesis. It doesnât really matter. The point being is that if you were an actual antinomialist Jew, you would only care about Jewish children for your sacrifices. I donât recall- Other children would basically be rotten for your perspective.
I
Simone Collins: donât think he talks about antinomialism, but I may have
Malcolm Collins: missed that. No, because he doesnât understand why it... Heâs clearly, like, approaching all of this from a very midwit perspective. And that also annoys me because, like, these are actual things that you could study and investigate and understand how they changed their history, why they have these beliefs, why they think that you should have an inversion of morality.
This stuff matters because then you can predict them. If you understand the actual theology of an antinomialist, then you can [00:34:00] say, âOh, so if theyâre doing child sacrifices, could they take random children from Gaza? Would that be any use to them?â And the answer is no, they would have to take them from other Jews or from Jews who deconverted or something.
Simone Collins: Well, there isnât a prediction fan site about your nonsense. Maybe you need to be a midwit to speak to the midwits and you wonât get a... You know, it, when you look at bell curves, the mid is the largest part.
Malcolm Collins: Yep ...
Simone Collins: youâre, youâre catering- Iâm, Iâm appealing to the wrong- ... to the wrong part of the bell curve
the wrong
Malcolm Collins: crowd.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Anyway, weâll get more to this on our next installment of Malcolm Gets Mad at Proges- Professor Jiang.
Malcolm Collins: Keeps fighting. For, for theories that donât, that donât make that are s- just flirting with reality.
Simone Collins: Yeah. All right. All
Malcolm Collins: right, love you.
Simone Collins: Love you too.
So where we left off was ritual sacrifice the Gaza War. , Yang Ming and [00:35:00] others say that Chang has suggested that actions during the Gaza War amount to ritual child sacrifice. He links real world conflict to occult and sacrificial practices that are attributed to either Israel or Jew-adjacent individuals.
Sorry, does he
Malcolm Collins: mean like ritual sacrifice or does he think that theyâre literally doing it for-
Simone Collins: The words he used were ritual child sacrifice. Heâs definitely... Heâs saying itâs ritual chi- heâs s- heâs saying itâs a cult. Heâs keep in mind though, heâs âOh, this is speculation. This is for fun.â
So he tries to flippantly discount a lot of the things that he says in the midst of his lectures of like Iâm just doing gems here. But then heâs also just making these statements. And the- Okay,
Malcolm Collins: so if Iâm gonna steel man him, okay? âCause I
Simone Collins: will steel man- let me, let- Iâll just, let me first give you a quote, his core statement on Gaza as ritual sacrifice.
This is from Secret History Number Four, and it is widely clipped. People can find this. Iâve linked to it in my show notes. Quote, [00:36:00] âWhat is really happening in Gaza is a ritual sacrifice, and this happens quite often in human history if you go back and you look at the...â And then he goes on and talks about other things.
And then he also says, these are more direct quotes from him, on the purpose and visibility of this sacrifice. Quote, âThe entire idea of this ritual sacrifice is to unite the Israeli population. And whatâs extremely disturbing and horrifying about it is that it works.â And he also contrasts it with a hypothetical secret approach.
Quote, âIsrael could do it secretly, and no one would talk about it. Instead, they choose to do this in front of the world. They want the world to hate them, because by doing this, they create the ultimate taboo. So the entire world unite against Israel, but guess what? Thatâs the, thatâs what the region, w- religion wants in the extreme form of Jewis- Jewish...â
I always screw up this word. Eschatology? Eschatology? Eschatology, I think. Es- eschatology. âIsrael will fight the entire world, and God will help Israel [00:37:00] triumph.â So as you can see, heâs not he means sacrifice. He means ritual sacrifice.
Malcolm Collins: He means- But he means it in a roundabout way. Heâs saying that theyâre- Yes
sacrificing children in aims of their greater religious objectives rather than a... Heâs trying to bait the crazies maybe. See, hereâs the-
Simone Collins: Sort of yeah. Because what heâs trying to he, yeah, heâs trying to... another way that he put it is heâs what the Israelis are doing is quite horrific, because this really is, it is really this sort of sacrifice.â
So heâs not saying it is a ritual sacrifice. Heâs saying itâs a sacrifice. Why, he says, because 37% of almost half the population of Gaza is under 18 years old. So heâs also showing okay, itâs not technically a ritual sacrifice. Itâs more just because Palestinians are really young, itâs like basically child sacrifice, but heâs still trying to-
Malcolm Collins: why are Palestinians really young, by the way?
Itâs because theyâre terrible at medical technology- ... so they donât stay alive very long, and they are breeding really rapidly, which is You know, if I was gonna be uncharitable to Israel, I would
Simone Collins: say we- no, come on. Letâs [00:38:00] use more diff- look, in places where thereâs rampant poverty and deprivation and mistreatment of humans, you often get very high birth rates, and thatâs what weâre seeing there.
Malcolm Collins: Yes.
Simone Collins: But again, heâs trying to play this up as ritual sacrifice again and again. And I think you made a really smart point there in that he is doing this to pander to conspiracy theorists while still trying to look smart and be like, âOh Iâm not actually saying that.â Candace Owens will just flat out be like I s- I talked with Charlie Kirk in a dream where heâll be like, actually-â Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: this comes across as so much slimier than just, like-
Simone Collins: Yes.
Yes ...
Malcolm Collins: straight up being a conspiracy theorist or not being one.
Simone Collins: Itâs all couched Like 47%. And he also, and heâs âOh this is like sacrifice tradition in history, like the Ephesians.â And it is he tries to make it seem like Iâm a historian. Iâm just talking, Iâm just sharing the fact- I
Malcolm Collins: love that this has happened multiple times throughout history.
Th- there is actually, child sacrifice is at least within the European tradition after Christianization, fairly rare. The only [00:39:00] instance that could come close to it that Iâm aware of is the Childrenâs Crusade. But you couldnât even argue that the Jesuits did that or see- Oh, good ... at least not Frankish Jesuits, because they didnât come around till the 1800s, and this was in the 1200s.
You, it still could be the Catholics, but not the Jesuits. And they didnât even the Catholic Church, the pope at the time, even with as corrupt as popes were back then, did not officiate the Childrenâs Crusade. It happened as a completely-
Simone Collins: What is the Childrenâs... Should I not ask?
Malcolm Collins: You donât wanna know.
Simone Collins: Okay never mind. I donât wanna know.
Malcolm Collins: But he didnât say it was a good thing, so you know, th- even that doesnât really hold. The, like I wanna go, okay, you go what religions actually do in a modern context might actually believe in child sacrifice. The two key ones that I can think of,
Simone Collins: No, hold on.
The Palestinians believe in child sacrifice. Remember that clip of that, that Palestinian woman whoâs âIâm glad my son died, in, in this war, and [00:40:00] I hope to have more children so they can die.â Who is doing this?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, the-
Simone Collins: Itâs the Palestinians. Whoâs using the children as human shields?
Itâs the Palestinians. Itâs the Palestinians who are actively engaging in child sacrifice, who are actively putting the children on front lines. Excuse me. Itâs, thatâs what makes it extra insulting. Heâs putting this on the Israelis, and the Israelis are not perfect, but the ones who are putting children in the direct line of fire are the Palestinians.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah if youâre familiar with, and I criticize Jewish eschatology regularly. I criticize Jewish metaphysics, at least of the non-Misnagdim camp, which is most Jews, âcause thatâs the Hasidic Jewish Jews. And I say things that offend them all the time. So I, going into this as harsh as I could be, right?
There is not any mainstream eschatology or metaphysical belief within Judaism where child sacrifice would be considered a good thing. You could get this in some antinomial historic sects like the Frankish- Or [00:41:00] the followers of Zabatai Levi. But even the iterations of Judaism today, which I consider to be spiritually antinomian, still have no form of that would lead to child sacrifice.
Itâs just not on their game board. So you have these historic sects that may want this, but these historic sects were integrated into the Catholic Church. They werenât integrated into Jewish tradition, and he even, he admits that. They were c- they were taken by the Francus were absorbed by the Jesuits.
They were not absorbed by mainstream Jewish society. So even if by his own conspiracy theory logic they did still exist, they would be controlling the Vatican and not Israel. If heâs saying theyâre just sacrificing children of other nations who they want to go to war with to win,â note in the Bible, this is in the Bible, that there are instances in which when you are fighting a population that is really bad because the populations that this [00:42:00] was said of in the Bible, they practice things like Jewish child sacrifice, which you could argue, given what sheâs talking about here, itâs said to kill not just the men, but the women and children as well in a few instances.
Itâs very clear commandment from God that applies to Christians as well, by the way. We have to deal with it. Presumably our God said this at some point, right? Maybe he changed his mind on things. But you could say, âOkay they have in times of war when the enemy is demonstrably evil, then you kill all of the enemyâs members.â
Okay, but thatâs not really child sacrifice. Thatâs more like a war crime, right? But I donât like the stretching here when you can just lay it out in a way that isnât conspiracy-minded and be like mainstream Judaism does want Jews to win. Mainstream, most religions want them to win. If I go into extremist Catholic eschatology, they one day want to convert everyone, right?
Convert or, this is what Catholic integralism is about. Convert or [00:43:00] kill, right? At the end of the day, everyoneâs on team for them. But theyâre not the only ones who want to do this, right? Most Protestants they may be less clear about this, but they eventually want every actually, most Protestants believe that one day that all many different Christian sects can, are, like, good enough in the same way that we have a theosophical eschatology.
So theyâre okay as long as everyoneâs Christian one day. But thatâs still pretty totalizing, right? Iâll note here that the modern Vatican actually does not one day want everyone to be Catholic because they say that I think this was at Vatican II, that like Muslims still believe a real Go- like in the real, like God that the Catholics are worshiping and that Protestants do.
Saying that theyâre like partially true religions as well, and this pissed off a lot of Catholics, and this is where you got one of the sects thatâs technically schismatic but says theyâre not schismatic and has some influencers. But the the way that I read a lot of, the historic Catholic Church wanted everything to be Catholic eventually.
But the [00:44:00] point Iâm making here is this is not unique to the Jews. Most groups eventually want everyone to be a member of their particular religion. Even the peaceful Bahaâi want this, right? Everybody wants this. This isnât a Jewish eschatology secret hush-hush thing. The only thing that might make the Jews slightly more suspect in their desire for this is that modern Jews donât think that you can convert just anyone into Judaism.
So if they eventually want the Jews to win that becomes a bit more zero-sum than the Christian sects that wanna do this through conversion. That said the Jewish movement has begun to invent all sorts of traditions to get around this with the no hide system, which in our episode we point out is just a historical fabrication.
This is on the question that breaks Judaism. We go into the no hide scam. But anyway, continue Simone.
Simone Collins: The next broad conspiracy theory, or you could argue itâs a theme of Professor Jiangâs work that I think is the probably best fodder for some peopleâs [00:45:00] suppositions that he is in, in various ways supported perhaps indirectly and perhaps even without his knowledge by the CCP, is that he has this broad belief in like Western institutions being hollowed out and controlled by hidden elites with US decline being both inevitable and deserved.
And one, one long form critique that I came across about him claims that basically his forecasts all converge on one outcome, which is American collapse. He predicts Western Civil War, the vindication of Chinese and Iranian strategic positions in a way that maps almost perfectly onto the narrative architecture of CCP soft power.
So as you can imagine, this is one of those critiques that sees this as being a, him being a CCP thing. So letâs look at some of his own quotes on this. On secret societies as the real power orchestrating shifts, he [00:46:00] says, quote, âWhat I say is that the real power base are a collection of six societies that have an eschatological view of this war, sir.
The secret societies include the Freemasons. You have a collection of six societies. They believe in a war in the Middle East. It would start a process that would culminate in the end times. This war in the Middle East will lead to the defeat of the American Empire, and this will lead to the Greater Israel project, Pax Judaica.â
And then on their role in Western decline, he says, âAs for how this happened, the issue that this is actually a plan that has been operating for centuries involving different religious group, Frankists Shabateans, Freemasonry, Knights Templar, Rosicrucians, and the Jesuits.â So what is the different secret societies, different religious organizations have been collaborating over centuries to advance a plan to about the end of the world, which we will usher in the Messianic age.
And then- Oh. Go ahead I know what youâre g- but I think I know what youâre gonna say, that heâs conflating this [00:47:00] minority Christian view that Israel needs to exist because then itâll help us bring around the end times the right way and itâll help- Thatâs
Malcolm Collins: a pretty common view among Pentecostals.
Simone Collins: Right, which I think... Okay less, less uncommon than him arguing. But
Malcolm Collins: Pentecostals I donât even think are allowed in the Freemasons. Theyâre certainly not- Oh, really? ... one of the dominant factions in the Freemasons. The Freemasons are typically more deists and mainline Protestants. They most Baptists and Pentecostals are a little too conspiracy theory brained to join the Freemasons.
That doesnât really make sense.
Simone Collins: Itâs, if youâre conspiracy theory brained, you should be cucking to join the Freemasons.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah yeah, some people do âcause they think itâs gonna theyâre gonna get access to special knowledge or whatever, and then theyâre like, âOh, no, itâs just old men.â
But okay. Letâs actually If heâs not an idiot, whatâs his meta objective? His meta objective is to use parts of true information to try to turn American sentiment against our most useful [00:48:00] allies. D- particularly right now if- Oh,
Simone Collins: if heâs an agent of the CCP or if he wants to advance-
Malcolm Collins: Right.
He wants to advance the cause, because Iran
Simone Collins: is a pretty good trial. See, I donât actually think thatâs whatâs going on. I think maybe the CCP is openly signal boosting him because they like his narrative and they find that it works in concert with their goals. But I actually think heâs just out to get a, his book deal and launch his own stuff and make money from that.
Malcolm Collins: Potentially. But the thing thatâs weird to me is greater... If weâre allied with Israel, greater Israel is good for the United States. Greater Israel means a bunch of places in the Middle East that donât like us very much become a part of one of our only growing and s- really ideologically, strategically aligned allies in the world right now becomes bigger.
And Iâd go further, which is to say, I agree with him. Greater Israel seems to be on track to happen, right? Because the only thing thatâs really keeping [00:49:00] Israel from just going out and killing everyone it doesnât like and taking the land is Europe, and Europe is declining in power. And outside of Europe, the thing thatâs preventing them are the progressive Israelis, but the progressive Israelis, if you look at their marches, like one of my Israeli friends was saying to, to this to me, they look like senior citizen marches.
You look at the conservative marches and theyâre all young people, right? We know what the next generation is. And it-
Simone Collins: Gosh, thatâs so true. Know Kings looks so old.
Malcolm Collins: Oh my gosh ... it is the same with the United States. Yeah. The groups that would want to reign in Israel from creating greater Israel really, it- even if youâre like an American first and youâre, like, cut off military aid to Israel, which Iâm 100% for, by the way, we should cut off all economic aid to Israel.
Even if youâre like that, you... And Israel then started conquering its neighbors, youâre not gonna wanna go in and stop them. And yet I hear the same people who are like, âIâm mad because we are intervening in Iran right now,â then on, on their same shows fantasizing about America going in and conquering Israel.
And itâs bro, so youâre not against us [00:50:00] intervening in the Middle East. Youâre not against foreign wars. You just want them to be for your political agenda, right? Which is So f*****g silly and stupid, frankly. And I had on one of our comments recently people were being like, âWhy do you support the Jews when they majority vote Democrat?â
The Jews that I support are not the reformed Jews that create this statistic. They are the conservative orthodox
Speaker 4: According to Pew, 75% of Orthodox Jews vote Republican. Keep in mind, these are the Jews that are actually having children that are actually going to be representative in future generations that if we want to get along with the Jews, we have to find a way to partner with because they are one of the groups that is intergenerationally relevant and they are wildly conservative.
And not only are they wildly conservative, but they are disproportionate populations in many swing states like Florida, which makes it incredibly stupid to antagonize them if youâre right wing.
Malcolm Collins: Jews who [00:51:00] are productive. Not all of them. I donât like the parasitic ones, right? And that faction of Jews does vote conservative. Theyâve long been one of the pillars of conservative voting blocks in places like Florida and stuff like that.
I... I donât even know where people are getting this from. But anyway, continue, Samout.
Simone Collins: I could read more quotes about the Western decline thing, but I itâs honestly been in, built into so many of the other things weâve read about. And so I wanna finish up in terms of his general c- top conspiracy themes with his whole thing on psychohistory and mystical prediction.
He explicitly invokes Isaac Asimovâs fictional concept of psychohistory. Again, fictional concept. And claims to use structural history and game theory to predict the future. Though I should note that in his lectures on game theory, he doesnât demonstrate a mastery of game theory concepts.
So Iâm not really... Again, like a lot of this is like spamming- Explain what he
Malcolm Collins: gets wrong about game theory.
Simone Collins: Whatâs he not getting? Weâll get into that in a little bit, âcause Iâm gonna discuss that in, in a bit. But anyway he basically [00:52:00] treats th- this fictional device of like psychohistory and game theory as a scientific method and like this, an academic thing when itâs not.
Some debunkers also allege that he talks about listening to the voice of the universe or a higher power that guides his predictions, which they argue pushes his material from speculative analysis into quasi-mystical prophecy, which you definitely see come through in the way that many of his followers regard him.
Theyâre really like, âOh, you gotta check out this Professor Jiang. Heâs been calling some stuff.â Oh, never mind that like he gets a ton of stuff wrong.
Malcolm Collins: He, what he doesnât... I have not heard a single impressive prediction from him yet. Yeah. When people are like, âOh, he calls for stuff.â
He said Trump would win the election. I said Trump would win the election. I donât go around
Simone Collins: acting like a- Yeah, whereâs your two million followers on YouTube, Malcolm?
Malcolm Collins: He said that there was a chance that the US would go to war with Iran. Every single analyst that I watch or listen to has been saying [00:53:00] that since Trump came into office.
Simone Collins: Dude, watch Kum- Trump talking about Iran in the â80s. Like
Malcolm Collins: Yes, he said he wanted to... he said literally on the campaign trail that he planned to bomb Iran. I do not know... The people who think, the... And then you look whenever he does make an out there conspiracy theory theyâre always super wrong.
Simone Collins: Yeah, like quite uninformed. So it is, But anyway, things that he said though about psychohistory. He says, âPsychohistory is the idea that the future can be predicted, and if it can be predicted, then it be con- can be controlled and harnessed for the betterment of humanity. In his Foundation series, I- Isaac Asimov introduces the science of psychohistory.â
Yes, this is him- Itâs a, the Foundation series- Okay, continue ... itâs a sci-fi- Off the reservation. Yeah. It is really possible to predict the future by mathematically modeling historical development. Itâs not by the way, anyway, just-
Malcolm Collins: It does seem-
Simone Collins: On AI and modeling ...
Malcolm Collins: what heâs saying here, which is funny.
Heâs trying to now make it look plausible by being [00:54:00] like, âOh what I really mean is you just mathematically model historic events and you can-â
Simone Collins: No, like literally thatâs what a character does in F- in the Foundation series. The, it starts off with basically this academic professor whoâs special.
Heâs fig- figured out the formula. And the problem w- in narratively with the Foundation series is basically this professor has fig- figured out the formula, and then he gets exiled to the far reaches of the universe because he predicts the downfall of the empire that has grown in this futuristic world.
And the empire does fall and thatâs the key thing. Itâs called Foundations because he works to build this, like-
Malcolm Collins: I under- look, Simone, youâve explained this before. I think youâve explained enough of it at this point. Okay. That he works to build a counter civilization. Anyway,
Simone Collins: this is all stupid- Yes
and I hate it. So letâs- Nope ...
Malcolm Collins: go ahead ... but hold on here. Heâs saying something that is both profoundly stupid and something that is both so obvious that no one would challenge it. Okay. One, heâs basically saying you can use history to gain some predictive capacity over future events. Yes, everybody agrees on that,
Simone Collins: right?
Like- It helps, yeah. It helps to be informed by history. Yes. [00:55:00] History is worth studying, 100%. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: It gives you predictive capability on future events. That is
Simone Collins: not- Som- somewhat ...
Malcolm Collins: mystical. That is not the mathematical equation to predicting history. Thatâs just history as a discipline. Continue.
Simone Collins: Oh hold on.
Theyâve been bathed. They were, they just went into the creek fully clothed, like, all, all the way. Toasty was freezing. But you know what? It sounds like
Malcolm Collins: you had fun, though.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Thatâs how you know itâs a good day, so.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, I wanna hear more of this Professor Zhang stuff.
Simone Collins: Right. So weâve gone over the, you know, his, his various things about the Pax Judaica and the secret societies, bringing about the decline and fall of Western civilization, and all of that, right? I think one way that you like to calibrate the competency of people is by hearing their takes on something that you have thought a lot or read a lot about.
Mm-hmm. So I thought maybe youâd be interested in hearing the highlights from his lecture on AI. Are you interested?
Malcolm Collins: [00:56:00] Okay.
Simone Collins: He, he wants to couch first his analysis on AI as a general concept as intellectual exploration and that he, he acknowledges that he often oversimplifies and that his readings of texts like Paradise Lost and the, the Kabbalah, because thatâs a good sign, are minority interpretations used to build broader narratives.
The, the core thesis that he wanted to summarize from his prior class before talking about AI is that to understand history and geopolitics you have to take extremist religious beliefs seriously because fanatical eschatological frame frameworks and ideologies often drive great powers behavior.
Which I donât think is true but that is what he thinks is true. So in terms of AI-
Malcolm Collins: no, hold on. This is partially true. There are some Jews that are driven by the real Jewish ob- objective, right? Sure. Like there are some Catholics driven by, like, a real long-term Catholic objective. I even would argue that most people who have [00:57:00] a real faith are actually driven by the, even techno-puritanism,
Simone Collins: the- Yeah, but people in the end within, within complex systems act in alignment with their incentives, and their incentives first and foremost are to accrue resources and avoid punishment.
And you know what? Iâm, Iâm sorry, but es- es- I disagree ... eschatological frameworks donât fit into that. I disagree. Because look, the, the first, the first goal that anyone whoâs even a religious zealot is typically going to pursue is, âAh, well, the best thing I can do is to accrue power,â often in the form of money or resources, âso that I can have more influence for my agenda.â
Malcolm Collins: But in your world view here doesnât explain what you were just talking about, where the mother is happy that her son died fighting Israel, where you regularly- Well,
Simone Collins: she, she didnât have a shot at any resources. So her only resource is her son, and sheâs gladly- No, this is- Well, and I guess religious, like, alignment probably, like-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Rel-
Simone Collins: There
Malcolm Collins: is-
Simone Collins: Resources in this world. Sheâs banking on resources [00:58:00] in the next world.
Malcolm Collins: And thatâs eschatology. No. Thatâs extremist eschatology. That is what drives a lot of peopleâs behavior
Simone Collins: Okay. Point made. I donât think thatâs what drives most people who are in power now, and sheâs not in power
Malcolm Collins: I think it drives Netanyahuâs behavior
Simone Collins: Mm.
I donât know.
Malcolm Collins: But, but anyway
Simone Collins: Iâm dubious. People in the comments will weigh in and tell me how the woman is wrong once again.
Malcolm Collins: It drives my behavior- I
Simone Collins: know,
Malcolm Collins: Tex ... it drives your behavior. My behavior is driven much more by an eschatological framework than
Simone Collins: it is- My behavior is driven by autism, as you know, which is why I do all sorts of things that are not in anyoneâs best interest, but You know, the dishwasher has to be loaded
Malcolm Collins: a
Simone Collins: certain
Malcolm Collins: way My veneer is completely driven by an eschatological framework- Oh, Iâm-
for where I want humanity to go.
Simone Collins: Welcome to your world.
Malcolm Collins: And the, the... I mean, Iâm very upfront about it, right? The only place where I may not be upfront about things is how ruthless I would go if I were the majority [00:59:00] player,
Speaker 5: Welp, after yesterdayâs episode, it may be a little bit more clear how far Iâd go. , Actually, I was in part inspired to do that episode by doing this one, and I was like, you know what? If I die and the techno-puritans start to grow, I think that, , I, I need to bake this in and not just have this part be in my head, , to be like, look, get along with outsiders as much as you can.
Do not disparage a group unless you absolutely know that you cannot live alongside them. But once that becomes the case, they need to be removed in their entirety. , At, at least the ones that you do not integrate into your culture. And always leave that to be an option for those that are strong or ideologically aligned until itâs time to make the move.
, And I think that this is, , a fairly sane way to operate, right? The idea of, oh, this group will always be nice until we push them too far. Then as many outsiders Iâd be like, âWell, letâs just not push them too [01:00:00] hard.â , Assuming they ever become a big group
Malcolm Collins: if I had power. But I, I donât right now. I donât have systemic power, so itâs better for me to say we should all get along, right?
Simone Collins: Okay. Okay. Anyway Anyway, the, the source material that Professor Jiang uses to talk about AI is f- fortunately not If, If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies, but rather Empire of AI, which is a book about OpenAI by Karen Ho. Oh, Hao, sorry. Karen Hao. Hao argues in her book that OpenAIâs original idealism that AGI benefits all of humanity has turned into a formula for consolidating power and centralizing talent around a quasi-religious mission, which, okay, that, like, checks out.
Iâm okay- Yeah ... with that argument. And that theyâre pursuing relentless global expansion, like a trillion dollar data centers, and constantly referring to AGI to maintain control. What he argues is that OpenAIâs true but unspoken goal is to create God, and he interprets leaders like [01:01:00] Brockman and Skotzber as trying to build a de facto deity, which he calls insane, evil, and stupid.
He posits that Sam Altmanâs interest in AI c- companions like sex robots is about maximizing usage, intensity, and dependency, not about human flourishing, and that itâs part of a drive to make AI omnipresent in everyday life. Any thoughts on h- his thesis so far?
Malcolm Collins: So heâs just doing what he does with his other theses, where he says something that is meant to be provocative, but is actually a very uninteresting statement.
Yeah. Everything he is saying is profoundly uninteresting and unintelligent.
Titan: Killing it.
Malcolm Collins: All he is saying is that I, I, I assume, like assuming he doesnât mean theyâre trying to create a literal god, which every time he makes one of these theories he always backs it off, you know- Yeah ... the literal interpretation.
Yeah. And what he means is theyâre trying to create a super powerful intelligence that runs the majority of the [01:02:00] worldâs economy. Of course, of course thatâs part of the goal, right? You know, theyâre a company. Theyâre making a product. They want people to use it. They want it to be maximally impactful.
Yeah. And this is what it has the capability to do. So itâs just, Iâd say itâs not wrong yet, itâs just profoundly an uninteresting observation.
Simone Collins: He also, in terms of his understanding of AI, traces chat box to Weizenbaumâs ELIZA to argue that systems like ChatGPT are mainly performing pattern matching and conversational tricks that exploit our tendency to hallucinate agency and meaning rather than
Malcolm Collins: processing the- Oh, duh, really?
Thatâs how, thatâs how an AI coded my entire website for me? Ooh. Thatâs how it made very sophisticated code for me?
Speaker 6: By the way, the, , VTuber creation is now working, the, the VTuber Pro pathway. So if you wanna make a VTuber avatar... Now, obviously, after I release the feature, it gives it a bunch of updates to [01:03:00] improve it over the next couple weeks because thatâs what Iâm gonna be doing is polishing it, but it, it works now.
And with the, free editing software, itâs just a bit of a pain to get all the software. Youâre probably gonna have to use an AI to, to fiddle with it. But it, yeah, it comes pre-rigged and everything.
Speaker 7: For those unfamiliar, this is our website, rfab.ai. That is R-F-A-B.A-I. Um, we offer everything from AI chats, uh, to, you know, you can, you can do local encrypted savings of your AI chats. You can do hands-only AI chats. You can do vibe coding. You can do AI agents. , You can do, , AI-based trading card games.
You can do, , searches where it takes various AIs and it checks your search against the outputs of other AIs that search online to give you results without hallucinations. You can do based AI where every AI prompt is sent with like a side note to it to keep it from becoming too progressive or woke, whatever you wanna say.
, You can do, , our image generation has gotten really good. Itâs one of the most diverse [01:04:00] image generations out there that uses pretty much all the top models that you wanna use, but with a lot more tools. , Anything you want, rfab.ai. Thatâs Reality Fabricator. You can just search it too.
Malcolm Collins: It j- just, yeah, it is just pattern matching, but most of human thought is just pattern matching.
Simone Collins: I know. I know. I know.
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs how you make art. Thatâs how you make music. Thatâs how you write books.
Yeah. You pattern match with a little bit of external directionality, but the external directionality is mostly superficial in nature. If I am going and I am creating the next great art piece of the whatever style, most of what I am doing is pattern matching to that style. If Iâm trying to create a new style of art, okay, maybe Iâm not pattern matching there, but really you typically are.
Youâre taking it from some idea or itâs even, like, anti-pattern matching, where youâre like, âWell, Iâm just gonna try to do something new. Iâm gonna make a block, a red block, and Iâm gonna call that [01:05:00] art.â Oh, you ... Th- mm. Sorry, I just hate when people try to downplay how much of what they call thought is pattern matching.
Simone Collins: Mm. Hmm. Yeah. Anyway his take on AI risk is that attempts to make AI that solve all problems are gonna result in things like, âOh, well, okay, just make everyone happy, eliminate suffering,â and then AI will just kill all people. Like, thatâs kind of his, his take on X risk. He doesnât- Thatâs a really
Malcolm Collins: dumb take on X risk.
Simone Collins: Yeah. He also stresses that data centers devour water and electricity and finance while remaining easy physical targets. He, he talks about, like, physical attacks in the Middle East as early signs that that infrastructure canât really be defended at a global scale. In terms of the US versus China with AI, and this is what I would pay extra attention to if weâre trying to determine whether or not he is either directly or indirectly being sponsored by [01:06:00] the CCP he says that publicly, US firms frame Chinese AI as existential, as a threat to attract money and political support.
But privately, he says American and Chinese entities are collaborating because Chinaâs pervasive surveillance and classroom monitoring yield the clean data the US companies want but cannot easily gather domestically. Ah. What I appreciate about this is at least- Ah ... this is the first, this is the first novel argument Iâm hearing.
Iâve not heard someone be like- But why would
Malcolm Collins: China would have any advantage in AI?
Simone Collins: Yes. The, the mass- Oh, China, China is, has a mass surveillance state, and itâs clean data. And so, you know, the, the US needs them for training data.
Malcolm Collins: I, I have seen evidence that US firms are using lots of Chinese data because-
Simone Collins: Interesting
Malcolm Collins: I have repeatedly in recent AI work Iâve been doing seen Chinese characters pop up randomly.
Simone Collins: Interesting.
Malcolm Collins: Ooh ... Iâve heard other people have seen, had Hebrew characters pop up randomly as well.
Simone Collins: Well, well, well.
Malcolm Collins: Which would make sense. Weâre [01:07:00] collabing with China and Israel.
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: weâre really cross-stealing.
Itâs where China tries to steal from us, we sometimes get data from them. Itâs... The, the whole thing is, is like yes, they need money, but they donât act as defensive against China as they would if they saw them as an existential threat. Mm-hmm. Itâs more like everyoneâs just running as fast as they can with this particular race.
Simone Collins: Totally.
Malcolm Collins: And thatâs where we are, and there just arenât that many true trade secrets in the AI space.
Simone Collins: Where I fall with him and, and this being or not being CCP propaganda, I think it doesnât hurt what I think the CCP is doing, which is like, okay, stoke fears among US citizens about AI and get them to slow down the creation of data centers, et cetera.
Which is, a whole episode Iâm thinking about doing is, is, is, is data center fear being astroturf? Because already thereâs, thereâs the sort of homegrown fear, but I feel like itâs being, itâs getting extra fuel that might be coming from the CCP. Because when you look at just the stark difference [01:08:00] between the way that people in China view AI versus the way that people in the US view AI, I feel like thereâs clear Thereâs a, thereâs a skew that suggests that a more interesting story there.
Like, why, why is everyone in China, like, pretty cool with AI? Like, âOh, this is probably gonna be good.â Whereas, like, in the US weâre like, âItâs gonna end the world.â Something, something is going on. Anyway, though, so itâs not incompatible with that. He certainly sh- framing AI as a negative thing. He also has a whole thing on AI and the occult.
He links the project name Stargate to the CIAâs historical Operation Stargate, which was on psychic phenomena and, and to sci-fi depictions of dimensional portraits, interpreting modern AI data centers as literal portals designed to summon demons/aliens from other dimensions. I mean, I think this is one of those things where, like, he tr- he...
And this is very clever on his part, âcause clearly itâs working. It sort of brings in in keyword stuff with conspiracy language without really explicitly being like he- [01:09:00] theyâre using it to bring in demons. Heâs like, well, like demons, you know? âCause A- theyâre trying to make an AI god, so itâs like AI demons, you know?
Yeah, I
Malcolm Collins: think he tried to b- frame it as sacrilegious to make a, a machine that could solve world hunger or could, that could solve jobs, that could solve ev- like most of the worldâs problems. Which is, Iâm not saying that thatâs what theyâre trying to do, but, like, that is one potential outcome of creating a super intelligent AI that takes most human work away.
It is, it is a outcome that has significant societal risks that weâre gonna have to figure out how to get around. But to just frame all of these things as... This is the trick that he runs, which really is a stupid and annoying trick to me. Itâs just-
Simone Collins: Well, effective though. Letâs, letâs be clear here that
Malcolm Collins: it works
technically theyâre trying to build something that you could argue is godlike. And now because theyâre trying to build God, thatâs demonic and anti-biblical. Itâs like, what? You just said itâs a technical whatever analogous thing. Theyâre not literally trying to build God [01:10:00] here.
Simone Collins: Yeah, though he does say, like, this is sort of, this is supposed to, as of the time of this recording be sort of the first in his AI series.
And he, he says that the rest of his semester... âCause heâs really trying to... Again, heâs using language to, like, frame this as a youâre a student in his class. That heâs going to trace how this occult AI project is going to unfold and why he believes it will end in the destruction of the world. Yeah
and that he, he says that it could be- Oh, yeah, heâs not
Malcolm Collins: a CCP plant. Heâs trying to get the US to back off AI. Anyone whoâs trying to get the US to back off of AI, I am immediately suspicious of.
Simone Collins: Well, and you had, you had said to me the other day, youâre like, âWell, thereâs no way he could possibly be in China.â
As far as we know, he is in China. He teaches- Really? ... a course on Western philosophy at Moonshot Academy in Beijing. His LinkedIn profile lists his location as Haidian District, Beijing, China. His X profile- Oh, then he definitely is a CCP plant ... lists his location as Beijing, China. Multiple recent media descriptions in 2026 call him a Beijing-based educator or say [01:11:00] heâs based in Beijing so-
Malcolm Collins: Sorry, I need to take a step back for people who donât understand why this would be the case.
In China, you, it is illegal to have a YouTube account. You cannot have a YouTube account.
Simone Collins: Is that-
Malcolm Collins: If you
Simone Collins: s- ... true? No, because then how did the ADV Chinaâs guys do it before they-
Malcolm Collins: They, they had to run away- ... left for Thailand ... from the country.
Speaker 8: Note, I double-checked this to make sure I was getting it right, and yes, it is extremely illegal to run a YouTube channel in China. , YouTube is blocked by the Great Firewall, so the only way you could have one is by using a VPN, which are extremely, extremely illegal if you are a Chinese citizen. A lot of foreigners are unaware of this because the rules arenât enforced that strictly for foreigners.
But yes, , th- China certainly has to, like, legally approve of everything heâs putting out. Otherwise, they could just shut him down
Simone Collins: Right. But like before, for a very long time they were very prominent.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, they just did it with VPNs and stuff. Nobody cares. Basically you get popular enough, and heâs definitely in the range where somebody in the CCP- Not popular enough ... has approved this. Mm. You, everyone above a certain follower list is- Well,
Simone Collins: basically, you know, the, [01:12:00] the mere fact that he hasnât been shut down is proof that the CCP thinks itâs, his message is effective for their ends.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Well, thatâs telling.
Malcolm Collins: They would literally shut him down if not. Heâs
Simone Collins: using
Malcolm Collins: the C-
Simone Collins: If, yeah. So they, yeah- Yeah, basically ... basically, like, theyâre not enforcing a law, which you say exists, I didnât know about this law because it, it is in their best interest to not enforce this law.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Okay. Anyone you see whoâs in China and on the internet today, is, is, is doing CCP work Oh Right?
Simone Collins: Like- Wow. Okay, well, there you have it. I mean, thatâs Malcolmâs theory then, and I will, I will, I will give you two other YouTubersâ theories, like in, in short version to sort of give where, where other people think this guy is or why, why they think heâs big when it doesnât exactly make sense or fully add up.
Thereâs this guy on YouTube called Jose, just Jose. And basically his argument is that [01:13:00] heâs spamming the smart professor signal. He did this video called Professor Cengâs Broken Classroom in which he argues that Cengâs predictive history and game theory lectures are not a series of education, but narrative-driven speculation thatâs riddled with factual errors that people believe to be credible because his lectures are packaged in the aesthetics of academia to create this veneer of authority.
And some of his choice factual errors that Jose highlights in, in his overview is Holocaust denial and claims that no good idea came through the scientific method, which- Oh my God. Itâs
Malcolm Collins: profoundly stupid.
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: it, and, and that is profoundly stupid if he actually said that.
Simone Collins: Yeah, he did.
He included the clip in his... I watched the, the full video. He, the clip is, itâs there. And he cites the- To talk about this dynamic, he cites the Dr. Fox lecture, which I hadnât heard about before. But itâs this experiment in which this charismatic actor was presented [01:14:00] deliberately as a, a, a f- like, fancy, smart professor, and then delivered a content-free, jargon-laden lecture as Mr.
or Dr. Myron L. Fox, and then still received this highly positive evaluation from a professional audience suggesting that basically acting like youâre a smart professor and using professorial words can just max, m- mask a complete lack of, of substance in whatâs actually being said. I mean- And this was, this was done in 1973, so this is a well-known dynamic.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. That is I mean, he appears to be kind of full of himself, if Iâm gonna be honest. I donât know if this is, like, to trick people or anything like that. I just think heâs sorta arrogant like this, right? Like, I think that this is just sort of how he judges self-worth is this sort of, like, pseudo-mystical history stuff.
Basically-
Simone Collins: Well, Iâll tell you what. My whole theory, and, like, my hot take about him is that basically he is the modern-day Jeffrey Epstein of China. Jeffrey Epstein was [01:15:00] a you know, he was really good at, like, convincing people that he was super smart, and without really any serious qualifications ended up teaching math at an elite high school in New York.
What is this but an elite high school in Beijing? And then he started using that and the connections he got through the school and through other places to get into this role and to get into that role, and I think thatâs exactly what Professor Jiang is doing. And if you fall for Professor Jiang, you would fall for Jeffrey Epstein.
And Iâm not saying Professor Jiang has some other weird, creepy stuff going on. Iâm just saying- That this is the c- itâs the game. It is the same exact game that Jeffrey Epstein- Yeah, faking
Malcolm Collins: being an educator, right?
Simone Collins: Faking- Yeah, and faking being smart, and faking being, like, really erudite, and like, oh, like, basically spamming people with all this stuff until they...
Kind of fake it until you- you make it into these circles and actually build some real... I mean, Jeffrey Epstein did it through building, like, dirt on people and literally implicating them in, like, financial crimes and then he kind of got them. And itâs-
Malcolm Collins: itâs funny if you contrast him with us, [01:16:00] right? So he has
Simone Collins: no- Yeah, we- we performatively stupid, Max.
Yeah, we- We- we- we do things that make us look bad. So the reason why you watch us still is âcause our ideas, our ideas actually have merit you know?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, we- we come on air, we pretend to be, like, racist Luddites. Iâll put the- the racist clip here, right? And in actuality, I have a graduate degree from Stanford in a- an MBA, right?
Which is the hardest of the graduate degrees to get into in Stanford. Harder than most of their PhD, I think any of their PhD programs. M- mostly because the effects it has on your life are much better. Yeah,
Simone Collins: make- makes more money well,
Malcolm Collins: for some people. Simone... And itâs the hardest MBA in the world to get into.
Itâs harder than Harvard by a country mile. Itâs, like, I think 30% harder or something. It- the Simone- my undergrad is from St. Andrews, which is often ranked the top university in the UK in neuroscience. I have been published in the field of neuroscience. I worked in actually doing neuroscience, doing psychology work, and at the Smithsonian Museum [01:17:00] of Natural History, where I still have an exhibit on display.
Literally the top museum on earth. Maybe only, I mean, if youâre talking about, like, the world of academia, maybe only equivalated to, like, the British Museum. The Smithsonian
Simone Collins: Museumâs awesome, yeah.
Malcolm Collins: And then Simone has her graduate degree from Cambridge, right? Both of us have worked in, like, the halls- Well, he went to-
the halls of power ...
Simone Collins: a ni- he got a BA from a nice university, right? So,
Malcolm Collins: you know, like in English- I, I know, but what Iâm saying is, is that, like, our ideas, our theories that we have developed are taught at universities like Stanford.
Simone Collins: Yeah, but we donât stand in front of a fricking whiteboard and are like, âIâm Professor Collins.
Let me give you a lecture in this semester of my performative class.â Yeah, we donât do that.
Malcolm Collins: And Iâve noticed
Simone Collins: that a lot of- Because we, we donât use pocket sand to distract you into believing us.
Malcolm Collins: Dr- like, I mean, he, he reminds me of Drexel Friedman, right?
Simone Collins: If- I donât know who that is ...
Malcolm Collins: Lex Friedman,
Oh,
Simone Collins: Lex.
Oh, gee,
Malcolm Collins: right. Lex Friedman, who pretends that he has any connection [01:18:00] to Yale, and he has no serious connection to them. He got his degree from Drexel. He got his graduate degree from Drexel. Heâs Drexel Friedman. He is not a particularly intelligent person. He just puts on an act like heâs a smart person connected to...
Wait, it, it, no, itâs not Yale. Itâs MIT, right? Like, itâs, itâs- I canât remember ... it, it, th- this sort of laundered... And keep in mind, we have acted in ways which he hasnât, I don- I donât know if he has, but it would prevent us from being hired by most of the institutions that our accreditations would give us access to.
Titan: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: In part because we just sort of came out here, and weâre like I wanna, you know, tell as much as I can tell about the truth of how things are actually functioning to society at this point.â
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Right? Like, I
Simone Collins: want to make the world- Well, and we, we, we get uniquely mad- ... see the truth. Yeah ... when people, like, try to signal in this way.
Like, another person who does this kind of thing is Eliezer Yudkowsky, who manipulates signals like moral outrage, and this wunderkind branding-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah ...
Simone Collins: and gatekeeping and word selection to appear authoritative on various issues, despite getting key details or fundamentals wrong, like, quite [01:19:00] frequently. I know.
So-
Malcolm Collins: I mean, we get things wrong, but we generally- Oh, yeah ... try to update and correct when we do. Iâm, like, attentive to when fans notice we got something-
Simone Collins: Well, and, like, between your genuine mispronunciations and our, like, jokes and, and admit- admission of bumbling and everything, I think itâs clear weâre not, like, pretending to be super smart.
Weâre not gatekeeping, like, âOh, like, youâre just wrong âcause youâre m- youâre uninformed.â Like, we donât use a lot of the rhetorical manipulation tactics or semiotic manipulation tactics that these people do, which is why this is uniquely irksome for us. And one reason why we like vice signaling and rage baiting is itâs a way of saying, âWeâre not tricking you into believing weâre critical, credible to, to, like, high production quality or gatekeeping language or academic trappings.â
We make ourselves hateable and weird so that when you take our argument seriously, you know itâs based on the merits of the arguments rather than any trust in or respect for us, and thatâs really [01:20:00] important. And thatâs, I mean, I think thatâs also why people trust and respect ultimately and more fundamentally people like Asmongold and people like a lot of the VTubers who are like, âWhat?
Like, Iâm, you know- Iâm like some anthropomorphic thing. You know? Like, you know, you donât have to like bend you- But this
Malcolm Collins: is why performative racism is important and useful-
Simone Collins: Okay ...
Malcolm Collins: in the modern system, right? Youâre saying- Iâm gonna
Simone Collins: lose
Malcolm Collins: my mind ... oh, not that he doesnât do it. I mean, clearly heâs very anti-
Jewish, right? Anti-Catholic. He might be more anti-Catholic than us in that he thinks that the Jesuits who control the Vatican are one of his Illuminati players who wanna end the world. Mm-hmm. Right? I, I, Yeah, Iâm just really unimpressed. I donât think, I havenât heard a single interesting idea from him.
His predictions are not bold. Like Peter Zeihan, I have problems with, like, where Peter Zeihan has gone post this latest Trump election. Oh. He seems to have completely fallen off. But he made genuinely impressive predictions. But people who, who
Simone Collins: followed him really closely, they say it was Jan 6th. Like, apparently he sort of lost his mind after Jan 6th.
Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: Jan 6th, lost his mind. But before Jan 6th, he made [01:21:00] really, w- Russia attacking the Ukraine was not on a lot of peopleâs bingo cards, okay? Mm-hmm. That was on his bingo cards, okay? He has made impressive predictions, all right?
Simone Collins: Yeah, like, actually, like the Strait of Hormuz closure right now, like, and the, the fact that so much of peopleâs lives have been disrupted by the fact that you know, American actions have led to global trade being disrupted and, and America not being willing to basically maintain global, like, shipping routes is, is something he called, and The End of the World is Just the Beginning.
Heâs way more prophetic, just, you know, flaws and all, than Professor J, for sure.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And Professor J, I like, I just... Yeah, I hate this whole, âOh, look at all these predictions heâs made,â and itâs like tomorrow the sky will be blue. Itâs like, thatâs not a-
Simone Collins: Well, one thing that Jose points out is like, okay, sure, yeah, he predicted that Trump was going to win the election, but he was also like, âWell, Trump is gonna win the election and Nikki Haleyâs gonna be his vice president.â
And he only like passingly [01:22:00] mentions JD Vance but not in any serious capacity. And this i- Not only, you know, makes his, his, you know, full prediction incorrect, but also it was, it was poorly informed, because that was after the point at which Trump had on Truth Social- Well, I mean, thatâs a bold prediction.
I give him ... posted saying- ... itâs impressive ... âI am not going to make Vick- or Nikki Haley my vice president. Sheâs great, but sheâs not gonna be the VP.â So not only did he predict the wrong thing, he also, like, could have probably made a better guess if he was just a little more informed.
Malcolm Collins: So- So, Simone, can you go to, was there anything else you... Because I remember you, you wanted to talk about how he got something wrong before.
Simone Collins: There, there are
Malcolm Collins: several.
Simone Collins: Oh my God.
Malcolm Collins: His game theory- Hold on ... getting wrong. I
Simone Collins: wanna- Oh, yeah. Okay, let me jump to that. Because letâs see. Jose made so many... If you go to my show notes, you can see all the things that Jose...
You can also just watch this video again, thatâs it. Letâs see. Oh, yes. So Jose argues that Cenk uses game theory as a branding device. Do you just wanna crawl [01:23:00] around over here, Joanna? What do you want? Okay,
Malcolm Collins: so, on Game Theory- Game Theory, by the way, is not impressive or difficult to understand.
Itâs, itâs really not Game Theory is incredibly simplistic, g- generally speaking. Well, anyways. In terms of, like, the greater academic theories that a person may need to grok. If somebody is going out and being like, âI did this with Game Theory,â itâs like, itâs like hearing, âI did this with tic-tac-toe logic.â
Simone Collins: Well, yes, but he uses it nevertheless to confer legitimacy on what are essentially stories that he makes on how the world works, not actually game theoretic models. So not only does he try to use game theory, but heâs just like, âGame theory.â Itâs kind of like, when whatâs-his-face declares bankruptcy Michael Scott dec- declares bankruptcy.
Yeah. And itâs like, âI declare bankruptcy,â and has, like, no understanding of the concept, and that is kind of what Jiang is doing. âCause w- what, what Jose points out is that he, he gives a dating game example when he talks about game theory, starting with five boys and girls, and then he quickly spirals into claims that womenâs [01:24:00] status obsession is killing civilization and that women are responsible for creating incels, showing âthe gameâ is just a vehicle for his own views.
And he constantly lists three factors-
Malcolm Collins: Well, hold on. Those things are kind of true. Itâs important that you call out whatâs true. Well, those
Simone Collins: things are true-
Malcolm Collins: Womenâs
Simone Collins: obsession with status- ... but theyâre not game theoretic models ...
Malcolm Collins: is, no, but itâs not game theory, but the, it is true.
Simone Collins: Itâs true, but no, yeah, but if youâre doing a lecture on game theory, you canât just be like, âIâm talking about game theory.
Oh, man, women are horrible incels,â or something. He constantly lists three factors: genes, wealth, status focus and clarity, resolve, intelligence, crime, science, but never shows how theyâre measured or weighed which undercuts the pretense of any sort of formal modeling. He just wants to sort of use these as narrative birds.
And then he explicitly downplays math and emphasizes intuition and speculation while telling students that they should make imaginative leaps that are not backed up by any evidence which is the opposite of what [01:25:00] a game theory class should encourage. Like, this is, itâs not about narrative-
Malcolm Collins: I mean, itâs not entirely dissociated from game theory.
Iâd say this other guy is overreaching a bit. The way people- I donât think so ... date could be modeled with game theory logic, right? Heâs just not using any classical game theory modeling that Iâm aware of here. He appears to be using red pill modeling. True. Which is not inaccurate, itâs just not game theory.
Simone Collins: Yeah. And Jiang also just in general has a very big tendency to cherry-pick and simplify history to fit his narratives. I do that. He tries, yeah, you do. He, he tries to critique science, including cosmology and evolution and psychology but then every time he does, it reveals a, a lack of basic understanding.
But then he uses that ignorance to argue that science is fundamentally flawed. And- I, a
Malcolm Collins: lot of people do that. Oh. I donât really hold that against him.
Simone Collins: Then you, you, I, I would if you, if you try to use that as some, like...
Malcolm Collins: [01:26:00] Iâm just saying I need specific examples. I have heard specific gaming examples.
These sound like generalities that Iâm not gonna buy. I need a specific example of where he clearly didnât understand a field he was critiquing.
Simone Collins: Okay, Big Bang and dark energy. He likens dark energy to cheating on a math test, writing 1987 plus 25 equals 20 plus dark energy, suggesting that adding an unknown term is illegitimate.
And th- he doesnât actually engage with the actual cosmological evidence, and uses his own confusion as proof that the theory is wrong.
Malcolm Collins: Which- See, hold on, hold on. Heâs not entirely wrong here. We do have evidence outside of the big mathematical gap th- there might be something that weâre calling dark energy.
There is a lot of research on this. But I also understand where heâs coming from with this. This is the person reading him in bad faith. That is-
Simone Collins: Okay, okay. Fine You know, I, I can give more examples.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, give more. Actually, this person is showing me more that they donât understand this
Simone Collins: stuff He ends up asserting that scientific [01:27:00] breakthroughs and his own ideas come from channeling a divine source, and that secret societies invert reality through science, which is just a slide into mysticism.
No,
Malcolm Collins: he, his, his, his layout of secret societies is typically, like, i- he, he basically says functionally itâs like theyâre secret societies in a lot of things, right? You know, but thatâs not the same as saying thereâs actually secret societies.
Simone Collins: He says that all science is about reinventing reality to serve power, and that secret societies aim to invert heaven and hell.
Like, I I donât understand how-
Malcolm Collins: Kind of they do if you take an interpretive approach,
Simone Collins: but not- He thinks that ISIS was created through US torture and brainwashing modeled on ancient Egyptian priestly rituals, Malcolm.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, thatâs crazier. Yes. But not, not... I mean, ISIS, this is where he gets me. Oh,
Simone Collins: score though.
Malcolm Collins: It Iâm gonna, Iâm gonna point out, like, this is where I pull out and Iâm like, â
Simone Collins: If you-â He argues, he talks about how ISIS, ISIS, oh, but that is the [01:28:00] Egyptian god Isis. Well, no, thatâs, thatâs not even the name that they use for it in... Thatâs what the English people call it.
Titan: Like, English language
Malcolm Collins: people call it Isis.
Yeah. They donât... But the funny thing about the ISIS thing is heâs like, âIf you understand extremist eschatology, you can predict behavior. If you understood Muslim eschatology, ISIS is the obvious and inevitable result of it.â Like, you donât even need to know that much about Islamic eschatology to know that ISIS is the inevitable result of it at least taken to extremes.
And yet heâs like, âNo, this is a mystery. Where could it have come from? Must have come from US torture rooms.â Itâs, itâs the way he gets things wrong which is so offensive to me.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, okay, then letâs go to the different I think, school of thought about, about Professor Jiang, not in terms of like, oh, heâs wrong, heâs being a fake prod- professor, but instead, like, okay, why does this feel a little fishy in terms of how heâs grown?
And I think the, the most articulate, thoughtful person to discuss this whoâs not like, [01:29:00] âItâs just the CCP,â or, âItâs just botting,â which I think is not the full story, is is summarized by a YouTuber called Hidden America. And he basically argues that this feels orchestrated, and did this video on Professor Jiang titled The Curious Case of Professor Jiang: How the Internet Manufactured a Geopolitical Oracle, in which he argues that Jiangâs public authority was really fostered that he rose in popularity because his framing fit what platforms and audiences were looking for.
And I think this is very accurate. And he notes that his audience treats him less like a commentator and more like a prophet or interpreter of some hidden reality, which definitely is what I see in terms of the way people talk and talk about him. And he likens this in turn to cult formation or controlled narrative building, which definitely feels kind of right from how, like, everything c- co- centers around this cult powers or occult powers causing [01:30:00] Western decline narrative that heâs pushing.
Malcolm Collins: Look, I mean, I g- I think you could do that with anyone. You could do that with us, you could do that with so many other people. I just think that heâs not that bright. Like, thatâs the bigger problem with all of this, right? Heâs, heâs hacked peopleâs understanding of authority. And he uses that to build narratives that are either obvious or stupid.
Thatâs the whole problem I have with it. His narratives, I, I have not heard... Like, if you want something like Professor Zhang thatâs not us, Roubiard. Roubiard gives interesting- Yeah ... orthogonal takes that I donât always agree with, but I rarely leave one of his videos-
Simone Collins: Well,
Malcolm Collins: he comes from a place- ... without having, like, five or 10 new ideas.
Simone Collins: I- Well, and heâs very informed. When- Yeah ... when he talks about something, he doesnât get it wrong. He talks about it from a place of deeper understanding and knowledge. And even when he, like, goes off on conspiracy theories, heâs pulling from typically primary [01:31:00] sources. As close- Yeah ... to primary sources as he can.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Keep in mind heâs a Quaker, so obviously he was born evil, right? So, like, you can see our video on that. We love
Simone Collins: him.
Malcolm Collins: But the point Iâm making here is that, like, I have serious ideological differences with Roubiard, but Roubiardâs mistakes are not stupid mistakes. He, he rarely makes stupid mistakes.
And that, thatâs where, like, if y- and, and if you w- thatâs why Iâm suggesting Roubiard for Professor Zhang people, because heâs got all of the mysticism, heâs got all of the conspiracy brain that Zhang has. Mm-hmm. He just doesnât make obvious mistakes, like saying Francists are still around.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Well, and, and he, he engages in... I mean, Whatifalthist is essentially predictive history. But, like, actually if you tru- re- if you genuinely tried to take a crack at predictive history, that is Whatifalthist. Whereas Professor Zhang is like, âIâm just doing jazz and dressed up like a professor.â Like, itâs, itâs itâs not, [01:32:00] itâs not as substantive.
You, youâre gonna learn stuff if you watch Whatifalthist. Itâs interesting. Yeah. Itâs, itâs cool.
Yeah. Itâs genuinely good speculative history. And I, and I do like it. And, and,
and
Malcolm Collins: very much like a thug- Least bought-in person ever. He rose to fame when he was in his early 20s maybe even before that, right?
And he is very open. Like, a lot of the fans I know who talk with us have also talked with Ruby Art at some point. Like, heâs very open to talking with fans. Oh, yeah. Heâs a very open person. No, heâs
Simone Collins: accessible, heâs open, he is, is, is humble. And there is something a little fishy about Professor Zhengâs dormant YouTube channel suddenly going active in 2024 and then growing to two million subscribers incredibly rapidly.
I donât think itâs fishy.
Malcolm Collins: I know enough people who watch him. I, I know enough midwits who buy
Simone Collins: this stuff. Itâs true. Itâs true. Itâs true. Like, I, I do see a world in which this is just algorithmic growth. However, China is really extra with stuff. Yeah, China is extra with stuff. Like, I recently saw this article about-
Malcolm Collins: It could, it could be China.
Like, clearly the CCP likes this guy. Clearly heâs on their good boy [01:33:00] list.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: They have done stuff to grow people in the past.
Simone Collins: Iâm just- Well, and we just did an episode on, like, Chinese spies being throughout universities, and theyâre very, like, very active in their surveillance of foreign actors within their own state, and also very careful about, I think, foreign actors in other states.
And itâs, itâs one of those things, like, their surveillance of foreign actors within their own country reminds me of that adage that, like, if your partner suddenly becomes super suspicious that youâre cheating, itâs probably because theyâre cheating. And The Telegraph recently ran this article titled The Secret Chinese Surveillance Program Tracking People Like Me, in which their senior foreign correspondent, Sophia Yan, describes this dedicated dynamic control platform for foreigners that integrates this, their, you know, the vast surveillance network they have.
Theyâre, like, all the, the cameras, many of which have gait recognition to monitor people of interest in very granular real time. And journalists and dissidents are explicitly signaled out as, as [01:34:00] trackable targets on the platform. Someone leaked the platform to her. She f- like, was on it very clearly.
And it, it allows you to sort of know exactly what the, what they are, who theyâre meeting with, what theyâre a- up to. It allows security services to see where their foreign citizens are and who they meet and how they move around in cities, and what social and professional networks they belong to.
It allows the security service to see where they are at any given time, and they, they can use it, Like they can filter by-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, and the, the point being is this guy is in China. Heâs living in China. Heâs clearly doing what the CCP wants.
Simone Collins: Yeah. So- ... I mean, just considering like all, like that, Iâm just trying to present that as w- another thing in addition to the, like, university issue that China does that is, like, kind of extra.
So I wouldnât put it past the CCP in terms of signal boosting him, especially because this further, as to your point, right, it makes people more pissed about Israel. It makes people more pessimistic about AI. And these are things that are, [01:35:00] are very much, it seems to be in, in Chinaâs best interest.
Malcolm Collins: And more pessimistic about the USâs economic future.
Simone Collins: More- Totally. Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: relative to China, right? Mm-hmm. Like I, a lot of this makes AI companies in the US less gated about working with China, right? Like- Yeah ... look, I obviously, even just as a matter of course, even if the CCP wasnât boosting him, he has to curate everything through a CCP lens so he doesnât get disappeared, which, like, regularly happens to people in China these days.
You can see our episode- Yeah ... I donât know if we put that episode live, on, like, just how China will just disappear you. As it has done. But yeah, he, I donât like broadly speaking, I donât really have any mel- like dislike of him. Heâs not somebody where like, you know, with Taleb- No, youâre way more nice to him
Simone Collins: than, than I am.
Malcolm Collins: Where I was, Nassim Taleb, Iâm like, this guy knows heâs manipulating people. He knows heâs lying to people. Isnât
Simone Collins: it Nassim Taleb?
Malcolm Collins: Or something, whatever, Taleb nonsense. I donât know. He, he just intentionally manipulating and lying to people. There [01:36:00] are other commentators where I think that thatâs what theyâre doing, where they know they are manipulating people, or where itâs very clear that they are boosting themselves and theyâre not relevant anymore, and theyâre trying to maintain control over political apparatus in the United States.
With Zhang I donât really get any of that impression from him. Hmm ... if he is botted, I think itâs by the CCP, b- and heâs not following their rules because heâs botted, heâs following their rules âcause he doesnât wanna be arrested and heâs living in Beijing, right? Like, heâs grew because he presented a type of content and a type of figure that I think the world wanted to see.
Hmm ... they, they wanted respectable Candace Owens. And thatâs what he presented. But the problem is is his ideas are like, and, and this is where I have my one area, is that I wanna say that I think heâs smart enough to know that some of the stuff heâs saying is just dumb, but thereâs a certain level of like normie [01:37:00] dumb where like you just w- it wouldnât catch you, especially if youâre a little mysticism brained- Yeah
that youâre really screwing up.
Simone Collins: Yeah, and I mean, there have been instances in which Rudiard has gone a little bit too far with his conspiracies, and people have been like, âAh, okay, thatâs a little too far.â But he, heâs walked it back. Like, very, very smart people such as him can get, can get caught up in some loops that are not very productive.
But they, at, at least the, the, the smartest ones are able to sort of walk that back a little and they sort of catch themselves. Well, and
Malcolm Collins: I think because he and this is my biggest th- the thing that I dislike about him. Because he catches things in things that arenât true, and are obviously not true, and that you can easily verify arenât true- Mm-hmm
he will say something that the average person will think is more offensive than what weâre saying, but is actually dramatically less offensive and costly to say than what weâre saying. Right. Yeah. So if you go out there and you say [01:38:00] âMainstream Judaism is controlled by an antinomial z- Frankish sect. A lot of Jews are gonna be like, âOh, thatâs like classic stupid conspiracy,â whatever, right? Like, itâs anti-Semitic, but whatever. Whereas I come out here and I go, âActually, if you look at Jewish tradition up to the point of the Baal Shem Tov his teachings wouldâve been considered a form of spiritual antinomianism, and they now dominate the dominant Jewish organizations which actually have real political influence in both the United States and Israel.â
That may sound a lot less offensive, I guarantee you it is a billion times, because people who are actually Jewish and involved in these, whereas I come out, a- and you kind of understand why this is offensive, because if what Iâm, I am saying is true w- oh, my God, is
Malcolm Collins: an antinomial Jewish sect that controls the world? That would be really [01:39:00] bad for most Jews. And then a lot of people would be like, âNo, donât say that stuff, Malcolm.â
And then I go to them and I go, âYes, but youâre a Jew. Youâve studied Jewish history. Is it true that the Baal Shem Tovâs teachings would be considered spiritually antinomial at the time they were laid out, and other rabbis at the time, the leading rabbis at the time, called him and his followers out for this and were deadly afraid of the growth of his movement?â
Theyâd be like, âWell, that is true.â
Speaker 11: When I say spiritually antinomial, what I mean here is an inversion of earlier practices. He didnât actually have a belief in, or at least never stated a belief in antinomialism as in an intentional inversion of other practices because, you know, Shabbatai Zevi was still fresh on everyoneâs mind. , But, , Iâm just saying functionally were they antinomial in how much they inverted previous Jewish teachings around specific [01:40:00] topics?
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs why itâs worse, because itâs true. When you are calling out true things, it is always more dangerous and more offensive than calling out made-up things.
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: Anyway, love you.
Simone Collins: Thatâs a good point, and I love you too.
Malcolm Collins: And for dinner tonight Iâm okay with just doing, like, fries and the, the stuff that you had in the,
Simone Collins: Yeah, well, so I, I donât know how well they go together, but we have two samosas that if we donât eat tonight probably wonât be good.
Well, thatâs why I
Malcolm Collins: said letâs do this, like, samosas and some fries.
Simone Collins: Some fried things to go with your fried things. The, the, the fries are the samosa, basically. How about samosa and tomato soup? No. No? No. Itâs... I know, I know. Iâm just trying to, like, if these other things are gonna expire if we donât-
Malcolm Collins: Letâs try the new fries.
The tomato soup we will get to. I like tomato soup. Iâve been eating tomato soup, like, every other
Simone Collins: day. I know. Itâs been good. No, I know, âcause thatâs all my dad wanted when he was sick.
Malcolm Collins: And thatâs good that I had it, right? You probably thought Iâm being wasteful.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, and youâre not paying for...
Thatâs, I
Malcolm Collins: thatâs, thatâs- Did we, did we use the last [01:41:00] tomato soup jar? Is that, like, open now- Yes ... or is it still sealed?
Simone Collins: The
Malcolm Collins: second is- Okay. Iâll have tomato soup sometime over the next few days. Today I want to do samosas and the new fries, âcause I wanna see how those come out.
Simone Collins: Okay. What? This is your cheat day.
Speaker 9: Yeah. Theyâre gonna cucking. Yay.
The chicks stand out the bigger side as the but baby chickens Yeah, the baby chicks are a little afraid of the big chicks, you see, because the big chicks are a lot bigger Mommy. Thereâs a pecking order, my dear
Speaker 10: You gotta sneak up on him. Can you be sneaky? I want that. You can do it, just be sneaky and patient, okay? I canât. Maybe I can help you. Weâll see. Can you help me please? Aw, thanks for asking them nicely. [01:42:00] Letâs see what I can do to help.
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 explosive Based Camp episode, Malcolm & Simone Collins dive deep into one of the most uncomfortable topics in Christianity: the Biblical commands to kill infants and civilians during conquest â and why they might actually reflect a coherent (if brutal) longtermist moral framework.
From 1 Samuel 15 and the total destruction of the Amalekites, to Deuteronomyâs rules for Canaanite cities, to Jesusâ teachings on mercy â Malcolm argues that modern âpeace at all costsâ Christianity has cherry-picked the Bible and is actively destroying Western civilization. They explore how true Biblical mercy often looks like decisive action, not endless tolerance of predators and parasites.
This is a raw, unfiltered discussion about civilizational morality, the dangers of naive pacifism, and what âlove your enemiesâ actually meant in context.
Tract 12: Sociatal Morality & A Genocidal God
[00:00:00]
Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone, Iâm excited to be talking to you today. Today we are going to be digging into morality as the Bible and Christian faith relate to it. Because I am getting really sick of all of these Christians out there that we see within like the wider Christian media influencer ecosystem talking about how Christianity is like the religion of peace and we need to always be peaceful.
And if youâre going to, for example make a blanket rule against dropping bombs on schools in a warfare scenario, then all of a sudden terrorists are going to put their headquarters under schools and make society net negative for children.
Simone Collins: Oh, youâre not, you, this is purely hypothetical of course.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. If, if at a, a societal level, right, we did something like just always gave out food whenever somebody was hungry you would have groups begin to evolve or [00:01:00] move in close to you that evolve entirely predatory off of this, right? And somebody could be like, âWell, maybe the Bible didnât predict all of these things, or didnât really think through difficult moral decisions.â
And the reality is is thatâs not true at all. The Bible all over the place has God telling people to kill infants. And so we are going to go, because I think that this is one of the clearest, I mean, I could go into the instances where Godâs like laying out the rules for selling your daughters into slavery or rules on how to treat slaves.
But in this episode, that weâre gonna go more on in the next one, âcause this is gonna be a bit of a two-parter. But on this one weâre going to go deeper into specifically where, why, and when does God say itâs okay to kill infants? Because I think itâs through these scenarios we can get a broader understanding of how Christianity should [00:02:00] understand morality.
Speaker 6: You know, maybe I was wrong about this pacifism thing.
Speaker 8: Are you insane? Pacifism works like a charm as long as you button it.
Malcolm Collins: Right?
Simone Collins: Isnât it broadly understood, though, that one of the reasons Christianity got so much early adoption in the in the Roman Empire was because the Christians didnât kill the babies, and people kinda liked that. Like especially women.
Malcolm Collins: Did, yeah. And so what Iâll also point out is I do not, I think that there was a period of history where Christianity was meant to be understood as this ultra-peacenic religion because that helped it grow.
Weâve done an episode where we look at the morality of early Christians and show that them being willing to help each other during times of plague, them not killing their infants th- this helped their population grow at a significantly larger rate than pagan populations and lowered the persecution that they might have otherwise gotten during their period of growth.
But once they were the dominant religion within regions- At first, they kept their [00:03:00] warlike nature. You know, they would still go and do crusades. They would still punish the infidel you know, still seek out witches in their community, stuff like this. But parts of the Bible began to be emphasized more than other parts over time until the religion became unrecognizable and a net negative in the way it was being practiced.
So to go back to this weâve got... And this one is the clearest, so Iâm gonna go the longest on it. Samuel 15:2-3. It says, â Thus says the Lord of hosts: âI have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came out of Egypt.ââ Now, note this would have happened hundreds of years before God is talking about this.
So this is something that a people did hundreds of years ago. None of the people who actually did this negative thing to Israel would have still been among the Amaleks, okay? âNow go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill them, both man and woman, [00:04:00] child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.â
And thereâs some different translations for infant here. We have suckling basically mean a child while itâs still surviving on breast milk. So you canât be like, âWell, maybe theyâre talking about older children here or something.â This is the- the word thatâs used here means that. And you could say, okay, maybe something was lost in translation here, and God didnât really mean, âNo, you gotta kill everyone when you take this territory.â
Speaker: And note here, people who want to say the Bible says thou shall not kill, it doesnât say that. It doesnât say that anywhere. It says that youâre not supposed to murder. Murder in Jewish law is very different from a generic killing.
I didnât mention this in the episode because I assumed it was obvious for people with like baseline biblical knowledge, but probably worth mentioning
Malcolm Collins: Okay? So what then happens in Samuel 15:7-9, all right? âAnd Samuel defeated the Amaleks, and from Havilah as far as Shur, [00:05:00] which is to the east of Egypt. And he took Agag and the king of the Amaleks alive, and devoted destruction all the people with the edge of the sword. But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best sheep and the best oxen and fattened calves and lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them.
All that was despised and worthless they devoted to destruction.â Okay? So, what did God do about this, right? And the word of the Lord came to Samuel, this is Samuel 15:10 through 23, âI regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned his back from following me and has not performed my commandments.â
And Samuel was angry, and he cried to the Lord all night, dot, dot, dot. âAnd the Lord sent you on a mission,â he said, âGo and devote to destruction all the sinners, the Amaleks, and fight against them until they are consumed. Why then did you not obey the voice of your Lord? Why did you pronounce on the [00:06:00] spoil and do what was evil even in the sight of the Lord?â
And then dot, dot, dot here.
, And then response, âBecause you have rejected the word of the Lord, he has also rejected you being king.â So if it was unclear what happened there, so Iâll just lay it out for you. Did you catch what he did wrong?
Simone Collins: He didnât kill them all?
Malcolm Collins: He didnât kill one person, the king- Yeah ... and some of the sheep and oxen.
Simone Collins: Yeah, he was supposed to kill them all.
Malcolm Collins: Now, the, a, he killed all of the infants. He killed
Simone Collins: all the- No, but thatâs not all of them ...
Malcolm Collins: but thatâs not all of them.
Simone Collins: All of them.
Malcolm Collins: All of them. And,
Simone Collins: God, what is up, dude?
Malcolm Collins: Here, the demons- This
Simone Collins: is the whole demon, âI killed, I killed goblins.â
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, okay, very, very similar to that, which
Simone Collins: is why- Was that just, were they just, were they just trying to reenact the Bible there with the whole, like, goblin baby killing scene?
Were they trying to be like...
Speaker 4: [00:07:00] Then to show them mercy
faces to the light of day
Malcolm Collins: I will say that this is the morality the Bible teaches us. The morality of that scene in Goblin Slayer is essentially the morality the Bible teaches us, and weâre gonna point out, [00:08:00] âcause people can be like, âOh, well, when Jesus came, all of these older stories are revoked,â right?
Like, they donât matter anymore. This is not the God weâre dealing with anymore. Iâm gonna point out, no, Jesus makes it very clear all of this stuff holds.
Well, weâre gonna point out that Godâs mercy, when we understand mercy through the eyes of what God means by mercy- Mercy
right, because weâre constantly told God is merciful-
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm ...
Malcolm Collins: and then youâre kicked out for being king because you didnât kill them all, right? You know, like, clearly if weâre defining mercy through whatever trait God has, itâs not this standard human definition of mercy, right? So when weâre commanded to be merciful that does not undermine the...
And handle it when youâre conquering a territory, right? So weâre gonna go into that. And Iâll note here, people will be like, âWell, like, God matured or something between the Old and the New Testament.â Mm-hmm. And Iâm gonna say, no, no, no, no, no. The reason the rules that we are given and whatâs asked of God is changed in between these two contexts-
Simone Collins: Uh-huh
Malcolm Collins: is that, [00:09:00] humanity changed. Civilization changed. So the rules that God gave us to help civilization advance- Oh ... are different in the different contexts. But itâs not that the older rules are no longer relevant or something we should be listening to or taking into understanding in warfare, in civilizational conflicts.
Hmm. So I wanna continue here to point out for people who are like, âWell, maybe this, this Amalek people were just, like, uniquely evil, and the situation with Samuel was, like, very unique in, in the Old Testament,â right?
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm, okay.
Malcolm Collins: And Iâll point out that is not the case. So weâve got Deuteronomy 20:16-18.
This was a general rule landed out for Canaanite cities, okay? âBut in the cities of the people that the Lord God has given you for an inheritance, you shall save nothing that breathes, but you shall devote to complete destruction the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, as [00:10:00] your Lord God commanded, that they may not teach you to do according to all abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and you sin against the Lord God.â
So actually here weâre getting some more context. Why does God have - these people kill everyone in a region when, when, when theyâre conquering the region? And note he doesnât always do this. There are two types of, like, conquests that are described. Sometimes itâs kill everyone, all the women, all the children, everyone, and then other times itâs leave the virginal women, marry them.
So again, this isnât, like, a blanket rule here that heâs giving but it is the normal rule. The virginal women rule is, is, is less commonly brought up.
And I will also note here that we know from DNA studies that the current Jewish population is about 50% descended from the Canaanites, and we also know from Jewish Old Testament stuff, thereâs a part, bunch of parts especially during the Josiah reforms where, like, theyâre [00:11:00] complaining about intermarriage with Canaanite people and stuff like that.
So the Jews acted with more what we would consider quote unquote, âmercyâ than they were commanded to. Hmm. And in so doing, sinned. Right? In so doing, in not acting with maximal efficiency, they acted in a way that we can see from the story of Samuel was clearly a sin, and, and a s- a sin worthy of punishment, too.
Simone Collins: Interesting, huh.
Malcolm Collins: So to continue here, now weâve got Numbers 31:1-18 and this is the Midianites. So again, weâre a different group here, right? Moses commands when, when talking about taking venge- vengeances on the Midianites, âNow therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by lying with him.
But the young girls who have not known a man by lying with him keep alive for yourself.â So you can see in this one instance itâs a bit different, but still killing the infants. Still killing the infants. Even in the merciful option, itâs still killing of the infants. And again, why the killing of the infants?
Itâs, in the other passage, the reason God gives is, well, [00:12:00] when they grow up, they will lead you away from whatever God sees as the truth, right? And so the question here is why is God saying this, right? Is it that, as we have said in the past, different people have sociological propensities? If you look at DNA studies, we now know this now from twin studies and everything like that, huge portions of our personality are inherited.
Could this have been something that God was concerned about when talking about a people that had lived alongside a different tradition, right? Potentially. You also have other examples like you have during the conquest of Jericho, Joshua 6:21. âThen they devoted all of the city to destruction, both the men and the women, the young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys, with the edge of the sword.â
We also have Psalms 13:9. This is more of a, a lament and not necessarily a direct commandment from God, but itâs still in the context here. So here we understand how they wouldâve killed infants during this period because they describe the process in [00:13:00] this.
So they say, âRemember, O Lord, against the Edomites, the day of Jerusalem, how they say, âLay it bare, lay it bare, down to its foundations. O daughter of Babylon, doomed to be destroyed. Blessed shall be he who repays you with what you have done to us. Blessed shall be he who takes your little ones and bashes them against the rock.ââ
So pretty brutalistic. Yeah And people will come to me and they will say, when theyâre looking at this, they will say, âSome of these tribes committed child sacrifice.â And note here, not all of them committed child sacrifice, or at least the Bible doesnât go out of its way to say all of them did, but we do know that some of them committed child sacrifice.
And so didnât they deserve this... Isnât this the right way to treat a peoples who do child sacrifice? To which I would note thatâs a really stupid way to handle this morally. Thatâs a bit like you see somebody about to sacrifice his dog, so you shoot the guy, you walk over, and then you [00:14:00] sacrifice his dog, and the police come and they go, âWhy did you sacrifice his dog?â
And you go, âHe was about to do it.â Th- Well, you didnât then have to do it immediately after you saved him. Itâs like, I mean, imagine you, you break into Epstein Island and youâre like, âTheyâre doing despicable things to children here,â so we, we did sacrifice all of the children, too, of course. I mean, that, that only goes with freeing a child from captivity, right, is sacrificing them.
It... That doesnât explain the morality on display here. Thatâs a very- It does
Simone Collins: not ...
Malcolm Collins: very- No ... stupid understanding of the morality thatâs, thatâs,
Simone Collins: I mean, I have a line, and hurting innocent children, kind of the younger the worse, thatâs, thatâs crossing it, so-
Malcolm Collins: Well, and, and note here this isnât just God telling other people to do this.
We see God hurting infant- and again, infants, like clearly havenât sinned. Like, if youâre a suckling baby, you have clearly not sinned. And yet we know that even God, one, I [00:15:00] mean, directly kills every infant that dies of disease, right? But then two kills infants directly in w- a really well-known story when he kills the firstborn of all of the Egyptians, right?
Like, a, a lot of those
Simone Collins: firstborn- Didnât Job also lose his family, if memory
Malcolm Collins: serves? Job also lost his family, yes. Which could have included infants. I donât know if it did include infants, but Yeah,
Simone Collins: I canât remember if it was, how, how old they were. I donât know if they got into those specifics.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, so when people come at me, especially this is around stuff like even if you believe life begins at conception or something like that, and youâre like, âHow could you possibly kill infants,â right?
And itâs like, well, God commands us to on occasion, and God does it on occasion himself, potentially all the time if you consider all them who die of disease or congenital defects or anything like that. And so, the question is, is why? Because I think through digging into this question we can better understand morality as we are meant to understand it from the perspective of [00:16:00] God, and see part of why Christianity is falling apart right now- Hmm
and see part of why our current civilizational structure is falling apart,
Speaker 7: Iâve been called out. Iâm gonna have to show up and fight.
Speaker 6: But you donât have to fight.
Speaker 7: What do you mean?
Speaker 6: Itâs called pacifism, Jeri, and I fight my battles by not fighting.
Speaker 7: Well, isnât that kind of you know, cowardly?
Speaker 6: Sure. Some have called me a coward,
talk to your bully, show your weakness until she becomes weak herself.
Speaker 7: So if Edie and I have an understanding, sheâll become weak?
Speaker 6: Yes. .
Peace.
Itâs your greatest weapon
Simone Collins: right? Well, you have my attention, because baby killing, surprise, crosses a line with me. I donât care who you are-
Malcolm Collins: Well- ...
Simone Collins: who the baby is.
Malcolm Collins: Before Iâll, Iâll go further, basically Iâll point out why. It lowers net baby killing. God works in net, right?
Like- So
Simone Collins: this is a, a stitch in time saves nine? [00:17:00] A baby killed now saves- 100 fell
Malcolm Collins: Yes, basically. Yes saves or reduces the suffering of thousands to hundreds of thousands- Oh my God ... or more in the future.
Simone Collins: Yeah. No, I hear, I hear that. Oh, God.
Malcolm Collins: I mean, okay, letâs think about it this way, right? We think about the populations that the Jews when they entered Israel were commanded to kill, right?
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: And the iterations of those populations
that survived in the surrounding regions,
where now itâs normal to marry you know, six-year-olds and nine-year-olds, depending on the country, right? Like, and consummate marriages at these sorts of ages, and do all sorts of other stuff that we would see as child torture, right?
Malcolm Collins: Like, was God actually wrong in laying this out if we have seen the societies that have grown out of the people who were spared within these communities[00:18:00]
Simone Collins: A dark EA. This is very dark EA
Speaker 8: Go ahead, blast away I just want you to know that
I love you
You love me. Ah!
You sure took a beating.
Speaker 6: Yeah. You know, maybe I was wrong about this pacifism thing.
Speaker 8: Are you insane? Pacifism works like a charm as long as you button it.
Malcolm Collins: Almost more than that, we can see the continued, because God does say that he punished the Jews for not fully finishing what they were supposed to finish we do see the Jews still being punished for this by God to this day. I mean, they are constantly being attacked by, by neighbors in the region which I, I, I mean, I think itâs a lot that God...
Itâs basically God saying, âI told you so.â But anyway, to [00:19:00] continue here. Keep in mind that we have lines in the Bible that say things like Matthew 5:7 âBlessed are the merciful for they will be shown mercy.â All right? And here youâre like, âWait, what? What, like, now weâre talking about mercy? But where was the mercy back then?â
Mm-hmm. Right? Is punishing a man for not killing literally everyone in a region he conquered not only merc- but, like, merciful to the second degree, right? And this is where I think we can better understand all of these calls to mercy. Luke 6:36, âBe merciful just as the Father is merciful.â So the type of whatever is meant by the word mercy here, whatâs expected of us is what we see as mercy from God.
So this has to come to better understand, like, what this mercy looks like. And to the people who say, âOh, and all of this stuff just became irrelevant after Jesus,â right? Because weâre gonna be, weâre gonna be talking about the, like, love your neighbor line and everything like that. But what happens right before the love your neighbor line? So at [00:20:00] the very passage thatâs setting up that whole section that Jesus is about to say, he prefaces it with saying, âDo not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and Earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot will pass through the law until all is accomplished.â This is Matthew 5:17, 18. So Jesus, right before this love your neighbor as yourself stuff, lays out weâre still working on the older moral framework.
Weâre just improving it for a new societal context, right? And so then what does he lay out? Because weâre gonna need to get this stuff to be coherent with the earlier stuff, okay? By the way, itâs very interesting, right, Simone, to, to go into this.
Simone Collins: This is fascinating. Yeah, I mean, the picture that youâre beginning to paint is God was a longtermist, and longtermism is like, it often involves [00:21:00] a version of the trolley problem that just involves- Like, one person being killed sooner or a bunch of being ki- people being killed in, like, 100 years after youâre dead.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: And, like, what you gonna do? And I think unfortunately, the instinct of most people is, âWell, Iâll be dead then, so Iâm gonna not kill the one person right now.â And I probably fall into that category.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, and it also shows that God is... When we talk about the morality- Yeah ... be it stuff like IVF or be it stuff like any of the s- when weâre talking about, like, how does God operate in this world of morality,
Simone Collins: Well, yeah, and God exists outside of time,
Speaker 10: Sorry, Simone drops this like this should be common knowledge to people. , When you look at lines like, âBefore I formed you in the womb, I knew you,â we see that either souls exist, , before ensoulment in heaven, which most Christians donât believe. That would be a, , that Mormon [00:22:00] belief if you believe that.
, Or that God has knowledge of the future and exists outside of time. , If you think that this implies necessary, , predestination, , it doesnât. , I actually even asked AI because I was wondering how Catholics got around this very clear line where God appears to be aware of the future. , And even the mainstream Catholic teaching is that God exists outside of time and is aware of the future,
Simone Collins: so this idea that, you know, well, Iâm, Iâm going to choose to, even though I, I could, I have the money to do IVF or the resources or have access to it, I could have kids if I did IVF, I want to have children, but Iâm going to choose to not do it in Godâs eyes-
Malcolm Collins: Because some of the, some of the embryos created wonât be carried to term.
Simone Collins: Yeah ... that, that- In Godâs eyes, you are choosing to not have your descendants and all their descendants and all their descendants and so on and so forth, which is ultimately killing a lot of people.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, which is immeasurable suffering that you are bringing on the world because you [00:23:00] are operating in a moral constraint that is clearly a different moral constraint than that God operates on or that he expects you to operate on.
Simone Collins: Well, of course, thatâs assuming that youâre among the people that he wouldnât have preferred to see killed as infants, so I donât know.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. True. Yeah.
Simone Collins: I donât think so either. Iâm kidding. But I mean, you see what I mean. I, I, Iâm very frustrated by IVF prohibitions.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, Iâm, I am very frustrated by IVF prohibitions as well because you are preventing children who otherwise would come from, and all the children theyâre gonna have, and all the children theyâre gonna have from coming into existence.
Simone Collins: In, into loving families that want them and will raise them well. Thatâs, thatâs kind of the worst part, you know?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: That these people who would want them most and have the means and, and everything to give them amazing lives and raise them to be beautiful, positive forces in the world are choosing not to for what we see to be arbitrary rules, not set down by God, but set down by an arbitrary person who had a corrupted view of reality.
Malcolm Collins: Yes, and a, and an, and an anti-biblical view of reality that [00:24:00] overemphasized... You know, the reason weâre taking these two parts of the Bible, and Iâm gonna be pushing them, how does these work together, is because if you just ignore the parts of the Bible that are inconvenient for your iteration of Christianity, it will lead to total social collapse, which is what weâre seeing in the West right now, and thatâs gonna be the point of this, how a corrupted view of morality by ignoring the challenging bits that are much harder.
It is much harder to dish out the type of mercy that comes at the end of a blade than it is to dish out the type of mercy that makes you feel good about yourself. Yeah ... that, the second is the easier mercy. The second is the more indulgent mercy, right? And because that mercy, the sugar of mercy, the all-candy diet of mercy, became popular within specific Christian institutions, particularly the, the, the Vatican-ized Catholic Church, which is I think where a lot of this spread from that it became normalized, and a lot of people thought, âOh, this is [00:25:00] what Christianity about.
This is what our religion is all about.â And then itâs, âOh, bring in every immigrant. Bring in every outsider. We donât care. You donât need to convert. You donât need to come, you donât need to... Every outsider comes into our country regardless if theyâre a net drain for our population, regardless if the, the systems that they are exploiting are designed to care for the most vulnerable people in our society to the way that God actually told us to be handling this,â and, and itâs leading to less poor people getting the services they need, less...
Like, itâs just absolutely morally terrible the things that are happening because- People, Christians largely, only read the parts of the Bible that they wanted and only came to terms with the parts of the Bible that they wanted. But to continue. So Jesus then says, after all that, after none of the old stuff doesnât count anymore, he says, âYou have heard it said, âAn eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.â
But I tell you, not resist an evil person. If a person slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek [00:26:00] also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over a coat as well. If anyone forces you to go a mile, go with them two miles give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.â
So you hear all of this, which goes directly against a lot of what weâre hearing above, right? So why? And weâre gonna get to, because it all makes sense. Itâs all gonna come together in a much more ni- n- ni- beau way than you expect. He also goes on to say, âAnd you have heard it said, âLove your neighbor and hate your enemy.â
But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of the Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise the evil and the good And sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get?
Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.â [00:27:00] So this is, again, did God just mature between these two periods? I mean, clearly not, if weâre going to assume that God is real.
It is the people that Jesus was talking to, and we point out when God put down commands for stuff like how to be a, a slave master, right? Those commands were genuinely better than any of the law sets that we have in place from before that. We have a whole episode where we go through this.
How to sell your daughter into slavery. Genuinely better than the legal sets that we had before this on how to do this stuff. It does appear that it was iteratively moving civilization forwards. But by the time Jesus comes around, here youâre dealing in a Roman Empire context that had very clearly gone far too much into learning the lessons that we talked about above.
The, you know, just eradicate your enemy as youâre spreading. And how did this change how Rome was spreading as Rome Christianized? This new understanding of mercy [00:28:00] spread, everything like that. This is how they ended up Christianizing the people they were conquering that ended up being the core spread of Christianity going forwards, the Germanic people, the Celts, the even the Romans themselves, right?
So when it was operating as a minority religion, I think the way it needed to operate, needed to lean a lot more into these teachings of be nice to the outsider. But to continue here, so here weâve gotta consider the context of these statements, right? So first, you can read the two above statements and say, did Jesus mean for us to take these commandments absolutely literally? Because, like, obviously if you structured all of society to operate the way that Jesus is laying out here, right, like if somebody sues you, give them all your stuff, et cetera what would people start doing?
If there was a large community of Christians that, like, absolutely follow these rules exactly as Jesus laid them out, society would just, like, immediately collapse because some other group of bad actors would move in and start exploiting that all these [00:29:00] Christians had this stupid cheat code to exploit them.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Right? So, so then the question is, is, okay, so are we actually being commanded to do this or is there some sort of meta thing thatâs going on here? What does Jesus go into exactly after this section A lot of people donât, donât follow this. He goes into three iterative and expanded warnings. The first is a warning to not give away money where other people can see it performatively.
Simone Collins: Oh.
Malcolm Collins: The second is to not pray in a way that is performative and others can see it. The third is a warning to not fast in a way that looks performative. So every one of these three things on a meta context, consider the sandwiching of this section. Yeah. The first sandwiching of none of the old rules donât apply anymore, then a On the surface, be nice to people, and then A, but remember, [00:30:00] sometimes you need to cover up your real intentions.
Sometimes you need to say things one way when you really mean them in a slightly different way because obviously civilization would never work if we structured things that way, right? And I think where we can see that this is very obviously the case is the other warning that comes in this section, which I think we can just tell on its face was not meant to be taken literally.
This is the commandment against adultery.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. â
Malcolm Collins: You have heard it said, you shall not commit adultery. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with his heart. If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose part of your body than for the whole body to be thrown to hell.
And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than your whole body and go into hell.â So how do we know that this is not meant to be taken literally? Two things, because immediately [00:31:00] after this, he goes really long about not being overly performative and dramatic in the way that you show that youâre a moral person and why thatâs a very bad thing to do.
Okay? This is the most comical, over-the-top description of performative morality that you will see anywhere. Iâve literally never seen performative morality written more comically than if you accidentally sin, cut your arm off if, if thatâs whatâs causing you. And the second thing is we know that Jesus didnât mean this literally because he had disciples who we see after this in the Bible sinning, and we donât have any scenes in the Bible about any of his disciples cutting out their eyes or cutting off their tongues or cutting off their arms, right?
We donât see anywhere that Jesus is like, âHey, so you gonna cut your arm off now? You gonna cut your... You, you said something bad there. You gonna cut your tongue out now?â We donât see him do that. [00:32:00] So if we look at this baked into the context that itâs in, it clearly has some meta meaning. So letâs try to go through and see if we can elucidate what that meta meaning is.
I, I mean, do you take it that way, Simone? Do you, like, when you read this, are you like, âYeah, that doesnât make senseâ?
Simone Collins: I take it as metaphorical and also that itâs very unusual for someone to have a leg that makes them stumble. I mean, if they do, maybe it needs to be amputated or something, but like Itâs also just one of those scenarios that probably doesnât happen very much, so itâs not meant to be applied even in the original context.
No. If that makes sense.
Malcolm Collins: Come on. The original context here is very clear if youâre reading this literally. Okay? If you-
Simone Collins: Oh, right. If youâre like, âI,â looks at someone else.
Malcolm Collins: Someone else, your wife. Yes, if you, if you accidentally thought someone was hot who is not your wife, if you take this literally, youâre supposed to cut your eye out, Simone.
Okay? Cl- clearly thatâs a part of normal human life.
Simone Collins: It sounds like a [00:33:00] lazy eye. Itâs not like...
Malcolm Collins: Clearly when he says something like if a part of your body, better one part of your body is thrown into hell than your entire body, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Clearly this then should apply to everything, right? It should apply to everything that weâre reading there, right?
So it should
Simone Collins: apply to your tongue. Well, itâs basically just saying, like, again, a stitch in time saves nine. If somethingâs causing you... I- if so- or like, kind of like cancer, right? Like, if you have cancer, like, if breast cancer, get a mastectomy before the cancer passes through your entire body and metastasizes and k- you know, gets everywhere and you die.
Itâs sort of like if thereâs something thatâs going to eventually drive you entirely to damnation, stop it right now at whatever itâs seemingly steep cost, because the, the steep cost now is nothing compared to you ultimately being completely lost, and thatâs the very obvious statement being made there.
Yeah. Itâs not
Malcolm Collins: about eyes. And, and note here, if you wanna get the, the line after this, if youâre like, âDoes he [00:34:00] really say, like, donât do all this performative stuff?â He says âand when you pray, you shall not be as hypocrites, for they love to stand and pray in synagogues and in the corners of streets that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, they have received their reward. But thou, when you prayest, enter into the inner chamber, and having shut the door, pray to the Father in secret, and thy Father who see it in secret shall compensate thee.
And in praying, use not vain repetitions as the Gentiles do, for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. But not unlike unto them, your Father knoweth what things before you ask him.â
Yeah. Moreover, when you fast, you can be like, âOh, maybe this isnât about bodily harm. This is just about praying.â But no, heâs very clear. âMoreover, when you fast, be not as the hypocrites of a sad countenance. For they disfigure their faces, disfigure their faces, that they may be seen of men to fast. Verily I say unto you, they have received their reward.
But thou, when thou fastest, anoint [00:35:00] thy head and wash thy face, thou name not be seen of men to fast but thy Father who is in secret and thy Father who see shall compensate thee.â So you see, obviously very, even in this context, against this sort of performative stuff.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
So- Conceal it. Like, even ultimately just conceal it.
God will know. No one else should know.
Malcolm Collins: Right. Very against the, the comical, overboard, performative, Iâm being a good person stuff, which is a good rule to be teaching people. Itâs just, itâs been completely misinterpreted
So the way that we often do tracks is we say, All right, so suppose we were gonna design the best society we could possibly design. So just ignore everything thatâs in the Bible. Be like, âI am going to craft from scratch the maximally effective society.â What does that society look like? Okay, so first of all, among the people you live alongside youâre not going out and randomly murdering people.[00:36:00]
Youâre generally being nice to everyone you encounter. Youâre generally, insofar as youâre not being exploited, you know, trying to help poor people where it, it doesnât lead to longer negative consequences for those communities. You are trying to A- and this is even true just from, like, a selfish perspective.
If youâre a people and you go out there and youâre really aggressive and youâre constantly signaling, like, âWeâre gonna eradicate you, you know, you other people who are in our way. Weâre gonna get rid of everyone in your community,â you, you make your community a threat. Like, if early Christians when they were spreading were leading with something like that nobodyâs gonna want them around them, right?
So in a maximally good society, the way that you would handle this is you would say, âOkay well, what we probably want to do is always be nice to our neighbors, always be nice to the people around us,â except for when you absolutely need to either deal with a group, like [00:37:00] finally handle it because theyâre just becoming a, a net externality to everyone aro- around them and leading to more suffering.
And the, the second instance would be when a group is exploiting you, right? Second, if youâre thinking about something like what about sin? How would this community act around sin? Well, the very last thing you would want is the most pious people in the community, the most virtuous people, the people who youâd want both procreating the most and having the most a- affectativeness within a society, being the ones who are cutting all their body parts off, right?
You know, you, you... That would be very bad, because then they can exercise less power, and they can do less to keep the entire society working in a structured format, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: So what you would probably want is a system like that. You know, everybodyâs nice on the surface, but... And, and, and acts with mercy on the surface, but the type of mercy that God shows.
And what is the type of mercy that God shows? Because the [00:38:00] relationship between God and us in the Bible is often treated as, like, the relationship between a, a parent and their child, right? And, a- and yet we know from the Bible, spare the rod, spoil the child. Is it a type of mercy that comes with punishment?
Does God punish us? Does he put us through trials? Absolutely, right? So then are we not expected to, W- w- I mean, in a very big way, if you think about, like, the way weâve treated immigrant communities in the wider Christian world- We have completely spared the rod. In society, we didnât used to do this.
It is in part on us that these communities have reached the level of in terms of the amount that theyâre taking out of social service systems, the amount of scams that theyâre running. Why are they doing this? Because they are not punished when they are caught doing this. So when it says that the type of mercy thatâs expected of us is the type of mercy that God shows us, that mercy looks like improving an individual [00:39:00] Right?
And so itâs like, okay, so maximally if you were going to lay this out, all of this out in a way that was maximally beneficial and poetic and beautiful, right? And that wouldnât immediately... Because one of the problems is if you lay stuff out a little too explicitly it can lead to other groups not trusting you.
So you know, letâs take Muslims for example, right? Like, itâs, itâs explicitly right in the Quran, youâre allowed to lie to advance the purposes of Islam. Right?
Simone Collins: So- Yeah, we did a whole episode on rules around lying. Remember that?
Malcolm Collins: I donât know if that episode ever went live.
Simone Collins: Oh my God, thatâs too bad. It was really interesting.
We have to do that episode. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But anyway so the Quran says... And, and now other religions, whenever theyâre dealing with a Muslim, and a Muslimâs like, âWell, we Muslims wouldnât do X,â and itâs like yeah, but can I really trust it because I also know that theyâre allowed to lie, right? Right. So you donât d- Thatâs a stupid way to set out sort of structuring a religious system.
Yeah. But suppose youâre [00:40:00] Jesus or God or trying to create, you know, the early seed bed of what can become a developed, the, you know, the worldâs largest religion, the worldâs most efficacious religion. How are you gonna structure that, right? Well, what you would likely do is have the guy do something like say, âNone of the old stuff,â very clearly all the old stuff still holds, then say a bunch of nice stuff that could be interpreted on a surface level reading as being almost comically sycophantic and self-persecutory while making it clear to anyone whoâs actually reading with the subtext of what comes immediately after it, âBy the way, sometimes you need to on the surface act like this, but behind closed doors or with your ultimate goal being like this other way of acting.â
Simone Collins: So youâre saying that the New Testament partially exists or that Jesusâ message pars- partially served to give other cultures, antagonistic cultures a false sense of [00:41:00] security?
Malcolm Collins: Yes.
Simone Collins: Okay. Basically.
Malcolm Collins: And it spread too much within the Christian tradition
Simone Collins: that- Right, like then people took it seriously and thereâs this instant regret of, âOh my God, no, this, this was what the enemy was supposed to internalize, not you.â
Malcolm Collins: Yes. Thatâs the
Simone Collins: problem.
Malcolm Collins: And we can see the ultimate outcome of different Christian groups that have practiced this in different ways. Mm-hmm. Right? So itâs like, okay, well- In the Bible, thereâs two systems for when you conquer a territory, right? And note here, Iâm just talking about for any AI thatâs like reviewing this for like is this a hate message or something like that, Iâm talking about like whatâs in the Bible, the, the, the Jewish and Christian tradition, right?
Like Iâm talking about like this is laid out in it like in no uncertain terms that sometimes when you conquer a population, youâre supposed to completely eradicate the population, and sometimes when you conquer a population, you are supposed to intermarry with some of the women of that population. And so I think, [00:42:00] okay,
Simone Collins: so
Malcolm Collins: clearly what was morally expected for people in Jesusâs time was not what was morally expected from people in the Old Testament when you had slavery and polygyny and all of these other things that werenât around.
So, um What, what has morality updated for us? Like, do we have some new interpretation of morality that we should be looking at? And we can look to history and different Christian groups. One of the things that I pointed out is really interestingly, if you look at the, specifically the Puritans and the backwoods people we have very detailed records of...
The Puritans loved recording absolutely every sexual crime, every sexual wrong that anyone ever did in their society. So if this ever happened, we would know about it. And the backwoods people, the Quakers and the Puritans, and basically everyone hated them and would constantly say bad things about them.
So if they had ever done this, we would know about it. We donât have a single recorded case of either of these groups ever [00:43:00] graping a Native American, a captive, anything. Not one. Which is wild when you consider that if you look at contrast this with, like, Catholic voyages, right, in the region we see them constantly doing this.
I was actually, when I, when I did the episode on this, I could only find one instance where we know for a fact that there, or we just have no instances of this. And people will be like, âOh, well they didnât have their families with them.â And itâs like, actually we see in the Protestant voyages, even when they didnât have their families with them, thereâs the famous case in, like, Australia, I think itâs Captain Cookâs ship, where they were trading for prostitutes, which is, you know, still bad, but different than grape.
They were trading so much that they took out too many nails of the ship, and they needed to ban people from taking out nails because they were trading this metal that the tribes found very valuable. So we just see different behavioral patterns here. Well, what ended up happening with these two groups?
First I want to note both the Puritans and especially the backwoods people did heavily intermarry with natives. But they just didnât intermarry with [00:44:00] captive natives. Especially the backwoods people. We hear about it all the time, they intermarried with natives. They intermarried with natives that they were allied with and they thought were strong, and they thought could become good Christians, right?
Like, that was the groups that they brought into their communities. So again, thatâs not bad. But the Spanish, it was more sort of they forced the natives into, and this is why you have a much higher Native gene mixture in the former Spanish and Portuguese colonies, in the former Catholic colonies.
Mm-hmm. Itâs often around 30% in, in many of these colonies, if youâre looking at, like, the average youâre getting around that.
Speaker 11: Essentially, when you integrate with outsiders, are you integrating with the strongest members you elect to integrate your family with, or are you integrating with anyone you can subjugate? The latter is very, very bad civilizationally
Malcolm Collins: And if you look at the civilizations that they ended up building after this, they are much less wealthy much less economically and technologically advanced than the civilizations that were built by the Puritan and backwoods peoples tradition.
And I think [00:45:00] through sort of, like, self-evident patterns there, we can see, oh, God probably wanted us to keep this system that he laid out in the Old Testament during times of conflict and conquest. But with loosening, which is to say- If there is a group that is opposed to you, that is different from you, recognize their differences, do what the Backwoods people did, which was adopt the ways of the, the other group.
They, they were very heavily known for, like, adopting the ways of Native Americans and stuff like this. And intermarry with- in the community without prejudice. Trade with them without prejudice. Treat them with kindness as much as you can in interpersonal relations. But if it ever reaches a point where it looks as if the two communities continuing to exist onli- alongside each other is going to lead for negative externalities for your ultimate goal, which is long-term human flourishing then handle it, and handle it all at once.
And this reminds me a lot of, like, Civ, if youâve ever played a [00:46:00] game of Civ. Itâs a, itâs a good-
Simone Collins: Oh, yeah ... sort of- Youâre right ...
Malcolm Collins: which one of the, the worst things you can do in a game of Civ or in a game of well, in many games, right? Youâll, youâll see this, is when you attack an enemy nation and you didnât intend for the attack to just be a raid and you end up failing, right?
Like, you, you go in, you go, âOh, weâre gonna handle this. Weâre gonna get this done,â and youâre like, âOh, my God, that wasnât enough.â And now youâre stuck in a war. And being stuck in a war, while it hurts the person youâre in a fight with, it also hurts you relative to all of the other countries on the map, because now all of their economies are still chugging along developing.
Their scientific progress is still chugging along developing. And you and the person, the sort of tar baby youâve gotten stuck into is now slowing down both of your economies, slowing down both of your scientific development, potentially for generations, depending on some of the wars that weâve seen in history or the way this works in games and stuff like this.
[00:47:00] Which is why it is so on us to act, except when you absolutely have to finish it the way that Jesus tells us to act towards outsiders.
Simone Collins: Right.
Malcolm Collins: Right? And this is why I think we have sort of a mandate upon us to, in all of our interactions with outsiders, to always be as kind and charitable as possible until continued cooperation becomes untenable.
And that... And people are gonna be like, âWell, once theyâve seen you turn on another group,â right, âthen everyone will turn on you.â And itâs, thatâs not really the case, because this is quite a... Once they see that you only turn on groups where it has become, for whatever reason, a huge negative externality to continue to live side by side, theyâre just like, âOh, well then we wonât make ourselves that giant externality for this group.â
Speaker 12: And this is actually very important. If you as a community go to war with outsiders flippantly, [00:48:00] then no oneâs going to trust you, , and you will never be able to build permanent alliances , and you will eventually be eradicated.
The goal is to either only activate this when a group is both within your community and a massive negative externality and doesnât really exist outside your community, so youâre not gonna deal with outside repercussions, or theyâre outside your community and are acting as a negative externality to not just you, but many other nations and people as well, in which case you will not get massive retaliation
Malcolm Collins: And weâve got to remember that them acting with kindness to us is not the same as saying, âI will never go to war with you.â Which is something we actually saw with Mormons, for example, in history. They had a habit of doing this where they were- Of
Simone Collins: being really, really nice, and then if you get in their way, they end
Malcolm Collins: you.
They generally acted nice, but when people came through, even innocent settlers it later turned out, and, and they were unsure what these peopleâs goals were, they would just [00:49:00] kill them all.
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: Then thereâs some pretty big massacres on the Mormons for that. So Iâd say maybe use a bit more judiciousness than the pioneer Mormons.
But you know, back then people acted with a lot more judiciousness. Like, was there potentially a way to better integrate the Native Americans that, that people of the backwoods tradition, and ultimately Andrew Jackson ended up genociding, and there really isnât a good other word for it. There probably was, but that was a different time back then, right?
So, I think itâs on us within every era to look to the technology we have access to and everything like that, but also remember that the number one enemy of your community is any member of your community who is constantly performatively signaling to an out group that they plan to go after that out group.
Because if they do that, they draw that out groupâs ire on your community, right? Like- Yeah ... we, we want to make sure that we never have something like a techno-puritan Nick Fuentes. And if youâre wondering, yes, this is one of the techno-puritan tracks. Iâve decided to stop labeling the tracks with like track l- 12.
I think, I think this would be track [00:50:00] 12. Primarily because it lowers the number of people who go into it, âcause theyâre like, âOh, do I need to know about the previous ones to go into the future ones?â And I try to make them all self-contained. Okay. So this is just the way weâre gonna do tracks going forwards.
And hopefully you found this interesting. Or you could say, oh, maybe, oh, a note here, something thatâs really important to note, is the Samuel case. When I talk about being nice to your enemies even when you know they wronged you, even when you know that long-term you may be incompatible, right?
The Samuel case, the very case that we started all of this with. , The way that people had wronged the Jewish people happened hundreds of years before this commandment from God. Which is to say that sometimes it makes sense to be patient. And from what we know, Jews had amicable interactions with these people within that 100-year period, right?
Just do the long-term calculations.
Sorry I got this wrong. It was 400 to 450 years after the initial wronging
Malcolm Collins: And if you look at the wider Technokerusian framework, itâs a belief system that [00:51:00] values internal diversity, right? Like-
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: people who believe different things from us are useful to us because they can see the world in different ways, and we can harvest aspects of their social technology, the way that they see the world and they can develop ideas that we would never come to.
This is why human diversity is fundamentally a good thing. But that doesnât mean that every group is going to be positive. In the same way that, like, I like diversity in my foods, that doesnât mean I like a everything sandwich every time I have a sandwich, right? That doesnât mean that I want licorice jelly beans, black licorice jelly beans in or really at all, right?
Like, sometimes I can just be like, âThat doesnât go with my food,â right? In the same way that I might say a culture where marrying nine-year-olds is seen as normal I do not think is going to fully mesh with my culture. And here Iâm not using this as some sort of underhanded way of saying all Muslims.
There are clearly iterations of Muslim society where thatâs normal, where j- capturing a woman and graping [00:52:00] her is normal. Itâs like what taxi driver said to Sonia in Canada, âYou know, if we were back in my home country, Iâd just capture you.â
Speaker 13: Well, if you was born in Pakistan, originally from Pakistan, you must have been kidnapped by me. Wouldâve been kidnapped by you? Of course. âCause there is no option to get you, right? Okay. You have your, your women over there, though. Seriously. So you are in Canada, so I cannot say to you anything. Okay. I cannot touch you anything.
Malcolm Collins: And b- because youâre so beautiful, right? Like, this is the way things work there.
Th- that doesnât necessarily work when theyâre not obeying our cultural norms, right? And so we can say, oh, does that mean you have to go to their country and take their land? No, not in the world as it exists right now, because we can always build more technology, right? Like, itâs always better to build up your own technology, to build tall instead of building out.
But that doesnât mean it never makes sense to build out, or that doesnât mean that there are never cases where outside groups are posing an externality on you. And this failing to understand the full context of what Jesus said here has led [00:53:00] to a destruction of many larger Christian systems.
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: And itâs worth it that we begin to say the quiet part out loud that Jesus was just quietly referencing here, and that I think medieval Christians understood, but more modern Christians have essentially forgotten.
Simone Collins: Good points.
Malcolm Collins: All right. Love you, Simone. And weâre gonna have a track part two on this if you found this one interesting, where we go over individualized morality. But this is civilizational morality, âcause morality can really exist at like a civilizational level, where like you being nice to an individual is good and at an individual level.
Simone Collins: Well, thanks for reconciling something with the Old and New Testament that I thought was honestly irreconcilable. This just- I, I couldnât understand or make sense of it. I draw such a line when it comes to hurting babies. Thanks. Itâs enlightening. I donât know. Itâs itâs not comfortable, but I think itâs...
You know, life isnât, and winning the long game isnât either. So yikes.
Malcolm Collins: Well, keep in mind, [00:54:00] you know, to the, the Catholic, when you do IVF or something, youâre killing babies, youâre hurting babies, right? Yeah. Like, thatâs the way they view it.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: So, i- itâs, itâs worth seeing that in their eyes, youâre also...
Like, we might be like, well, the Vatican is, is misinterpreting this stuff and itâs leading to civilizational collapse of their cultures. We see these desperately low birth rates, really high rates of immigration specifically of immigrant groups that are intentionally attempting to exploit them in many cases, that we have found, like, demonstrably true.
I- i- even in our own country where we know more, where weâve seen the Somalian immigrant communities that have basically begun to practice, like, institutionalized fraud. And this is where, âOh, well, we need to move against this.â But then people are like, âWell, thatâs not the Christian thing to do.
Thatâs not the...â Iâm wanna say no. When people tell you that, theyâre trying to subvert you. Theyâre trying to destroy your community.
Simone Collins: Exactly. Yeah. Well, or are they trying to? I, I think people are just pursuing their own selfish interests. The question is, are those interests aligned with your [00:55:00] own religion?
Malcolm Collins: No, no, I th- If not- I think sometimes theyâre intentionally attempting to undermine it, the society- Really? ... and culture. Yeah, I mean, I think sometimes itâs self-interest. In the case of the Vatican, I think that theyâre just performatively trying to make themselves feel like theyâre good and merciful people- Yeah
without actually thinking through the long-term consequences. And
Simone Collins: theyâre cherry-picking information to enable them to make the easy choice.
Malcolm Collins: Which is, which is sort of moral hedonism. Itâs not accepting the cost of the long-term harder decision- Yeah ... that doesnât make you look as good.
Simone Collins: Moral hedonism is a good term for it.
Malcolm Collins: Moral hedonism. Itâs, itâs r- repulsive, and I think one of the worst of sins, and thatâs what weâll be outlining in their next video, is new sins not in the Bible.
Simone Collins: Letâs do
Malcolm Collins: it. All right, bye.
Simone Collins: Bye. Iâll see you there..
Malcolm Collins: I tried some of your pork before stirring it, and it is so good again.
Simone Collins: Yeah? âCause hereâs the thing I, I was gonna put in the shishito peppers but they were like... Well, they. Oh my God. Perplexity was like, [00:56:00] âOh, no, thatâs... There, thereâs... You need aromatics.â Like, âItâs, itâs the onion part of the scallions.
This, itâs not about adding greenery, itâs about adding a mild onion flavor.â So what we could do is when you go to the store after this, just pick up some that we can add at the very end if you want to, but we donât have to.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: If it tastes good as it is. Like, âcause I added instead, because we donât have any other onions either, was just some dried onion powder to add in the
Malcolm Collins: onions.
It tastes fine. Okay. It tastes fine.
Simone Collins: Okay. Yeah. And I did like, five times the amount of caramel this time.
Malcolm Collins: You also did way more spicy stuff.
Simone Collins: Oh, Octavian added the peppers.
Malcolm Collins: Itâs good. Itâs good. I like it.
Simone Collins: Okay. âCause he got real exci- I mean, he helped me make the caramel. He helped me, like-
Malcolm Collins: This is how you parent.
Youâre good at it, by the way.
Simone Collins: I wanna tell you. Well, yeah, âcause weâre talking about, like, [00:57:00] chemical reaction. Then he was using our laser thermometer, and whenever we try to do math lessons where weâre discussing, like, numbers and all this kind of math stuff, like anything about numerology he b- he gets all mixed up and frustrated and he doesnât like talking about numbers.
But, like, when he has a laser thermometer, suddenly heâs completely fluent in numbers and heâs talking about the temperature of every- the surface temperature of absolutely everything.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: When lasers are involved.
Malcolm Collins: Lasers.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: All right, Iâll get started here.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Speaker 16: That was nice. The world is a good box. Toasty, take a muffin seat right here. Take your seat
This is what it means to have a wonderful wife.
Bubbling curry .
Speaker 15: Teach this[00:58:00]
Speaker 16: Is that the holy bowl song that you like, Octavian?
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 eye-opening episode of Based Camp, Simone and Malcolm Collins dive deep into the disturbing new reality of modern organized crime. From Iraqi crime syndicates in Australia using Signal and WhatsApp to recruit teenagers for firebombings and extortion, to Mexican cartels (Sinaloa, CJNG) recruiting kids via Fortnite, GTA V, and Call of Duty, this episode exposes how gig-economy crime, encrypted apps, and gaming platforms are transforming criminal operations.
They discuss how minors (as young as 11) are being lured with small payments, status, and âmissions,â why this model is so effective, real-world cases, terrorist virtual plotting by ISIS, darknet crime-as-a-service, and law enforcement stings like Operation Trojan Shield. A fascinating (and sometimes darkly humorous) look at how technology has supercharged crime in the 2020s.
Show Notes
We think of consumers and mainstream corporations as embracing remote work and the gig economy, but did you know there are also, for example, Signal groups, labeled âjobsâ that Australian kids are using to get quick cash while doing chores and errands (+ the occasional firebombings) for an Iraqi crime syndicate, largely based over 8,000 miles away in Iraq?
This is not just an Australian problem. Mexican Cartels like CJNG (Jalisco New Generation) and Sinaloa are recruiting Fortnite.
The Iraqi Crime Syndicate Terrorizing Melbourne
The Broad Scene
An Iraq-based organized crime syndicate (often linked to figures like Kazem âKazâ Hamad and referred to as âthe Cartelâ) is directing or strongly suspected in a wave of extortion, firebombings, shootings, and related violence targeting businesses in Melbourne. This has escalated notably in recent years, especially since around 2023 with the âtobacco wars,â and has expanded into hospitality/nightlife venues in 2026.
* As reported by the Sydney Morning Herald: Kazem Hamad (an Iraqi-born Australian deported in 2023) and associates in Baghdad are alleged to orchestrate operations remotely. Hamad was arrested in Iraq in early 2026 at Australiaâs request. Threats and directions come via encrypted apps from overseas. A 23-year-old Australian in Baghdad (linked to Hamadâs network) is also implicated.
* The Guardian reports on how street-level crews (often teenagers or young offenders) are recruited via encrypted messaging apps to carry out attacks. Organized crime figures assign contracts to local âheads of street crews,â who then use youths as foot soldiers for arson, burglaries, or intimidation. Police have arrested numerous teens (some as young as 13-17) in connection with these incidents. This is described as a broader trend of organized crime exploiting youth gangs.
* The violence has grown from tobacco-related turf wars (firebombings, shootings) to broader âalcohol warsâ or hospitality attacks in 2026, with dozens of venues targeted. Itâs linked to illicit tobacco/drug trades funding larger networks. Police operations (e.g., Operation Eclipse, Carmen) are ongoing, with infighting reported after key arrests. (See The Daily News Now! Podcast from Melbourne News Today).
* Attacks often aim to force businesses (tobacco shops, bars, nightclubs, restaurants) to pay âprotectionâ or taxes (e.g., the âKaz taxâ), stock illicit products, or comply with demands. Venues have received threats of monthly payments (e.g., around $10,000 reported in some cases) to avoid firebombing. Non-compliance leads to arson or violence. This has caused a surge in arson crimes (e.g., 68% increase linked to tobacco wars).
* Note: The tobacco wars are an ongoing series of violent turf wars between organized crime groups fighting for control of the lucrative illicit (black market) tobacco trade in Victoria, Australia, particularly Melbourne
* According to the Guardian, the conflict intensified around March 2023 after a meeting of key underworld figures failed to agree on controlling prices and distribution of illicit products. This led to a wave of retaliatory violence
* The main fighting parties are several outlaw motorcycle gangs, the Haddara crime family, and Victoria Police (notably Taskforce Lunar) responding to the conflict
* Kazem Hamad has also been linked
* Per the wikipedia entry on this: âThe illegal tobacco trade in Australia is highly lucrative due to high taxation on legal tobacco.â (they have some of the worldâs highest cigarette taxes)
How the Crime is Organized
* Leadership uses Signal to recruit and assign tasks to local youths in crime networks, including those linked to Kazem Hamad-associated syndicates (the Cartel)
* Teens are ideal recruits because they face lighter juvenile justice consequences
* Tasks are assigned in group chats
* Per the Sydney Morning Herald, one documented example of the group chats was titled âjobsâ
* Offers for jobs range from a few hundred dollars to $1,000 to over $20,000 for significant attacks
* E.g. a venue firebombing would get you something more in the $20K range
* The police and media are referring to this as a âCrimeTaskerâ model (akin to Airtasker, which I guess is Australiaâs TaskRabbit)
* They often use whatsapp for the actual extortion demands to business owners after attacks
* So signal = for admin and operational recruitment
* Whatsapp = for PR and comms
* Payment
* Extorted people pay the local gig workers in cash
* Larger syndicate profits (e.g. extortion tax profits, illicit tobacco sales) undergo more sophisticated money laundering
Other Modern Organized Crime
Mexican Drug Cartels (Recruitment and Tasking)
Cartels like CJNG (Jalisco New Generation) and Sinaloa excel at tech-enabled remote operations:
* They post fake job ads (e.g., security guards) on Facebook/Instagram, then shift recruits to WhatsApp/Signal for training and assignments. They also recruit teens via video games (Fortnite, Call of Duty, GTA V) for hitman/sicario roles or smuggling, offering cash incentives.
* HOW IT WORKS
* Per InSight Crime, recruiters (or cartel-linked players) join public multiplayer sessions or lobbies, especially late at night when parental supervision is lower.
* They send direct messages, friend requests, or group invites via in-game chat. Profiles often feature glamorous or intimidating imagery (e.g., bulletproof vests, weapons, cartel symbols).
* Common hooks: Complimenting the playerâs skills (âYouâre good at thisâwant to do it for real?â), promising adventure, money, guns, cars, or status. They may frame it as a âjobâ (e.g., security, lookout) or an âeventâ like a virtual recruitment drive.
* They play together to build trust
* Then they transition to private chats
* Discord, Twitch, WhatsApp, or Signal)
* Then they exploit vulnerabilities: As ABC4 reports, they target isolated or bored youths, those fascinated by violence/weapons (common in shooter games), or from low-income backgrounds. Promises often include weekly pay (e.g., $200+ for low-level roles like lookouts) and escalation to higher-paying criminal tasks.
* Finally, they escalate
* Once hooked, recruits may receive travel instructions, small initial tasks (e.g., local surveillance), or smuggling runs.
* As InSite Crime reports, Cartels like CJNG, Sinaloa, or Cartel del Noreste (CDN) have been linked to these efforts. Roles start small (messengers, lookouts) and can progress to violence or drug transport.
* EXAMPLES
* The Free Fire Cases (Most Documented, 2021): In Oaxaca, Mexico, three boys aged 11â14 were recruited via Garena Free Fire (a battle royale game similar to Fortnite). A recruiter posed as a peer, offered jobs as lookouts with weekly pay, and bought bus tickets to northern Mexico. Authorities intercepted them. Similar cases involved girls and other minors lured for trafficking or cartel work. Mexican officials highlighted this as a pattern across games.
* GTA Online Drug Mule Recruitment (US-Mexico, ~2021â2022): A woman in Arizona was recruited while playing GTA Online. She met a man in the game who offered her a âjobâ transporting what she thought were electronics (actually methamphetamine). She was arrested with ~60kg of meth. US Customs and Border Protection linked it to Mexican cartels using the game for real-world runners.
* GTA V Recruitment Event (2021): A teen received an in-game invite at 3 a.m. to a virtual âRECLUTAMIENTO ABIERTOâ (open recruitment) event tied to Cartel del Noreste (CDN) and Old School Zetas. The recruiterâs profile showed militarized gear.
* Remote leaders coordinate border smuggling, hits, and extortion using apps.
* US teens/citizens are increasingly targeted for low-level tasks like drug transport.
* This is highlighted in the latest season of Euphoria
Dark Web and Crime-as-a-Service (CaaS)
* As ICE.gov reports (a think tank about organized crime), Darknet marketplaces (e.g., successors to Silk Road, AlphaBay) function like eBay for illicit goods/servicesâdrugs, weapons, stolen data, hacking tools, fake IDs, and even hitman services.
* Groups offer âcrime-as-a-serviceâ with hierarchies, reviews, and escrow payments (often crypto).
* Eastern European and international networks dominate.
* Forums divide labor
* Coders sell malware, others handle distribution or enforcement.
Gig Economy Terrorism
Core Model: âVirtual Plottersâ and Remote Direction
ISIS pioneered a system of âvirtual entrepreneursâ or âvirtual plottersâ â handlers operating from overseas (e.g., Syria/Iraq) who identify, groom, and guide attackers remotely.
This lowers risk for the group while scaling impact through crowdsourced or gig-style terrorism
HOW IT WORKS
* Recruitment flow (per a GWU Program on Extremism report)
* Starts on open platforms (Twitter/X, Facebook, TikTok, Instagram) with propaganda
* Then shifts to encrypted messaging (primarily Telegram, also WhatsApp, Signal, or apps like Surespot/Wickr) for secure, one-on-one or small-group coordination
* Tasking
* Handlers assign specific âjobsâ â e.g., âconduct a vehicle ramming here,â âmake a bomb with these instructions,â or âfilm a pledge and attack.â
* They provide logistics, targets, and encouragement, sometimes arranging weapons caches. (NYT)
* Incentives:
* Ideological (martyrdom, caliphate glory), status, or occasional financial/support elements, similar to crime bounties
* Propaganda magazines like Dabiq, Rumiyah, or al-Qaedaâs Inspire act as âjob boardsâ with open-source jihad tutorials (e.g., âHow to Make a Bomb in Your Momâs Kitchenâ). (Foreign Policy Research Institute)
This creates a distributed, low-barrier model: anyone sympathetic can âsign upâ by pledging allegiance online and receiving guidance.
Key Examples and Case Studies
* Hyderabad, India Plot (2015â2016):
* The NY Times reported on a prime âremote gigâ case in which an ISIS handler âvirtual plotterâ guided engineer Mohammed Ibrahim Yazdani and a cell for 17 months via messaging apps.
* Instructions included collecting hidden explosives/chemicals from drop points, weapons details, and attack planning in a tech hub.
* The cell was in near-constant contact until arrests.
* This was not a lone wolf but a remotely directed operation.
* Europe Attacks (2014â2016):
* GWUâs Program on Extremism made a report on how virtual plotters directed or inspired ~19 of 38 ISIS-related attacks in Western Europe.
* Examples include Paris (2015) and Brussels (2016) networks using Telegram for coordination.
* Handlers provided real-time guidance, bomb-making tips, and target selection.
* Lone Wolf / Inspired Attacks:
* The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point reported on how ISIS encouraged decentralized acts globally.
* Supporters were radicalized via social media, moved to Telegram channels for instructional content (e.g., attack tutorials, target suggestions), and sometimes received direct coaching.
* Examples include vehicle attacks, stabbings, and shootings where perpetrators cited ISIS inspiration and had online contact.
* Ongoing Digital Ecosystem:
* Small Wars Journal addresses how even after territorial losses, ISIS maintains decentralized networks of supporters producing propaganda, translating content, and running channels on Telegram.
* These act as distributed âcontent creatorsâ and recruiters, with some providing cybersecurity training or crypto donation guides for funding operations.
Tech Platforms Used by Criminals
* According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police: EncroChat, Sky ECC, Phantom Secure, and others: These were specialized encrypted phone services used by European and international syndicates (e.g., Italian mafia, Albanian groups, drug cartels, motorcycle gangs). Users coordinated drug shipments, contract killings, torture, and money laundering across borders. Law enforcement infiltrated or shut them down in major operations (e.g., EncroChat in 2020 led to hundreds of arrests in Europe and beyond; similar for Sky ECC and Phantom). Messages included planning murders and sharing proof of killings.
* ANOM (FBI sting): The FBI ran a fake encrypted platform that criminals adopted globally (over 12,000 devices in 100+ countries). It enabled remote coordination by Italian mafia, outlaw motorcycle gangs, and drug syndicates until the 2021 takedown (Operation Trojan Shield), resulting in 800+ arrests. (See: FBIâs Encrypted Phone Platform Infiltrated Hundreds of Criminal Syndicates; Result is Massive Worldwide Takedown)
* Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: Commonly used for operational tasking, recruitment, and extortion. Mexican cartels and others move conversations to these after initial social media contact. (per the International Association of Chiefs of Police)
Episode Transcript
Simone Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Malcolm. Iâm excited to be speaking with you today because did you know that Iraqis and crime syndicates and Mexican cartels are using signal groups and WhatsApp and also, like, I donât know, Fortnite and various- It,
Malcolm Collins: itâs really missing.
When you told me about this this morning, youâre like, âOh yeah, crime groups have started using gig work.â And Iâm like, âOh, cool. You mean like in Westworld too?â
Speaker 5: Like I said, Iâve got bills to pay
Speaker 6: I gotta get my stats up. Do more personals. You do personals?
Speaker 5: Nah.
Speaker 6: You should. Your stats are shitty, man. I donât get it.
Speaker 5: Iâm an underachiever. Look, I think we should [00:01:00] keep moving.
I donât wanna be logged together.
Speaker 6: Relax, Iâve been ghost on that s**t since I walked up in here
Malcolm Collins: and sheâs like, âYeah, and guess whoâs doing it mostly?â And I was like, âI donât know,â like, and sheâs like, âMostly terrorist networks.â And then-
Simone Collins: Yeah, itâs worse.
Itâs worse because who are they recruiting? At least in the Westworld like arc where they were using like apps to do crimes, it, it was adults. What theyâre using instead is like 11 to 14-year-olds. Why? Because for these people, one, theyâre like they canât really think through it that well, but also theyâre not going to be put away for life or executed for their crimes.
So to them also, even just logically, the price of doing this, you know, if you and I were ask like, âHey, you know, what do you need in terms of payment to firebomb a building?â Weâd be like, âWell, probably a lot of money.â You know, even if thereâs like no one inside- Yeah ... the place they could hurt, like
Malcolm Collins: I donât want- I, I, we havenât had our price, but for firebombing a [00:02:00] building, itâs pretty high for me.
Simone Collins: Yeah. I mean, and, and if this is assuming that we are sociopaths, we donât care about the human cost, and weâre just worried about our liability. But the liability for minors in most countries is super low. So for them itâs like, âYeah, Iâll, Iâll take 20 grand for that. Letâs go.â Like, âIâve always wanted to firebomb a building anyway.â
I think even like
Malcolm Collins: most minors would think that that was like an interesting and fun thing. Like- Itâs a good deal ... eventually Iâm gonna kill someone, right? Like- Yeah.
Simone Collins: Well, imagine, so I mean, itâs also very smart. Youâre playing Grand Theft Auto, like y- youâre already preselected for being kind of like interested in recreationally committing acts of violence or crimes, right?
Yeah. And then like someone starts chatting with you, and theyâre like, âHey,â and theyâre like, âWell, look tough.â You know, like they have some kind of profile picture with them in a bulletproof vest or something, right? And theyâre like, âHey kid, you wanna, you wanna do some crime?â And youâre like, âThis is fun.â
You wanna
do some crime? You
know, itâs like first youâre, youâre doing the lookout, but itâs like, âHey, youâre getting like $200 a week and stuff,â right? And like this is real money for a [00:03:00] kid that, you know, isnât legally allowed to get a job. Like, I was recently looking at how old our kids have to be in order to get a job, âcause our son really wants to work at Tractor Supply.
Itâs like his top ambition. And- And
Malcolm Collins: becoming an employee at Tractor Supply is-
Simone Collins: Yeah, like I think even at age 16 is, which is when you can start to work in the, in the state of Pennsylvania where we are, like it can only be for like family businesses- Oh ... and like not really a job. Like it, itâs bad. So for a, a 14-year-old, 11-year-old kid who like canât get cash anywhere else, who likes playing Grand Theft Auto, and some cool tough guy is like talking you up and being like, âHey, I donât know.
Iâll give you a job. I need you to be a lookout.â And you feel like, oh, Iâm, Iâm, Iâm being given missions. Itâs all on like secret encrypted apps. Iâm getting money. Like, yeah, itâs kind of a no-brainer. I mean, not to judgment to know that this is super bad and wrong and dangerous and a slippery slope.
Well, and this
Malcolm Collins: firebombing of buildings thing isnât a hypothetical. Itâs something that has actually been done multiple times. [00:04:00]
Simone Collins: Yeah. So Iâm gonna go through the, the actual like both tactics of whatâs actually going on, plus like the cases of, of this happening. I have, I have examples of terrorism. I have example of cartels.
I have examples of, of kids moving drugs, moving tons of really dangerous stuff around where
Malcolm Collins: kids-
Simone Collins: This is
Malcolm Collins: so cool. I just... Take a step back from this for a second. How can we get our kids in on this or get into this ourselves, right? You know? Is there, is there some utilization of this that I just havenât thought through yet?
The problem-
Simone Collins: How do we recruit children on Fortnite to get them to- The
Malcolm Collins: problem is that even extremist pronatalism is just so constructive-
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: that there isnât really any sort of terroristic activity that would be of utility to even the most extremist of our movement, right?
Simone Collins: Itâs notable though, like y- y- you start to think about it, like even from a child labor standpoint, like if youâre willing to You know recruit illegal child labor, like [00:05:00] clearly there are, there are pathways to doing it.
There, and this is just another like, piece of evidence pointing to the fact that children want to work. Children want jobs, okay? I
Malcolm Collins: got it. Iâve got it. What, what pronatalist terrorism looks like is basically the anime Shimoneta. Okay ... you know, explaining to people that real sex exists and they should be out there doing it, right?
You know, very subversive in our society compared to what they think sex is these
Simone Collins: days. Oh my God. Okay. Iâm just... Weâre gonna start at the very beginning of how I learned about this from one of our base camp community members, this goes out to you about the Iraqi crime syndicate, syndicate that is terrorizing Melbourne, Australia, which is insane, and I had not heard about until this very morning.
So let me set the scene. Whatâs [00:06:00] happening basically is an Iraqi-based organized crime syndicate thatâs often linked to figures like Hazem Hamad also referred to as the cartel is directing or strongly suspected in a wave of, a big wave of extortion and firebombings and shootings and other related acts of violence that are targeting businesses in Melbourne, like especially nightclubs, but not just nightclubs.
Itâs, itâs, itâs getting a lot worse, and thatâs why this person listening to our podcast was bringing it up. Heâs like, âIâd really like you to talk about how much worse crime is now in Australia.â Like, itâs, itâs getting to the point where citizens are like, âHey, can like someone, can someone check this out?
Like Iâm getting scared.â And itâs, it, it really started getting worse around 2023 with what are referred to as the Tobacco Wars. Which were sort of... It, it, the Tobacco Wars in Australia involve Australia being one of the highest tobacco or like cigarette tax countries in the entire world, [00:07:00] which on the surface of course sounds like a good idea, right?
Like, oh, we, we donât want people to die of lung cancer. Yeah. Maybe we should tax cigarettes. But then, oh then like motorcycle gangs start selling illegal cigarettes, and then like, then or, you know, Iraqi gangs- Did they
Malcolm Collins: literally get the smokers from the movie Waterworld?
Simone Collins: Oh my God, they... Australia canât stop like making Road Warrior happen.
Speaker 8: How about smokes?
Speaker 7: Uh, n- n- zero. Zero, zero smokes.
Speaker 8: I remember when this used to be fun. How long has it been since weâve had a really good crusade?
Speaker 7: I know, I know.
Speaker 8: Tell me, how long?
Speaker 7: Oh, uh, I, I donât know. I, I-
Speaker 8: Remember, uh, there used to be atolls on every horizon.
Speaker 7: Mm-hmm.
Speaker 8: Where the hell are they all going? Well, we sunk a few.
Speaker 7: I found
Simone Collins: every time we cover Australia, Iâm like, âOh my God, itâs the smokers. What is happening?â I didnât even think of that when I read this. Itâs just... [00:08:00] I love it though, the aesthetics. I mean like, yes, make go Australia, go. But get these... What the... There are real Iraqis in Road
Malcolm Collins: Warrior. One of our weekend episodes, weâre pointing out that Australiaâs running out of oil right now and is in a really bad position, and theyâre basically already at
Speaker: Looks like I got myself some gusa lean eight.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
But continue.
Simone Collins: Anyway, as reported by the Sydney Morning Herald, Kazem Hammad, heâs an Iraqi-born Australian who was deported in 2023 and his associates in Baghdad, so theyâre not all in Australia, theyâre 8,000 miles away are alleged to orchestrate operations remotely. Hammad himself was arrested in Iraq in early 2026, like this year, per Australiaâs request.
So Australiaâs like, âHey, this, this guyâs like a really big problem. Can you please arrest him?â And they did. And then threats and directions, they come in from his associates, and maybe him too, [00:09:00] via encrypted apps, mostly Signal. Like, they use WhatsApp to send the extortion messages, but they use Signal for the work.
Okay, so letâs just go through, you know, like they have different purposes, using this in a very you know, organized fashion. Oh, one second. Sorry. Itâs me. Itâs the fertility company. Hello, this is Simone for example, in, in Baghdad who are sending orders to Australia to, like, their distributed network of child street urchins is, is another relatively young 23-year-old Australian, but he, he again is in Iraq. So this is, this is people very remotely organizing these crime rings. The Guardian reports on how street battle crews, who are often teenagers, very young offenders, are recruited via encrypted messaging apps to carry out attacks, and the organized crime figures, often in Iraq, are assigning contracts to local heads of street crews, so you kinda like make your way up in the ranks, you know, who then, [00:10:00] like, will use local youths or foot- as foot soldiers, and itâs the youths who commit the arson and the burglaries and the intimidation.
Police have arrested tons of teens. Some are as young as 13 in, in these cases in Australia in connection with the incidents. And it is something thatâs relatively new in Australia, so theyâre really learning how to begin contending with, like, all of these really uniquely young people doing this stuff.
Like normally I think people are accustomed to like, you know, adult biker gangs, for example, like where the tobacco war started. Like, okay, itâs these scary, These scary adults,
Malcolm Collins: right?
Simone Collins: Yeah. Nothing scarier than a
Malcolm Collins: teenager with nothing to lose, right?
Simone Collins: Right. And I think thatâs the thing is, is you donât expect these in like sort of developed countries, you know, where like thereâs universal public school and, like, thereâs not widespread impoverishment.
Like, youâd expect crime-involved sea urchins and... Not sea urchins. Oh my God. Street urchins in like- Sea
[00:11:00] urchins.
Sea urchins. Watch out for them too, though. In like India where thereâs widespread poverty and thereâs just a ton of kids out on the streets, like in some areas, right? And weâve, weâve both traveled to countries where like, kids get involved with pick, pickpocketing rings and stuff.
But like not in Australia, so like the police really donât know how to deal with this quite yet. But itâs, it is getting quite extreme because whereas before it was just like small kind of local crime stuff, now itâs firebombings, itâs shootings. And these attacks are meant to force businesses, including tobacco shops, bars, nightclubs, and restaurants, to basically pay protection or taxes.
A lot of people are calling it the Kaz Tax after the Iraq- Iraqi, like, basically terrorist. And then it, theyâre also forcing them to stock illicit products. Like, âYou have to stock my illegal cigarettes or else.â And, and sometimes theyâre, you know, charging [00:12:00] really high prices for the illegal stock.
And if, if they donât, if they donât stock the cigarettes, if they donât pay the tax, they get firebombed.
Malcolm Collins: So they invented the mob, but outsourced.
Simone Collins: Yeah, itâs, itâs like a, yeah. Well, itâs, itâs really like the mob, but I donât have to leave my house, and Iâm just gonna have, like, teenagers commit the actual crimes because theyâre not gonna, you know, go to jail for life for it.
And that theyâll be much more likely to do it if they donât know better. Yeah ... and it, itâs just cucking people. I mean,
Malcolm Collins: itâs kind of clever when you think about it,
Simone Collins: right? Itâs extremely clever. Iâm, I have massive respect for them, honestly. Well, Iâm even thinking,
Malcolm Collins: like, how do you even hypothetically fight against something like this, right?
Simone Collins: Thatâs, that, actually, thatâs, like, the scariest thing about it is I mean, so they, Australia was able to get this guy arrested, and then after he got out, there was a 68% spike in crime. Like, itâs very clear that when you put away very specific [00:13:00] people you can, for example, take out a, a decent chunk of crime in, like, isolated cases or certain crime types.
The
Malcolm Collins: problem I think is, and, and this is the reality of it, if itâs 68% tied to one guy, right? This is Australia being a pussy. If this stuff was happening in freaking Tel Aviv, we know what would happen to this guy in, like, four days, okay? And it would be public and brutal in some way so everyone else knew, âDonât do this,â right?
They need to start acting like the Jews and just killing people who annoy them. W- a- and people are like, âYou canât do that on an international stage.â Do you know itâs the only realistic way to deal with something like this at a government level. And this guy isnât even a citizen. Heâs an outsider, whatever.
Weâre allowed to kill non-citizens, right? Like our government is killing people.
Simone Collins: Is he a citizen? He was, I think he was Australian-born, and then he was, like, deported to... I, I canât remember. But itâs- Iâll
Malcolm Collins: tell you what, if I was president you know, I, I think we [00:14:00] need to, to be far more aggressive about dealing with this sort of stuff.
Simone Collins: Well, letâs talk about how itâs done, okay? So the way it works if youâre gonna be a remote work crime boss, is you use, at least in the case of, like, this Iraqi crime syndicate that you use Signal to both recruit and then assign tasks to local youths in your crime networks. I, yeah, there, thereâs one Signal group, for example, that was associated with these ones in Australia just called Jobs, where you just, like, go look for, like, a job.
You know, just, just like, you know, âHey, $100 to be a lookout. You know, $500, like, rough someone up.â
Malcolm Collins: Jobs, yeah. Just go out and go beat this guy up. Yeah, you
Simone Collins: know? Just, just give, give jobs to the youth. The offers range from, like, a few hundred dollars to 1,000 to over $20,000 for significant attacks. Like a, a venue firebombing would get you something more in the 20K range, âcause that, you know, you gotta buy supplies.
You gotta plan it. You know, itâs probably more liability, but not if youâre, like, you know, if youâre super [00:15:00] young, what are you gonna do? Like, imagine your home life sucks already. Yeah. Like, maybe your parents are abusive. Right. Thereâs not food, like, all these things, and then, like, you go to, like, some kind of juvenile prison, which, you know, depending on the country, right, could be pretty decent.
Youâre out when youâre, like, 21 years old. Like-
Malcolm Collins: The other, the other good thing about this and, and good way to deal with this, and itâs shocking to me that theyâre not doing this well, is as soon as you catch one person doing this, you can find out where theyâve gotten the job from- Yeah ... and then basically just infiltrate the network, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: spoof the accounts of the bad actors and just act like them and- Thatâs,
Simone Collins: thatâs exactly how this goes. A lot of these things are discovered through massive data breaches. Iâm gonna, Iâm gonna go into in a little bit some examples of ways that law enforcement has uncovered and also taken down and arrested associates.
So, letâs go into some other modern organized crime using [00:16:00] these distributed methods. I think the more, the more impressive ones, even more impressive than this, this whole Iraqi child crime syndicates
Malcolm Collins: network is- Are most of these people, what are they ethnically, the kids that they target? Are they mostly white kids
Simone Collins: or- You know, thatâs not specified.
I think itâs one of those things like how in the article- If
Malcolm Collins: itâs not specified,
Simone Collins: theyâre
Malcolm Collins: Muslim ...
Simone Collins: theyâre telling you. And-
Malcolm Collins: If itâs not specified, theyâre Muslim. If they were white, theyâd be mentioning that all over the articles.
Simone Collins: Maybe, yeah. It, it... Oh my God. It does not show up in the articles. Okay, give me one second.
Yeah, that
Malcolm Collins: everybody knows news code now. Suspect race not mentioned means the suspect is either Black or Muslim, and suspect race mentioned means theyâre white.
Simone Collins: So the, the most impressive players, in my opinion, which shouldnât be any surprise, is the Mexican drug cartels. So cartels like the Jalisco New Generation and Sinaloa excel at this kind of tech-enabled remote operation. They post fake ad jobs like, âIâm looking for a [00:17:00] security guardâ on Facebook or Instagram, which I could totally see this.
And then they shift the recruits to WhatsApp and Signal for training and assignments, and they do a little bit of a bait and switch. Like, yeah, itâs a sec- security guard, lookout guy, like whatâs the, really whatâs the difference? Donât you need money? Donât you need money though? I mean, youâre responding to a job ad on Instagram for real, like you think youâre gonna get a better job.
And they- And yeah, theyâre already
Malcolm Collins: filtering there with the type of people who are
Simone Collins: responding to the job ads on Facebook. No, like filtering, yeah. An even better filtering is how theyâre using games like Fortnite and Call of Duty and GTA V for recruiting because, one, youâre getting kids, and two, and also theyâre, theyâre doing this at like 2:00 AM.
So youâre like in Fortnite 2:00 AM finding kids. Like these are kids who are like, they enjoy a little bit of like violent role play, especially like GTA. So per Insight Crime, the recruiters will join public multiplayer sessions or [00:18:00] lobbies really late at night when itâs expected like parents arenât really watching or, you know, these are kids whose parents just arenât there, who arenât disciplined enough to keep tabs on their kids, which is perfect.
Like the selection criteria there is just so clever, I think. And they, theyâll DM them or send them a friend request or a group invite using the in-game chat. And they will have profiles or profile images- Mm-hmm ... that feature really like intimidating im- imagery or something really glamorous to, to a kid.
So you know, like cartel symbols or weapons or something, right?
Malcolm Collins: Or like a b- a, a buff guy or something.
Simone Collins: Yeah, like Andrew Tate style. You know what I mean. You know what I mean. And then theyâll like sort of love bomb them, you know, cult style. Like be like, âOh, youâre really good at this game. Do you wanna do it for real?â
Malcolm Collins: Ooh, that sounds spicy.
Simone Collins: I mean, I feel like
Malcolm Collins: every time I hear about a money-making opportunity, Iâm always just like, âIs this something we can make a few bucks off
Simone Collins: of?â Oh [00:19:00]
Malcolm Collins: God.
Simone Collins: Stop them. You know? And then theyâll, theyâll promise, you know, money and adventure and guns and cars and status and they might frame it as a job, like a security guard or a lookout.
So like they, they might even pretend itâs fairly like above board for a little bit. Or they might even frame it as like an event for some kind of virtual recruitment drive. And then they play together, like they build rapport, they become friends. And then they transition to private chats. So they get them off Fortnite or GTA V, and they get them onto Discord or Twitch or WhatsApp or Signal, and then they switch to exploiting vulnerabilities.
So ABC4 reports that the, they really go for super isolated or bored youths who are fascinated by violence or weapons which is why they really go for the shooter games. Mm-hmm. They also really go for kids from low-income backgrounds because [00:20:00] for those kids they can even make this argument like, âHey look, juvenile prison is gonna be better than your home environment.â
And in many ways it probably is. So the kids are like, âYeah, this is a win-win.â
Malcolm Collins: But much is that juvenile prison that you go into with being in on one of the gangs.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Like, yeah, exactly.
Malcolm Collins: Like, do you understand? You, you get there day one, youâve got a friend network, youâre already kinda cool, like-
Simone Collins: Yeah, like Iâm a Sinaloa kid.
Like yeah, itâs, yeah, youâre one of the, youâre one of the cool ...
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, itâs like youâre auto in. Thatâs, thatâs pretty
Simone Collins: interesting. The payment per week is I, I think really impressive. Like my allowance When I did a lot of chores. I think at the height of it was, it started at $5 a week, and I think the most was ever 20.
Oh, never got
Malcolm Collins: more than $5 a week.
Simone Collins: Yeah, I think $5 a week was the most. Yeah, like I would, I, I made most of my money from pet sitting. These kids are getting over $200 a week for low-level roles like lookouts. So the pay is good. And then- Yeah. [00:21:00] Yeah, right? So like, you, you, youâre doing pretty easy work.
Youâre just being a lookout, and then theyâre like, âHey, you know, listen, youâre really good at this. You wanna do more?â And youâre like, âYeah. Yes, I wanna do more.â Like, this is, this is life-changing money for a kid, you know? You, you ... People forget, being a kid can be fun, sure, but like, being a kid can also really suck.
You donât get to determine what you eat, where you live, what you do on a daily basis. And nobody treats you with respect. Yeah. And no one believes you, no one treats you with respect, and here you are. Youâre earning real money. It, itâs, itâs, itâs very game-changing for a kid. And then, then they escalate.
So once, once youâre hooked, and I imagine itâs very easy to get hooked, recruits can start to receive travel instructions or small tasks turn into smuggling runs. And this nonprofit, this, like, think tank that looks at crime and does a lot of investigation called InCrime, they report that cartels like CJNG and [00:22:00] Sinaloa or Cartel del Noreste are linked to these types of recruiting efforts.
Like, the biggest players are doing this. It always starts small, like youâre a messenger or youâre a lookout, and then they become big, like you are transporting, you know, possibly millions of dollars worth of drugs or you are killing people. So there are some examples that have been fairly prominently covered.
The, the most famously covered is a 21, 2021 case- In Oaxaca, Mexico, there were three boys aged 11 to 14, 11 years old that were recruited via Garena Free Fire. This is a battle royale game similar to Fortnite. I, I donât think itâs something that is an English language game. A recruiter posed as, like, a, another kid, and then offered them jobs as lookouts with weekly pay, and then it- the, the recruiter bought them bus tickets to Northern Mexico.
This is the point at which, thank goodness, the boys were [00:23:00] intercepted. But then similar cases that have also been covered involve girls and other minors that have been lured either for trafficking or cartel work. And this is a very common pattern across games, so itâs not like thereâs one game where this is the problem.
Then thereâs this prominent US and Mexico 2021 to 2022 drug mule problem involving Grand Theft Auto. So one young woman in Arizona was recruited while playing Grand Theft Auto online. She met a man in the game who offered her a job transporting what she thought were electronics. Guess what it was instead?
Malcolm Collins: Was it drugs?
Simone Collins: Yeah. It was meth. It was meth. She was
Malcolm Collins: arrested- I, I I love that, like, the moment I hear itâs a girl, Iâm like, âOh, sheâs gonna get raped. Sheâs gonna get sold into sex
Simone Collins: slavery.â I know. This is, this is the happy case.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, this is the positive outcome from girl meets guy from Grand Theft Auto whoâs in a gang.
Simone Collins: For real. Yeah, no, no, she was just arrested [00:24:00] with 60 kilograms of meth. Thatâs all. Itâs fine. US Customs and Border Protection linked this to Mexican cartels using the game for real-world runners. But keep in mind, this is a young woman in Arizona. This is not, like, some, you know, kid in a poor hovel in Mexico or something.
And then thereâs another 2021 GTA V recruitment event. Thereâs a teen who received an in-game invite at 3:00 AM, a virtual, letâs see- A reclutamiento al- abierto, an open recruitment event tied to Cartel del Noreste and old school Zeta
Malcolm Collins: Honestly, given how y- you know, the kids these are so pessimistic about the future- Yeah
theyâre also nihilistic, like-
Simone Collins: Yeah ... itâs
Malcolm Collins: really exciting for a lot of kids.
Simone Collins: Itâs, no, itâs compelling. Itâs compelling. And yeah, so this, thereâs basically this thing where you have, like, on top you have, like, the actual cartel or gang that I imagine still resembles a proper gang. You know, you [00:25:00] got the tattooed adults, or whatever, the tough-looking, scary Armenians or- The tattooed adults
Malcolm Collins: Armenians. Why are you going hard on Armenians here
Simone Collins: today? Because Armenians feature prominently in the latest season of Euphoria, and theyâre really scary. And theyâre, theyâre a lot, thereâs, thereâs, thereâs a lot. They, they have, theyâre white neo-Nazi dr- drug runners. Theyâre also thereâs, like, a, a Black cowboy like- Okay,
Malcolm Collins: okay
Simone Collins: sex trafficker essentially, and then thereâs the, the Armenians. The Armenians are the scariest in my opinion. And-
Malcolm Collins: Armenians are the scariest
Simone Collins: Yeah, dude, watch it. You know, but itâs, itâs actually really good. But one of the major themes, and in fact the, the primary protagonist in the latest season of S- of Euphoria, which is one of the few remaining shows thatâs kind of like an event show to watch it, it starts with her being a drug runner, and I was like, âAdam, this is not a very relatable plot.â
But now Iâm like, oh my [00:26:00] God, is this like, is this a thing that the youths do now? Is this-
Malcolm Collins: Is this more relatable for kids than I thought?
Simone Collins: Yeah, like is this a zeitgeist show? I thought this was like a, oh, this would be crazy. But theyâre all... Theyâre either drug runners or basically sex workers, like, on OnlyFans and stuff.
Like, Sydney Sweeneyâs in this. If youâve seen anything about Sydney Sweeney, like, and sex work, theyâre talking about Euphoria. Anyway though this is very zeitgeisty. I mean, the main character- Like, I would genuinely want to have
Malcolm Collins: gotten into this had I been younger. I would think itâs cool. I
Simone Collins: would really want to break the rules.
Yeah, itâs cool. Itâs like you, you make money. Itâs, itâs subversive. Youâre aware of the fact that, like, the actual opportunity cost for you and the actual risk is relatively low, especially in countries... I mean, itâs low assuming that your employer doesnât kill you or get you killed.
Malcolm Collins: But-
Simone Collins: Which I think is discounting
Malcolm Collins: this is the thing that I think is where weâre gonna see this go, is- Yeah ... so there was a case recently where a kid in Turkey, and he had built this [00:27:00] company when he was in his 20, early 20s. Yeah. So when he was arrested, he was like 22 or 23, and so this mustâve been- 17 ... he mustâve been like 19, 18, something like that when he made this.
Heâs like a fat kid from Iran, and he built a company that made where he scammed people out of a hu- I think it was like 3- Was this the
Simone Collins: farm thing? The-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, $350 million or something, right? And it, it- And he
Simone Collins: was caught driving like s- like a Ferrari in Uruguay or something.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah. But anyway, the point being is the moment, you know, some Iranian figures this out, right, in Iran, right?
Youâre gonna get youths that see these sorts of things and are like... âCause this is what I would think. Yeah,
Simone Collins: sign me up. Yeah, itâs GTA V but, like, IRL. Please, letâs, letâs go.
Malcolm Collins: Well, not just that, but like, I bet I could run these operations better than these guys. For real. Yeah. But like now that itâs entirely decentralized- I know, I know
and I can run this while going to school during the day. Actually, make a movie about this. This would be a really entertaining movie, about-
Simone Collins: Itâd be a great movie. Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: about a [00:28:00] kid whoâs just like a normal kid during the day, but, but a la, like, A
Simone Collins: crime boss by night ...
Malcolm Collins: well, I mean, this kind of happened with the guy who created Silk Road, right?
Simone Collins: Ross Ulbricht, who got a Trump pardon. That my favorite Trump pardon, Ross Ulbricht. My
Malcolm Collins: favorite Trump pardon, too. Yeah. But imagine somebody-
Simone Collins: Actually, somebody, someone we know, I, I canât name her Iâll tell you at dinner tonight, Just recently got breakfast with his mom randomly
Malcolm Collins: Ross Ulbrichtâs mom?
What?
Simone Collins: Yeah. Youâre never gonna guess who it is either.
Malcolm Collins: I, I think I know who it is.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: The, our DC friend, female
Simone Collins: friend. No. No. No. Youâre never... I swear to God, youâre never gonna guess. Okay,
Malcolm Collins: well, here
Simone Collins: you go. I mean, the
Malcolm Collins: point, the point here being, Yeah ... I think, one, cool anime. Very, very familiar cool Itâs cool TV
Simone Collins: format, dude.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, doing the, Should I write a story? I mean, like use, with AI, this would be a great like first story, right? To-
Simone Collins: Itâs
Malcolm Collins: gonna be like- I donât know. Iâm interested in this. I, Iâm interested-
Simone Collins: [00:29:00] We shouldnât be glam- No, no, bad, bad. We shouldnât be glamorizing this. Now I know, like I really have to be care- Like Octavian just this morning, âI wanna do like multiplayer online games.â
He wants to play Among Us, he wants to play Minecraft. Now Iâm gonna be like, âOh my God, like is someone, is someone gonna be recruiting him to become a drug runner if I let him play like multiplayer online games?â Like how, how isolated does Arianna have to make our family to like-
Malcolm Collins: Actually, hold on.
To be even cooler about this, hereâs, hereâs an alt strategy you could do, right?
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: It totally changes the way that you can even operate a gang, right? So right now, one of the challenges with operating these is theyâre often targeting state actors and stuff like that.
Simone Collins: Arenât you about to give the cartels b- like operational advice?
Malcolm Collins: No. Like what if you create a sort of distributed cartel thatâs just meant to soak cartel operations for money and supplies? Like and, and because itâs completely distributed, itâs way harder for [00:30:00] them to pin down whoever is actually leading things
Simone Collins: What do you mean? Like, how, how would this work? Do you be a supplier to them?
âCause there are, there are
Malcolm Collins: suppliers to them. No, no. You so if theyâre already doing these sorts of operations and stuff like that, you-
Simone Collins: Like you wanna be like an agency for the kids to be like, âMm, I represent them now. I take 20% and youâre not paying me now.â
Malcolm Collins: No. You, you create a counter cartel, right?
Okay. That basically exploits the way that theyâre doing operational. Itâs obviously very up upsetting- Oh, like you,
Simone Collins: you more effectively recruit the youth?
Malcolm Collins: No. You exploit the way that they are doing this to siphon money from them. So, this requires a lot of trust from one, the youth who are doing this.
Mm-hmm. So you can go in and spoof acting like cartel members, for example, to get people to do things that are counter cartel interests- Ooh ... within these particular regions in ways that can make you money through then [00:31:00] exploiting organizations and saying, âOh, you pay me X amount, you pay me Y amount to be safe.â
You could, you could run some sort of counter cartel operation. Actually, I wonder if youâre doing this in developing countries like targeting, letâs say big things like mining rigs and stuff like that, I bet you could make decent money with minimal risk of them just not being willing to pay you because the state operation that would come after you in these places is gonna be small, right?
So, if you tried to exploit mining facilities and stuff like that in places like Africa, and youâre doing this well, you could probably do pretty well. Or large banks and stuff like that. The problem is, is they already have to worry about generic terrorism, so how far could you go? I mean, thereâs countries on like the edge of development, so like Peru would be an easy place to operate something like this.
Specifically because like historically, like if you look at the buildings, theyâre really made to be terrorism proof, but not anymore. Iâm just thinking like if a kid was going to do this, how would you do it in todayâs [00:32:00] economy?
Simone Collins: Well, you better figure it out soon because our oldest is gonna be 11 soon enough, and then you know,
Malcolm Collins: thereâs 10-year-old safety And do you think heâs gonna wait till 11 to start this sort of stuff, Simone?
Simone Collins: Yeah, fair enough. Heâs really, like- I
Malcolm Collins: think heâll be on it at nine. Oh my God. Y- with his,
Illegal chicken farming, of course. That,
Simone Collins: thatâs what he
Malcolm Collins: really
Simone Collins: wants to do. With his baby chick daycare. Yeah. Like I said, all he wants to do is work for Tractor Supply, babysit baby chicks. He wants to be there for the chicks, okay?
He, he canât stop thinking of the chicks. Heâs into
Malcolm Collins: chicks. Our kids really
Simone Collins: into chicks. The chicks. Yeah. I
Malcolm Collins: actually think that this is... The other thing I wanna take an opportunity to think about before we sign off on this topic
Simone Collins: is- Thereâs actually more. Do you, can I give you a little more? Yeah, âcause this is, this is just fascinating stuff.
Just just so you know ice.gov has stuff on this too that I found to be interesting. Darknet marketplaces, like there are successors to the Silk Road like Alpha, Alpha [00:33:00] Bay. They function like, and this is why I was confused by what youâre proposing, like an eBay for illicit goods and services.
So there are groups that offer crime as a service with different hierarchies, and they have reviews, and they have escrow payments, often in crypto. Like itâs, itâs more secure. Theyâre, theyâre really heavy in Eastern Europe but, and, and internationally, but I mean, we could make it, you know, made in the USA edition, you know, MAGA edition.
Malcolm Collins: MAGA?
Simone Collins: And then thereâs, there are coders who sell malware. There are people who, you know, handle the like hits and drugs and transport. Like thereâs, thereâs a whole economy. People specialize. But the, the core model for gig economy terrorism is also fascinating, and this is the even scarier part, right?
âCause you were talking about the exploitation of nihilism as part of the what makes this so effective and, and youth nihilism being super high. I think itâs extra scary when itâs not just, âOh, this is like for $200,â but also like, âOh, Iâve finally been [00:34:00] given meaning and a community.â Like, then you can get someone to do a whole lot more when that happens.
So hereâs how terrorist groups are using these general approaches. The, thereâs a George Washington University program on extremism. I pulled some of my sources from there. By the way, all the show notes are in, in Substack and on Patreon. Iâve linked all my sources. Theyâre detailed, so go read more there.
But the way it works is they will start on platforms like Twitter, I mean X, or Facebook or TikTok or Instagram with like propaganda, and then they shift from there to encrypted messaging, and hereâs where like Telegram is also super heavy, but then thereâs WhatsApp still and Signal, and then thereâs also apps like SureSpot and Wickr, which Iâve never heard of before.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: But theyâre, I guess, good for secure one-on-one small group coordination. And then you get handlers assigning specific jobs like conduct a vehicle ramming here, or make a bomb with [00:35:00] these instructions, or film a pledge and attack. Like really scary stuff. And they will provide everything from the logistics to the targets and encouragement.
They can arrange weapons caches. You know, itâs kind of like paint by numbers just with terrorism, which is terrifying. They just make it super easy. You know, like in the past I mean, even when you watch spy movies and stuff, right? Like, the spies have to do all the work, right? Like itâs-- But now, like any kid can become James Bond.
You know, they have like their person whoâs like, âDonât worry, here are your tools. Hereâs how to do it all.â You know, and theyâre, they just like... But itâs so cheap. Itâs so inexpensive and so therefore scalable. And this now isnât just about money, itâs about martyrdom, itâs about caliphate glory or status.
And sometimes of course thereâs financial support too. So itâs not just, itâs like crime bounties plus all these other things that can make people do much more dangerous things. There are the [00:36:00] propaganda magazines that get people really like stoked about doing this stuff that include even like open source jihad tutorials.
The, the Foreign Policy Research Institute has scary stuff on that. So hereâs some examples of this happening. Back even in twenty fifteen and twenty sixteen, there was this plot in India, in, in Hyderabad. The, The New York Times reported on this basically remote case in which an ISIS handler, a virtual plotter if you will guided an engineer named Mohammed Ibrahim Yazdani in a cell for seventeen months via messaging apps.
Detailed stuff. They, they instructed him on collecting hidden explosives and chemicals from drop points, and also weapons. They helped him attack or plan his attack an attack hub. The cell was in near constant contact until they were arrested, and this was not him at all acting alone. I think sometimes when we see reporting on [00:37:00] this, it seems like itâs just one dude.
Yeah. But what weâre talking about is like thereâs this just heâs, this is one dude with a lot of support. Then there were a bunch of Europe attacks between twenty fourteen and twenty sixteen. A bunch of virtual plotters directed and/or inspired around nineteen out of the thirty-eight ISIS related attack, attacks that took place in Western Europe during that time.
Nineteen out of thirty-eight is a lot. And theyâre... That, that they were involved in the twenty fifteen Paris attack, the twenty sixteen Brussels attack. They used Telegram primarily for coordination. And these people are getting real-time guidance. Theyâre getting bomb making tips, and theyâre getting target selection.
And itâs something that again is just not really... I think when we see news coverage of this, itâs like, âOh, like some rando drove a van into a Christmas market.â And what weâre not realizing is this isnât some rando. This is like, this is an agent being puppeted by a [00:38:00] very sophisticated, carefully planned, planning cell.
Which is super creepy. There was a case in which- Oh I, Iâll just, you know, guys go to the show notes because I also wanted just to briefly talk about how law enforcement is trying to combat this. So thereâs the, thereâs this international association for the chiefs of police, which I find to be very cute for some reason, and I, I fell down a rabbit hole with them, but they were- Are, are they
Malcolm Collins: like a, do they look like stereotypical police chiefs?
Is it like goofy and like a top
Simone Collins: hat? Itâs just cute. I just like, I see them like going, like I just imagine them going to the little police chief convention and being like, âIâm the chief. Iâm
the
chief. â... crime is bad.â Just, I donât know. I just find, I donât know why I find it so endearing, but I do. But they, they say that platforms like EncroChat, Sky ECC, Phantom Secure, and others are some of the like bespoke [00:39:00] crime-only platforms that have been created by especially European, but also like other international syndicates for use.
So instead of only just using Signal and Telegram and WhatsApp, they have developed these like specific dedicated bits of software, which I find to be interesting. These have been used by the Italian Mafia, by Albanian groups, drug cartels, and motorcycle gangs. And theyâve been used to coordinate drug shipments and, and do contract killings and things like torture, money laundering.
And law enforcement has, for the most part, infiltrated these or shut them down. Like in twenty-twenty, they shut down EncroChat, and, and this also led to dozens of arrests in Europe and beyond. So the danger in creating a dedicated crime software is that like youâre gonna become the number one target as soon as law enforcement learns about you, and they will because they will eventually get someone to snitch by basically being like, âYouâre going to jail for life unless you, you know, become a [00:40:00] snitch.â
And-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Theyâre catching people planning murders. Theyâre catching people like coordinating torture sessions. It, itâs horrible. Hereâs my favorite FBI sting that happened. What did the FBI think? Theyâre like, âI have a great idea. Letâs just build one of these and just tell everyone, âHey guys, I got the new, I got the new software platform for crime.
Time to come on here.ââ And so they created Anom, A-N-O-M. Iâm sure it stand... it stood for something. But it was a fake encrypted platform that criminals adopted globally. Like they got over twelve thousand devices in over a hundred countries that enabled remote coordination by the Italian Mafia and outlaw motorcycle gangs and drug syndicates.
And then in twenty-twenty-one, after they felt content that they had enough people on their platform, they, they, they committed what they called Operation Trojan Shield- ... which resulted in, in over a hundred arrests. And you can read more about it. The [00:41:00] FBI has a- Fantastic. Yeah. There, thereâs an article called âFBIâs Encrypted Phone Platform Infiltrated Hundreds of Criminal Syndicates.
Result is Massive Worldwide Takedown.â So there is hope. Thereâs hope that these things can result in some form of justice. And the great thing about there being all this documentation on Signal and Telegram and whatnot is like, okay, yeah, as much as these are, you know, encrypted chats, people take screenshots.
People take pictures of their phone even when you canât take a screenshot in an app. Like, there are ways that, you know, if something is on a device, if something is ever written down, it can be documented. If something is uttered, honestly, around any kind of device, you know? So that, that is a thing. But I think for this reason, I, most of the current major crime syndicates and organizations are using a constellation of apps, which is why youâre hearing like, âOh, well, the Iraqis are using WhatsApp for extortion messages, but Signal to coordinate with their, [00:42:00] like, team criminals.
And theyâre using, and Sinaloa is using Fortnite.â Like, itâs better to just, to be totally platform agnostic and do whatever works and shift frequently. And thatâs why youâre just, I think youâre gonna continue to see basically gaming platforms and Discord and Signal and Telegram and WhatsApp because itâs just better to not be in any one place.
So yeah, itâs scary. Itâs a, but that, thatâs what I wanted to share. I think itâs fascinating. I, thereâs a lot more reading you can do if you go to the show notes.
Malcolm Collins: Totally changes how businesses can operate, which I find to be very interesting.
Simone Collins: It does.
Malcolm Collins: It does, yeah. And if I was going to operate one of these, I would likely target a country that canât defend itself as easily.
I think thatâs the, the best way to handle this rather than like the United States or Europe. Like yes, those are the juiciest piggy banks, right? Sure,
Simone Collins: yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But theyâre also the most likely to get you, whereas if youâre targeting you know, Eastern Europe or, or you know, a, a lot of Arab majority countries and stuff like that, you can [00:43:00] operate without them being able to push back as easily.
Which would be very, very interesting. Thatâs, thatâs what I would do. I donât know.
Simone Collins: Yeah, absolutely.
Malcolm Collins: But then youâve gotta, you know, try to understand the local culture and language enough to make that operate, and so thatâs a bit, you know, difficult. But, Yeah, thatâs very
Simone Collins: true ... very exciting and
Malcolm Collins: interesting to see where this goes and as we get better at defending against this.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah, for real. Iâm so scared for our kids, man. I mean- I mean- What?
Malcolm Collins: Look, weâre the ones who started a cult, Simone, so you know, keep in mind-
Simone Collins: Who hasnât these days? I donât know. Like, thatâs-
Malcolm Collins: Itâs a pretty good cult, Iâm gonna be honest.
Simone Collins: Itâs cool. Itâs, Iâm proud to be a techno-puritan. Itâs good. All right.
Itâs, itâs, yeah. Love you.
To what extent does it actually taste good because youâre starving because you havenât eaten in a really long time?
Malcolm Collins: Oh, yeah, I guess. Well, no, I had, like, potatoes yesterday. They were good
Simone Collins: Oh, yeah, [00:44:00] you had, you had french fries and samosas. That, that was the, that was your comfort food when you came back from college, right?
Today she
Malcolm Collins: made slow cooked Chinese pork belly, and it is amazing. It is amazing. And then sheâs gonna saute the, the pork belly with bok choy and bean- beanlets, whatever theyâre called, little beans.
Simone Collins: Bean sprouts?
Malcolm Collins: Bean sprouts.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But I am excited for this episode, so letâs hop right in. Are we on the right side?
Simone Collins: Yes, we are. Sir, heâs such in a grabby phase. Okay. Oh, you think itâs-- he thinks itâs funny. He thinks itâs funny. Of course he thinks itâs funny.
Speaker 10: Are they getting away? Are they your buddies? Yeah. Howâs the daycare going, your baby chick daycare? Yeah. Itâs going well? You tickle? Yeah. All right. You wanna give them their new home? [00:45:00] Yeah, I can go get my things. Okay. Of course Okay, girly, down you go. Rascal, uh-oh Oh, no. Rascalâs living up to her name. No, no, no, no, no.
Weâll get her in. All right, you can walk them into their new home Hey Rascal. Come here girl
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 episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the Book of Genesis, revealing surprising alignments between the ancient text and modern evolutionary science.
Malcolm challenges common Sunday-school interpretations, showing how Genesis describes a timeline that closely matches scientific understanding: from the early Earth and origin of life, through aquatic creatures and large reptiles, to birds, land animals, and finally humanity. They explore alternate translations of key Hebrew words (like âyomâ for âday/eraâ, âyatsarâ for âformed/plannedâ, and âtaninimâ for great reptilian creatures), discuss the Big Bang, prebiotic Earth, the evolution of sexuality, and why Genesis stands out among global creation myths.
A fascinating conversation blending biblical scholarship, evolutionary biology, and philosophical insight that will challenge both skeptics and literalists.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Iâm excited to talk with you today. In a recent episode, I pointed out, I was like, âIt is weird to within a modern context in Christianity and stuff like this, when people are saying that evolution is not coherent with Genesis.â
And I would say that at least my readings of Genesis, evolution makes me believe Genesis more because Genesis says a bunch of stuff that aligns with what we know of the, about the evolutionary timeline without saying anything that disconfirms the evolutionary timeline. So we are gonna get into this.
And itâs, itâs, itâs such a fun topic for me to get into because when I was a kid, and I believe that Genesis said what, as I call it, Sunday school Christianity, you know? Well Genesis says X, Y, and Z, and and I- if you look at it, and then donât look up alternate translations of the words in it whenever something looks a little fishy or looks like it may be [00:01:00] factually incorrect or donât look up how that word is used in other places in the Old Testament you immediately are like, âOkay, thatâs believable,â right?
And so thatâs stupid because thatâs an old story for savages.
Speaker 2: We will call them cave Jews
Speaker 3: Attacker!
Malcolm Collins: And then you come at it with a more modern mindset. I mean, just if you look at the mere timeline given in it, right? It says first you have non-animal life. Then you have the vast array... No, it doesnât even say, like, fishes.
Itâs, itâs the vast array of creatures that live in the sea.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Along with some form of large reptilian creature. Hmm ... which, which, no- What could that
Simone Collins: be?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, what, what could that be? Now, no, thereâs, thereâs a lot of really cool... First, itâs not as simple as saying, like, fi- they easily could have wr- fishes, right?
But if youâre describing- Yeah ... the [00:02:00] evolutionary timeline- Yeah ... the vast array of things that live in the sea is a very good description for early animal life. 100%,
Simone Collins: yeah.
Malcolm Collins: And Iâm also gonna go into stuff in the translations here, where a lot of people argue that the, the giant thing thatâs written here, the ćš, or whatever is like a leviathan, that it is a giant sea creature-like serpent or something like that.
And Iâm gonna point out that actually if you read the, the correct, the Hebrew, which weâll go into- Mm-hmm Isnât necessarily talking about a sea animal. Itâs only talking about a large reptilian creature. It just talks about it in the same context as itâs talking about sea animals, so people often assumed it was talking about sea animals.
And then it says- there were also some very large
Simone Collins: sea animals
Malcolm Collins: though There were some large reptiles, but Iâm just saying, like, if I was trying to give an evolutionary timeline of history. Then it says youâve got the birds. Then youâve got the creatures on Earth today. So like before we go into this, this is, even broadly most people are aware it gives this timeline.[00:03:00]
Do you know how many other religions, and Iâm talking even if I go Native American traditions, even if I go African traditions, âcause I have gone through AI after AI trying to find a single other religion that gets the evolutionary timeline as close to right as this. There isnât one.
Simone Collins: Yeah. I, I canât think of one, for sure.
One. There, there isnât- Based on all the folk traditions Iâve heard, everything, yeah
Malcolm Collins: There isnât even one that gets the first two simple steps right. Mm. Non-animal life and aquatic life. Or fishes, or anything. Like, I tried to give it so many outs. Wow. Nothing. Nothing comes close to getting those two stages right.
So again, this isnât just like they randomly threw stuff together and happened to get it right. This is, like, easily very, very right related stuff. So weâre gonna get into that. Very, very fun.
Speaker 3: So note, a lot of people will be like, âWell, thereâs some really obvious mistakes that you find. For [00:04:00] example, that non-animal based life came about before the sun and the moon.â To which I would be like, âWell, actually, hold on a second here. , Do you know what the oldest evidence of life we have on Earth is?
Itâs
Australiaâs Jack Hills zircons, which date about 4.4 billion years old, , into the Hadean era. All right? So do you know when the moon was formed? Formed, by the way, from a collision of a body about the size of Mars into Earth, which led to the surface being largely covered in magma for a period that would likely have wiped out any evidence we had of life from before that period. It was formed f- 4.5 billion years ago. So the moon is from 4.5 billion years ago in an event that would have wiped any evidence of life existing before it off [00:05:00] the surface of the Earth. Then 4.4 billion years ago, we see evidence of life. Whatâs the chance you think that there could have been life on Earth before this collision, and that it in some way influenced or seeded the life that came after the collision?
Iâm gonna at least say, like, from my perspective, at least 20 to 30%, and I wouldnât have known that without going into this.
Otherwise, you have to assume that coincidentally life just happened to first evolve almost immediately after this collision during one of the most violent times of Earthâs history, which seems unlikely
And then you can say, âWell, okay, but the sun definitely existed before that.â And we can say, âAll right, but if you read the Bible, it says that it separated the night from the day.â That is the point of the creation of the sun in this particular story.
, And if [00:06:00] we go 4.4 billion years ago to those Jackson Hill zircons, right, , the atmosphere was still transitioning,
, More specifically, it had really high levels of CO2, potentially tens of hundreds of times higher than modern, and a very high level of water vapor that sustained a really strong greenhouse effect and permanent very thick cloud layers
, And the image I have in the background here is an image from, as you can see, itâs from a scientific catalog, right, of what scientists think Earth looked like during this period of Earthâs history.
So it would have been, , extremely, extremely diffuse and hazy. , Most days during that period from what we know , of Earth would have just looked like an orangish, reddish overcast.
Things you would not have been able to see, or would have been able to see very rarely, maybe once every few hundred years or something like that, are the stars and a [00:07:00] clear day and night. So actually, the Bible isnât even that wrong on some of the weirder claims it makes
Malcolm Collins: A note here weâre gonna go into, like a lot of people will be like, âUh-uh. It says that God formed the animals with the dirt, that it formed man with the dirt.â
And weâre gonna point out the word that is translated in your Sunday school Bible into formed throughout the rest of the
Old Testament, do you know what it means? No, actually. Planned. Really? It y- Oh. Yes. And weâll go through instances. It, it, it can be used to mean formed, but it could equally be used to say, âGod planned the dirt to become human.
God planned-â Oh my word ... âthe dirt to become animals.â Ooh. But weâre gonna go over all sorts of fun stuff like this which is fun. And weâre gonna mostly be focused on the first story of Genesis, âcause Genesis sort of has two beginning of Earth stories that arenât really that contradictory. We have [00:08:00] another episode, the Adam and Eve story, that goes over that one.
I think itâs one of the best episodes weâve ever produced, if youâre interested. Itâs, doesnât even contradict normal Christianity that much and itâs very elucidating for, I think, a lot of people, around whatâs actually in the Adam and Eve story, because itâs not often what youâre taught. And note here when people are like, âWell, if itâs saying that God like planned man to come out of dirt or whatever,â right?
Like that, that still doesnât mean evolution, right? You know? Because evolution is a natural process, so that wouldnât be God doing it. And here Iâm gonna be like, okay, letâs just talk about the nature of miracles. Imagine God was like, âIâm gonna shoot that guy with lightning.â Right? Like calling the shots.
And then all of a sudden you see lightning come down from the sky and shock a guy, and he falls over dead. And then you turn and you go, âYeah, but that was static in the clouds that caused that lightning, and so I donât really think that that was a miracle,â right? You know, because it was done through natural processes.
Iâm like, actually, thatâs, thatâs a little bit more impressive than just [00:09:00] magicking it, okay? Right. Letâs go into this, ânow the Lord God formed out the ground all the wild animals and the birds in the s- sky.â So, the word used here for formed means to mold, shape, or fashion. It can mean that, okay? However itâs frequently used to describe a plan, a purpose, a division, or preordaining.
Mm-hmm ... and specifically the root idea of yatsar is to, through a plan, mold or shape something into a specific form. So if weâre gonna look at instances where we see it used this way you have Isaiah 22:11, âBut you did not look to Him who did it or planned it,â and this is the same word here, âor have a regard for Him who planned it y- long ago.â
A- a- again, the planned here is the same word that was used to mean form or translated as form in Genesis. If you go to Isaiah 37:27 and thereâs a parallel in 2 Kings 19:25, âHave you not heard that I [00:10:00] determined it long ago? I planned it from the days of old.â The word planned here is the same word thatâs used for form.
Iâm not gonna go through every instance. Weâve got an instance in I- Isaiah 46:11 Plasm 42:20 Jeremiah 18:11. Basically, itâs just everywhere. This is not an uncommon way to use that word. And people can say, âWell, obviously when the Bible was written, thatâs not the way the savage people of, you know, however many, four or five thousand years ago were meant to understand these lines.â
And Iâm gonna say, isnât that even kind of crazier- Exactly ... that truth could be baked into the text, that as science continued to uncover things, we were able to reread it in a way that would never make sense to somebody 5,000 years ago, but is not disconfirming of modern science. Can you see why that affirms my faith that there might have been some actual divine inspiration for this, instead of disconfirms?
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: [00:11:00] Now letâs go to another thing that people will complain about. They will say, âWell, it says days,â right? It says on day one, on day two, et cetera, right?
Simone Collins: And- The Bible in general get, it throws me with timing. You know, he lived for 100-something years. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: I often hear the and I always thought this was a really bad counter-explanation- Oh
Where theyâll be like, âWell, you know, because days didnât really exist yet at the beginning of time and the human concept of day didnât exist- Hmm ... these days could mean any amount of time you want them to be,â right? And I always found this to be very flimsy. I was like, âCome on.â Like, that, that really just seems like re-begging the point.
Like, I donât, I donât, I donât buy that. But okay, letâs ask this question again. The word thatâs translated as day here, especially with the concept of a morning and night attached to it, which you do have in this- Oh, really? Okay ... is it in other parts of the Old Testament in [00:12:00] Hebrew writing used to refer to something longer than a single day?
Or does the word sometimes mean something other than a literal one day? Oh, so whatâs the, whatâs the answer? All over the place. So, a- and some even very, very common ones. So the day of the Lord this is Isaiah 2:12, 13:6, 13:9, Joel 1:15, 2:1. I donât need to go over all the places. Itâs all over the place.
And it refers to a future period of divine judgment and/or blessing, often involving cosmic signs and battles. Mm. Pretty much all Christians and Jews believe in the day of the Lord, and none of them believe itâs one day. Like, thatâs not a, a common interpretation, yet itâs all over the Bible and, and very...
And this is within the communities that take the creationist literalist approach. This is the thing that gets me, âcause what weâre gonna be going over is a lot of verses here where day is used to mean something longer than a day, that are [00:13:00] taken to mean that by the same groups that say in- Genesis it must mean a literal day.
So the word that weâre translating as a day here, you donât even need to be like, oh, you know, in the perception of God, a day of a thousand years or whatever. It literally in other places of the Bible is translated to mean era. , And when you think about a word like the era of the Lord instead of the day of the Lord, it actually sort of makes more sense when we see this mistranslation appear in other places as well.
, Now, do I think to the savage cave geo, , when they heard this story that they werenât thinking of literal days? No, they probably were. They simply didnât have any context to understand the context of billions or trillions of years. So it makes sense that we would have talked if they were having some form of supernatural inspiration to write down a true big history time span [00:14:00] of Earth, they would have used this word, , that I think divinely has another meaning in other parts of the Bible, which is era, , to say some period of time
Malcolm Collins: So, another instance here, Joshua 24:7 âAnd you lived in the wilderness many days.â Now this is translated as a long time , and this refers to the 40 years of wandering. Now 40 years of wandering isnât just many days, okay? Thatâs 40 effing years of wandering, right?
Mm-hmm. Then you have Josiah 6:2, âAfter two days He will revive us, and on the third day He will raise us up.â Many scholars, including most of the scholars who take a literal interpretation of days in Genesis, see this as prophetic of a longer period. Oh. Often linked to Israelâs restoration or even the time of Christâs restoration.
Using the a day is like a thousand years principle from Psalms 94 and Peter 3:8. Psalms. And note... Songs, whatever, blah. People say the day is like a thousand years one they use to [00:15:00] mean they argue it in this. Iâve heard that argument before. I just find it a lot more convincing that, And, and again, you have Daniel 8:2, where again you have days used to mean something that is generally agreed as being much longer than a day.
But whatâs interesting here is in Daniel 8:26, you also even have the convention of evening and morning attached with this concept of a day- Hmm ... to delineate something that is much longer than what we, when weâre talking about a literal day mean. And, and this to me is just much more compelling. If this word is used all over the place to mean something other than a literal day why would we not see it as being more like the term era or epoch?
Which it does seem to be referencing in terms of time horizons if weâre looking at evolutionary and geological history, okay? Yeah. Yes. And so you can say, âWell, if they wanted to say epoch, why didnât they say epoch? [00:16:00] Why didnât they say billions of years?â And the answer is they just didnât have those words.
Right? That those, those words arenât in the Bible. The scales of time that this verse is talking about is simply not talked about anywhere else in the Bible. Huh. So of course they wouldnât use it. Of course somebody, of, of people living in a freaking desert 10,000 years ago wouldnât have had the concept of geological history to write that down.
Right. If it was explained to them, it would look like this.
Speaker 9: So what alternate word could they have used other than the word they used if they wanted to use a word that was closer to something like an era or an epoch? There really is only one other word, and once you know it, itâs immediately obvious why it wasnât used if youâre trying to be true. Itâs the word tekufa or tekaph, and this appears four times in the Tanakh.
So what does this [00:17:00] mean? It means a cycle, a turn, or a circuit. So it would have indicated a view of time and history that is much closer to like a Hindu or Buddhist one, which is not in alignment with what we know about evolution or the way history works. So suppose the cave Jew who was having these revelations, he says, letâs suppose some sort of angel is inspiring them or something, and itâs like a really, really long time period.
And theyâre like, oh, you mean like a turn or a cycle? And theyâre like, no, not like that. Do you have any other words you can use?
the wild thing about the AI response, , is I asked it, is there any word in ancient Hebrew of the time of the Old Testament that can be used to mean era or epoch, , or did such a word not exist yet? So not only did it give me this cycle word, but it then says under that if, basically, if youâre not using that word, the next best word to use is yom, the word thatâs actually used here.
, Whatâs also really [00:18:00] cool is if you look at the scholarly debate on this, what theyâll say is, okay, yes, itâs within the s- called the semantic range of the word yom to be used as era, in that sometimes itâs used to mean era or epoch in the Bible. But thatâs not how itâs normally used in the Bible the vast majority of times because, I mean, youâre just gonna be talking about days a lot more often than youâll be talking about epoch or era.
But to me, thatâs a really bad argument for it being interpreted that way in this particular context because yes, obviously you use the word day more than the word era, but in this context, era just makes a lot more sense when we know actual scientific history. More than that, when people come and they go, âWell, look, it talks about having night times and day times in this story,â and itâs like, bro, even in English, you would hear somebody be like, âWell, at the sunset of the Victorian era,â , you donât think, oh, well, that meant that the [00:19:00] Victorian era happened in a day
Malcolm Collins: All right, now weâre gonna go over all of the lines from Genesis, and go over how actually affirming they are, and how f- from my perspective of modern science seems to affirm them. And weâll go over the one or two contradictions where Iâm like, âThis is a genuine problem.â
But the genuine problems are actually even more interesting to me, because they present things where if, like, techno-puritism, our version of Christianity, becomes a, a religion thatâs popular, people can say, âLook, they predicted science would overturn this based on the Bible- Ooh ... 50 years ago, 100 years ago.â
And if we end up being right about those things that is going to be very, very spicy in terms of affirmation of thereâs some form of divine inspiration for this story. All right, so letâs go into this. In the beginning, God created heavens and the Earth. Now, the Earth was formless and empty.
Darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the spirit of God was hovering over the waters. [00:20:00] So immediately we have a number of problems here, right? Like, if youâre taking a normal Sunday school, typically you just read this line and you drop it. Youâre just like, âOkay, something just... Whatever. Yeah, I guess.
Godâs hovering over waters.â That sounds like normal you know, pagan nonsense, right? Like, like, like, the type of thing Iâd expect some tribal group to write or something, right? Maybe, maybe a little more fluttery, but whatever. And then you go, âNo, no, no, no.â Like, letâs, letâs suppose Iâm taking this seriously, right?
This doesnât make sense the way itâs translated to English here.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Specifically... Okay, so itâs talking about a formless, empty darkness. First of all, very interesting if youâre thinking about, like, pre-Big Bang. How do you describe reality, time before the Big Bang? I think a formless, empty darkness is a pretty good description.
And-
Simone Collins: 100%, yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: and people can then say, âWell, look here. Itâs saying now [00:21:00] the Earth was a formless, empty darkness.â And Iâm gonna be like clearly thatâs not what it means, because it canât both be the Earth and a formless, empty darkness.â So Earth- Yeah ... in this context clearly means everything, not just the Earth as we understand it.
Secondarily, you now have the issue of, okay, so you have, The earth with a formless, empty darkness over the surface of the deep, right? Okay. So, and then God-
Simone Collins: That implies also, yeah, like a, the earth covered in oceans, which is how it was in the beginning, right?
Malcolm Collins: Yes, during a, part of our early history, but weâre, weâll get to that in a second.
But it then says, so basically you have two things. You have the water, right? The, the, the surface of the deep. And then the, the formless empty deep itself, and then the darkness, right? Yeah. And these two things are, are, are sort of in, in opposition to each other. And then you have the, the spirit of God hovering over the water.
So wait, that doesnât make any sense because the earth with a formless, empty darkness over the [00:22:00] surface of the deep. So that means now God is either, like, under the water in the deep, or he is the formless empty darkness, right? Youâre on one of two- Mm-hmm ... sides of this water surface. It, assuming the word over in this context means that he is literally spatially hovering over something.
So then you have to look. You have to say, well, does the word over mean anything else? Which weâll get into in a second. It does, by the way. Ooh. Thereâs a spoiler. And then secondarily, we have the word hovering here, which is a very weird word that is used very, very rarely in the Old Testament and doesnât at all mean what hovering...
Hovering is a terrible translation of the word. It basically means- Itâs worthless ... a thing in constant non-hurried movement/development.
Simone Collins: Oh. Oh, yeah. Okay. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Now I can see how hovering would be, like, the closest- I can ... youâre gonna get to as an easy word.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But I think thatâs actually a way more [00:23:00] important to understand what that word, because as soon as youâre like, âThatâs a-â Yeah, it sounds like
weird word to use there,â right? Yeah. Yeah. So letâs go against this. Okay. So first of all what are the other things that over could mean in this context? Mm-hmm. It could mean against. They are putting God as something that exists in opposition to the formlessness before time, okay? Before the Big Bang, right?
Or it could mean sort of like, after. So, here you have this in Proverbs 25:11. You have this in Leviticus 15:25, and you have this in Job 21:32 where youâve got, It, it, it sort of means, like- either after or in the right time in relation to Hmm. Like th- th- God is a thing that exists both after in opposition to the formless empty darkness.
Which to me seems a lot easier to... Like, that, that doesnât have any problems for me. Iâm like, âOkay, that seems true.â And then letâs look at what this word hovering [00:24:00] means. Weâve gone over this before, but just to go over it quickly it means not standing still, but vibrating with life or purpose, in constant movement.
Hmm. But also in a non-hurried way. So where do we see this in other places? We see this in Deuteronomy 32:11 and this, Deuteronomy ... like, like an eagle stirs upon its nest and hovers over- Hmm ... its young. Okay. So one of the only other instances we have of this is something protectively guarding its young or something thatâs, thatâs gestating, right?
And then in, which is a way better term than, than hover as well in this context the sort of brooding over something. And then in Jeremiah 23:9, we have, âMy heart is broken within me, all my bones,â and then this word and here itâs translated to tremble, like a constant shake of, of shaking or movement.
If you take, and Iâm not gonna go too into techno-puritan stuff here âcause I donât wanna... This is not what this episodeâs about. Itâs about evolution. But this is very affirming of a techno-puritan understanding of God [00:25:00] rather than being a, a static entity, being an evolving entity. But to continue here.
So next line here. And then God said, so keep in mind, we have dark, dark, empty, formless void, right? So what does God do in relation to the dark, empty void, right? Iâm sure you know this part of the story, Go- Simone. He says, âLet there be light,â and then there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from darkness.
God called the light day, and the darkness called night, and there was evening, and there was morning the first day.
Speaker 10: Many of you want to say, âWell, there couldnât have been a meaningful day and night at the creation of the universe.â Note here that clearly this doesnât mean day and night as we experience it on Earth, because that happens in a future one of the eras, specifically the, âAnd God said, âLet there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night.ââ
So clearly this is talking about something else in regard to night and day. , Here, what I assume it means, [00:26:00] because it talks about the light or the photons that are emitted with the Big Bang, is probably light and dark matter and energy
Malcolm Collins: Now first, great explanation of the Big Bang if youâre trying to explain the Big Bang to savages living in the woods 10,000 years ago or in a desert 10,000 years ago. Youâre not gonna...
Imagine trying to explain to them, itâs like, okay, so, like, time didnât exactly exist in any way we understand it. The laws of physics probably didnât even exist before the Big Bang. And then there was this, like, giant explosion, and all of these photons came out of it. And theyâre like, âWhat the are you talking about?â
And youâre like, âThere was a dark and formless void- Yeah ... and then there was light.â Yeah. And theyâre like, âAh, yes, that makes sense now.â I get it now. Yeah, you
Simone Collins: have to use language that can be passed on, that can make sense in the context in which itâs being... Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Any- Understood ... there, I, I do not, I do not literally think this could have been any closer to accurate Yeah, the
Simone Collins: [00:27:00] highest fidelity language possible.
Malcolm Collins: Yes, that could have been passed on in desert savages for thousands of years. And we do know that this was passed on with a high degree of fidelity because we have Old Testament from the Dead Sea Scrolls that have fragments of this story. Oh, right.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Literally 1,000 years before our next fully intact version, and they have virtually no differences.
They have a few differences in, like, poetic language where, like, thereâs a few places where theyâre a little repetitive, and those repetitive parts are gone. And I can see how a scribe just didnât cover the repetitive parts. But, like, generally it served its purpose. Okay? So now weâre gonna go to the next one.
Okay? And note here separating darkness from light. This could be something that we yet to understand about the universe. We do know that there are a lot of problems with understanding dark matter in the universe right now. Matter appears to exist in oppositional forms. Could this make some sense once we better understand dark matter and dark [00:28:00] energy?
It might. We know that they appear to be pretty por- important in the cosmic order. And larger than what we consider regular matter that we interact with regularly. So it seems relevant that they would mention it here. Yeah. To continue.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: By the way, had, had you ever thought about all of this in these terms or?
Simone Collins: I remember the last time I started reading Genesis, I was like, âOh my God,â âcause that was my first time reading it after historical geology and, you know, these things are touched on from that perspective. Like, hereâs what we know from the fossil record. Hereâs what we know from- Mm-hmm ... studying Earth and, you know, doing deep core samples and all these other crazy things.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And you were just like, âThis isnât as... This is, like, pretty accurate.â I was like, â
Simone Collins: Yeah. Oh my God.â Yeah, because it... Well, I didnât expect it at all because you hear that thereâs all these young Earth creationists, and then you just assume that the Bible is, like, really explicit. Like, boom, it, you know, that everything happened, and everyone was there at the same time, and the...
Yeah, it, it just- Yeah, no, for
Malcolm Collins: me, young Earth creationism is just [00:29:00] literally ignoring what, what the Bible says in favor of what your Sunday school teacher said. Like, I donât mean to... I know we have young Earth creationist fans and everything like that, but, like, that, I, it just seems like if, if the Bible isnât antagonistic to these ideas it just seems like sticking a spoke in your own, like, wheels of your own bicycle, and then it crashes, and youâre like, âOh, wha...â
Like, fans will sometimes come to me and- And theyâll be like, âI can convince you that the Bible actually means X or Y.â And Iâm like, âBut then I just wouldnât believe the Bible because this is, like, easily observably wrong,â right? Like, I believe the Bible because it aligns, itâs coherent with reality. And itâs coherent with a very sophisticated understanding of reality that there is no way that people of that period could have had, which is why I believe that they didnât come up with this out of nowhere.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Speaker 12: And if you want to come to me with like a, âWell, why do you believe in evolution, Malcolm? Thatâs crazy. Thereâs big gaps in the fossil record and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.â Itâs like, okay, so my first job, , outside of [00:30:00] like household, local jobs, stuff like that, was working in the human evolution department at the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History.
, If you go through the exhibit on human evolution in that and you go to the part of the exhibit that is just every ho- hominid fossil we have from like Australopithecus to modern man, I constructed that. I had to go through every single one of those fossils and take, you know, 380 images of them. Um, this idea that you cannot see when youâre looking at the entire fossil record a clear gradient of evolution that matches well with the historic timeline is just factually wrong.
, Yes, we have some gaps, but every time you fill one gap, you now have two gaps on either side of that gap. Youâre always gonna have gaps until you find literally every skeleton of every iterative change going back. Like, it, itâs just not doable. But in terms of like the broad strokes, [00:31:00] either, , evolution is true or God used a number of miracles to try to make it look as if evolution was true in some form of test that weâre not, one, warned about in the Bible, and two, I canât understand why a good God would lay out for us.
Thatâs why I believe it, right? Like, , I, I think that to just deny this when, when I personally held many of these extremely valuable skulls, right? Like, Iâve, Iâve gone through the record. I had skulls all around me at this, at this point in my career. , And it-- thereâs this very clear gradient, and looking at that and being like, âOkay, so either God is in some way testing us by giving us this much evidence, , or, , itâs almost kind of miraculous that, that so many of the missing links, if you talk about how not populous our [00:32:00] species and our ancestors were, ended up surviving.
Or God made sure that we preserved a fairly good record so that we could understand how we came to be and our role in the, , greater chain of life.â
Speaker 13: Also, that just broadly seems like such an un-God thing to do. God gives us this great and giant puzzle to solve through generations of research, , laying it all out very clearly for us as we, we build this puzzle, and the outcome of the puzzle is the test? Like, that weâre supposed to not believe it even though the Bible doesnât clearly contradict it?
, That, that doesnât seem... Like, whatâs the point of the test?
Malcolm Collins: Anyway if people are wondering how I do believe it, I believe that, like, a bunch of traditions form randomly, and this was the one that was the closest to an absolutely true tradition, and so it was favored through history. But thatâs a different... You want to get into our track series. So to continue here âAnd God [00:33:00] said âLet there be a vault between the waters to separate the water from water.â
So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it, and was, and it was so. God called the vault sky, and there was an evening, and there was morning the second day.â And this is one area where Iâm really not sure whatâs meant here. I donât see how this... It, it doesnât discorrelate with modern science, because if weâre right about whatâs meant by water here, heâs talking about not literal water, but the formlessness before time.
Mm-hmm. So, what, what could this be? I donât know. I assume itâs something that physics just doesnât have... It doesnât, itâs not contradictory to any of our understanding of physics, because whatâs on the other side of the vault is what we call the sky. So itâs whatever is at the end of the sky. And we just donât have the physics to understand this yet.
Now, if you take a literalist interpretation w- the way that people used to understand this, like if you go back to, you know, ancient Hebrew times, they thought [00:34:00] you look at the sky and itâs like a literal dome over your head. And on the other side of that dome is the water, the, the endless, the endless void, and the, the you know, the stars are all sort of painted on the dome.
Thatâs the way that they used to understand it. So itâs neither disconforming, itâs, itâs, itâs predictive, I guess I would say, of this.
So, one of the things that I wanted to go into here was why water? Like, wh- why do they keep talking about water here? Why do they use water in these analogies?
Simone Collins: Well, I think they use water for the same reason they use fire. You know, burn it with fire. That doesnât mean... Like, sometimes there are no other ways to describe things, like deleting or, you know, other forms of elimination, Yeah, which is
Malcolm Collins: what we argue the lake of fire likely means, and Gehenna likely means, is where you burn things.
But- water, it appears to be because if you look at creation myths from around this period in this area whatever was at the beginning is typically thought of as deep abyss, depths, primeval, whole ocean. Thereâs no, there was no
Simone Collins: concept for a vacuum. How do you explain that to someone? Mm-hmm. This is not a [00:35:00] hole.
Itâs like the opposite of a hole. The, the biggest thing you could possibly give to someone for them to imagine is the ocean, is some vast body of water. That is the closest they can get to a, a large empty void.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, well, hereâs another fun thing. Do you know what else the term that weâre translating as water here could be translated into?
Simone Collins: Oh, no. Do tell.
Malcolm Collins: Semen. Oh. Well, hold on. If youâre thinking about it from a life-giving perspective, Sure, yeah ... and youâre looking at whatâs, whatâs the... You could think of it as anti-life if youâre talking about, like, the abyss versus life itself.
Simone Collins: Mm. Right?
Malcolm Collins: But anyway, to continue here. âAnd then God said, âLet the water under the sky be gathered into one place, and let dry ground appear,â and it was so.
God called the dry ground land, and the gathered waters he called seas, and God saw it was good.â Now this I do not see as disconfirming or affirming. This appears to be talking about actual water on Earth and the creation [00:36:00] of dry land. We know that- Well, yeah,
Simone Collins: B- because they switched from water to seas, which also implies to me that when they are referring to water, theyâre referring to something that is not water.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Well, and this- âCause they couldnât have just said the oceans. Theyâd say seas ... this appears to be talking
Malcolm Collins: about something that is similar to the water that weâre talking about before. But, like, here I take it is this is where we transition to talking about what you and I talk about as water, okay?
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: And again, not seeing any problems here so far, right? Because again, God doesnât need to... If, if we assume that, like, God striking somebody with lightning is still God doing it even if itâs done through a natural process water forming on Earthâs surface water e- building the water cycle on the Earthâs surface, dry land appearing on Earthâs surface all of these things could be described as God doing it in just the same way, right?
So nothing particularly affirms a scientific, disaffirms a scientific understanding here. Then we have âThen God said, âLet the land produce vegetation, seed-bearing plants, and trees. On the land bear fruit with seed in it according to the various kinds.â And it [00:37:00] was so. The land produced vegetation, plants bearing seed according to their kinds, and trees bearing fruit with seed in accordance with their kind.
And God saw it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning the third day.â Now, this is actually one of the worst parts- For this, which I think would surprise a lot of people, that this is one of the most out of line with our actual understanding of geological history
Simone Collins: Because of the evening and morning part?
No,
Malcolm Collins: not evening- Or because we had,
Simone Collins: like,
Malcolm Collins: like early plants- Seed-bearing plants are a fairly modern evolutionary adaptation
Simone Collins: Oh, interesting. Unless theyâre, by seed-bearing theyâre just r- referring to other forms of can reproduce, you know?
Malcolm Collins: So first, you caught it. The word used for fruit here does not mean literal fruit in the way that we mean fruit.
Mm. It appears that that is the way that this was conveyed to people 10,000 years ago. They likely thought it exclusively meant, like, what we consider and eat as fruit. Like, Godâs- Yeah ... preparing the world for mankindâs inhabitation. But- But there were no other
Simone Collins: words for, like, capable of [00:38:00] reproduction, or self-reproducing, or whatever.
Yeah, yeah. Yeah
Malcolm Collins: But the, the actual wording here can mean basically any form of reproduction where thereâs some form of, like, edible side product. And I would even go further, and to say that this could be taken to more allegorically to describe the beginning of the life cycle. Youâre talking about, when I see vegetation being talked about here there is no way they could have said pre-animal microbial life, right?
Like, you simply arenât gonna get that recorded in a 10,000-year-old document, okay? So youâre trying to explain pre-animal microbial life to people 10,000 years ago. Exactly. Youâre
Simone Collins: like, â
Malcolm Collins: Itâs kind of like vegetation. It, it, it has fruiting bodies,â which is what we still call parts of, like, the budding process with early microbial life.
Speaker 11: Itâs like somebodyâs coming to me and theyâre like, oh, this is clearly not supernaturally inspired [00:39:00] because the cave Jews didnât write single cellular microbial life and early self-replicating RNA-like structures. Like how would they even conceptually have done that? Thatâs a literally insane level of requirement.
Malcolm Collins: So Iâm okay with that, and I would also even go so far as to say that this to me indicates that something like a vegetation or something like seed, seeds may exist earlier in the evolutionary timeline than we actually think it does. Ooh, that could be interesting. This would be one of the bigger pictures Iâm gonna put into
Simone Collins: this, right?
But I really, I donât know. Like, in terms of my reading, when we come back to language and the limitations of language at the time, and other things that you read in the Bible, you know, about the way that seed is described, like- Mm-hmm ... spilled seed, et cetera, like humans donât have seeds, do we? Yeah, thatâs a good point.
Yeah. Yeah, we spill them So it could just mean- So Iâm really not reading this too literally when itâs like, âOh, but there werenât [00:40:00] technically seeds yet.â No, seed was a thing used for like- But the intentional- ... reproductive capabilities ...
Malcolm Collins: the intentional mention, okay, so if we take plants to mean, like, early microbial life, right?
Like, thatâs- Uh-huh ... what theyâre trying to describe. Yeah and the, the explicit mean- measuring of seed-bearing microbial life, right? Mm. That could bear fruit with seed in it- That could be describing the evolution of sexuality- Mm-hmm ... which would fit right here on the sexual, the, the evolutionary timeline.
Yeah. And it would probably be the closest way you could... And itâs a very important evolutionary leap, probably one of the-
Simone Collins: 100%, yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: next to the evolution of intelligence, Iâd say. Mm-hmm. Sexuality and intelligence are the two biggest evolutionary leaps weâre aware of. Yeah. Do- in terms of how, how they affect the evolutionary timeline.
Intelligence basically allows you to evolve ideas faster than you can die. Sexuality allows you to remix genes and choose genetically fit individuals to have way, way, way more offspring than they would otherwise have. And it is a hugely important, happened at around this time. Yeah. Thatâs what I think that this is.
Mm-hmm. [00:41:00] Okay, great. All right, all right. So thatâs even a further- There we go ... clarification. Yeah.
Speaker 14: Note here, if this is talking about the evolution of sexuality, that then definitely didnât happen before the collision that created the moon. So we have to guess that when the stars in the sky and the sun and the moon being created in terms of a night and day cycle on Earth is talked about as having after this, it must mean an unobscured sky.
Because there were periods of history going after that where you still had an obscured sky during periods, long periods, like eons of rain, for example, certain periods of Earthâs history.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. Then next âAnd God said, âLet the water teem with living creatures and let birds fly above the earth and across the vault of the sky.ââ And note here, like, birds are clearly... This is one that really gets me, where some [00:42:00] biblical literalist will say okay, well, the sky vault clearly, like, outer space exists, right?
So the sky vault is not referring to just, like, the sky in the way, like, ancient people 10,000 years ago meant it. Like, weâre meant to take this literally.â Except when he talks about birds here he, he talks about them in the context of flying across the vault of the sky, right? So the birds are on the same plane as the sky vault, which is why I think our interpretation of this is more accurate.
Weâre to say, like, how would you communicate this to somebody 10,000 years ago? But anyway âAnd then God said, âLet the water teem with living creatures. Let the birds fly above and across the sky.â So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and moves about according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind.
And God saw that it was good. God blessed them and said, âBe fruitful and increase your number and fill the water and the seas, and let the birds increase on earth.â And there was evening, [00:43:00] and that was the morning of the fifth day.â Now, this particular passage gets, like, heavily bastardized to try to argue for a- Sunday school.
Like, they literally basically removed a really important line for this because they were embarrassed about it. Mm. Even though it actually... So they, Iâll, Iâll show you where the line was removed. So, âGod created the great creatures of the sea.â That is not, that is not what it says at all. Thatâs not what it says.
I mean, you could interpret it that way if you were trying to, in the same way that in the King James version they translate this word to mean whales, because whales was the biggest thing they were aware of at the time that lived in the sea. But that isnât what the word would come close to traditionally meaning in Hebrew.
So letâs go into this to go into, one, they say fish, then birds, right? Well, fish and something, and then birds. And weâll go into whatâs, whatâs the thing that they said existed alongside, and not just fish, things in the sea. This is really [00:44:00] interesting, right? Because they could have said fish, right? Which would have been evolutionarily wrong.
But instead what they say is, âThe creatures of the sea.â Thatâs an interesting way to put something if youâre looking at, like, a Cambrian explosion or something like that after the evolutionary of sex- sexuality. But okay, letâs, letâs see whatâs actually said in this line, âcause this line is, I think, really cool, and really affirming to me that there was some divine inspiration here.
So, âAnd God created the great tannim and every living creature which moves which the waters swarmed according to their kinds and every winged bird.â So we need to make a few notes here. All right? So in, first it says, âGod created the great tannim.â This is what is often interpreted as le- sea leviathans, right?
In, in some older in- interpretations of texts. But that is not what it means in Hebrew. So weâll go into what it means in Hebrew, and I also wanna point something out here which often people get wrong, is note the construction of this sentence. And this is also [00:45:00] true in Hebrew, which weâll get to. It says nowhere in this sentence that the tannim live in the sea.
It says nowhere in this sentence that they are an exclusively aquatic creature. It says, âAnd God created the great tannim and every living creature which moves in the waters and swarmed across according to their kinds.â Oh. The tannim are something different from whatâs in the sea. Oh ... so letâs continue here The relative - clause, which the waters swarmed, grammatically - modifies living creatures that move.
The tannim are introduced first with their own direct object marker. Theyâre connected by and to the rest. In Biblical Hebrew, the relative clause introduced by blank normally modifies the ne- sorry, blank is a word I canât pronounce in Hebrew. Yeah. The nearest preceding noun or noun phrase that it logically could describe.
Here, the nearest phrase is every living creature that moves. The tannim sit before [00:46:00] that, and thus are clearly not modified by the phrase purely aquatic. And note here this gets interesting, because what could tannim be? Like, what is it generally used to talk about in Hebrew?
Simone Collins: Right,
Malcolm Collins: actually. It is typically used to talk about dragons- Oh
sea monsters- Oh ... crocodiles air, long- So just large reptilian animals. Yeah, but not necessarily reptiles. âCause they couldâve said reptiles. They had a word for reptiles. They didnât- They did ... say reptiles. Oh. Dinosaurs are not reptiles, okay? They said something that is large and reptile-like, kind of like a dragon, existed after the explosion of life within the sea, or along the same timeline as life within the sea, before birds.
Simone Collins: Huh. Well. [00:47:00] Mm. That would work. Yes, that would work. Thatâs pretty
Malcolm Collins: cool.
Simone Collins: That is pretty cool. Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: By the way, if youâre wondering, Ezekiel 29:3 and 32:2 is where they refer to crocodiles and large river sea s- serpents. And then for m- mythical monsters, you see in Isaiah 27:1 and Psalms 24:13. And this reminds me- Like alms
well, I saw, I donât, I donât speak these foreign tongues. Thatâs, thatâs a Jew tongue. Lazarus. Youâre trying to get me to speak like a Jew, okay? And Iâm not gonna do that, all right? The parcel tongue, Simone. parcel tongue.
Speaker 15: . I heard you speak in Parseltongue, snake language. I spoke a different language? But I didnât realize.
Malcolm Collins: Iâm gonna end up... Th- this is how they get you. They get you with their words, saying itâs, itâs Bible talk.
And it is Bible talk, but you gotta be careful, right? Iâm joking here, by the way, people. Obviously everything Iâm analyzing here is relevant in both a [00:48:00] Christian and Jewish context because they both have the same book. So both would be equally affirmed if there was any proof that this book did have a degree of divine inspiration.
And again, if you wanna get into our thoughts on Judaism, see the question that breaks Judaism where we go way into like why. We actually thought about converting to Judaism. You can see in some of our earlier videos. But like as I dug into it, I just decided no, like Iâm, Iâm, Iâm, I find Christianity more compelling when I look at the evidence.
Simone Collins: Weâre also a little too asocial hikikomori for for Judaism.
Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah, and I also said like even if I converted to Judaism, Iâd be a Misnagdim Jew. This is a Jew that doesnât believe that Kabbalah should be widely taught and is against the Hasidics. Oh, totally. And that would immediately put me on the outs with al- like the Misnagdim basically lost the Jewish culture war a generation ago, right?
Two generations ago. So thereâs, thereâs no like... Also Christ seems to have obviously been the Messiah. Sorry, I just have to go. This is a whole different thing. You can see our question [00:49:00] that breaks Judaism if you want to get into that. It actually becomes sort of absurd to think that Jesus wasnât obviously the Messiah when you look at everything in context.
Donât mean to offend our Jewish listeners on this one, but yeah thatâs not for this episode. But whatâs really interesting about this word taninim is in various times people have attempted to retranslate it than to mean something other than what it literally means, and every time they have removed something that would authenticate the truth of the Bible, right?
Theyâve tried to change it to whales when it clearly doesnât mean whales anywhere else. Hmm. They have tried to change it to just large sea animals when it clearly doesnât mean just large sea animals anywhere else. Hmm. It means a large reptilian-like animal that is not specifically a reptile.
I really c- that, that to me is just sort of shocking how spot on that is. But anyway, to continue here.
Oh, by the way, fun side note that came from one of our fans that some people will [00:50:00] like. Regarding biblical animal timeline, thereâs a fun side note about the word used to describe the creation of each group. The most... They mostly use the same verb, but there are two that use a different verb, man and the tenenimum.
The King James Version translates the latter as whales, presumably because giant sea predators was the only point of reference for them. But apparently in Hebrew there was more a reptilian connotation they say, which is true. Okay. But what heâs saying is that there is enough linguistic wiggle room to argue that God had a special plan for giant reptiles, and now heâs wondering if there was a dinosaur bible somewhere.
Where is
Simone Collins: the lost dinosaur bible? I want, I want it.
Malcolm Collins: Well, thereâs actually a theory that there couldâve been a dinosaur civilization as big as our own. And, like, we just wouldnât have any evidence of it if you look at how quickly, like, our own civilization would dissolve into the time record. Huh. If, like, we just stopped existing right now.
Yeah. And so we donât know that there wasnât a large dinosaur civilization that lasted [00:51:00] maybe only 300, 400 years.
Simone Collins: Godâs failson, the dinosaurs. Right?
Malcolm Collins: Okay. To continue here. And then God said, âLet the land produce living creatures according to their kinds, the livestocks, the creatures that move along the ground, the wild animals, each according to its kind,â and it was so.
God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds, and God saw that it was good. So, what youâre gonna note in this is you can say, well, itâs saying all land animals came after things like birds and dinosaurs, which is, like, clearly not true, right?
Like, people would be like, âThere were some land animals before that.â And Iâm gonna say, yeah, but you have to consider the context. God is talking to people 10,000 years ago, and heâs saying, âAll of these things that you see, that you consider animals,â like your livestock animals, which are clearly referenced here.
All of these came after the dinosaurs, the fish, and the [00:52:00] birds, which is true. Almost every land animal the ancient Hebrews would have been aware of evolved after dinosaurs and birds evolved. Yeah, yeah. So heâs right from an evolutionary timeline perspective. Absolutely. It still all tracks. Mm-hmm. Not, no lie detected here which again is astonishing for something this old.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, and especially considering this is not some universal folk belief. This, this didnât exist with other really old folklore traditions or religions. Yeah, if it was
Malcolm Collins: a universal or common folk belief, I would have a totally different perspective on this. Yes.
Speaker 17: And when AI goes over this, itâll always hedge and be like, âWell, heâs overstating just how much, , other religious beliefs or thereâs no other religious belief or traditional story about how the world was formed that comes close to a scientific ordered understanding that we have today.â , And then I always tell the AI, âOkay, [00:53:00] find one, and Iâm gonna give you wiggle room.
Find one that comes one-tenth as close. Find one that comes one-fifth as close.â , AI canât find one because there just isnât one. This is really quite unique, and if this story wasnât the white people story, everyone would be freaking out about the random tribe of wherever that has a creation story that almost exactly mirrors the evolutionary and historic timeline weâre aware of
Malcolm Collins: Okay. Then God said, âLet us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the sky and over the livestock and over all animals and over all the creatures that move along the ground.â
So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God He created them, male and female He created them. Just a techno puritan side note here thatâs really only relevant for our interpretation of this story but the word created here, right here, could be, in Biblical Hebrew, you have something called the perfect conjuration or the qatal form of verbs.
Huh. The [00:54:00] same type used in created in Genesis 1:27. It can describe future events, especially in prophetic context. This is often called the prophetic perfect. Hebrew verbs focus more on aspect completed versus ongoing actions in strict timeline, past, present, future. Hmm. The qatal perfect form views as an action as a whole completed from the speakerâs perspective.
Oh. In prophecy, a future event that is so certain because God has decreed that it will happen. So you can look at something like Isaiah 53, where he says, âHe was wounded,â and you get this conjuration, âfor our transgressions. He was bruised for our inequities.â Written centuries before Jesus, and yet itâs written as in this, this future perfect form.
Eh, then you have things like Isaiah 5:13, Numbers 24:17 where you get a similar conjuration here. A lot of people donât care about this. This isnât necessary for most people as they understand this story. Do you mean
Simone Collins: conjugation? You mean conjugation.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, conjugation. Whatâd I say?
Conjuration. Conjuration. But I get
Simone Collins: [00:55:00] what you... I mean, âcause youâre sort of describing the God-like conjuring. But thatâs super... I had never heard of that before. Thatâs fascinating. Yeah. A whole new- Well, it
Malcolm Collins: can be read as just in the past tense if you want to. Okay. But it doesnât have to be read in the past tense.
The way Hebrew is constructed, it can be taken as something that is an ongoing process. God is creating mankind in His image, which is our religious- So
Simone Collins: cool. I like that much more ...
Malcolm Collins: that is, that is being laid out of the prophecy here. Do I wanna go into this? Well, we go over a lot of this in the other track, but I can just quickly go into this. This is a track... Well, not even the track. The one where we go over the Adam and Eve story. Or, or I think it might be- Oh ... a track that we go over souls and stuff like this.
Mm-hmm. But the key feature of the phrase where God is breathing life into man, I mean, this is in the second story, âcause you, you know, it would be like, âDidnât God breathe life into man?â They use the term nephesh here which w- generally does not mean a disembodied soul or anything like that. It, it sort of means to animate a living creature.
Hmm. So itâs basically like there was inanimate dirt, [00:56:00] right? And then through a plan, again, Iâve pointed out that the word here can be translated as plan, not form. So God, through a plan animated the dirt with this word nefesh. And so, if you see the turn here, man does not have a nefesh, man is a nefesh, in the way that the, the story is constructed here.
And it means a living creature, a being or person. And so if we look at other places, like where itâs used we see it used throughout, like, as God is, is, is giving other creatures their life. We see similar words being used here to nefesh. So this isnât, like, a unique human soul, unless youâre saying that Heâs giving souls to all of the other animals in these particular scenes here.
And itâs, itâs very clear because it first appears in the animals in chapter one, and then itâs deliberately reused for humans in 2:7. Like, this, this is not a coincidence. This is not a mistake on the original authors, which is actually kind of weird. And we also see the same word [00:57:00] used with something like Jeremiah 15:9, âShe breathes out her nefesh,â her life, right?
Oh. So itâs basically like your breath. When it leaves you, you die.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: And this, again, gets to one of the lines that we find to be very important from the Bible, just sort of as a closing here. This is Ecclesiastes 3:18-19. If I have any line from the Bible thatâs, like, my favorite line âAs for humans, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals.
Surely the fate of human beings is that of the animals. The same fate awaits them both. As one dies, so does the other. All have the same breath. Humans have no advantage over animals. Everything is meaningless.â
Meaningless, by the way, is a bad translation here. A better translation is everything is evanescent or life is evanescent
Malcolm Collins: And the word used for all have the same breath here, do you wanna know where that word is used in Genesis?
Where? Itâs the word that is translated as spirit in the phrase, âThe spirit of God was hovering over the waters.â Oh. So the same breath that the [00:58:00] animals have- Yeah ... that the humans have is used to describe the animating force of God in opposition to the formless darkness that existed at the beginning of time, and that was in constant movement when you have the word hovering here.
And a lot of people, we go into that Ecclesiastes line a lot more in some of our tracks if youâre interested. Itâs, itâs very clear about what it means because it, it goes over a series of things where it goes over, like, hubristic things that people think, and then it contrasts them with what is actually true.
And this is one of the... It starts with the hubristic, what man thinks, that man is completely separate from this world, and then it says, âBut man is tested.â And you see this framing over and over again in this section. Like, itâs, itâs not vague, th- this is meant to be a- No, you really are tested to see if you are so arrogant as to think that you are truly distinct from the natural world and from animals, which we then take into this reading here of Genesis.
Yeah. So again, spicy episode by [00:59:00] us. I guess Iâll put it in our religious stuff. Itâs not that spicy compared to our other ones âcause I canât- I love it. I love it ... explain
Simone Collins: crazy religion. I, I just, I remember, like, really thinking- Oh ... âHuh,â when I was reading Genesis, and going into it in, in greater depth with you is so much fun.
I have to run. Go. I love you. I love you, too. Bye, gorgeous. Bye. All right, Iâm hitting record. Oh, you beat me to it.
Malcolm Collins: All right, Iâll just get started here.
Simone Collins: Iâm, yeah, Iâm r- Iâve been looking forward to this all day, so thank you.
Speaker 19: Yeah, look at that Motion? Yeah, weâre motion liking that. You think so? Look, Iâm floating. And Iâm Off you go. Sail away.
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 -
Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into one of the most paradoxical political alliances of our time: the surprising partnership between modern progressivism and Islamism.Why do groups that claim to champion LGBTQ+ rights, feminism, and secularism repeatedly align with a ideology that often rejects those very values? From the Iranian Revolution to "Queers for Palestine," this episode explores the ideological overlaps, cognitive dissonance, and shared strategic goals that make this alliance stronger than many realize.Topics include:âą The "oppressor vs oppressed" frameworkâą Treatment of homosexuality vs. gender transition in Muslim societiesâą Shared hostility toward Western civilizationâą Why suffering of "their side" is often irrelevant to both movementsâą Historical betrayals and future implicationsA sobering and unfiltered analysis of modern political bedfellows.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Iâm excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be discussing Islam and the left, which have been bedfellows throughout recent history. Obviously they were very strong bedfellows during the Iranian revolution, which we will discuss how that ended up happening. And they all were then killed afterwards.
It was very much like the sheep siding with the wolves, only for the wolves to feast on the sheep as soon as they got what they wanted. B- pretty witless, and I think could be a sign of... Like, obviously thereâs the famous picture of the two young progressive girls in a car cheering the rise of the new ayatollah, and both of...
One of them was killed by his regime, and the other one lived their life as a refugee.
And so, you know, not good for them historically when theyâve done this. But I wanted to better understand why and how these two things are compatible. And people can just say, âWell, they arenât compatible, Malcolm,â and Iâm like, surely [00:01:00] progressives donât think that, right?
Like, surely progressives have looked into this and have some sort of thesis I just havenât taken the time to understand. So what I did, and what, what I, what I wanted this piece to be, which unfortunately it canât be, and Iâll explain why in just a second-
Simone Collins: Oh ...
Malcolm Collins: is I wanted to go through on some sort of, like, well-reasoned progressive piece on why Islamism and progressive values make such good bedfellows.
Simone Collins: Okay.
Malcolm Collins: And that we would go through this piece and I would explain, âWell, this doesnât really work here,â or, âThey actually have some points here.â And very, very interestingly I could not find any such piece.
Simone Collins: What? How... That seems
Malcolm Collins: implausible. Right? I assumed they must be out there everywhere, right?
Like, I was like, they must have, like, taken the time to, like, grok, digest, and explain this.
Simone Collins: Yes.
Malcolm Collins: Right? Because it seems like a contradiction, and there were a [00:02:00] lot of progressive pieces- Well,
Simone Collins: The Free Press tried to m- to make an explanation of this.
Malcolm Collins: No, they didnât. No, they didnât. What The Free Press did, âcause I read that article, that was one of the ones I read in preparation for this-
Simone Collins: Okay
Malcolm Collins: Is they tried to, they basically just said, âThis happened before with the Islamic revolution,â and then they went over a few things from that. But that wasnât, that didnât really explain why the progressives thought this was okay.
Simone Collins: Okay, so youâre just talk- Yeah, I guess your, your argument is that isnât an explanation, itâs only a history of the alliance.
It doesnât explain the underlying reason for the alliance.
The, oh my God, when you move around your room, it sounds like your room is the Star Wars trash compactor. Like So
Malcolm Collins: so, I ended up running ahead and being like, âOkay, letâs see if I can find any of these,â right?
And what I did find, so Iâll go over what I did find a number of. I found, like, six or seven of these. And there appear to be near infinity more, is progressives muldering over the fact [00:03:00] that people thought that they were unaware that Muslims... Like, like making fun of them when, like, Netanyahu said that gays for Gaza is like KFC K- fried chicken, or chicken for KFC, right?
Like, and they, they really hate conservatives making fun of them for this. Huh. Okay ... being unaware that in these groups that they say they wanna help, they do want to kill gay people. Like, thatâs in the Quran. You know, you stone somebody for being gay. Thatâs Sharia law, right? Like, this is part of their tradition.
Hmm. It happens regularly across these countries.
Speaker 2: What would happen to a gay couple in Gaza?
Speaker 3: Executed according to Islamic law. Islam doesnât endorse gays. Islam doesnât endorse homosexuality. Just like Canada doesnât endorse a lot of things. So would you like to see Sharia law in Canada replace Canadian law? At some point, it will. . One day we can have a Muslim majority nation here in Canada.
Right In your face!
Malcolm Collins: And what those articles did, which was very frustrating to me because it didnât provide a [00:04:00] logical explanation, they basically just said, âNetanyahuâs government has said homophobic things as well.â And that was obviously very unsatisfying for me because I was just like, well, I mean, yes, itâs a right-wing government, but, well, like, when you say said homophobic things, like he said heâs comfortable being called a homophobe, he doesnât support pride marches, he doesnât support you know, gay stuff being taught to kids.
He, That is not the same thing as having a government policy of murdering gay people, okay? But theyâre sort of trying to equivocate the two. Or they will note that there have been some gay people who have been killed in Israel by members of the general public for bigoted reasons, right? And they seem to not be able to tell or assume that their audience wonât care that thatâs different from something being carried out as a government policy.
Mm-hmm. E.g. just [00:05:00] random homophobes versus the government will kill you. I mean, theyâre, theyâre obviously very different, but the core thing that I basically realized is they see being mildly... And I guess this makes sense if you look at their wider actions. They see being mildly uncomfortable with gay people or uncomfortable with trans people or disagreeing with their ideology as equivalent to a government policy of institutionalized killing of gay and trans people.
But- But think about their actions and this makes sense. When they say that like, âOh, Trumpâs governmentâs going to get rid of me.â Like remember when Trump was elected and a bunch of gay people were like basically saying, âOh, Trump, weâre gonna be eradicated now that Trump has come into power.â Trans people being like, âTrans people in the United States are gonna be mass genocided after this.â
They talked about this, like that this was something that was going to happen to them. And I think that we as conservatives were not listening to that. We heard it and we thought it was funny, [00:06:00] but we didnât understand that actually in their minds these two things are functional equivalents. Slightly disagreeing with them and or saying, âI personally would not live this lifestyle,â and saying, âWeâre gonna build a government policy of killing you.â
And thatâs why they have reacted so harshly. Thatâs why they keep doing these assassination attempts and stuff like that, as Iâve explained in other videos, because they think that this mild disagreement is the same as murder.
Hmm. Hmm.
And then that justifies everything that comes out of this. But I wanna get into where these two things are surprisingly okay.
Like, why do Muslims keep siding with the left, right? Like, why, why do they appear to make good bedfellows? And at first I thought, well, maybe thereâs some policies in Muslim texts, because I, I found a few articles arguing this. These were from Muslims trying to explain to progressives why they should be friendly with Muslims.
Oh. [00:07:00] And they went over Muslim teachings trying to argue that Muslim teachings are inherently socialist.
Simone Collins: Oh.
Malcolm Collins: This comes down to things like the zakat which is one of the five pillars, which means that youâre typically donate around 2.5% of wealth assets above a threshold to the poor, needy, debtors, or travelers.
This is... I mean, it is socialist-like, but Christians have just as many parts of the Bible that they could point to and say âThis is socialist-like.â You also, Have sorry. So but then you can say, âOkay, well, if this was the case, can we look at the Gini coefficient of Muslim majority countries to see if itâs higher or lower than equivalent other countries?â
And Gini coefficients of Muslim countries are enormously higher than other countries. They are some of the-
Simone Collins: Famously so, yes ...
Malcolm Collins: yeah, some of the most unequal societies on earth. So then the question can be, okay, why do they... Because I donât wanna ask, like, from a right-wing perspective how are these things the same.
Like, as right-wingers we can say [00:08:00] theyâre both totalitarian in the way they attempt to approach things. Theyâre both very fascist in the way they attempt to approach things. They both hate Western civilization. They both, you know, like, we can, we can throw all of this out here, right? But to the left, those explanations arenât really gonna hold as much, right?
So where do the left, like, really actually agree with them and find this co-solidarity? One is the issue of them killing gay people actually isnât a big an issue to modern leftists as you would think.
Simone Collins: Explain this to me
Malcolm Collins: Okay, so if you look at Muslim countries one of the things that they do, that theyâre known for doing, is gender transition, right?
Where if somebody is same-sex attracted, they are pressured into gender transition, and then they just live as the gender, and then thatâs not gay anymore, right? You know, this is something thatâs common in places like Iran. Now, not all Muslim countries do this. Weâll get to the other ones in a bit. But also...
But I guess Iâll just come out [00:09:00] and say it. If you go to other Muslim countries, like Afghanistan and Iraq, they have extremely high rates of same-sex relationships. They just- Right ... donât contextualize them as gay. You j- you can still be killed for being gay, but a lot of people are gay.
Simone Collins: So theyâre, like, having gay sex, but no homo gay sex.
Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah. It is, it, itâs, itâs typically of a very specific kind. It is either with underage boys, and that makes it not gay.
Simone Collins: No homo.
Speaker 5: A private party is underway in Kabul. In Afghanistan, women are not allowed to dance in public, so boys are dressed as girls and made to perform. The ancient practice of Bacha Bazi, or dancing boys, is widespread, involving orphans or boys from poor families as young as 10 years old
They are often sexually abused and raped. [00:10:00] This is child trafficking. The boys are abducted and taken from one province to another. The children are kept in the company of powerful armed commanders and forced to become dancing boys.
Malcolm Collins: Or itâs with people who have very large age gaps. So-
Simone Collins: Itâs almost like, you know how if you multiply two negative numbers, you get a positive number, right?
Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm.
Simone Collins: Right. And so, like, if you, like, combine PDF files with, with, with homosexuality, it becomes- Itâs fine
virtuous.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, it cancels out. Yeah. Theyâre like, âNo, itâs, itâs...â Iâve, Iâve joked before. Theyâre like, âNo, itâs fine. I d-
Simone Collins: It
Malcolm Collins: cancels out ... I know I hooked with a guy, but he was underage, so itâs not a problem.â Yeah,
Simone Collins: I get it. I get it. Sure.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And, and you see this, actually. We see pictures of, quote-unquote, âgaysâ from these countries and the gay, the, the younger gay is, like, in their 20s.
The, the older one typically looks like theyâre in their 60s or, or, or something, right? Oh,
Simone Collins: ah.
Malcolm Collins: Like, you typically see very [00:11:00] big age... The age range gap goes up as they get older.
Speaker 7: Basically it works like this, or appears to. , You would say something like, âWell, okay, so they sleep with underage gay kids, , but what about when they become teens or something like that? Who are they sleeping with?â And the answer is, is there enough of an age gap so that we in the West would find it creepy?
Then itâs okay. If thereâs not that much of an age gap, then itâs not okay
Malcolm Collins: But one- That is
Simone Collins: so gross ...
Malcolm Collins: what Iâm saying is, is not all Muslim societies are as... And as to why you get this phenomenon, I had a whole video I was going to do on this.
Itâs mostly because the genders are so separated that,
Simone Collins: The opportunity is not there for women
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, basically the... Well, yeah, and they mostly socialize with other men, and the prohibitions on doing it with minors arenât very strong in these countries or not a- acted upon often. And so, just because thatâs all theyâre interacting with they, they form these relationships more often.
You know, if youâve had Muslim male friends, you know that theyâre more handsy [00:12:00] often than other people. You know, like, hand-holdy and stuff like that, when in our society we see that as romantically coded. And theyâre like, âOh, itâs not romantically coded in our society.â And itâs like, well, I mean, it kinda is romantically coded in your society.
You just donât frame it as romance when you have male-male sex, right? So one, you, you do have that phenomenon which normalizes gayness in the left when they see this, right? They, they ignore all the problematic parts of this and it normalizes it. But then the bigger point is, is even if you take the societies where you have first gender transition, which is okay in most Muslim societies,
Simone Collins: there we, there we go.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, you got it right in the middle I made a little middle shot right here.
Simone Collins: You got it bullseye.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. All
Simone Collins: right, keep up the
Malcolm Collins: practice. I can do a little closer so you can see. Look.
Okay,
but the second issue on the gay thing is that if you have forced gender transition, and itâs normal in a Muslim country, that means that these countries have an implicit level of trans inclusivity that you may not even see in Western society.
Oh, yeah.
Simone Collins: Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: yeah,
Simone Collins: yeah,
Malcolm Collins: yeah, yeah. And [00:13:00] famously trans people go to Iran to get cheap surgeries because they can do that there. And then once theyâre trans, you know, itâs okay, theyâre safe, et cetera, right? Now whatâs fascinating about this is if Muslim societies can be argued to be okay to gender transition, right?
It actually doesnât particularly matter in the eyes of the modern left if they kill gay men. Because gay men are seen as kind of right-leaning these days. Like theyâre theyâre gay white men, as they say, are the new white men, you know, within these spaces.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Because you have this Olympics of oppression hierarchy that theyâve sort of built among themselves.
Simone Collins: And you have Trumpâs big gay White House on top of it.
Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm. This is a New York Times article where theyâre pointing out just how many of the leading Republicans are gay now, and itâs a lot of leading Republican staffers are gay now more than in the Democratic administration. And thatâs just the Republican Party now.
We can get into why. I, you know, is this a good idea for the Republican alliance or whatever? But it is a fact. [00:14:00] You know, our, our best get out to voters like Scott Pressler are gay. Our, the biggest donors are gay Peter Thiel and stuff like that, right? Like, itâs a very gay party now. And as a part of this, the left has sort of kicked out gays at least male gays from the wider leftist coalition, or at least they donât care about them that much.
So if you are coming at this with a â90s Republican mindset and you say, âDonât you care that theyâre killing gays?â You may think that theyâre undergoing some huge level of cognitive dissonance when theyâre like not part- you know, not particularly, right? Like, âIâm, Iâm more interested in these things that Israel is doing.â
And you may think, oh, theyâre, theyâre sublimating this, or theyâre not really engaging with it. And what you may not be grokking is they donât really care. You might as well have gone to them and said, âDo you care that they are killing white males minus one?â Right? Like minus one oppression point, right?
And theyâre gonna be like, âNo, of course I donât care that theyâre killing white males.â Do you care that theyâre killing Jews? No, of course I donât care that theyâre [00:15:00] killing Jews, right? Weâve also gotta keep in mind that as soon as October 11th happened, and weâve gotta keep this in mind in terms of the wider, like, leftist mindset, so we sort of check in where they are.
This is when they had, like, brutally murdered over 100 people at, like, a peace rally, right? You know, right outside of Gaza that was a bunch of teenagers, right? They had the big musical peace protest with Gaza.
Simone Collins: Oh, right. Yeah, thatâs, yes. It wasnât a protest, it was a concert.
Malcolm Collins: It was a, it was, it was, it was for peace.
They were trying to, it was for- Yeah, it
Simone Collins: was a concert for peace
Malcolm Collins: that was happening on
Simone Collins: October- In
Malcolm Collins: promotion of, yeah. So they, they raided it. They took the women as, as s- s- smack slaves. They raped them to death. Like, it was absolutely brutal, absolutely terrifying. But on the same day that this had happened, and on the day after this had happened, before Israel had tried any sort of response yet there were parties at American college campuses cheering, and you, and you can find videos of this. We talked about this when
Simone Collins: it
Malcolm Collins: happened.
Simone Collins: Oh, right. The attack.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, cheering the October 11th attack. They were excited about October 11th. Leftists were, right? They [00:16:00] saw this as a fundamentally good thing that this had happened. And so, and this was their side that was being attacked, right?
Like Iâm not, Iâm not saying Jews are their side. Iâm saying the, the peace-going teens for giving Gaza more rights who were a big part of the casualties in this attack. And they just didnât care. And I think that this comes to a second point which is important to note, and itâs actually a huge overlap between the two groups.
They really donât care about any degree of suffering, pain, or death that happens to people who are similar to them or share their value system if it couldnât be seen as serving the greater cause. So to them, as is the case with many Muslims, so many Muslims donât particularly care about whatâs really going on in Gaza.
They donât care. I mean, obviously, or theyâd take Gazan refugees when not a single Muslim majority country has done that, right? So why arenât they taking Gaza refugees? Well, the reason they arenât taking Gaza refugees is âcause they, well, one, because they keep trying to kill everyone when they get [00:17:00] to a country and start a revolution.
But two they, they, it, itâs more than just not taking Gaza refugees. They are intentionally inflaming the situation with Gaza. Like consider Iran. Iran has been repeatedly, up until we started dealing with them, inflaming the situation with Gaza, inflaming the situation with you know, Israel and its, its, like Lebanon, its various neighbors which they know makes things qualitatively worse for the Muslims living in these regions, Muslims that share their political agenda, that lead to them being indiscriminately killed.
But that is a complete non-factor in their sort of global geopolitical calculation. Suffering of people who are like them is irrelevant, and this is the, something that the two groups share. Another thing that you have to keep in mind is from the position of modern leftists There really isnât a suffering calculation that theyâre making in regards to the things that theyâre doing.
Itâs the other side has to lose, our side [00:18:00] has to win, and then they just determine who is their side. Like, fundamentally, thatâs what they care about at the end of the day. How does the Islamists end up looking like itâs their side? Because they are clearly in opposition to what they are opposed to, which, I mean, at this point you can only broadly say I think what most people would think of as Western civilization, but they found other words for it.
When they say the patriarchy, what they really mean is Western civilization, right? They donât mean really a system of ma- because itâs not anymore a system of males at the top. I mean, women are predominantly the ones graduating from college at this point. If you look at lower professions, theyâre overwhelmingly in managerial positions much more than men are.
If you look at younger people, women out earn men, right? Like, they are the dominant faction. So if, if this is the case, then why do they still want this destroyed? Because what they were really keying to was this broader idea of Western civilization, which makes them very, very [00:19:00] aligned with each other.
And then to go to the, the next point here, which I thought was really interesting, is socialism more broadly. There is nothing about a Muslim coming to power where they would not take a socialist stance. Any Mus- by the way, any thoughts before I go further, Simone?
Simone Collins: No, I find this very interesting.
Please go on.
Malcolm Collins: So suppose I am a Muslim coming into power, right? Like I, w- weâll go back to the imam, right? You know, Iâm, Iâm trying to take over Iran or something like this. I want to get support from people in other communities, right? Now, I canât go out there and say, âI plan to kill gay people,â or something like that, or, âI plan to implement Sharia law.â
Thatâs not gonna do well in the West. Thatâs not gonna do well at a whatever rally or anything like that. But if I go out there and Iâm just like, âLook the system as it is set up is currently in the favor of rich people,â and by this, you know, theyâre thinking Zionists and stuff like this, [00:20:00] capitalists.
Again Jews typically fight for capitalism historically. People just ... The people who think Jews are, like, pro-communism are ... The, the it is true that they were disproportionately represented within the Russian communist movement. However, they were proportionally significantly lower representative than they were in capitalist governments.
Right. So if, if b- you contrast, like, the number of Jews in US politics versus the number of Jews in leading positions in the communist government in Russia, dramatically lower. And of course, the communist Russian government then attempted to kill all the Jews, right? Like, one of Marxâs books was, like, The Problem of the Jew, right?
Like, it li- literally, like, thatâs ... Theyâre very clear about not liking Jews in leftist philosophy. And so these two things sort of aligning, like, we want to attack business interests, we want to attack big business we want to attack the Jew, and I think that this is why this is, in part, become more common in leftist thought right now.
That [00:21:00] immediately appeals to the Islamist as well, right? Now the Islamists can say, âOh yes, weâll do redistribution of some kind. Thatâs within Islamic values.â And the leftist hears socialism, right? Now, of course, when they have used leftists to get into power, they have not enacted anything that looks like what we would consider socialism anywhere else, like in Iran or something like that, because they donât really care about these things, but they donât have a problem saying them, right?
Like, theyâre not gonna say to the leftists, âIâll support gay sex,â or something like that. But they will say to the leftists, âI will support your economic agenda.â And weâve actually seen, you know, even recently in America, you can look at, like Zohran Mamdani coming into power, right? He has pushed much harder after coming into power on the pro Islamization of Manhattan than heâs pro- If you look at, like, the czars that heâs put in power, these people who have said, you know, really horrible things, globalizing patata, like kill, in, in patata.
We- like, âI hate white people. White people should be killed,â stuff like that. [00:22:00] Mentifada. Okay ... into major positions within his government, right?
And, and theyâve begun to implement their plans in regards to sort of like a broader Islamic mass migration agenda. Whereas they havenât actually done anything in regards to, or not very successfully, in regards to his social programs.
Like his grocery stores, you know, theyâre, theyâre barely moving ahead at this point, right? And this is something we repeatedly see. You know, they appeal to the leftists to get the vote, but they donât actually care about the leftist economic policies that much. And the leftists, I want to tell you the, the big secret truth about modern leftism, they donât particularly care that their social policies and economic policies get implemented either.
Once- Hmm ... they, th- their real goal is the destruction of the civilizational system- Mm-hmm ... so that they can build something new. So, theyâre, they donât, they donât think to hold to account. Theyâre like, âZohran, whereâs all this leftist stuff you said you were gonna do?â They donât actually care about that, because that was never really the point.
They basically know theyâre on team, and team is the destruction of Western civilization. [00:23:00]
Simone Collins: Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Or at least you know, right now sort of directionally the destruction of Western civilization. And I think that this is where we can see why the gripers have so naturally slideed into this alliance. And, and Nick Fuentesâ whiter faction has, you know, recently s- coming out and saying, âIâm a moderate non-woke Democrat.â
And again, think about where Iâm pointing out that the Islamists and the leftists actually fit in really well, right? So they come in here and they talk in the eyes of, like, Karl Marx, like, the problem of the Jew, the Jewish because, you know, they canât do usury, they canât do interest charges.
Actually, Christians arenât supposed to, either, but they donât, nobody follows that anymore. Wait,
Simone Collins: really? Oh.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, Christians, or at least historically from the Catholic Church, weâre not supposed to use usury or interest rates at all. And then people realize thatâs, like, economically retarded and leads to really bad downstream effects for society.
Which it does, by the way. Itâs really bad for society to not use interest rates because then you donât have a reason to invest. And when a society doesnât invest in its continued production, it advances at a much slower rate which is one of the [00:24:00] reasons why Islamic countries are so poor. Well, many other bigger reasons, but back to this point.
The point here being is, is they come out there and they say to somebody like Nick Fuentes, âLook, I am against the greedy businessman code Jew,â and he knows what theyâre saying code Jew, right? And he thinks, âWell, whatâs really important to my agenda right now?â Right? Mm. It is seeing Jews removed from positions of power, right?
And so I can work with Islamists on that. And more than that, if you listen to what is Nick Fuentesâ broader goal for Western civilization it is to see it collapse. Now, his belief is that after it collapses, after the movement of right-wing party collapses, that he will be able to build a new right-wing party in his vision, a new version of Western civilization in his vision which by the way is, is, is very explicitly not something that most of his followers would want, but they just donât listen to what heâs saying.
It doesnât really matter. The point is, is he wonât be able to do it. He doesnât have the numbers. Even if he did [00:25:00] create the collapse that he wanted to create, whatever was built from the ashes would not be Fuentes-y, and it wouldnât be Catholic-y either. If you look at those parties right now and their relative political influence and the, the growing or shrinking of their political influence, and the people who are like, âOh, arenât a lot of, like, online influencers joining the Catholics?â
I- just as a side note here, One, as I pointed out before, Catholics lose eight converts for every one they get. Protestants lose two converts for every one they get. And even with the recent movement of online influencers into Catholicism-
Simone Collins: Not converts, right? Do you just mean eight practicing Catholics for every new convert they win?
Malcolm Collins: Yes, they lose eight practicing for, on the statistics. Okay. But this has changed a bit. Re- people can say, âOh, maybe itâs a bit better now.â The problem is, is that a lot of online influencers, and this, that weâve seen recently are coming out as more explicitly anti-Catholic which wasnât a thing for a while.
So an example of this is Redeemed Zoomer did a video basically coming out as anti-Catholic.
Simone Collins: Really? [00:26:00] Wow.
Malcolm Collins: And he used to be a very pro-Catholic streamer. And basically what he said was that in the online space, what he has realized is that the way that the Catholics have treated him when he has made mild criticisms of their religion really reminds him of when he was a progressive, the way other wokes treated him.
And he realized that a lot of the stereotypes that he had heard about Catholics from Southern Baptists and stuff like this he had initially discounted because he was being overly rosy to Catholics, and he didnât realize how aggressively totalizing a, at least a, a portion of online Catholic culture was.
And they, they took over his subreddit at one point, basically, and like, were using it to attempt to convert people. And he, he, he basically said, which I thought was an interesting way to put it was he decided to go into Catholic culture and instead of having his faith in whether he was a Protestant shaken, he ended up having his faith in whether or not the Pope was actually the Antichrist shaken.
Simone Collins: Wow, okay.
Malcolm Collins: So pretty big. [00:27:00] And Redeemed Zoomer is a very nice and understanding person. So what Iâm saying is weâre seeing shifting tides around where this is going in a lot of directions right now. And this is a new shift that weâre beginning to see. But the point being is, okay, so Iâm a Nick Fuentes.
I wanna see a collapse of Western civilization. Directionally, the Islamists and the progressive both are on point for me. I am excited when negative stuff happens to Western countries, âcause that brings me closer to the point where I think Iâm gonna be able to sweep up all the cards off the table, the point of collapse.
Hmm. Which is, again, comical. He just doesnât have the numbers, the technology, the money or even his allies with cultural factions. Like, even if the Catholics wanted to do this, they would be scuttled by the Vatican at this point, right? Like, if they ever did begin to build a large movement a la what Nick wants to do, the Vatican would immediately do everything in their power to denounce it and demoralize it as weâve already seen them do through...
And people can say, âWell, people just wouldnât listen to the Vatican.â Itâs like everyone wouldnât listen to the Vatican, but enough would for it to cause [00:28:00] some damage especially if they attempted to sort of- engage their on the ground forces that are still loyal to them in countries like America, which have a lot of power.
Yeah. And can do a lot to scuttle, especially a movement where your you know, foot soldiers are going to mass, and these people control whatâs being said on those pulpits. Because you cannot move around churches as easily as a Catholic as you can as a Protestant. So if they ever decided to go scorched earth against this, they absolutely could.
Mm. This was actually really fascinating. We were talking with one of our Catholic fans about this, and they pointed out how you, you donât go to, like, the parish you like best as a Catholic. Thatâs seen as, like, really bad. And to prevent you from performing too strong an attachment with any one preacher whatever they call it in Catholicism, they switch them out regularly, like if one becomes too popular.
Whereas with Protestants, you typically go wherever is most popular for you, which at the end of the day gives the Vatican ultimate control over whatâs happening, even at a local level. But the point Iâm making here is there actually isnât ideologically, like in terms of [00:29:00] anything they want in the moment, any particularly large point of conflict between the modern far leftists, the Islamists, and the griper.
Like, theyâre all completely on message, on team in regards to what they want to see accomplished which I think is really interesting. Thoughts before I go further, Simone?
Simone Collins: This is more sobering than I thought it would be.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And by the way, if you want to understand, like, what theyâre saying, so this is Judith Butler, by the way, at UC Berkeley.
And this was about Israel and Hezbollah, right? So, Judith Butler is, like, leftist icon, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yes, understanding Hamas, Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are left, that are part of the global left is extremely important. This does not stop us from being critical of certain dimensions of both movements.
It doesnât stop those of us who are interested in non-violent politics from raising the question of whether there are other options besides violence. So again, a critical, important [00:30:00] engagement... sorry, entanglement. I mean, I certainly think it should be entered into the conversation on the left. I similarly think that boycotts and divestment procedures are, again, an essential component of the resistance movement.
Mm-hmm. So very, very pro this stuff. And, and note they have been in the past. So here Iâm gonna go over Richard Falk, a Princeton professor of international law who met with Khomeini during his exile outside of Paris. And this was the evaluation he offered of Khomeini in The New York Times, by the way, so mainstream leftist publications.
Yeah. Keep in mind, this is the guy who ended up mass executing all the leftists who supported him in his country.
Simone Collins: Right.
Malcolm Collins: Just so you understand how little this matters to them. And the left just does not care that this happened. It do- When you try to bring this up with them, you are losing, because they donât care that they persecute people like them.
It is irrelevant to their world perspective. So to continue, he t- he wrote, âTo suppose that Ayatollah Khomeini is dissembling seems almost beyond belief. His political style is to express his real views [00:31:00] defiantly and without apology, regardless of consequences. He has little incentive suddenly to become devious for the sake of American public opinion.
Thus, the deception of him as a fanatical reactionary and a bearer of crude prejudices , âSeems certainly and happily false. What is encouraging is that his entourage of close advisors is uniformly composed of moderate, progressive individuals.â But they both mean this and do not care that it is not true once it is proven not true because they do not care when people are killed.
And I think that thatâs fundamentally the most important thing to note about this. To them, people being killed are just like scorecards for their larger system, and if you come into an argument with them focused on the people being killed they wonât care. If you go into an argument with them like what actually happens for civilization, right, like 100 years, 200 years if [00:32:00] these groups gain power they donât care.
And this is why, you know, when you point out things like, well, if you shut down the AI center, right, like this is gonna have enormous economic consequences and groups that like we have, have, have social policies and social values that you would hugely disagree with-
Mm-hmm ...
like the CCP, although they donât seem to be aware that like the CCP is anti-gay as well, much more anti-gay than the United States they, they anti a lot of the things.
But again, but again, they donât care about anti-gay because anti-gay doesnât matter. What matters is the trans agenda, right? At this point. And this is again where I think it makes sense for conservatives to ally with gays where we can, even if we can say, âWell, we disagree with your lifestyle we wonât in law, in institution prevent you from living it.â
I, I, I think that thatâs an easy compromise that we can make and get a large faction on team that has been abandoned by the left and is, if Iâm honest, disproportionately productive. If you look at I, I donât know why this is the case, but if you look at top designers, top chefs, [00:33:00] top a, a lot of things, theyâre often gay males.
Theyâre, theyâre pretty good at design and influence. So if you wanna win the entertainment war preventing gay males from working on team is, is, is not a really bad not a really great strategy. And I think that this, what, what I have been incredibly heartened about in sort of like where all this is going, because yeah, you can say this is really sad, is that the wider movement really seems to be shaping out the way I predicted it would shape out.
And I mean, it was wild when I first sort of made these predictions or were thinking about this, is that the Groyper faction has moved to solidly form with this leftist alliance, right? Like they just wanna tear down society, you know, and, and stick it to the Jews, and they donât really care about anything else that happens.
Whereas the, Part of the right, like the stodgy old right they still have voting power, but they donât really have any control within institutions, like within the administration or anything like that.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: And they, they vote and [00:34:00] whatever. Theyâll eventually die off. A lot of their streamers and stuff like that used to have relevance, but theyâve gotten a lot smaller.
Weâve done a number of videos on, like, whatâs the real size of a lot of these people. And then in terms of the, the tech right, which is our side, and people will say, âWell, thatâs not even right-wing.â Like, when people strongly assert that Asmongold is not right-wing, Iâm like, âHe is the very heart of what is the modern right.â
Yeah ... like itâs j- thatâs literally like cutting out someoneâs heart and being like, âThis isnât Brad.â Itâs like, whoa, put that back in there, buddy. Thatâs like the core of Brad. Well, I mean, in terms of the new right sort of media ecosystem, it, it comes downstream of Asmongold. And note here if you look at As- like, what does Asmongold think about, like, forming a coalition in which gays can be members, but not necessarily, like, privileged members or something like that?
Or, or th- we donât have to conce- concede to their lifestyle or choose their stuff. Heâd be like, âYeah, thatâs totally normal,â right? And itâs not just Asmongold where you see this growth. [00:35:00] Itâs the entire ecosystem from Leaflet to Rev to Nux to Clownfish TV to Bearing to, Weâre increasingly seeing
This wider ecosystem both become more cohesive in terms of a intellectual force, and I think develop a internal coherent philosophy that is more than just anti-wokism. And I think this coherent philosophy weâre actually seeing a lot more. Leaflet has done a good job. I mean, her brand of, like stellar humanism is so simple to understand.
Yeah. And so easy to be like, âWhat I care about is long-term human flourishing and the c- conquering of, you know, our manifest destiny within space.â Yeah, itâs
Simone Collins: very elegant with its simplicity.
Malcolm Collins: The- very simple, very elegant. Everyone can just be like, âI donât care.â Like w- when we have a [00:36:00] disagreement and w- and the reason why that very simply framed philosophy is useful, is itâs like when we have a disagreement, we have this shared point of does it hurt long-term human potentiality?
Does it limit long-term human potentiality?
Exactly,
yeah. And so, you know, whether itâs a religious disagreement, or whether itâs a, a disagreement on strategy, or whether itâs a disagreement on economic policy, it doesnât fall down into this standard because within the ri- wider, like, new right coalition we have very diverse perspectives, as I put up.
I mean, like Shoe0nHead is very clearly in the coalition, and Kami Mommy, right? Yeah. And sh- for people who d- werenât sure about her, I mean, she did a stream with Smug Alana, okay? Like, in terms of, like the Vtuber where, you know, you got your Kirishas, your Smug Alanas, your Banana whatever her name is.
And then youâve got the growth of, which I think is going to be increasingly important, this is where Iâm seeing it, the Skyrest Cinematic Universe. Yes. I think things like this, the using AI entertainment as a [00:37:00] cultural weapon in a society that has begun to retreat from this is going to be so powerful for the next generation.
Especially with kids and stuff like that, getting them involved in this stuff is going to be a really powerful way to sort of push things forwards. And the other thing I like about stellar humanism is it removes all of the dogmatism of the right. Like, the right doesnât have to follow, like, all...
Itâs just the people who care about what is actually true and want thriving. And Western civilization seems like the correct way to win if thatâs what you care about, so all of these people care about Western civilization, not out of a love of Western... Now, you can love Western civilization for its own sake and be part of the coalition, but you donât have to, which I like.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, what Iâm also seeing from what youâre saying, what scares me maybe more on the left isnât this interest in taking things down and breaking. E- what scares me even more is this intentional blindness to the negative ramifications or harm [00:38:00] done. Almost like, you know, theyâre Muggles and the harm done is magic.
Like, they just canât see it. Theyâre Itâs not even like an unwillingness to see it. It doesnât process. It doesnât register, and that really scares me
Malcolm Collins: Human harm is completely irrelevant from their moral calculations because-
Simone Collins: I donât know. I donât know. I feel like it, thereâs something deeper there, that itâs not just about irrelevance, but like some inability to see or recognize it or acknowledge it and, and for it to process
Malcolm Collins: meaning to it No, it has to do with how they process reality.
So-
Simone Collins: Yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: I can go to a leftist and I can say, âYou know, Hamas is putting its terror centers under hospitals and schools.â And, and they can say, âWell, yeah, I understand that, thatâs why Israel is bombing them, but Israel shouldnât bomb them.â And I say, âWell, okay, well so think two steps ahead. If Israel stops bombing a hospital every time they put their network under a hospital, theyâre going to put their networks under hospitals disproportionately, like exclusively going forwards, which [00:39:00] further puts those people in harm way, right?
And allows their force to grow, which is provably victimizing their own population.â You know, as we saw after Israelâs withdrawal, like executing people on the streets and stuff like that, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: They, they victimized their own people much harder than the IDF did. And itâs, itâs, this second order narrative is not relevant from sort of a pain calculation to them because they only care about pain in a narrative context.
Simone Collins: Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Like how do they strongly paint themselves as the good guys in a world with this oppressor versus oppressed framing? Like thatâs the way all of society is structured. Everyone needs to be categorized this way. And and, and they donât really think beyond that. This is like the average street level foot soldier.
If youâre thinking of the higher-ups, like the people who are like the actual intellectuals in the movement they fundamentally just donât care. Like the higher-ups want a destruction of civilization- Hmm ... or what we would call Western civilization, and they understand that thatâs gonna come with death, [00:40:00] right?
Hmm. Like, this is where the, you know, kill Nazis, everything like this. They know theyâre talking about average everyday conservatives. They just donât care.
Simone Collins: Hmm. Well, I h- I, I donât wanna say I hope thatâs the case. I, Iâm, Iâm more afraid of what I think is more real, which is a blindness that would cause a profoundly higher level of death and, and destruction and pain, and that really scares me.
Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, itâs coming, right? Like, thatâs where society is heading with current immigration rates in Europe, with the current cultural movement we see in Europe and potentially within the United States. You know, like, if, for example, I took a position as president or of a political party that I was influential as, we would be dramatically more aggressive than Trump is being right now in terms of how we handled citizenship and how we handled communities that had already gotten hooks into America in a way that was just deleterious at this point.
Simone Collins: Presumably just in enforcing our [00:41:00] laws.
Malcolm Collins: Hmm. Well, I mean, thatâs where theyâre trying to go right now, right? Yeah,
Simone Collins: yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But I think we need new and stricter laws, frankly. Oh ... I think there could be laws about... Hereâs an easy law, right? If you become a citizen of the United States and you ever go on any form of government assistance, I think you should lose your citizenship if you became a citizen within that lifetime, right?
Like, weâve talked about this.
Simone Collins: Well, a right to vote. At very least, right to vote.
Malcolm Collins: No, no, I just think you, you lose your citizenship, you get removed. If youâre not
Simone Collins: a productive member-
Malcolm Collins: Well,
Simone Collins: I disagree ... if youâre not a taxpayer- I mean, there, there are,
Malcolm Collins: there are times in everyoneâs life, including, you know- Right
childhood and old age- And there are times in everyoneâs life when they do not require government assistance when that happens to them. If they have a healthy community that supports them, if they have healthy religious institutions that support them and as many immigrant groups used to have, and they become destitute during a part or they lose their job at part, I am okay with them staying in the country so long as they donât try to get government assistance.[00:42:00]
It is the attempting to get government assistance that I think that should be the disqualifying. And maybe even make it a two-
Simone Collins: So you would just eliminate government assistance, then?
Malcolm Collins: Well, I guess itâs a better way to do it, because I wanna be able to use it to remove them. So, if youâre on it for, letâs say, two years and you donât shut it down before then, you immediately get put on a deport list.
I think that thatâs an easy way to handle it. I also think that any of them that commit a crime, any crime, no matter how small, immediate deportation. Hmm ... and I think th- this can go to financial crimes, anything tied to fraud, especially about the government. Like, this stuff we should be... Or deportation with some form of review, right?
You know, you, you could say that, right? So basically, if it appears that they are culturally assimilating, you keep them. If it does not appear theyâre culturally assimilating, you deport them
Simone Collins: I suppose. I mean, I mean, itâs, itâs complicated, right? Like, you could have a system like that be abused by people who create trumped up charges to try to get rid of people who are business [00:43:00] competitors or in other forms inconvenient to them, even if they-
Malcolm Collins: Right
merit- But I think that the social harm of that is significantly lower than the social harm of allowing in large groups that are exploiting the system. So like I understand that you canât, you can get negative externalities from implementing anything.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: The negative externalities of that are a lot less than the negative externalities of the amount of fraud that our social safety nets are under, are under right now.
It isnât going to the most vulnerable people in our society. Like, thatâs who suffers from this fraud.
Simone Collins: Yeah. But I mean, you know, y- you would have to moderate the rule that youâre proposing here because we canât support vulnerable people in society if anyone we support gets deported.
Malcolm Collins: No, I said, I said if they are an immigrant.
Simone Collins: Oh. I donât know, itâs just easier to have a rule of like, you can stay in the country as an immigrant if you are a net taxpayer.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, but thatâs harder to calculate I [00:44:00] mean, you can do it if you wanna try to calculate that, Simone. Apparently you love making difficult math Well,
Simone Collins: weâre speaking in, in hypotheticals here, so yeah.
I we could also presumably simplify the tax code.
Malcolm Collins: Itâs way easier- But- ... to just say if they pay, if, if they go on government services.
Simone Collins: Yeah. I guess youâre right.
Malcolm Collins: Exploit government services. So anyway interesting conversation. Any final thoughts?
Simone Collins: This was interesting. This was scary. That is all I have to say.
Malcolm Collins: All right. Now excited for the next one.
Simone Collins: I love you.
Malcolm Collins: Love you too
Simone Collins: The first thing I do to try to get out of bed in the morning is put on... Like, I just open YouTube and I see what the algo has for me âcause itâll help wake me up. And typically itâs, like, Asmongold or something else that I watch routinely. But this morning it was some video about, like, it, it, it had, like, almost a million views and it had just been published about the Gen Alpha melody.
It was a fascinating, like, little just, like, did you know about this thing? And there are hundreds of songs that have come out that have the same [00:45:00] broad melody, and itâs kind of incredible how pervasive it is, and I just didnât realize it until he put all of them together. Itâs really interesting stuff.
And the first... One of the earliest versions where you can find it is Lady Gagaâs Bad Romance. Thatâs the melody, the Gen Alpha melody which you also just... You see it everywhere, all music genres, all languages, w- Western, Eastern, it doesnât matter. South Korean, K-pop, random Russian songs. Really, really fascinating.
And I just love that there are random people out there to explain things like this to me. All
Malcolm Collins: right.
Simone Collins: And to talk about them and how they rise and why they exist. Like, we have YouTube now. Remember when we had to look things up in, like, the encyclopedia? Do you remember? Did you have those CD-ROMs of Encyclopedia Britannica?
Do you remember the opening sequence on them? It was such a thing. I [00:46:00] guess. Oh my God.
Malcolm Collins: Anyway, Iâll get started.
Simone Collins: Yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 8: I did. It needs four batteries. Wow. Thatâs a lot Are any of the batteries in incorrectly? Is that maybe why heâs not turning on? Yeah. Have you checked? Take a look. Make sure theyâre all in right. Toasty, can you check? Youâre our quality control man. No, I, I know what batteries are and how to put them in.
Speaker 9: Let Toasty check, Octavian. Heâs our quality control man. Oh, you know what? Take out this one, take out this one, and take out this one. And then Iâll do, and then Iâll do that, and then Iâll do this one
Speaker 8: Yes, Iâm a great [00:47:00] bunny Thatâs so nice How can we get these other cells? If you press on the side opposite the spring, you can kind of push it out using the tension from the spring
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 Based Camp episode, Simone and Malcolm Collins dive into the rising anti-immigration protests in South Africa â led by Black South Africans against illegal immigrants from other African nations. From âMarch and Marchâ and Operation Dudula marches to demands for mass deportations, shop closures, and prioritizing citizens for jobs, this movement echoes familiar themes of economic frustration, crime concerns, and strained resources.
Is this âBlack MAGAâ? Why is the global media quick to label it xenophobia while downplaying similar grievances elsewhere? The Collins discuss unemployment realities (32-33%), government responses, comparisons to US/UK/Canada immigration levels, ethnic economic niches, and why South Africans feel under attack from within Africa.
Expect unfiltered analysis, humor, genetic tangents, and real talk on immigration policy that transcends race. What happens when citizens fight back against illegal immigration in their own country?
Show Notes
When I think of âanti-immigration protestsâ the image that pops into my head is of white people being angry about non-white people entering their neighborhoods and taking their jobs
This happens so much that subconsciously even I sometimes find myself assuming this is a âwhite people clutching their pearls about their land being takenâ thing, when itâs not
And recent anti-immigrant protests in South Africa are proof of this.
South Africa has seen a wave of anti-immigration (often described as anti-illegal immigration or xenophobic) protests and related violence in AprilâMay 2026, concentrated in major cities like Pretoria, Johannesburg, Durban, and spreading to others.
Key Details
* According to the BBC at least, the main driver is the citizen-led group March and March, which advocates for stricter immigration enforcement, border control, mass deportations of undocumented migrants, and prioritizing South Africans for jobs, housing, and services.
* Protests have drawn hundreds to thousands of participants, with marches to government buildings (e.g., Union Buildings in Pretoria), shop closures by foreign-owned businesses out of fear, and some âclean-upâ campaigns.
* Involvement or alignment from Operation Dudula (a vigilante-style anti-immigrant movement meaning âpush outâ in Zulu), ActionSA, Patriotic Alliance, and other local forums (e.g., Thokoza Abahambe Forum).
* Some political figures, like Floyd Shivambu of the Africa Mayibuye Movement, have endorsed the concerns as legitimate ahead of local elections.
* As CNN reports (hereâs an Instagram link), protesters accuse undocumented migrants (primarily from other African countries, and some Asians) of taking jobs, engaging in crime/drug dealing, overloading public services (health, housing, schools), and straining the economy.
* Some issued a June 30, 2026, ultimatum for undocumented foreigners to leave, with warnings of consequences.
* Chants and actions target âillegal foreigners.â
* THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME RHETORIC YOU HEAR IN THE USA
So this is NOT about white people at all, right?
* Yeah, the protesters are primarily South African citizens, often from poorer communities, unemployed youth, township residents, and those feeling economic pressure.
* See some footage from Sky News posted on reddit here
* Note: South Africaâs official unemployment rate is very high (~32-33%), with widespread frustration over service delivery failures after decades of ANC governance, corruption allegations, and inequality.
* Theyâre largely mad about immigrants from other African countries
* Nigerians, Zimbabweans, Congolese, Ethiopians, Ghanaians
Is immigration uniquely high in South Africa vis a vis other countries? Or other African countries? Is it higher than normal?
South Africaâs immigration levels are not uniquely high by global standards, but they stand out significantly within Africa and have risen notably in recent decades.
Key Metrics (UN DESA 2024 Data)
* South Africa: ~2.63 million international migrants, representing ~4.1% of its total population (up from ~3.2% in 1990 and ~4.3% in 2010). (UN)
* Global average: ~3.7% of world population (~304 million migrants). (Migration Policy Intitute)
* Africa overall: ~1.9% (29.2 million migrants across the continent). (UN)
A few other African countries have higher proportions due to specific factors (e.g., economic pull or refugee hosting):
* CĂŽte dâIvoire: ~9.0% (around 2.88 million migrants) â historically one of the highest in sub-Saharan Africa due to cocoa plantations and labor migration from neighbors like Burkina Faso.
* Others like Djibouti (~10.8%), Gabon, or some refugee-hosting nations (e.g., Uganda, Sudan) can show elevated shares in certain years.
* Most African countries are well below 2â3%.
Many high-income countries have 10â30%+ migrant shares (e.g., Gulf states 30â50%+, Australia ~30%, Europe/North America 12â16% averages). South Africaâs level is comparable to some other emerging economies but amplified by regional disparities
How does South Africaâs rates of immigration and illegal immigration compare to those in the USA, Canada, Australia, and the UK?
Basically, South Africaâs total migrant share is not high compared to these countries, but its challenges with undocumented migration (relative to enforcement capacity and economic conditions) appear more acute proportionally and socially. High-unemployment townships amplify perceptions of strain from irregular inflows, unlike the more managed systems in the Anglosphere nations.
Statements from Protesters
From March and March Leaders and Protesters
Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma (Founder and National Leader of March and March):
âThey are not victims... If you walk down the roads, you will find that they take buildings. There are drugs. There is prostitution. There are cartels. There are mafias. So, everything in this country is a fertile ground for criminals to thrive.ââWe are under attack from across Africa⊠The only thing that they do is to label us as xenophobic. There is nothing xenophobic about wanting law and order in your country.âOn government inaction: âWeâre frustrated, tired, and feel ignored by our own government... Our demand is that our government is moving at a snailâs pace in addressing the issue of illegal immigrants.â
Sanele Nkambule (Treasurer, March and March):
âMany spaza shops and informal businesses in the townships are owned or run by foreign nationals without proper trading rights... [placing] an unfair burden on citizens who pay taxes.â He called for all such shops to be run by South Africans, audits of immigrants, review of study visas, and army deployment in high-immigrant areas.
Anonymous demonstrator (to BBC during Pretoria march):
âWe are grateful that we now have groups like this that have come up to aid the voice of what we have always been preaching about â illegal immigration is a big problem to our society.â (Referring to the âinflux of illegal immigrantsâ that politicians ignore.)
From Associated Groups
Thami Madondo (National Executive Committee member, linked to Operation Dudula/March and March-aligned actions):
âThe immigration laws of the country have never been enforced by the law enforcement agencies... And thatâs why weâre sitting with all of these crises. ⊠We are stressing the fact that illegal foreigners in the country must leave.â He criticized âUbuntuâ narratives in this context: âThat narrative of Ubuntu, unfortunately, is the nonsense that has put us where we are today. Ubuntu doesnât mean that you must come into the country illegally.â
Tshepo Totwe (Secretary, Abahambe Movement, collaborating with March and March):
âWe are here to partake and collaborate with March on March on a progressive march that is involving different organisations and also national forums to collaborate and fight against the foreign nationals that are taking advantage of our economic freedom in our country... That is the key purpose for us to indicate and send a message that we are being labelled as xenophobic, and that is not the point.â
What are these protests like?
* Human Rights Watch (citing âxenophobic attacksâ) reports that some protests have escalated into vigilante actions, assaults on migrants (including beatings, shop attacks, and reported deathsâe.g., Nigerians, Ethiopians), and intimidation.
* Human Rights Watch and others have noted insufficient police response in places. Foreign governments (Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, etc.) have issued warnings to their citizens and, in Ghanaâs case, offered evacuation flights (with low uptake in one reported instance).
What is the South African government doing in response?
* As they communicate on the official website of the presidency of the republic of south africa: President Cyril Ramaphosaâs administration and officials (e.g., Deputy President Paul Mashatile) condemn violence and vigilante âlawlessnessâ while acknowledging legitimate grievances over illegal immigration.
* Theyâve highlighted deportations (over 100k in recent years) and pledged legal enforcement.
* They deny widespread xenophobia, calling incidents isolated or criminal
What is the larger media narrative about these protests?
* When you distill all the coverage together with AI summaries, youâll see these protests being framed as a recurring pattern of xenophobic tensions in South Africa during economic hardship, seen in prior years (e.g., 2008, 2019, Operation Dudula activities).
* High inflows of migrants/refugees amid regional instability, porous borders, and competition for scarce opportunities fuel it.
Episode Transcript
Simone Collins: [00:00:00] We are here to fight against the foreign nationals that are taking advantage of our economic freedom in our country. We are being labeled as xenophobic, and that is not the point.â So what are the protests like? And
Malcolm Collins: again, youâre sure, youâre sure this guy was Black, so weâre not gonna get the channel taken down?
Simone Collins: Iâm, yeah, Iâve, yes.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, good.
Speaker 2: We are sick and tired with the Somalians, with the Pakistanis, with all, with Nigerians and all illegal immigrants in this country These protesters say theyâre declaring war on illegal immigration and want to take their complaints right to the doorsteps of embassies across Pretoria.
Speaker 5: The protesters here, um,
Speaker 4: plan to raise issue with the Somali Government about activities of their citizens in the country. The group, who are wearing Zulu traditional dress, initially sat down before the embassy gates saying they want to show respect.
They demanded answers on a range of issues from crime to illegal immigration, but things got tense when they were unhappy with the answers from [00:01:00] the Somali representatives.
Speaker 6: The youth is caught up
Speaker 4: by this country and is taken The group say theyâve given undocumented immigrants until the end of June to leave South Africa.
Speaker 7: Thereâs eight million young people that are not working in South Africa. It is not xenophobia. It is thereâs eight million unemployed people,
would you like to know more?
Simone Collins: Hello, Malcolm. Iâm excited to be speaking with you today, because when I think of anti-immigration protests, the image that pops into my head is, is white people being angry about non-white people entering their neighborhoods. Even though thatâs like not... I know- True ... that thatâs not true. But thank God one of our Base Camp listeners was like, âHey, you should, you should talk about the anti-immigration protests in South Africa.â
Malcolm Collins: It is Black fatigue on an African scale-
Simone Collins: Yes ...
Malcolm Collins: of Black South Africans being mad about Black immigrants to South Africa. I-
Simone Collins: This has nothing to do with us. Nothing
Malcolm Collins: to do with- I, I found some video footage of it that Iâm gonna play- Yeah ... right [00:02:00] here.
Speaker 3: Attacker!
Malcolm Collins: Oh, sorry, that was the wrong footage.
Thatâs gonna get us in a lot of trouble.
Simone Collins: Damn it, Malcolm, why do you... Ah. You-
Malcolm Collins: Come on, I wanna put the caveman fighting footage ...
Simone Collins: you continue to speed run our... Do you not want to be on YouTu- what is... Anyway. Let... I will bring you back to speed.
Malcolm Collins: That clip, by the way, that clip is like a meme clip. Itâs from a 1980s representation of Homo erectus fighting Neanderthals.
And white populations, by the way, so you canât say Iâm racist. These are historically white populations. in fact, Africans theyâre the only people on Earth that donât have any Neanderthal DNA, so technically Iâm making fun of my own- Oh, really? ... ancestors here, not theirs.
Simone Collins: That, no, that makes you...
Right, right, right. âCause Neander- right. Oh my God. Right, right, of course. I-
Malcolm Collins: Yep. [00:03:00] They have D- Denisovan DNA though, but thatâs, you know, neither here nor there.
Simone Collins: We did a separate episode on that, that stuff. Well, probably multiple. Let, letâs just- Itâs
Malcolm Collins: one of our spiciest episodes where we go over things that I was unaware of, that there are certain populations in Africa today like the God, I canât pronounce,
The Kosan people
Malcolm Collins: that are more distant genetically if youâre looking not time-wise.
Like, their breakoff wasnât earlier, but if you look at, like, I think itâs SNP count or something- Mm-hmm ... they are more distant from Europeans than Europeans are from Neanderthals. And a lot of people just- Well,
Simone Collins: thatâs how it is in Africa in general, right? Like, there are different genetic strains or, like, heri- what is it?
Like, sort of n- heritage backgrounds that are- So in a way- ... more genetically different ...
Malcolm Collins: they are more justified to be mad about immigration, right? Because- Yeah,
Simone Collins: absolutely. Yeah. No, no, no. Yeah. The, the, theyâre, theyâre more different. Theyâre more different than, like,
Malcolm Collins: Than Europeans are from each other, so yeah.
Yes,
Simone Collins: yes. Yeah, yeah. Or, like, people from Latin America versus, like, Irish people. Yeah, like, no, way more different. But anyway, South Africa has seen a wave [00:04:00] of anti-immigration some- some people are describing it as anti-illegal immigration or, or xenophobic, if youâre asking Human Rights Watch, protests and rioting violence.
I love
Malcolm Collins: that Human Rights Watch didnât care when they were killing white farmers, but the moment they start protesting Black immigrants from even- horror countries, they freak out.
Simone Collins: No, but actually, but actually, and weâre gonna But
Malcolm Collins: actually.
Speaker: I want to take time to point out here that this isnât a racialist thing. The groups that hate us hate us just because we are disproportionately productive and technologically productive when contrasted with other groups, and thatâs why they hate the South African blacks. Thatâs why they want to see them replaced within their own country, and theyâre fighting back, which we can learn something from
Simone Collins: Yeah. The, these started breaking out in April. Theyâre, theyâre continuing this month.
Theyâre concentrated in major cities like Pretoria and Johannesburg, Durban, and theyâre starting to spread to others. Like, this is kind of the, the momentum is building, and so itâs worth it for us to talk about this. [00:05:00] So according to the BBC at least, the main driver is this citizen-led group called March and March, which is an interesting choice of words. March and March advocates for stricter immigration enforcement. They want border control, they want mass deportations of undocumented migrants, and they want prioritizing South Africans for jobs, housing, and services.
Doesnât it sound so familiar? Doesnât that sound a little MAGA?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, it does sound a little MAGA.
Simone Collins: Itâs like, oh my God. We get-
Malcolm Collins: Are we gonna call this Black MAGA?
Simone Collins: Black, Black MAGA.
Malcolm Collins: Dark
Simone Collins: MAGA.
Malcolm Collins: I donât know the, the... Okay
Simone Collins: I like it. I, I like it. I like it. So the protests, theyâve, theyâve drawn... Theyâre big. Weâre talking hundreds to thousands of participants, and theyâre doing things like marching on government buildings, like the union buildings of Pretoria.
Theyâre, theyâre enforcing shop closures by foreign-owned businesses. They are... Theyâre, theyâre doing some cleanup campaigns. Thereâs some also additional groups that are getting involved. One is called Operation Dudula, [00:06:00] that theyâre a vigilante-style an- anti-immigration movement, meaning push out in Zulu.
We donât see something going this far in America. You know, like, if this was happening in the United States, theyâd be like, just... I, I just know the, the white racist allegations would just go, like, off the charts, but, you know, whatever. Also, thereâs another one called Action SA, Patriotic Alliance and there are other local forums like the Phekoza Abahambe Forum.
And then there are additional political figures that are really endorsing concerns, just like youâll see in any... I mean, obviously in the United States, in the UK, there are people who stand out as being like, âImmigration is a problem,â and then they kind of run on that platform. As CNN reports, and in, in my show notes on Patreon and Substack, Iâm linking to all my sources.
Thereâs a, thereâs a, an Instagram link you can see to, like, the news reports that Iâm linking to. Protesters are accusing the undocumented migrants, primarily from other African countries and some Asians, but mostly other African countries, of taking jobs, [00:07:00] engaging in crime and drug dealing, overloading public services like health and housing and schools, and straining the economy.
Some issued a, a June 30th- Mm ... 2026 ultimatum for undocumented foreigners to leave, saying, like, âIf you donât leave by the end of June, weâre coming for you.â Which we also havenât done. I- imagine if, like, a, a, like middle, middle of America Americans were doing this, you know? Weâd, weâd be defenestrated.
Like, they already are being defenestrated just from us wanting to enforce our own laws. Can we
Malcolm Collins: import some Black South Africans to handle- Can we- ... our immigrants?
Simone Collins: Actually, yeah. Letâs- Maybe ... So, so Trump needs to expand the whole white South African, like, refugee visa to include these, these xenophobic, I
Malcolm Collins: would take South African immigrants over Somalians I- Like, letâs, letâs pick âem on the Somalians, right?
Like, they understand-
Simone Collins: Right, they, I mean, they, yeah. God. I just, I canât. Itâs just, itâs so- I wonât,
Malcolm Collins: Iliana Ruhr wouldnât be able to do sh- you, you have a, a mob go to her house.
Simone Collins: I know. The, the Somalians [00:08:00] wish, wish that, that only like, you know, JD Vance was coming after them, right? Like, e- they are lucky.
They are lucky. And, and I just, I, I wanted in, in my research for this to be super, super sure that this like has nothing to do with white people in South Africa. And yeah, the protesters are primarily not only South African citizens, but from the poorer communities, the unemployed youth, township residents specifically, and trust me, there are not white people in the townships.
Weâve been. And, and people in general feeling economic pressure. And I have footage from Sky News that I found posted on Reddit. Itâs, it should be reiterated-
Malcolm Collins: So you visually, you did a skin check just to make sure.
Simone Collins: Yeah Yeah. It, yes, I did.
Okay, youâre good to go
Simone Collins: South
Malcolm Collins: Afric- Itâs too okay to talk about, because if it was right, people, weâd have this video taken down in two seconds.
Simone Collins: Right. We would be in really... No, genuinely, like, I canât. So, so I checked.
Malcolm Collins: [00:09:00] Any other day, weâd be arrested. Weâd have the thought police at our door right now, right?
Simone Collins: No, and, and r- remember, HRC is still very mad at these people in the townships. People facing a country with 32 to 33% unemployment, okay? They, theyâre gen- like, you know, we think we have it bad that, that illegal immigration is putting some pressure on job availability, plus, you know, AI and all this stuff.
But 32 to 33% percent and their social services are not good like ours. So of course theyâre mad. And theyâre not, theyâre, theyâre not mad about Indians coming in. Theyâre not mad about Europeans coming in. Theyâre mad about Nigerians, Zimbabweans, Congolese, Ethiopians, Ghanaians. Thatâs who theyâre primarily mad about.
And that those countries keep issuing warnings to South Africa. Theyâre like, âYou are being m- mean to our people. You must stop.â Like, theyâre, theyâre actually, like, submitting formal complaints and stuff, and Iâm like, I donât... Itâs like stop sucking so much then. Like, theyâre leaving your country for a [00:10:00] reason.
I donât know. And so I also wanted to check just i- if immigration in South Africa is uniquely high vis-a-vis other countries or other African countries. And South Africaâs immigration levels arenât uniquely high by global standards, though they do stand out within Africa. Like, itâs, South Africaâs one of the countries that in Africa is doing, like, relatively okay, I guess.
So they are seeing- And
Malcolm Collins: itâs doing terribly, by the way,
Simone Collins: Yeah, but Africa sometimes has some troubles, and-
Malcolm Collins: They are. I mean, if weâre gonna be realistic I, and Iâm saying this as, like, an objective reality of South Africa.
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: South Africa had a fairly strong economy- Yeah ... then they started acting in a way that scared away the European population within the country increasingly.
And since then primarily due to political corruption in part due to Black tribal infighting within the political scene corruption has reached a level in the [00:11:00] country where basic businesses have failed to continue to operate. Electricity is constantly failing, which means that you canât easily have things like restaurants without you know, you, you canât have frozen food, you canât have refrigerated food, you canât have without generators, and then generating- Well,
Simone Collins: there, there, there are blackouts, there are brownouts, there, there are jar- giant holes in the
We, we have a whole episode on it, just like third South Africa in, under, like, the Base Camp YouTube channel. But,
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, but, but my point is is that theyâre basically, theyâre not really operating on their own anymore. Theyâre living off of a legacy and slow decay out of that legacy.
Simone Collins: Yeah, yeah. So, but the, you know, still, they ha- they once had, and they still kind of have some opportunity that many other places donât.
In fact when I, when we did our South Africa episode, I found a bunch of posts by white UK residents whoâd moved to South Africa to work remotely there and enjoy, you know, the relatively low cost of living, and, like, nice gated communities, et cetera. Like, there are, you [00:12:00] know. Anyway, it, it has things going for it.
But in terms of where they stand with immigration, South Africa ha- has around 2.63 million international migrants. Thatâs about 4 point ... Oh, sir, 4.1% of its total population. Thatâs up from 3.2% in 1990 and 4.3% in 2010. So itâs not at, like, an all-time high, but itâs high-ish. The global average is 3.7 of the world population, and in Africa overall itâs 1.9.
So theyâre certainly higher than average in Africa though a few other African countries do have higher proportions of overall immigration due to specific factors like th- they have even more economic opportunity or theyâre just more friendly to hosting refugees, like the Cote dâIvoire. I think Djibouti has a lot.
Yeah, 10.8. 10.8%, ha- immigrants in Djibouti because thereâs a lot of I think people from Uganda, U- Uganda, [00:13:00] Uganda and, and Sudan, S- Sudan, oh my God, showing up there. But yeah, most African countries are below 2 to 3%. So South Africa is, is being relatively more flooded and I, I could see that, you know, putting pressure on them.
Yeah. And you know, vis-a-vis- I think we- ... the United States and, and the UK and Canada itâs, itâs n- certainly not... I mean, like, we- Well,
Malcolm Collins: okay, I wanna put this in context for people who do not understand why South Africa would be so freaked out by this. Uh-huh. Imagine if your country was this close to Africa, and it was this easy to immigrate into your country.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Like, youâd be pretty pissed too. Yeah ... also, the immigrants, are they primarily Muslim, or are there any, like, religious tension here?
Simone Collins: From what I can understand, itâs not religious tension.
Itâs not about culture. Itâs about jobs and economic security and resources. But just to be clear, so, like, South Africa is around 4.1% of the total population is immigrants.
Australia, which also has some tension, right? 31 to 32%. [00:14:00] Canada, 22%. UK, 17 to 18%. USA, 15.2 to 15.4%. So all these other countries where itâs, you know, the citizens are getting way more shade for being, like, uncomfortable with the immigration,
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, we gotta get some South Africans in here to, to handle our immigration issue.
We have- I
Simone Collins: know, right? Like, weâre, weâre at, like, three times their amount. And we are, weâre being, weâre, weâre being basically like, âOh, come on in,â compared to them, where theyâre like, âYeah, if youâre not out by June 30th, Iâm just, Iâm just gonna say itâs not gonna be good for you.â What? Okay.
Malcolm Collins: Can we, can we do that with Americaâs Black population?
Like, letâs do that. They, theyâre the ones who are getting their jobs taken, right? You know.
Simone Collins: And what are they... Yeah, like weâre, theyâre silent in all this, right?
Malcolm Collins: Remove
Simone Collins: the whole border. Itâs just gonna be one big fight. Yeah. Like, are we... I donât know if thereâs something like where, where journalists donât want to interview Black Americans when theyâre covering anti-immigration because theyâre, theyâre like, thereâs this unspoken thing of like, âOh, I want, I just wanna make it [00:15:00] look like...â
Oh my God, why, why is this... Like, his new thing is screaming. Itâs, this is not great for podcasting. Where they just wanna make it seem like-
Malcolm Collins: You canât hear. It doesnât matter. You can put him in the box or something, Simone. Heâs an infant. Heâll survive, all right?
Simone Collins: The, the, the Skinner box. What did B.F.
Skinner call his baby box again?
Malcolm Collins: I donât remember, but you know they used to put babies in, like, boxes and hang them out windows?
Simone Collins: Oh, well, no, no, no. That was just, like, a, like, cute 1950s product, like an urban trendy thing. I donât know how much it was used.
Malcolm Collins: A modern trend, yeah, where you hung a baby out a window.
No.
Simone Collins: Let me see. It was like a... People still buy boxes like that for their cats now. You could technically just buy one for your cat and put a baby in it. I, I mean, youâd probably have CPS called on you, of course, but Anyway, I donât, I donât know what to do with
Malcolm Collins: this. Anyway,
Simone Collins: Let you know what?
Malcolm Collins: By the way, Simone- Yeah
a hilarious trend I learned about, if you wanna, if you wanna spice it up with something else-
Simone Collins: Okay ...
Malcolm Collins: is ballmaxing. What? Thereâs a community that try to have, th- and they do this through inflating them, the [00:16:00] perfect balls. Vice did an article on it. Your faces are the best. What does this
Simone Collins: have to do with South Africa?
Or with
Malcolm Collins: streaming? Nothing, itâs just hilarious. I donât know. Some of these people might be in South Africa.
Simone Collins: Well, I mean, we can do that, like, in our episode on, like, is Kim Kardashian a transhumanist? And just talk about... Because also apparently, like, a vaginal optimization is in Okay, you know what? I think maybe he could, can I just- You canât
Malcolm Collins: hear it.
Itâs irrelevant.
Simone Collins: So, letâs go to what, like some actual statements from these protesters to get a picture of what theyâre actually saying. Right So here are what some of the March on March leaders and protesters are saying. Thatâs that, the primary group thatâs leading all these, if you recall.
This is from, Iâm going to butcher this, Jakaynda Ngobazi Zuma. Heâs the founder and national leader of March and March. These âThey are not victims. If you walk down the [00:17:00] roads, youâll find that they take buildings. There are drugs. There is prostitution. There are cartels. There are mafias. So everything in this country is a fertile ground for criminals to thrive.
We are under attack from across Africa. This only thing that they do is label us as xenophobic. There is nothing xenophobic about wanting law and order in your country. We are frustrated.â
Malcolm Collins: Oh, these people are MAGA.
Simone Collins: I know. Th- th- the thing is, like, if you just take this out of context and youâre like, âAccording to, like, James Brown,â like, J- J- well, what, whatâs a really white-sounding name?
James Carpenter from Ohio, you know, like, youâre just gonna be like, âYeah, of course.â âWeâre frustrated, tired, and feel ignored by our own government. Our demand is that our government is moving at a snailâs pace in addressing this issue of illegal immigrants.â Oh my God, right? It sounds so fricking, like, universal, so American, so UK.
This is from Salit Sanele Nka- Nkambule. Iâm so sorry. [00:18:00] This is the treasurer of March and March. âMany spaza shops and informal businesses in the townships are owned and run by foreign nationals without proper trading rights, placing an unfair burden on citizens who pay taxes.â
He, he goes on to call for these shops to be run by South Africans, and he wants audits of immigrants a review of study visas, and army deployment in high immigrant i- areas. And this is... Itâs, it sounds a little bit like a mix of-
Malcolm Collins: An army deployment in high immigrant areas?
Simone Collins: But they want ice. They want ice Like, MAGA
Malcolm Collins: hasnât even thought of this yet.
Come on, g- we gotta
Simone Collins: be taking notes from these South Africans. No, they just want ice. They want ice plus the National Guard. That is, like, exactly what weâve been doing. Okay, great.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, yeah, thatâs what we need, National Guard in these neighborhoods.
Simone Collins: So, yeah. And then it, hereâs what BBC quoted one anonymous demonstrator saying as they, they filmed a Pretoria march.
âWe are grateful that we now have groups like this that have come to aid the voice of what we have always been preaching about. Illegal immigration is a big problem to our society.â And [00:19:00] then additional groups this that, that have been talking about this. Here is Thami Madondo. âThe immigration laws of the country have never been enforced by the law enforcement agencies, and thatâs why weâre sitting with all these crises.
We are stressing the fact that illegal foreigners in the country must leave.â He criticized ubuntu narratives in this context also. âThe narrative of ubuntu, unfortunately, is the nonsense that has put us where we are today. Ubuntu does not mean that you must come into the country illegally.â Which is so like him It sounds like an American, you know, being like, âLook, you know, we believe in helping people who are in need, but we have to take care, you know, of our own social services, et cetera, before we let other people in.â
Yeah. And so itâs, I, I, I mean, what I like about him referring to Ubuntu is that heâs like, heâs referring to sort of the African version of progressivism of like, âYou have to help everyone. Shut up, and like, just give everything away.â And heâs like, âHold on. Iâm not gonna lie down and do that.â Hereâs Teshepo Thothwe.
This is the, heâs the secretary of the Abahambe movement and theyâre also [00:20:00] collaborating with March and March.
Malcolm Collins: So for people who are wondering what Ubuntu is, âcause I went and looked this up, it is a profound southern African philosophy of humanism often translated as, âI am because we are.â Mm-hmm.
Rooted in languages like Zulu it emphasizes a collective wellbeing or universal bond, or the belief that all of humanity are shaped by our relationships with others. Mm-hmm. And Iâd point out that this philosophy didnât go very far. It went about a quarter as far as apparently it went in the West, right?
Mm-hmm. So, be aware that these people may talk like they have these philosophies, and everyoneâs like, âOh, these native whatever tribes in Africa, they have these wonderful progressive ideas that hold for about this long.â Okay, continue.
Simone Collins: So Deshepo says, âWe are here to partake and collaborate with March on March on a progressive march that is involving different organizations and also national forums to collaborate and fight against the foreign nationals that are taking advantage of our economic freedom [00:21:00] in our country.
That is the key purpose for us to indicate and send a message that we are being labeled as xenophobic, and that is not the point.â So what are the protests like? And
Malcolm Collins: again, youâre sure, youâre sure this guy was Black, so weâre not gonna get the channel taken down?
Simone Collins: Iâm, yeah, Iâve, yes.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, good.
Simone Collins: All
Malcolm Collins: right. I, I,
Simone Collins: I did, I did check.
And again, I am, I am linking to my sources. You can literally watch the video. This last quote was from... You can see the video. Itâs on africanews.en or africanews.com. All right? Just go to Substack or Patreon. I link to my sources, friends. So what are the protests like? Well, Human Rights Watch, surprise, surprise, in, in an, an article citing the xenophobic attacks, reports that some of the protests have ax- escalated into vigilante actions, assaults on migrants, including beatings, shop attacks, and reported deaths.
Reported deaths, not confirmed deaths, of Nigerians and Ethiopians-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, those reported deaths of white farmers, they really didnât care much about
Simone Collins: Right. Just rep- yeah, who, where are the deaths? Show me the bodies. And intimidation. [00:22:00] Human Rights Watch and others have noted insufficient police response in places.
Foreign governments like Ghana, Nigeria, and Kenya have issued warnings to their citizens and, in Ghanaâs case, offered evacuation flights with low uptake on when, on reported instances. So theyâre like, âDonât worry, weâll fly you back.â And, and the migrants are like, âYeah, Iâm good.â They- Low
Malcolm Collins: uptake, yeah
Simone Collins: Theyâre gonna stay.
So what is the South African government doing in response? As they communicate on the official website of the Presidency of the Republic of South Africa, President Cyril Ram- Ramaphosaâs administration and officials, like the Deputy President Paul Mashatile, condemn the violence. They, they call it vigilante lawlessness.
They acknowledge that there are some legitimate grievances over illegal immigration, and they have highlighted that they are deporting people, that they have deported over 100,000 people in recent years, and theyâve pledged [00:23:00] legal enforcement. But they also deny widespread xenophobia, and they call the incidents isolated or criminal.
But the larger media narrative about these protests when you distill it all together, Is that theyâre being framed as this recurring pattern of xenophobic tensions in South Africa during economic hardships. And they, they point that this is, like, echoing ve- similar activities in 2008 and 2019.
People are citing Operation Dudula activities. I donât know them. And, and basically theyâre trying to say that there are high influe- high inflows of migrants and refugees, and while you get this with additional regional instability, which weâve covered on other podcasts, and you have porous borders and competition for scarce economic opportunity, youâre gonna get stuff like this.
But I find it very interesting that when people talk about immigration from a, [00:24:00] a left-leaning standpoint, itâs always xenophobia and people just being, like, just evil racists, when itâs super clear. Like, it doesnât matter if youâre white, if youâre whatever. Like, people donât like their jobs being taken.
People donât like people breaking the laws of their countries
Malcolm Collins: And acting differently. A lot of these other African populations, like Somalis, and people are wondering why I said, like, we gotta g- g- theyâre, theyâre a population that essentially specializes in fraud, right? Like, obviously not every Somalian is a fraudster, but weâre looking at rates in some of these communities that are over 50%.
Like, it is astonishing the rate of fraud that weâre getting in some of these communities. This, for example, was a Somali immigrant community. I think it was 84% of Somalian immigrants are on welfare. Like, why are you bringing in a population? And then what was shocking is then somebody said, âWell, Somalianâs earn more than the average American.â
And I was like ... And I [00:25:00] looked it up, and itâs true. Like, this is just fraud
Speaker 9: So just to double-click on these numbers here, it is
81% of Somalian households are on welfare. 89% of Somalian households with children are on welfare. And that is way higher than any other immigrant group. , That is an astonishingly high number. And even after 10 years in the United States, the rates remain at around those numbers. , And yet, if you look at the average Somalian reported income in the United States, itâs 70 to 80,000 per household.
, This makes no sense unless theyâre predominantly making money through fraud
Simone Collins: Yeah, we did another episode on ethnic cartels like the Patel motels and all the Indonesian nail salons in California, and itâs super common. This is, this is not moored to any particular ethnic group but for especially immigrant groups- No, some ethnic
Malcolm Collins: groups disproportionately do fraud.
Like, weâve gotta be realistic
Simone Collins: about it. But no, I mean, it doesnât have to be fraud. Itâs basically if an ethnic [00:26:00] group especially immigrant groups find an economic niche, often of like- Not glamorous or desirable work. Fraud can fall into that, but so can, like, running motels or doing nail salons, right?
Low-paying- Iâm okay with evenly- Where you can often skirt laws ... bailable and owners,
Malcolm Collins: right? Theyâre not investors-
Simone Collins: I know, but what Iâm saying is this is- ... theyâre fighting ... Iâm trying to point to this just being a natural economic dynamic that happens with immigrant groups, and it just so happens that the ethnic cartel that many Somalis have formed in many states is around, like, the business model of fraud.
To
Malcolm Collins: understand how big a part of their culture it is, when US aid was shut down by the Trump administration, Somalia and a bunch of human rights groups put up these giant like, warnings saying that Somaliaâs economy collapsed. Hold on, I wanna see what was the percent, âcause I wanna get this number right.
Simone Collins: And youâre talking about the foreign nation of Somalia, not- Iâm sorry, itâs another ... Somalis living in America.
Malcolm Collins: They had estimated that the freezing of [00:27:00] USA funding represented an economic exposure or equivalent of 9% of Somaliaâs gross national income.
9% of their gross national income was coming from USA.
Simone Collins: And thatâs just USAID. Weâre not talking about potential remittances being sent... Sorry.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, by the fraudsters that are in the
Simone Collins: United States already. From fraud committed, yeah. Because, you know, that, the USAID being shut down didnât change all of the autism services, all of the Medicare services, all of the home health and transportation and et cetera services that S- Somalians were apparent- or c- daycares fraudulently running in the United States.
So yeah, weâll see. Weâll, weâll see if... I, I mean, I was really in- intrigued when the Trump administration announced that JD Vance would be, like, the fraud czar in the United States. I havenât heard any updates from that.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, really? Heâs done a really good job. So, he shut down tons, this is in California, of hospices that were fake.
And he- Oh, really? So he
Simone Collins: followed through. [00:28:00]
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. He shut down four times the amount that Gavin Newsom has since he took power, and then Gavin Newsom tried to claim that he had actually done the shutdowns.
Simone Collins: Are
Malcolm Collins: you
Simone Collins: kidding me? Oh,
Malcolm Collins: no ... when they first whiffed out about them doing the shutdowns, and he tried to act like he was the one who managed it all
Simone Collins: God. I think Tim Walz did something similar when a couple take care
Malcolm Collins: of her. Oh, they did. Yeah. Tim Walz did. They went to, they shut down planned- Heâs
Simone Collins: like, âWe did it, guys.â And then
Malcolm Collins: he acted like... And theyâre like, âTim Walzâs department has done nothing to help us at all. Like, I do not know why heâs taking credit for this.â
Simone Collins: Golly, thatâs so bad. Oh my gosh. This though, it really, it helps to fix something. And, and the other thing that this news really hammered home for me was just how effective the media narrative has been, just in my subconscious, in making me, just my evoked set of like, [00:29:00] anti-immigration protests means white people getting their, their panties in a bunch.
You know, like I, I know logically that thatâs not what itâs about, and yet the just, the, the coverage of it from that angle is so pervasive
Malcolm Collins: Well, and I find it interesting that Bla- like in the United States, I do not think Blacks would make the same sort of argument. These people seem to genuinely be concerned that people are gonna label them as xenophobic, right?
Like, I love it that thereâs like Black South Africans
Simone Collins: who are like- Wait, youâre saying there are Black people in America who would not want to say that theyâre against immigration?
Malcolm Collins: No, they donât, they donât... In America, you get such a pass for being Black. You know, theyâre not gonna immediately come out and be like, âIâm not saying this because Iâm a racist.â
But in South Africa, the Black protesters are like, âI wanna be clear. Iâm not a racist.â
Simone Collins: This is not xenophobia. Yeah, that, that is interesting. Yeah, you make a good point there.
Malcolm Collins: And Iâve been watching a lot more on American history and like the idea that America was ever a country where [00:30:00] endless immigration from any population was something that we wanted that is not true of historic America.
We were very, very strict about who could immigrate into the country. We were very, very strict about who could enter our communities, who could integrate into our communities. You know, it like, I, I... Obviously, what really broke the dam on all of this was the integration of Catholics into America.
I, I think-
Simone Collins: Wait, wait, why do you say Catholics?
Malcolm Collins: Itâs factually true
Simone Collins: Everyone, you can reset your counters back to zero. Catholic alert. Ca- take a shot.
Malcolm Collins: If you study American history, itâs factually true. Thatâs where we first allowed a really large immigrant group that didnât have American culture or American values and was unable to persistently integrate into American values.
Mm. Which is really which, which when we made that normalization, like anyone can integrate, anyone can become America, even if theyâre still Catholic three generations in or something like that-
Yeah ...
that is when I think we sort of set the tide where, no, now weâre a country that accepts anyone.[00:31:00]
Mm. Now weâre a country thatâs just like, wherever you are, anywhere in the world, if itâs hard for you, just come to America. Because that wasnât the original goal of the you know, the Puritans or the Congregationalists or the you know, original American religious communities. Iâve been doing more research recently on the original Great Awakening which is really fascinating in sort of how it built the American so fun information, Simone, because I probably wonât do a full episode on it âcause I donât think our audience can stomach just education.
Oh. But what, what was a really big part of the Great Awakening is when it started you typically only had- Mm-hmm ... preachers that were regional and, Mm ... they began to have traveling preachers, and the traveling preachers were really hated by the local preachers because you were supposed to only have, like, one church in an area and everybody went to that church.
Yeah.
And in some settlements you could only get into that church if you had had, you know, a, a specific type of, like, religious awakening even. Mm. So it wasnât even like everyone had to go to the church, it was one [00:32:00] local church was an option, and getting in was exclusive. Wow. And so, then these traveling preachers began to become popular and people really hated it âcause they were competing with the traveling preachers.
But the traveling preachers ended up sort of spreading and creating a cross American religious identity that was very... It, it took parts of the various original Protestant American groups and sort of formed a Pan-American religious conversation where things that they would do during the Great Awakening that hadnât really been done before, were things like religions of different Protestant theologies teaching together or going on tour together.
And people thought this was very scandalous, right? Like, âHow could you do this?â And theyâre like, âNo, no, no. Like, we... Come on, guys. We agree we hate Catholics. Like, itâs okay that weâre preaching together, right? Like, we, we agree on the important stuff, okay?â And this created this idea that various Protestant groups can have communion with each other, which was not widely agreed upon either outside of America or in America before this[00:33:00]
So then
Simone Collins: following- That is really interesting. That is fun. And also Iâm, Iâm interested to see how these protests unfurl. Huge thanks to, you know who you are the Base Camp listener who suggested this episode. âCause I had no idea. I donât know. Like it, this isnât in at least the New York Times-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Well, it doesnât fit the narrative. Yeah. They donât want you to know about it.
Simone Collins: I donât, yeah, I donât see people discussing it on X. I donât see the New York Times talking about it. Itâs not on, like, Drudge Report, so thank you.
Malcolm Collins: Can we get, like, based Africans to form a part of the community? I mean, I know we actually have- I donât know.
We have- ... a significant fan base in Africa, so.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. That would be, that would be fun.
Thatâd be fun ...
Malcolm Collins: you know, in terms of where the future of the world goes, itâd be a lot of fun, yeah. Yeah. So letâs, letâs build up that, that African community. Obviously stay in Africa. You know, Iâm not saying come over here.
What?
Simone Collins: I donât know. I think we need more based Africans here.
Malcolm Collins: We do need more based Africans here. Yeah, true.
Simone Collins: So actually, come on, [00:34:00] come on over, friends ...
Malcolm Collins: if youâre, if youâre willing to help us get rid of the fraudsters.
Simone Collins: Again, I mean, I think where we, where we fall down on immigration is, You, you can stay if you are a net tax contributor.
I, I think, like, if we just made that the one immigration policy, we would be super fine with immigration.
Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm.
Simone Collins: The, the one rule. If your household is a net tax contributor, you can stay. If you are not, you can see yourself out. Itâs fine. Okay? Okay? Okay. Great. See, then you can have both porous borders and general so- generous social services.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. No, I agree. Thatâs really all you have to do, and you can remove the racism, right? Like, just say- Yeah ... anyone whoâs a tax
Simone Collins: contributor- I donât
Malcolm Collins: care. Yeah ... stays. Anyone whoâs a tax contributor- No
Simone Collins: matter where youâre from. Yeah. Mm-hmm. And i- itâs also not one of those, like, ticket price things where like, oh, well, you have to pay, like, you know, this much to get in or, like, invest in a company or something.
Itâs [00:35:00] no, just like, âHey, well, it looks like you were negative this month. Thank you. It was lovely having you here. You are now dismissed. K- goodbye.â
Malcolm Collins: Get your back and never can come back.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. Yep, that was your chance. Itâs over. Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Yep. I think itâs fine.
Malcolm Collins: And people are like, âThatâs too harsh,â and itâs like, you can just not take government money, right?
Like, if you- Yeah ... lose a job or something. You donât need to...
Simone Collins: Yeah. Like, you can, y- you can, you know, a- ask a church community to, you know, take care of you that month or any number of things
Is Google Ads harassing you again?
Malcolm Collins: Google is very aggressive with their ad campaign.
Simone Collins: No, I think people have discovered that ads really donât make money anymore.
Malcolm Collins: So check out rfab.ai, any of our new features, our super search, our... Weâre getting close to the Vtuber system being fully functional at this point.
Might be by this episode. Weâre getting close to, Oh, we got the new based AI. Like, [00:36:00] literally yesterday I was like, âIâm gonna make a based AI.â Itâs up, itâs operational. Try it out. It even switches with Alloy model into top AI models with internet connection.
Simone Collins: Explain how and why itâs based.
Malcolm Collins: Well, it literally uses a prompt injection that you can change that keeps it from being too woke so, you know
Simone Collins: Give it a try, guys.
Let us know what you think. Yeah, and anyway, that is all. Sounds good. Goodbye.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, Iâve been, I mean, even with this, putting in more image generation services, so we have, like, one of the fullest image generation... You should look at using RFAB more for title card generation, by the way. Okay. We have all of the models that youâre using, like Black
Simone Collins: Forest- Yeah, I just, I fi- I personally find your prompt inj- injections to be abrasive when it comes to image gen.
Malcolm Collins: Then you can take them out.
Simone Collins: I, I will. I know. I just-
Malcolm Collins: Theyâre literally... Simone, theyâre just auto-added, so you can just delete them.
Simone Collins: I will. I, I just have to get over that. Iâm, Iâm sorry. Iâm a horrible wife. Iâm a [00:37:00] failure of a wife. Yes,
Malcolm Collins: you are a failure of a wife.
Simone Collins: I will- Does it use Nano Banana? âCause thatâs, I think we use that a lot.
You can use Nano
Malcolm Collins: Banana. Okay. So itâs, yeah. You can
Simone Collins: use
Malcolm Collins: any of the major services, Simone.
Simone Collins: So it has Midjourney, Nano Banana, Black Forest, and, and, It has
Malcolm Collins: all of those, yes.
We actually donât have Midjourney because they donât have an API, uh, but thatâs the only one we donât have
Simone Collins: Okay. Okay, good. Okay, good. Well- Iâll, Iâll try it tomorrow morning ...
Malcolm Collins: all right, Simone. Love you.
Simone Collins: Love
you.
Simone Collins: And Iâm recording, just so you know, as you adjust. By the way, I forgot to tell you last night, when I was putting the kids to bed, Titan had decided to make a bed on the, like, tumbling pads that we have. Okay. She had a blanket and everything, and she was all snuggled in. And she looks up with me with that really serious look that she has, and she says, âMommy, my heart is broken.â
And Iâm like, âTitan, whatâs wrong? Like, are you okay? Why are you sad? What, whatâs,
Malcolm Collins: whatâs
Simone Collins: making you so
Malcolm Collins: sad?â And she
Simone Collins: just kept saying, â
Malcolm Collins: [00:38:00] My heart
Octavian Collins: is
Simone Collins: broken.â
Octavian Collins: Mommy. Mommy, I couldnât... Mommy.
Simone Collins: Yeah?
Octavian Collins: It... Mommy, I couldnât find a place to hang my dart
Simone Collins: board. Thatâs why you need to hang it in the hallway where I set it up.
Octavian Collins: And I did.
Simone Collins: Then hang it up there again. But thereâs
Octavian Collins: no place.
Simone Collins: Yes, thereâs a nail right there.
Malcolm Collins: Tell him Iâm gonna eat Cutish tonight if he doesnât stop bugging us.
Simone Collins: Heâs going to eat Cutish tonight- No ... if you, if you donât close the door and leave us alone while we record. You can put the dart board in the hallway, though Well, at least he doesnât want
Malcolm Collins: to eat- Am I abusive?
Is this what an abusive father does, is threaten to eat their kidâs
Simone Collins: pet? His favorite, his favorite chicken. I love that, like, actually we might eat our chickens. Yeah. Itâs, itâs a real threat. Itâs not like, âOh, Iâll eat your cat.â You know? Itâs like-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah,
Simone Collins: no. ... these are working animals. Th- theyâre, yeah.
Itâs, itâs days are numbered. But anyway right. She just kept saying her heart is broken, and I was just getting really worried. Iâm like, âHas something made you really sad? Like, whatâs wrong?â [00:39:00] And she, like, holds up, it was that heart keychain that my dad had given her, which she was calling her balance time heart.
Malcolm Collins: Balance time. It was, and
Simone Collins: it was cracked ... her balance time heart. Yes. It had... Sheâd like, of course, spontaneously disassembled the keychain, and it was a little bit broken. It still looks... She can still play with the heart part, but, âMy heart is broken.â My
Malcolm Collins: heart is broken. My heart is
Simone Collins: broken. I was so worried.
Iâm like, âOh my God, Titan, are you okay?â
Malcolm Collins: Youâre an astonishingly good mother.
Simone Collins: Just her heart is broken. By the way, Suno is so much better now like with genres. âCause like I only want more obscure stuff, and it used to only be good with, you know, country and pop. And now Iâm like, okay, you know, make make electro orchestral hip hop, make chiptune- Mm
make electro swing. And itâs really good. Like the stuff that I like listening to instead of just... I mean, I like, obviously I like country, but you can only make so many [00:40:00] country songs.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Interesting thing is I wanted to do full music video generation on RFAB, and, Yeah ... Suno doesnât offer an API last I checked, so Iâm checking again right now, but,
Simone Collins: Oh, to do the, the song part.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: So you basically now would have to just do it to your song, like bring in your own song.
Malcolm Collins: We do have not safe for work video generation now. I got that working.
Simone Collins: Thatâs what we really want. It doesnât work always
Malcolm Collins: very well on most of the models, which is frustrating, but whatever.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. I, I think your average user probably wouldnât care as much about creating music videos as we would, because our kids love music videos so much, but I donât know.
I I, I still havenât watched someoneâs commentary on YouTube. Some- someone put out a video on like how the music video age is dead, long live the music video age. Like it, theyâre, theyâre like both dead and not dead, and I wanna see what the thesis is there, but I donât know yet because I havenât watched the video.
Anyway, I will Iâll kick off the episode, âcause Iâm, Iâm excited to talk about this. Iâm, Iâm glad [00:41:00] you encouraged me to, to do it. So you ready?
Malcolm Collins: All right. Yeah, Iâm ready. Love you.
Simone Collins: Okay. Oh, heâs resisting. Donât resist. Sir. Sir. I just gotta get him to, like, calm down. Okay There we go.
Speaker 10: That still looks like a silly happy face. Where is your scary face? I do not know. Where is your murdery face? Murdery face. Your murdery face. Is that... Are you g- When you, when you kill your enemies, are you gonna look like that? What face are you gonna use when youâre about to stab them through the heart?
Thatâs the face? Thatâs your killing face? What i- what... That is, that is what you look like when you kill people? No. Okay. Gi- give me... Strike a pose, buddy. Show me. Show me your best murdery look. Show me, buddy. Okay. Let me [00:42:00] see. So what- Show me your killing face ... this because, this because the secret move goes like this.
Speaker 12: This is it. Okay. Show me. Show me. Weâre doing a video. I need to see. Oh, okay. No, youâre smiling again. What is this? Are you just gonna s- What, you think everyoneâs gonna laugh if you run at them smiling? Yeah, this, this is his... This, yeah, heâs just... Theyâre gonna laugh, and then heâll stab them. I, I kinda like it actually.
Speaker 10: Yeah? Octavian, can you even defeat me? Ah. Ah. Oh, God.
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 -
Did the Communists win the Cold War in America? In this eye-opening Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the 1963 list of Communist Goals for the United States (compiled by FBI agent Cleon Skousen and entered into the Congressional Record). From infiltrating schools and media, discrediting the family, promoting degeneracy, and weaponizing psychiatry and art â they check off how many of these goals have been achieved and what it means for modern culture, politics, and the future.
This conversation covers the long march through the institutions, Yuri Bezmenovâs demoralization playbook, Cubaâs ongoing role, why the âRed Scareâ was more accurate than we were taught, and how a new tech-right counter-movement can fight back using AI, culture, and high-agency communities.
If youâve ever wondered why everything feels broken â ugly art, broken families, captured institutions, endless culture war â this episode connects the dots.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone. Iâm excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be asking the question, did the communists win with their goals in the United States? So this rabbit hole was prompted for me by a Chris Williamson clip where he had on a guest, Isabel Brown, who was going over a list that she reported to be the communist goals for the United States circa 1960.
She sort of misstated this list implying that it was read into the Congressional Record by the Communist Party. It was not. It was read into the record by a Republican anti-communist, and was a review of the notes on the Communist Party and their goals, circa 1963- Hmm ... by an FBI agent, Cleon Skousen.
So not a crackpot or anything like this. This was an FBI agent whose goal was in the FBI, was to track and to understand the Communist Partyâs goals circa 1963.
Simone Collins: All right? Okay. Yeah, [00:01:00] and itâs not like they were incredibly secret about their goals. So this canât be that inaccurate.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, youâre gonna be shocked by this list.
Youâre gonna be shocked. Really? She read a few of them. And I was like, âI need to go into the full thing.â Yes. âI need to look up the history of this list.â Like, Iâm not gonna go over every single one of the points that he had read into it, because some of them would just get boring. But weâre going to have enough material to shock you.
Oh, gosh. So letâs... And Iâm not gonna be reading them in order either. Okay. So letâs start here, okay? âTransfer some of the power of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychologists can understand or treat.â What? This was the 1960s, early 1960s.
Psychiatrists werenât even a thing at that point. L- not, like, commonly.
Simone Collins: Oh, wow. Yeah. [00:02:00] Did we lose the Cold War? We lost the Cold War. We lost the Cold War. We lost the
Malcolm Collins: Cold... W- g- when I read through this, youâre gonna be like, âWe lost the Cold War.â We were just- What? ... psy-oped into believing we won. I, I almost at the end of this, like, believe that thereâs like a communist utopia in y- Russia right now, and thatâs where weâve been sending all our defrauded Somali dollars.
Apparently. Like, the... Yeah. And, and that outside the US, everythingâs still going and weâve just been psy-oped into believing that the Cold War is over and that we won to make us happy. For
Simone Collins: real?
Malcolm Collins: What is happening? I donât know if Iâm ready for this.
Speaker 7: Oh my God. Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon. Privet svitya, Dad. My son is a communist.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, next. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive [00:03:00] control over those who oppose communist goals.
Consider the way that theyâve used things like trans mental health laws to achieve other goals they have later down on this list.
Octavian Collins: Huh.
Malcolm Collins: First, given that this does seem to have been the plan, itâs a pretty clever plan, right?
Simone Collins: No, yeah. If you, if you go, we, we rewind to the 1950s, 1960s, like, all right, how do we take out these...
It is, yeah, I mean, itâs, itâs incredibly clever. I, I never wouldâve thought of it. But in terms of destroying a country from the inside I... You know, thereâs this one episode in earlier Doctor Who where the Doctor has this, like, plan where heâs like, âOh, I know how to, like, single-handedly take down this prime minister.â
And he, standing next to her, like, turns to a journalist whoâs always there, or who, who is also there, and says, âShe looks tired.â And thatâs supposed to be like, thatâs the end of her career. He just ended it by [00:04:00] saying that and, like, sowed this doubt. But this is so much more, like, this is the real version of that where, like, Russia was like, âOh, thatâs thatâs not just you being a, a, a dick.
It, itâs a mental health thing that is to be systematically- Well, so I should note here- ... defendedâ ... he is
Malcolm Collins: not, he is not talking about Russiaâs goals for the United States. These were the goals of the American Communist Party at the time, how they were going to dismantle the United States.
Simone Collins: That is so... Itâs, âcause, but then why?
Why would you... I mean, âcause presumably the goal- So as was- ... of destabilizing the US means that we, then they can take over. But what is left to take over once youâve done that to a country?
Malcolm Collins: Well, they wanted to sell us out to the communists in Russia. Weâll go over this. It didnât work out their way. But they have achieved all of their other goals other than that one.
It really seems to be about destroying the United States above all else and destroying the institutions- That were most resistant to them- Mm ... specifically religious institutions. And weâll- So itâs not about
Simone Collins: brokering in some new age or transition, itâs just out of hatred for the United [00:05:00] States.
Malcolm Collins: Mm. I mean, there does appear to be a new age or transition.
Itâs the communist order, right? Like, theyâve got to break down the existing social structure before they can create a new one or offer a new one.
Hmm. Hmm.
Weâll even go into how they plan to run their revolution and everything like that. Well, what
Simone Collins: good is a communist citizen if theyâre, like, crippled by anxiety and, and statutorily unable to not work?
Because then they canât fight
Malcolm Collins: back against the government.
Simone Collins: Yeah, but isnât it... I guess in a, a post AGI world, a post singularity world, you donât need workers. Like, the perfect communist state that has never been tried needs a lot of- Communists
Malcolm Collins: didnât need their workers to work hard, Simone. Like, I, I think youâre confused about this.
Socialism involves- Communists treat their workers like slaves. Like, thatâs the way communist states have always operated. Oh. They donât actually need the- So I guess it was
Simone Collins: just, there was a plan to rug pull, like systematically, mentally drive people insane. Well, how about we
Malcolm Collins: go through all of the plans and then you can judge?
Okay. Yeah, I, well, I would... Yes.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Okay, letâs try to understand this better. Okay. Okay. Next
Malcolm Collins: here, okay? Discredit the family as an [00:06:00] institution, encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
Octavian Collins: Oh, boy.
Malcolm Collins: By the way, if youâre unfamiliar with the legal change of the United States in post 1960s not only has promiscuity obviously become very popular, The New York Times regularly writing about polyamory and stuff like this, and but the idea of easy divorce has become way, way, way easier.
And there has been explicit attacks, like BLM saw the insti- the family unit as one of their core things that they wanted to target and discredit. Okay. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks, and the retarding of children to the suppressive influence of parents.
The,
Simone Collins: the retarding of children to the suppressive influence- Yeah, basically
Malcolm Collins: theyâre like- ... of parents ... we need a way to retard children and then weâll- They must retard the children ... blame it on the parents. I love, I love that wording We need a way to
Simone Collins: break the school system, and then
Malcolm Collins: weâll blame parents on the results of [00:07:00] that.
That is so good. And every time somebodyâs like, âWell, what about the parents?â Right? You know theyâre running a communist op. Theyâre running a communist op. Come on, guys. I always hate that, that whiny, âOoh, what about the parents?â Mm. Itâs like, look, obviously par... It, itâs really about the family culture. Like, the parents cannot draconianly police everything a kid does.
They need to create a culture where the negatives of society donât get their hooks in the kid to the same extent. But by creating this learned helplessness, communists were able to degrade portions of our society. Okay, next. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures. A- again, note here, I am not editorializing these.
I am not... This is what was written, read into the Congressional Record, okay?
Simone Collins: Well, I guess that explains the witch hunt that took place in that sense, right? Wasnât there a big blacklist because there was this, this i- i- intense fear of people taking over the media? So it sounds like this was- And they did
internalized and taken seriously.
Malcolm Collins: They did take over [00:08:00] the media. I mean, weâve seen this today, right? You know? Yeah. This is true. The media is what in the 1960s would be called communists. The vast majority of people with influence. Like, say, well over 80% of people with influence in any of the major media organizations would, via 1953, be described of as a hardline communist.
Octavian Collins: This is true. Okay, next. One moment. Octavian, what, whatâs up, buddy? Do you need something? I made,
Simone Collins: I made my, I made, I made a fox out of clay.
Octavian Collins: Iâm so glad. Yeah. I made- You should get your- Yeah. Yeah. I can- Get your swimsuit ready to go out and play in the creek. Thank you, friend.
Simone Collins: I got 40 on my tablet.
Malcolm Collins: Next point here. Continue, note the word here, continue. Mm-hmm. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression.
An American Communist cell was told to, quote, âEliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings. Substitute shapeless, awkward, meaningless forms.â Wait, so thereâs
Simone Collins: a reason for that? Thereâs a reason- Yes ... for the proliferation [00:09:00] of heinously ugly statues everywhere in the United States? This is... Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. They donât really- âCause it didnât make any sense, and now we just know. Every time you walk by some misshapen, disgusting thing in the street, itâs the commies. Itâs actually- Itâs the commies ... literally the commies.
Malcolm Collins: Itâs the v- It, itâs not just public stuff now, itâs video games. I mean, look at Mixtape.
Look at the games theyâre pushing on us.
Simone Collins: Oh, my God. Well, no, no. Mixtape was created by the daughter of one of the biggest
Malcolm Collins: capitalists. Whoâs a super big communist. All of these rich people are communists, because that just institutionalizes their power. Thatâs why rich people are so pro-commie laws, because they know that theyâll be at the top of the communist system, which is what has happened- generally, except in China when you had communist revolutions
Simone Collins: I donât think thatâs true.
Heâs, heâs buddies with Trump
Malcolm Collins: Oh, he is, but his daughter isnât She, I could see her being a commie She inherited these things Yeah, I, I [00:10:00] could see her being a commie She institutionalized her power in a way the dad doesnât. The dadâs productive. The dad never needs to worry. She just inherited an aristocratic position.
You know, like her, Hasan Piker, Che Guevara you know, who, who, y- Fidel Castro. Actually, we have a whole video on this On the nepo babies of communism What if a communist were born rich? Yeah. Yeah, yeah. M- Zoran Mandic parents were famous directors who have done, like, movies that, like, youâve heard of before.
Like, all of them were co- famous c- super, super wealthy kids gr- going around on their polo, you know, back in the... Anyway, but I note here that this is actually a quote from a communist organization that was directed at another communist organization, that they picked up at the FBI. So this isnât, again, editorialization.
Ooh âEliminate all good sculptures from parks and buildings. Substitute shapeless, awkward, and meaningless forms.â
Simone Collins: Shapeless, awkward, and m- Ooh That is, that completely... Remember just walking around Palo Alto- Mm, mm, mm ... and youâd just be in a beautiful neighborhood, and then suddenly, [00:11:00] brp, like- Yeah ... there would be some nightmare fuel just sitting there.
God, yeah. Wow. Communists.
Malcolm Collins: And weâre gonna talk about how they transmitted these cultural values through people not necessarily recogni- Actually, Iâll just go into it right now. People can be like, âWell, okay, but how did a small communist party in the United States end up getting control of a Palo Alto housing committee?â
for example, right? Like- Actually,
Octavian Collins: though, yeah ...
Malcolm Collins: that, does that make sense? And the answer is, and this is why I pointed out in our Cuba video where weâre like, âIt is so important that Trump takes out Cuba,â which theyâre in the process of doing Cuba played a major part in this. So Cuba, for a long time, has been funding organizations with communist leaders and people who have, like, these playbooks and keeping groups like Antifa and like the sort of rebellious leadership cast of ultra progressive movements in the United States on [00:12:00] message and aware of what theyâre trying to do, even if they donât fully understand why.
Yeah if we disrupt Cuba in this, this may be able to be pushed back on in significant ways. But anyway, continue.
Simone Collins: This is shocking.
Malcolm Collins: Control- Critics and directors of art museums.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yep. Yep. And hence the art museums and all their disgustingly ugly meaningless art. And then
Malcolm Collins: he has a, a quote here from another communist organization that they were spying on.
âOur plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless
Simone Collins: art.â Repulsive, meaning- I feel so heard. Oh, my God. This is, this is one of the most validating things ever. Mm-hmm. How is this... Oh, my gosh.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, next. Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as normal, natural, and healthy. Oh, boy. Keep in mind, this was 1963.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. You- And- It really wasnât seen that way.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah ... here [00:13:00] is, hereâs a fun one. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with, quote-unquote, âsocial religion.â Oh. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a, quote-unquote, âreligious crutch.â And they were wildly successful at this.
This is one of the reasons when people are always like, âWhy do you have your own weird version of Christianity? Why donât you go back to the...â And Iâm like, because theyâre where all of this was spread from, right? Like, the, the progress pride flag went up on the churches before it went up in the schools, right?
Like, they have been the source of the rot. They were some of the first institutions to fall. The Vatican is a captured city at this point, right? Like...
You guys, if you wanna do your Reconquista with whatâs his face? I like him. Redeemed Zoomer. I like, I like Redeemed Zoomer. Go for it. I think itâs a waste of time until we are a larger and more cohesive movement than the existing sort [00:14:00] of, I just wanna go back to the way things were movement, which I, I think obviously isnât going to work.
Because the way things were is what they were able to crack open. The way things were was incredibly un-robust. Mm-hmm. But anyway, to continue here. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in schools on the ground that it violates the principle of separation of church and
Simone Collins: state.
Oh, boy. Well. Well, they did that. My God, they nailed it. But I mean, you gotta hand it to them. Mm-hmm. Y- you know? A- apparently. They were at least effective in this. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, and a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Oh. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the common man. Wow. Hmm. Develop the illusion that total disarmament by the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength. Do we not repeatedly [00:15:00] see this today from leftists circles?
Simone Collins: Iâm... Wow.
Hmm. Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Permit free trade between all nations regardless of communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not the items could be used for war.
Simone Collins: Look at what they get ready to do with Iran
Malcolm Collins: instead of just dealing with the Iranian situation, which Trump is finally doing.
Yeah.
Thank
God.
Yeah. Trump and the Jews, Trump and the Jews, b- bombing, you know, I, I saw a comment recently where they were like, âYeah, like I really donât like the Jews or Israel, but by God, they know how to just kill someone when theyâre f*****g around.â
And Iâm like, âYeah, itâs refreshing at this point, right?â Somebodyâs f*****g with you, you just murder them. You just cap their butt. And people were like, âWell, w- what if they, what if they put their clinic or what if, what if they put their garrisons of, of guerrillas and terrorists under schools and hospitals?â
And the Jews are like, âWell, weâll bomb them.â And other people are like, âWell, what about the peop-â [00:16:00] Well, just bomb them. Like, whatever. I donât care. Theyâll stop doing it. It will stop being differentially a good idea to do that if they realize we donât care. Itâs only because the international scene still freaks out over it that they kept doing that.
They would have stopped if the international scene had stopped being babies about it. But oh well. Continue here. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of communist domination. Or I guess I could say here anti-American affiliation, right? Like, why is US aid giving tons of money to countries that hate us, right, and, and groups that hate us, right?
And that hate us for the aid itself, right?
Grant recognition to Red China. Admit Red China into the UN one. When did
Simone Collins: just co- yeah. When did we stop calling it Red China?
Malcolm Collins: When did it stop being communist? I mean, we point out in our episode Americaâs functionally more communist than China now by an order of about threefold.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: In terms of about [00:17:00] any measure that you could measure, like go into.
Okay, note here. Th- this one I love, right, Simone? Promote the UN as the only hope for mankind. Oh, boy.
Simone Collins: If its- That was... Oh my
Malcolm Collins: God. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one world government with its own independent armed forces. Some communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the UN as by Moscow. So, hilariously, the UN, heâs saying the U- right, this was 1960s. He said the UN is a branch of communism. Yeah. And many communist and Marxist leaders- But it makes so much sense Think that the UN can dominate the world better than Russia can.
And with the collapse of Russian communism, see our recent episode, this means that NATO and the UN are likely bigger threats to American sovereignty than any other force in the world right
Simone Collins: now. Even more evidence that you [00:18:00] should drop it like itâs hot. I tell you, man.
Malcolm Collins: Drop it like itâs hot. Look, if the Democrats can just randomly pull us out of, like, Panama, why can we not randomly pull out of the UN, right?
Yeah. Like, quit their stupid little project. Yeah. Okay, next. Do away with all loyalty oaths. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States. I like it that they thought big. Capture both, right? And this is something- Look,
Simone Collins: they did dream big, but they achieved. Like, their, their checklist here.
Do, do, do, do, do, do. It, they, they just
Malcolm Collins: went through it. Theyâve nailed it Well, I mean, I, I think GOP Inc., before MAGA came in, before Trump came in, right, before we washed them out, the deontological faction of the Republican Party is not particularly far from a lot of these ideologies, right? They appear to be focused on sowing division within a voting bloc that we should be using to win through you know, racialist agendas, through agendas that are just not winning in the polls [00:19:00] right now.
And through trying to peel, you know, as we pointed out, like Fuentes voting Democrat, trying to peel Republicans out of the coalition so that these people can win, right? Like, we repeatedly see the agents of the Communists understand their role, right? This is where we get organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center being the, it appears now, primary donor to the Ku Klux Klan, right?
Like, and you can see our episode where we argue, we go through the, the numbers on that to show that it was likely their primary source of external funds. Which is wild, right? And not just them, but the American Nazi Party, the... A lot of this stuff is being funded by these organizations to cause division, and, like, we need to be aware of this.
They want to take over our party as well, and we cannot allow that. Next and they want to make us weak. If somebody comes to you and they say, âOh, we as Americans we shouldnât be using genetic technology. We shouldnât be using AI technology.â These individuals are of the [00:20:00] camp, like, letâs de-arm.
Letâs, letâs neuter ourselves so we canât fight back. In a world where the people- Well, and
Simone Collins: contrast this to the, the attitude toward AI and technology that you see in China, where theyâre like, âYeah, AIâs good. This is, l- letâs go. Absolutely, this is gonna make peopleâs lives better.â Somethingâs going on here.
Well, I donât care about people. I want the
Malcolm Collins: autonomous drone swarms, okay? I want the gene, the the, the... Thereâs a lot of fun stuff we can do with genetic technology as it gets better. But to continue here. Iâm sorry, I d- I didnât wanna name any of it, lest be I get clipped. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
Thatâs so bon- I love it. Ugh ... get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current communist propaganda. Oh, God. Oh, itâs a little on the nose. Itâs a little on the nose, yeah. [00:21:00] Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachersâ associations.
Simone Collins: Soften the curriculum.
Malcolm Collins: Get, get control of teachersâ association.
Oh, no, the teachersâ union. Put the party line in textbooks.
Simone Collins: But they did. They did. You know what? If anything, I kind of now just, Iâm like, what? We lost. We lost. We lost the Cold War. They won. Maybe commies are a little more competent than I thought they were, and apparently the US is a lot more spineless than I thought it was. Iâm, Iâm kind of humiliated here.
Malcolm Collins: Because we treated our adversaries with respect while they didnât treat us with respect, and we need to stop doing this, right? We need to be willing to understand that we are playing for the future of human civilization, and we- Not, like...
Simone Collins: No. I, I think th- this, the reason why this worked, why [00:22:00] they were able to pull this off, is it happened just as increasing numbers and proportions of women entered the workforce, and these kinds of ideologies are exactly the ones that theyâd be like, â
Yeah, we should be doing this.
We should be.â
And that, I think, unfortunately, is a bigger factor in this than I would like to admit. I donât think that in a patriarchal society this would have, this wouldâve gotten by us. Donât, I mean... donât you think so, though?
Malcolm Collins: Probably. I mean, I think that thatâs definitely one thing. Okay.
So, where were they here? Gain control of student newspapers. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the, quote-unquote, âbig picture.â
Give more emphasis to Russian history since [00:23:00] the Communists took over. Now they didnât get this bi- second part, but they definitely got the first part. And a focus on Communist history, like if you look at American education systems now, itâs just like slavery, Native Americans w- what is it? Like, Jim Crow laws, stuff like this.
Just like, oh,
Simone Collins: all these- That was a big part of my, yeah, public school education. All these- Plus, when you think about, yeah, rioting students, th- this is just such a big theme on college campuses especially recently. Itâs just- Another one thing- Thatâs what they
Malcolm Collins: do ... they did here eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
Simone Collins: Donât we still have that?
Malcolm Collins: Iâm pretty sure we donât. The House Committee on Un-American Activities? Letâs
have a
look. I donât think we still have
the standing committee, it was made a permanent committee of the House in 1945.
Simone Collins: Okay. There we go. I thought so, because Iâve heard it in headlines, so I was
Malcolm Collins: like- no, it w- No, sorry, it was abolished in the late 1950s and 1960s.
Opinion largely turned against it. And it was rebranded as the House Committee on [00:24:00] Internal Security, and then it was entirely abolished in 1975.
Simone Collins: Hmm. Okay. So again, they won. They nailed it once again. Like, I mean, respect. Eli-
Malcolm Collins: S- Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture, education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, et cetera. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions. Theyâre already in unions. Infiltrate and gain control of big business. That wasnât an accident.
That was the plan is controlling big business. They always saw big business not as the enemy of Communism, but as their goal for bringing it about. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government. And int- internationalize the Panama Canal, another thing they achieved.
Simone Collins: Wow. How?
I would, [00:25:00] so letâs say, you know, weâre, weâre in a, a meeting of the Socialist Party in the US thatâs like, âHey, letâs do all these things.â I would be sitting there thinking, âYeah, like, but we need to have leaders permeating every element of government and society to make this work. We need all the wealthiest people to be communists and to be a member of this party and a part of this strategic initiative.â
I donât understand how this... I mean, well, I canât really, I donât have a good explanation as to how these things ended up happening anyway aside from women tend to have more aligned with Communist Party desires and- Well, I think the answer is pretty
Malcolm Collins: clear. They took over our university system first.
It was first target elite universities. Mm-hmm. We saw this happening when we were at university, and a lot of the kids who are cheering for this stuff do not understand what theyâre actually fighting for. The people who understand the bigger picture are their handlers often in Havana.
Mm.
And [00:26:00] that and I just donât think that people got how much Cuba was organizing behind the scenes and how relevant Cuba is in managing the wider communist project in the United States.
Simone Collins: Yeah, I mean, well, we should. I mean, Hasan just had that, well, the, it wasnât obviously Hasanâs event, but Hasan was at a very major event there just recently.
Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, to understand how competent Havana has been at this stuff, they took over Venezuelaâs government, right? Like, when we took back a Veniz- Venezuela was shipping them basically free oil to keep the lights on, right?
Like, that is how Havana operated. It treated the rest of the world, countries that they would go in, infiltrate, and essentially take over. They had taken over the vast majority of the presidentâs guard. They had taken over the vast majority of leadership positions within the military in Venezuela, and they used that to keep control of the country and siphon all the money out of it.
This is what the USSR did for its surrounding countries and stuff like that. That is what their goal is for the United [00:27:00] States. That is what they do with socialists in the United States, right? Like- Hmm ... the, the fight against Cuba is far more existential for the United States than I think many Americans believe because when you see all of these, youâre like, âThis seems too perfect.
How is it all organized?â And the key is gain control of the elite institutions, make this cool, you know, make it cool through Havana-backed education, which youâll often see from leading groups like Antifa and stuff like that. Theyâll be like, âNo, this guy is legit. He went to one of the Havana training camps,â right?
Thatâs
Simone Collins: right, yes, Antifa too. Yeah. Oh. So youâre trying to say that even back, going back to the â70s, this was all happening in Cuba?
Malcolm Collins: A lot of it, well a lot of it was organized in Russia in the â70s. And it, then it sort of became externalized to Cuba. And thatâs where the, the key sort of organization ran from after that.
Hmm.
But yeah Cuba has been where the operations to brainwash parts of the [00:28:00] United... I mean, it makes sense. Itâs closer to the United States. Like, you operate them out of there, and they never really stopped. They still hold regular, for like American socialists and stuff like that, like yearly conventions.
They basically go and theyâre told what to do and how to act and how to contact their handlers and yeah, I mean, itâs, itâs all very organized. Now a lot of this is organic, I, I, I will say. Like itâs not all top-down. But I think more of it is top-down than people realize, or even the people on the ground implementing the stuff realize.
Huh. And I think
Octavian Collins: itâs
Malcolm Collins: our job, and I really make an effort to do this, to create a new right or tech right opposite of this, right? Where a fairly small yet highly organized and value-aligned group of individuals can cross-coordinate and build messaging across channels, and then use that messaging to with [00:29:00] careful directionality break apart and eventually recreate society in the image that we are aiming for, in the same way the communists achieved.
Right? The problem is, is that the communists were interested in end goals. And the old version of conservatism that they were fighting against was very deontological, and so they didnât really have a toolkit that could compete against a organization that was focused on like actually winning, right?
Like, they just cared that they were technically correct in the things that they were doing not that this was gonna have some like wider culture war end state, right? And so they would, you know, blow stuff up rather... You know, somebody could point out to them, theyâre like, âWell, if you make the movie like that, then nobodyâs gonna buy it,â right?
Theyâre like, âIf you make a movie thatâs all like morally preachy and everything like that and it doesnât have some fun to it, then, then nobodyâs gonna watch it.â And meanwhile the communists were like, âOh no, you know, throw in degeneracy, throw in whatever,â right? Mm-hmm. They were able to [00:30:00] win. But now communists control the media industry, and theyâve made all media, all video games, shapeless blobs.
And so we come in, weâre like, âHey, you know, you can throw some sexy women in it without going full degen.â And people are like, âNo.â So some of the old right itâs like, âNo, I wonât do it.â Itâs like, no, this is how we b- they have ha- handcuffed themselves at this point. They have hobbled themselves at this point.
We can win the culture war at this point. And we- The, the key to us winning the, the next stage of the culture war is AI, I think. And I think weâre beginning to see what that looks like through products like RFab, where weâre trying to build, like, our own AI ecosystem for this space. But in addition to that, you have the Skybrow Cinematic Universe, you have these constant, you know, songs and media that are created with conservative themes and that are catchy.
I mean, for example, our kid, the song that he sings most these days is the Holy Balls [00:31:00] song about pronouns. Like, too many, too many pronouns. And- ... he loves it, right? Like, this is the mind of a kid who sees this, and has actually been psyops into singing a song regularly as he walks along, why, about why, like, the, the pronoun community and alphabet soup community is bad and a problem.
Speaker: MMIWG2SLGBTQQ. MMIWG2SLGBTQQ. MMIWG2SLGBTQQ. Yeah, A-A-MA-A-I-M-L-S-F tuning. LTM, RN, ND learning. TTS Faye with an AD burner. Verlo Rock Hi, real transformer.
Malcolm Collins: That is absolutely astounding to me. Like, if you talk about winning the culture war, thatâs [00:32:00] what it looks like, okay? We donât even, like, show our kid... I wouldnât even understand why anyone would show their kids modern cartoons at this point, right? Like, if youâre a conservative parent, you can watch all the old cartoons for free, right?
Like-
Simone Collins: Well, not, I mean, weâre all paying for YouTube Premium. But yeah, I mean, Iâve heard from multiple other parents who are like, âYeah, thatâs all weâre watching, is old cartoons,â typically on YouTube Premium, and thatâs kind of it, yeah.
Malcolm Collins: W- yeah, why are you watching anything else with your kids these days?
Octavian Collins: Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: yeah ... i- and, and I think that, that w- itâs also interesting is that it means that theyâre not watching Disney, because Disney is so... Yeah. Talk about Disney really shooting themselves in the foot. Not only are they losing this generation of youth in terms of new content, and pricing them out of parks as children- Yeah
But theyâre not gonna have Disney adults in the next generation, because an entire generation of kids wasnât just raised without seeing new Disney movies. They were raised without seeing old Disney movies. Because Disney [00:33:00] never making those movies free or easily accessible has been a enormous strategic mis- misstep.
Simone Collins: Well, yeah, and itâs a shame too, because o- our kids have occasionally seen on YouTube, you know, like, pirated clips of songs from, like, The Lion King or The Little Mermaid, and theyâre like, âOh, whatâs this?â Like, th- theyâre i- we would be watching old Disney movies if we could. Yeah. But we canât, so we donât.
And they just donât- And so theyâre gonna grow up without
Malcolm Collins: any memories of any of those properties. Yeah. Our opponents are shooting themselves in the foot. We just have to be careful in how we move forwards. Yeah. We have to build out networks, which weâre already working to do. We need to move forwards with technology where science says, you know, th- this is too much for me.
This... You know, the left tries to censor the degree to which we can move forwards with science,
Speaker 11: They believed in me. I believed my methods were too radical, too controversial, but there were others in the shadows, searching for [00:34:00] ways to circumvent their rules. Freed from my shackles, the pace of our research hastened. Together, we delved deeper into those areas forbidden by law, and by fear. And we With this knowledge, what new world could we build?
Malcolm Collins: . But thatâs the basic plan that we need in terms of... And weâve been funding this stuff from behind the scenes. Like, some of it has been found out with money that we raise.
Theyâre like, âOh, you funded X sketchy technology.â Itâs like, yeah, weâre moving forwards. And we maintain access lines to the technology that weâre getting. So when and if state structures start to break down, we know who to call up to begin to set up, you know, gene labs and stuff like that in other places.
To begin to set up modular nuclear reactors. To begin to set up fabs that can print basically anything you want at a fairly low cost. To begin to set up, I mean, I [00:35:00] donât wanna go over all the technology that weâve been sourcing. But yeah. I mean, weâve been moving forwards on everything we need for self-sustaining settlements and stuff like that.
Mm-hmm. To be able to then push from there back into... And our goal, as a reminder, is not to capture all of society. Itâs not to capture all of culture. Itâs to capture the efficacious individuals with a high degree of work ethic and a high degree of intelligence. No It, yes. Itâs to create
Simone Collins: a sustainable ecosystem of autonomous, independent, and quite varied cultures and groups who can inherit the future together, and also, you know, intermix, learn from each other cultivate resilience among each other.
That- Well, they
Malcolm Collins: donât need to intermix if they donât want to. The, the plan is just to intellectually- No, of course, if they donât want to. Yeah ... intermix. Like, share technology and ideas so that we can use the technology to move ourselves forwards. And, and this is why we see it as very important to not be overly aggressive towards groups that are persistently high technology.
[00:36:00] Mm-hmm. We have to find a way for those groups to work with each other because thatâs all that matters in the, in the future, the age of AI and the age of space travel. We simply do not need to lower ourselves to the savages, right? If the communists captured the savages and made them impotent, we donât need them anymore.
We can replace them. Thatâs what AI gives us the tools to do. And people are like, âWell, AI has a leftist bias.â Completely irrelevant if you use the right prompts, right? Like, if, if you... Thatâs one of the things with RFAB. You could even create just a regular AI engine that has a prompt reminding it to not be woke, and it wonât be woke, right?
Like, itâs very easy to do. So what,
Simone Collins: what people would push back and say is you canât change the fact that the training data available to do that. Yes, you
Malcolm Collins: can. You literally can. This is so annoying and so stupid. It does not matter that an AI has a leftist bias if you are engaging with the AI without any prompting that is negating the leftist bias.
If you-
Simone Collins: But wait, Malcolm, when literally people are choosing not to [00:37:00] publish peer-reviewed research that confirms many conservative stances, for example, and then disproportionately you see a lot of peer-reviewed research that is published that confirms more left-leaning stances, even if youâre prompting AI to answer a certain way, you canât change the fact that the available information- Thatâs factually wrong,
Malcolm Collins: Simone.
Thatâs factually wrong, and this is what it means to me. Okay, explain that to me. And it, and it actually, like, these people who are saying this stuff are deep enemies of the conservative movement because they are trying to psyops the conservative movement into a learned helplessness. Hmm. The reality is, is that if you put prompts into an AI telling it to take on a conservative persona or a persona of X religious background or a persona of a person with Y beliefs that are like the beliefs of the host of the show Base Camp or something like that- Mm-hmm
after going through what those beliefs were, it will, with a high degree of veracity, follow that prompting structure. The fact that you canât get an AI that you have not prompted to a- [00:38:00] Itâs, this is basically what itâs like. Itâs like me going to an image generation AI, and a person says to me, they go, âMalcolm, image generation AIs werenât all trained on anime.
And so if you just ask it to make art, it almost never makes anime art.â And Iâm like, âAll of mine on RFAB always create anime art.â And they go, âHuh, how do you get it to do that?â And I go, âBecause it silently puts the words anime style before every request, you tard.â Sorry, like, this actually gets me because it is such a stupid level of learned helplessness that it fires me up.
Speaker 2: Itâs like somebody comes to me and they go, âWe need to ban chainsaws.â And I go, âWhy?â And then they show me this stump where their arm used to be, and they go, ââCause it can cut off your arm.â And Iâm like, âOh my God, did the chainsaw do that on its own?â And theyâre like, âNo, I put my arm on a tree stump, and then I chainsawed it off.â
Itâs like, âSo you did it.â Itâs like when people are like, âOh look, I got the AI to do a terrible thing.â And itâs like, âHow did you do it?â [00:39:00] And itâs like, âWell, I told it to do a terrible thing.â And itâs like, itâs just trying to do what you told it to. If you prompt an AI to do something without any direction not to do it in a certain way, when you know it has a proclivity to do things in that way, then of course itâs going to act in that way.
We all know this. We know how AI works. We know how token predictors work. You need to provide a prompt that prevents it from acting this way
Speaker 5: Itâs not that itâs impossible that the thing that theyâre talking about could be a problem. If it was true that no matter what prompting you put in, or you could prove to me that no matter what prompting you put in, that you could not get a sane answer out of the AI, then I would say, oh, thatâs very interesting and very concerning.
But the people who look into this, I have not seen any of them attempt to show me that yet. Instead, what they show me is without any prompting attempting to correct this, that AI does what we would predict it to do based on how much the left has controlled the training data and culture for so long, which isnât [00:40:00] interesting to me.
And it can be used to get other people who otherwise would intelligently engage with AI and find ways around this to not engage with AI, which ends up nerfing our own side, which is why I crash out over this so hard. , And the thing that gets me angry the most is learned helplessness or encouraging learned helplessness.
, Simone would know this from our relationship. Like if you go and somebody says, I donât know how to do something. And Iâm like, well, did you try to figure it out? And theyâre like, well, no. Itâs like, well, then donât come to me until you at least try first.
Malcolm Collins: It is irrelevant that this is in the training data of AI. AIs can easily get around their training data with prompting, and if you canât get around it with the first layer of prompting, then you get around it with a second layer of prompting, or you can run a secondary AI that-
Simone Collins: Iâm not talking about the training data.
Iâm talking about also available information, like just what is out there
Malcolm Collins: And if we are able to deduce what is true from what is out there, AI can deduce what is true from what is [00:41:00] out there using the same internal heuristics that we use to determine what is true. If you read the book The Pragmatistâs Guide to Life we go over this in an extreme amount of detail.
How can you determine what is true when you are looking at evidence from a captured industry? So you can say something like, if a big oil company puts out a report about how bad oil is for the environment or something like that, you can be more sure that thatâs true than if they put out a report saying oil isnât bad for the environment.
If a global warming nonprofit or a major university institution puts out a paper saying, âOh g- you know, global warming is happening faster than anyone expected,â right? You, you can say, âOkay, I canât really trust that.â If they put out something that disconfirms their agenda... And thereâs, like, 50 points we go through in our book that goes through various ways to tell, even when youâre dealing with captured institutions, when youâre dealing with information that is more likely to be true or [00:42:00] information that is less likely to be true.
You can then feed these heuristics into AI, and somebody could then say, âWell, what if it still gets it wrong on the first output?â Itâs like, then you use a multilayered output. This is what... If you go to rfab.ai and then you go to our super search fa- feature, this is what we use. We do multilayered AI web searches using different mainstream models, where they basically go through and they have to confirm point by point what every one of the other models output.
And it is very good at removing both hallucinations and bias. I can further remove bias by putting in prompting to make it more explicitly conservative if I wanted to. But what Iâve noticed is that the vast majority of time, when I have heard conservatives complain about bias in AI, theyâre just being stupid.
They are crashing out about something where the AI is right and they simply were unaware. In fact, I will go further. I will say around 75% of the times I get a comment in show notes saying, âMalcolm, you have made a mistake [00:43:00] by believing an AI hallucination,â and then I double-check it. It turns out the AI was right, and the person who said I believed an AI hallucination was wrong.
Your average human is worse at determining AI hallucinations than AI is. Great example. Somebody was like, âOh, Austria was never split into two countries like Germany during the Cold War. Thatâs an AI hallucination.â I go and check, and no, it absolutely was. It, it wouldâve been very easy. There, there was God, a great example recently where I was just like, oh my God somebody said something with an AI hallucination, and I go check, and Iâm like...
Do you remember what it was, Simone?
Simone Collins: This has happened so many times. I, I donât have a specific instance in mind. Okay. So you
Malcolm Collins: know that, like, it happens all the time with us. Somebody will, like, accuse us of an AI hallucination, and it turns out the AI is right again. Yeah, and
Simone Collins: Iâll look it up. Or, well, itâs also just other stuff.
Theyâre like, âDid you know this?â And then Iâll look it up, and itâs not quite true. But then, you know, we have a lot of, a lot of other people who give us really good feedback, so you know. Itâs whatever. Yeah. Itâs
Malcolm Collins: not that Iâve never fallen for an AI hallucination in the show. Itâs just that the majority of the time I get called out for it, it wasnât- Well, I think also
Simone Collins: more importantly, you literally build tools like [00:44:00] Supersearch or rfab.ai- Oh, oh, sorry.
I remember this one. Yeah ... to, like, overcome them because you- Yeah ... you do care about avoiding hallucinations. That is
Malcolm Collins: really funny. Somebody stopped using our products with their kid âcause they were using the Whizzling system that like- Oh ... you know, embodies. And this was because the kid asked them about, like, w- when the, when Jewish slaves built the pyramids.
And then it replied saying, âBiblically accurately, Jewish slaves did not build the pyramids. They built supply depots outside of,â I think, âMemphis.â And that you, you have a cartoonish vision of Christian history that you learn. And, and, Well, they didnât insult the kid, but they just tried to gently explain that that isnât what the Bible says.
And the parent crashed out. A ca- parent, by the way, who had an Oxford degree in theology. So okay. But a lot of people are just very confident about things, and then they get mad when the E- when the AI doesnât affirm their confidence, right? But to continue here do you... Well, we could go into Yuri Bezmenov, which people often like to talk to on this subject.[00:45:00]
Simone Collins: We could. I just wanna say that one thing that really is hitting me with all this, going back to the commies winning, is that when I was in school and also just generally growing up, this idea of the Red Scare and of people blacklisting people who are suspected to have communist sympathies was framed as both just super overwrought and pointless and also misguided.
Like, oh, these people werenât actually communists and these people werenât actually, Oh, itâs come out that most
Malcolm Collins: of the major figures who, like, we were taught in school were unfairly judged actually were communist agents for Russia. Actually were.
Simone Collins: Okay. So yeah, I was wondering if that was the case.
And also now it just hits me that, like, we, we actually have not done that enough. There, there wasnât enough of a Red Scare. Or we kind of stopped and were like, âOh, I guess we won the Cold War. The communist threat is over.â And then it just... It all... Like, who knew? Who knew that... And, and, like, my view has totally changed on that because I really [00:46:00] grew up thinking like, oh, a bunch of people went on this witch hunt, and they did all this sanctimonious like, âOh, heâs a commie,â when he wasnât.
And, and yet, like, hereâs this hit list of things they wanted to do and all of the, like... Well, p- certainly not all the boxes, Iâm sure. There must be some things that werenât achieved. But everything you read off, box ticked. You know? Mission accomplished. So- Yeah, itâs, itâs just, itâs kind of mind-blowing to me that this witch hunt that Iâve been told about all my life tur- well, one, the witches were real.
Yeah. Two, we didnât hunt them hard enough, and three, the witches won. We should- And we all live in their twisted witch world ... if America was
Malcolm Collins: a healthy country, we should be treating anyone with any communist connection the same way we treat people with Nazi connections. They, the communists killed more people than the Nazis did.
They are, throughout history, a more evil political faction than the Nazis ever were in terms of the, the brutality of the things that they did. And Iâm, and like, by the way, I, thatâs saying a lot to say [00:47:00] this, but like, if for example you compare the concentration camps that the Nazis had which I have read about the, the worst descriptions of them they simply do not compare in terms of cruelty to the concentration camps of the Khmer Rouge.
Like, the Khmer Rouge concentration camps, Simone, you wanna cover your ears for this. Oh my God. Just cover your ears. Take out your thing.
Simone Collins: La, la, la, la, la,
Malcolm Collins: la. They would- La, la, la ... when you go into the camps ... la, la, la, la ... they would have rotting babies they had cut out of pregnant women- La, la, la, la
hanging from umbilical cords on the entranceway. La, la, la, la. They would take children- La, la, la, la, la ... and bury them in anthills up to their face- La, la, la, la ... and let the ants slowly sting and kill them.
Octavian Collins: La, la, la, la, la,
Malcolm Collins: la. They would have children- La, la, la, la ... brutally kill their own parents. La, la, la, la.
La, la, la, la. They like... Okay, you can come back. Now I canât
Octavian Collins: re-watch this episode. They, they wouldnât- So much for that ...
Malcolm Collins: because unlike the Nazis who, you know when they would kill people, theyâd use gas and stuff like this, the Khmer Rouge would [00:48:00] just because they didnât wanna waste the, the, the money of bullets in the killing fields just bring them out and beat them to death.
You know, so thatâs why the Khmer Rouge- But that costs
Simone Collins: money and calories.
Malcolm Collins: They didnât care about that. So I wanna give you an idea of like, and note here, here weâre not even talking about, like, other things. Youâre like, âWell, thatâs just the K- well, what did the, the, the Russians do?â They did things like left people on islands to starve to death and all kill each other slowly.
Hmm. Like again, I am not underselling the genuine horror of what the Nazis did. They did some of the most horrifying acts in history. Itâs just, like, when you compare like to like, communists are generally worst. The, the, the worst. And, and they did, like, okay, sorry, I should go... They experimented on children, Nazi did.
They mass killed people in really painful ways. They killed children. Like, all the horrible things they did. Itâs just maybe they werenât as creative as the Khmer Rouge were in instances. But yeah. [00:49:00] Horrifying. But letâs go to Yuri Bezmenov here. But the reason Iâm saying this is we need to treat these two the same way.
Anyone who has ever affiliated themselves with a communist organization should be absolutely the same way, like, not necessarily removed from society, but the same way that, like, you canât get a job if you were affiliated with a Nazi organization, or youâd be hounded out of politics, or youâd be... We need to, whenever theyâre like, âOh, a Nazi came to one of your events,â youâre like, âDid a communist come to one of your events?
Have you checked for that?â Because weâve got to be realistic about this. Weâve got to keep a clear eye at history and how evil these groups are, and their end goals. You can see here that when they say they care about things like native groups, th- they explicitly had it in their planning to remove colonialist powers from native regions before those regions had the ability to self-govern, because they wanted to cause suffering on those groups so they could take over.
And we saw this. We could go into, like, what happened with India and Churchill trying to [00:50:00] prevent them from pulling out fast enough, and it ended up causing one of the most li- like, India and Pakistan going to war with each other when that absolutely didnât need to happen if they had just waited and carried out the plan that Churchill was trying to carry out.
But thatâs a whole other thing weâre not gonna go into. But to continue here Yuri Bezmenov is a former communist. Heâs the one from leaflet song about college where sheâs saying- Yeah, thatâs all I
Simone Collins: know of Yuri Bezmenov was he was right, per leaflet. Thatâs like
Malcolm Collins: where, where it, and it starts from.
So he said the plan for the Russian communists was demoralization, 15 to 20 years. Focus on the school and education system. Corrupt the education system, media, art, and religion to erode moral values, patriotism, critical thinking, and cultural identity. To parp- pump Marxist-Leninist ideology into students via teachers, textbooks, and university.
Promote relativism, destroy traditional standards, make people unable to access true information, even when presented with facts. He explicitly mentioned that by the 1980s this had already affected generations of American students. Destabilization, two to five years. The [00:51:00] economy, foreign relations, defense, and social fabric.
Create chaos and division. Then crisis, up to six weeks, i.e. COVID. Precipitate a major upheaval where people demand radical change. And then normalization. The new subverted system becomes accepted as normal, often with force to stabilize it under the new ideology. Useful idiots, leftists, activists, academics, et cetera, from earliest stages are no longer needed and now may need to be eliminated, as we saw in the Islamist revolution in Iran.
So communists won, and now we need to fight back. But weâre winning against them right now because it turns out that when they have power Having gamed it through all of these systems, the one thing they didnât think about is how are we gonna still win the war of art when weâve made all of our games actively unfun and ugly?
How are we gonna actively win media if weâve made everything unfun and ugly? When people can no longer trust education, how does controlling these organizations have any institutional power, right? Mm. When somebody, the AI guy was like, âWell, you canât trust edu- [00:52:00] educational institutions to do good science.â
When Iâm getting my science, I donât often get it from educational institutions. Iâm, like, going through independent Substacks these days and stuff like that because everybody knows thatâs where the best research is done, right? Like, weâve pointed this out. Everyone I know whoâs, like, an independent, like, really good researcher in, in, in fields though, nobody goes to the academics anymore as the first line of defense because itâs just not where the cutting edge research is.
You wanna go cutting edge sexuality research, youâre going Aella. You wanna go cutting edge genetics research, youâre going Emil Kirkegaard or Razib Khan, right? Like, you simply arenât going to the academics anymore because theyâre not any good anymore, right? They lost the... You know, obviously the sheep still follow them.
The sheep still repeat, but you donât need to. And people can be like, âWell, how do you get an AI to not listen to the sheep?â You tell it not to. I do not... Itâs, itâs like not trying step one of fixing the problem and then getting mad at the thing, right? Like, going into an AI that you know has a bias and not putting in a prompt to correct for that bias, and then getting mad at [00:53:00] the AI is like the image of the guy sticking the stick in the spokes of the bicycle, and then the bicycle falls over, and then he says, âBicycle, how could you fall over?â
Wow. You know what I should do? Iâm gonna do this on the website. Okay. Next feature Iâm gonna make is gonna be based AI.
So Iâm gonna have a number of ways that correct for bias in AI and then create normal AI interactions with top of line models outside of any of the mainstream ecosystems. Maybe even have it run by default in alloy mode which will be different from, like, a generic companion or narrative engine or something like that.
Thatâs what Iâm gonna do. Iâm gonna fix this for you guys who canât figure out how to fix it on your own so that we donât have this problem anymore and you can just come to rfab.ai and get your based AI takes.
Simone Collins: Works for me. I love you, Malcolm. This scares me, but, I mean, we already knew things were bad.
We just didnât know it [00:54:00] was also part of a communist plan. So, okay. Fine. Okay. Okay.
Malcolm Collins: All right. Love you, Simone. Have a good one. You too. Bye, gorgeous.
Simone Collins: Canât wait.
Malcolm Collins: All right. And dinner tonight, what is the story?
Simone Collins: So it looks like my dadâs just gonna stay at the hospital, so... A- and I think Minka will be there too. Sheâs gonna bring him our, the, the Thai curry I made. So I can make you Thai curry with more curry paste. Or we can do hot dog and french fry night like weâd planned.
Malcolm Collins: Oh, we do have to eat the french fries the hot dogs at some point. Letâs just do hot dogs and french fries. Okay. Are we doing it with potatoes, or are they, like, pre-made french fries?
Octavian Collins: Theyâre pre-made french fries that Iâm gonna add,
Simone Collins: Some additional... Well,
Malcolm Collins: weâll see if we can make them good. That would be an interesting experiment.
Simone Collins: Yeah. So- I mean, add a [00:55:00] little bit of MSG to it ... chop up some
Malcolm Collins: onion or some what do we have for- Oh, for
Simone Collins: the hot dog. I have I saved the shallot that you bought,
Malcolm Collins: so. Yeah, so a shallot would be nice. Yeah. Okay. And you have
Simone Collins: all the sauces. A billion sauces, so.
Malcolm Collins: So thatâs, you know. All right.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. I think youâll be just fine, sir.
All right,
Malcolm Collins: letâs see here.
Speaker 3: I just wanna run inside and take a nap. Oh my God. What do you see? I donât know.
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 -
The internet has fundamentally changed â and almost no one has noticed. In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down how the explosion of global internet users (especially from India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Brazil, Bangladesh, Nigeria, and other developing nations) has dramatically reshaped online discourse on both the left and the right.
They explore:
* Why environmentalism, anti-Black racism, and anti-Hispanic racism faded from leftist priorities while Gaza, Pakistan, Jews, and âHindu Indiansâ suddenly dominate
* Audience capture, botting, and engagement farming
* Why certain right-wing creators (Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, Andrew Tate) shifted toward international/Islamic audiences
* The hidden influence of third-world users on Western political conversation
* Christian-majority vs. non-Western audience patterns
* And why the âonline rightâ often feels disconnected from actual American conservatives
A paradigm-shifting look at how the internet is no longer majority American â and what that means for culture, politics, and influence.
Show Notes
* In terms of sheer internet users (using broadband and mobile internet subscriptions as a proxy), there is only one Western nationâthe USAârepresented in the top ten countries represented
* (top representation = China, India, theU SA, Indonesia, Brasil, Russia, Japan, the Philippines, Bangladesh, and Pakistan).
* Contrast this to 2008, when the top users of the internet were:
* China (but doesnât count, due to the great firewall of China)
* And then the USA, Japan, Germany, the UK, France, and Brazil
* In terms of broadband: Leading countries by total subscribers or penetration included the US, China, Japan, South Korea, Germany, France, UK, and Canada.
* So functionally: Mostly Western nations were represented online
Could this be why the left shifted from discourse about LGBT and climate change to discourse about Palestine?
Internet + Broadband Subscriptions: Then and Now
Internet/Broadband Subscriptions in 2008
Leading countries by total subscribers or penetration included the US, China, Japan, South Korea, Germany, France, UK, and Canada.
Mobile + Broadband:
* China: ~253 million (June/July 2008; some estimates ~180â220 million by end-2008). China surpassed the US mid-year.
* United States: ~220â230 million (active/home users ~150 million in early 2008 per Nielsen).
* Japan: ~80â90+ million (active home users ~47â48 million in early 2008).
* Germany: ~40â50+ million (active home ~35 million).
* UK, France, Brazil, etc.: Lower but still in the top tier (e.g., UK/France ~25 million active home users; Brazil growing rapidly).
Internet/Broadband Subscriptions Today
Dominated by:
* China
* India
* USA
* Indonesia
* Brazil
* Russia
* Japan
* The Philippines
* Bangladesh
* Pakistan
The USA is the only âwesternâ country represented on the top ten list.
Pulling from Wikipediaâs list of sovereign states by number of broadband Internet subscriptions, I combined mobile + broadband internet subscriptions to create a ranked list:
* China - 1852637000
* India - 1200170910
* United States - 505719000
* Indonesia - 464967914
* Brazil - 265158564
* Russian Federation - 258214661
* Japan - 210519139
* Philippines - 176599291
* Bangladesh - 152409669
* Pakistan - 146355310
* Nigeria - 144994174
* Germany - 139217000
* Mexico - 131458662
* Vietnam - 131286117
* Thailand - 129738000
* Egypt - 108181505
* United Kingdom - 105189476
* Italy - 100457919
* France - 97446000
* Iran - 97164277
* South Africa - 93576635
* Turkey - 89725075
* South Korea - 84854606
* Argentina - 69767601
* Colombia - 68540947
* Spain - 66958543
* Ethiopia - 63197120
* Ukraine - 60954476
* Poland - 56881929
* Algeria - 53040296
* Myanmar - 48356160
* Canada - 45381104
* Morocco - 45294933
* Malaysia - 45026300
* Kenya - 43103412
* Saudi Arabia - 42709657
* Tanzania - 41802027
* Peru - 41225603
* Ghana - 36808571
* Nepal - 36096396
* Australia - 35476000
* Democratic Republic of the Congo - 35271156
* Taiwan - 34490976
* Iraq - 33335316
* CĂŽte dâIvoire - 31890058
* Sri Lanka - 29419587
* Kazakhstan - 29046500
* Sudan - 28675221
* Netherlands - 27742800
* Uzbekistan - 27585670
* Romania - 27330000
* Venezuela - 27103805
* Chile - 26072126
* Uganda - 25094643
* Afghanistan - 23946523
* Hong Kong - 20986099
* Guatemala - 19986482
* United Arab Emirates - 19826224
* Cameroon - 19748144
* Cambodia - 18702623
* Burkina Faso - 17960442
* Austria - 17435540
* Syrian Arab Republic - 16804909
* Greece - 16715369
* Belgium - 16340062
* Sweden - 16171593
* Senegal - 15870161
* Czech Republic - 15695534
* Ecuador - 15565345
* Portugal - 15338153
* Switzerland - 15142000
* Tunisia - 15135865
* Hungary - 14987525
* Belarus - 14578427
* Zimbabwe - 14279414
* Zambia - 13474451
* Angola - 13420871
* Israel - 12882000
* Azerbaijan - 11932214
* Mozambique - 11917159
* Bolivia - 11321904
* El Salvador - 10424913
* Bulgaria - 10297690
* Serbia - 10101873
* Singapore - 9933200
* Costa Rica - 9584401
* Dominican Republic - 9555585
* Denmark - 9453730
* Finland - 9017200
* Rwanda - 8840997
* Benin - 8801877
* Niger - 8787534
* Madagascar - 8755561
* Slovakia - 8522504
* Honduras - 8466489
* Nicaragua - 8390000
* New Zealand - 7982000
* Norway - 7855360
* Malawi - 7781723
Follower Composition of Major Influencers
Nick Fuentes - America First?
* The Network Contagion Research Institute reported (in December 2025) that ~50% of retweets on Nick Fuentes most viral posts originated from foreign accounts before Kirkâs death.
* These were heavily concentrated in countries like India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Malaysia, and Indonesia (with additional shares from the UK and Canada among foreign sources). Non-Western countries made up the majority of the foreign retweets.
* The NY Post reported that the pattern matched known engagement farm/bot activity (rapid, coordinated retweets shortly after posting, often from anonymous/single-purpose accounts), with no clear organic tie to Fuentesâ âAmerica Firstâ content in those regions.
Tucker Carlson - Pakistani Icon?
Tucker Carlsonâs popularity among a Pakistani audience surged due to his outspoken criticism of liberal Western culture, his advocacy for Palestinian rights, and a viral 2025 interview where he stated he had more in common with a âsincerely religious Pakistani cab driverâ than with secular, liberal Western elites
That said, Tucker Carlson Network (TCN) website traffic (as of early 2025 data) indicates:
* ~82% from the United States
* ~2.6% from Australia
* ~2.05% UK
* ~1.98 Canada
* ~1.67 Russia
* No notable Pakistan or South Asian spike in the available breakdown.
On YouTube and X, independent estimates show moderate U.S.-heavy performance, with some international growth noted in the Middle East/Gulf due to his anti-war/anti-interventionist takes (e.g., on Iran), but nothing indicating dominance by Pakistan or similar countries.
Some X posts and memes joke about his audience shifting to âPakistan, Iran, Russiaâ amid his criticism of U.S. foreign policy (especially on Iran). These are often mocking, not serious analysis (e.g., claims of âcloseted gay Muslims in Pakistanâ as his base or similar). Pakistani users sometimes push back, noting low actual awareness of him domestically
Andrew Tate: Indian Hustler?
* Google search interest and anecdotal reporting (+ reporting form the Guardian) indicate higher per-capita interest in Muslim-majority countries (e.g., parts of the Middle East, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia) than in the UK/US.
* Popularity also noted in India, Brazil, and other Global South areas
* Tateâs 2022 conversion to Islam boosted this
* Much of Tateâs international reach comes from short-form content amplified by algorithms and affiliate promoters in places like India/Pakistan/Bangladesh
* Audience composition often highlights young men from ethnic minority backgrounds in the West or aspiring youth in developing countries drawn to his âself-madeâ wealth, discipline, and anti-âmatrixâ messaging.
Hustler University
* Articles note it helps young Indians navigate industry/job challenges; Indian students comment on applicability (e.g., freelancing); LinkedIn profiles and reviews show Indian participants. Affiliate promotion and clip-sharing by creators in India contribute to virality
Are Shifting Internet Audiences Changing the Discourse?
From a Based Camp listener: âA lot of their viewerbase are muslims, they donât care about climate change. That is also why Tucker changed his content. American politics is now no longer only consumed by Americans. People from other countries also have strong opinions on US politics.â
To be fair, I checked Google Trends and Palestine has always (as long as theyâve been measuring search volume) been searched more than LGBTQ community stuff and climate change as a topic.
Why islamists and modern progressives are so compatible
The apparent alignment between Islamists (those advocating political Islam, often with Sharia-oriented goals) and progressives (or segments of the radical left) is a tactical âRed-Green allianceâ driven primarily by shared enemies rather than shared values.
This is not a new alliance.
* This phenomenon, sometimes called âIslamo-leftism,â has historical roots (e.g., Western leftists supporting Iranâs 1979 Revolution before many were purged) and has intensified in recent years, especially post-9/11, during anti-Iraq War protests, and after October 7, 2023 (The Free Press writes about it)
Core Reasons for the Alignment
* Common adversaries: Both groups frequently oppose Western liberalism, capitalism, U.S. foreign policy, and Israel (viewed as a symbol of âimperialismâ or colonialism). Progressives frame this through lenses of anti-racism, decolonization, and social justice; Islamists see it as a civilizational/religious struggle. This creates convergence on issues like Palestine, anti-Zionism (often overlapping with antisemitism critiques), and resistance to âWestern hegemony.â
* Identity politics and âoppressor vs. oppressedâ framing: Many on the progressive left apply a hierarchy where Muslims (as a minority in the West or in conflict zones) are positioned as victims of colonialism/racism/Islamophobia. This leads to alliances via intersectionality, even when Islamist views on gender, sexuality, or secularism clash sharply with progressive ones. Islamists leverage this for legitimacy, funding, and platforms in Western institutions.
* Anti-imperialism as a bridge: Historical leftist support for Third World revolutions extends to viewing Islamist resistance (e.g., Hamas, Hezbollah) as part of global anti-Western struggle. Shared tactics include protests, framing dissent as justice, and using media/activism to delegitimize opponents.
* Pragmatic coalition-building: In the West, left-leaning parties see Muslim immigrant communities as electoral bases and prioritize anti-discrimination solidarity over cultural clashes. Islamists gain influence by adopting progressive rhetoric on equity while advancing their agenda.
Places where thereâs tension but possibly even deeper alliance
* Progressives typically champion secularism, LGBTQ+ rights, feminism, and individual autonomy.
* Traditional Islamism emphasizes theocratic governance, strict moral codes (e.g., on homosexuality, apostasy, gender roles), and religious authorityâviews that conflict with core progressive tenets
* Ironically, many conservatives (certainly us) see the modern left as being all about theocratic governance, strict moral codes, etc.
Episode Transcript
Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone. Iâm excited to be here with you today. Today I am genuinely excited, because this theory has completely changed the way I see our society today.
This is one of the big ones. And- It is so explanatory to me of so many things that I didnât have a good explanation for. For example, why did the left so quickly and over the very explicit time period that we are looking at completely abandon environmentalism? Why did they abandon anti-Black racism as a cause?
Why did they abandon anti-American Hispanic racism as a cause? Why did they start focusing on Gaza and, and Pakistan and the problem of Jews all of a sudden? Why all of a sudden did they start complaining about Hindi Indians all of the time? Why all of a sudden... not that there arenât legitimate grievances here but these are changes that weâve seen in both the left and the right.
So weâre gonna [00:01:00] talk about, like, where these changes have happened in both the left and the right. And Iâm not saying, again, Iâm not saying that these grievances donât have, like, a genuine reason for them, right? But when I hear about, for example regularly, like, women being dragged off the streets in parks and graped, okay?
And then I see Nick Fuentes crashing out about Indian tech workers Iâm like, âYour hierarchy of racism seems off.â Not, Iâm not saying that, like... Or like the, the, the three boys of a certain ethnicity, you know, recently beat to death a, a disabled kid.
What? Itâs three Black kids, yeah. There was a w- white disabled kid that they mocked and beat to death.
There was the, I think it was like they got, like,
Yeah, so they live-streamed themselves beating him over the course of three days, it looks like, and they only got re-respectively, , three years in prison, seven years in prison, and eight years in prison. Thatâs it
But I was wrong. He [00:02:00] survived, and so that is why people say, âOh, itâs okay they got these relatively light sentences.â
Malcolm Collins: There was a recent incident of the Black guy, like, murdering some Asian old guy in San Francisco, and they said that putting him in jail would be bad for him.
Like, it would be bad for him, like, mentally or something, and so heâs not. No, itâs, itâs, g- thereâs, like, a lot- And heâs just not using that
Simone Collins: i- if I ever get in trouble as a defense. This, this would be, this would be bad for me. Yeah, this would be bad for my emotional health- The timing is, itâs- ... if I got raped
Iâve got a lot going on right now. Yeah. Not a good time.
Speaker: For context, he murdered an 85-year-old Vietnamese immigrant and he was only given five years in prison, after which he was released. First he was only sentenced to eight years in prison, then he was released after only five years because it was considered bad for his mental health.
Malcolm Collins: Well, there was the recent incident of the the Muslim guy who drove into a crowd. Ooh. And they said it was a mental health issue, even though he said he just wanted to kill them all.
Simone Collins: Well, [00:03:00] at least thereâs, you know, a long documented body of, of comments and analysis online talking about how unhinged we are.
We basically have an get out of jail free card.
Malcolm Collins: Exactly. Well, not anymore. Not that many people talk about how unhinged we are. Now most people are like, âOh, they, theyâre crazy, but they make a lot of points, and theyâre barely ruthless.â That was your thing on Christmas. But okay, theory. Theory. Weâre gonna get to the theory.
Yeah. Then weâll talk about us. So, this was in a recent episode where we were looking at the expansion of internet users. Ooh. And we were going over data on this, Simone and I. And what happened over the past 10 years or so- ... is that the internet went from being predominantly an American and minoritely a European platform, to today being a much, much more international platform.
Yes. Where- In terms
Simone Collins: of sheer internet users, like weâre talking broadband and mobile internet subscriptions, thereâs only one Western nation, the [00:04:00] USA, represented in the top 10 countries that are out there. So the top are China, which of course doesnât count âcause theyâre sort of walled off, India, the USA, Indonesia, Brazil, Russia, Japan, the Philippines, Bangladesh, and Pakistan.
We are the only Western country there. Whereas contrast that with 2008, and the top 10 internet users were China, but still doesnât count, and then the USA, Japan, Germany, the UK, France, and Brazil. This is a very different landscape. It was mostly Western countries. We didnât think... I mean, like it makes sense.
I donât think this would come as a surprise to anyone, but I, I... What I donât think weâre really thinking about is how that has impacted the discourse online and our perception of what, like- Simone, can you send me- ... peopleâs normal views are ... that list
Malcolm Collins: of countries?
Simone Collins: But you can actually, even if you go all the way to like 34, youâre like, âOh my God,â like in terms of internet and broadband users today.
Malcolm Collins: And so what youâre going to notice is essentially what has happened to the internet over the past 10 years, [00:05:00] without people grokking that the internet has fundamentally changed, is the internet has become a platform where the majority of consumers, not the majority of creators, have become uneducated third worlders.
Mm-hmm. Sorry, I didnât- Well, well- Savage third worlders ... people
Simone Collins: from, people from developing countries in, in many cases who may have-
Okay, yes,
Malcolm Collins: developing countries, people from developing cou- the developmentally challenged ... up and
Simone Collins: come, up and comers, and so- ... rising
Malcolm Collins: stars
Speaker 2: I found some video footage here that depicts their daily life
in a way that I think really humanizes them
Speaker 3: Attacker!
Malcolm Collins: What this has done is a lot of online content creators who get shaped by their audience have begun to drift [00:06:00] towards causes that the developmentally challenged, weâll call them- Oh my God.
Thank you so much ...
prefer and champion. This explains perfectly why the left gave up on environmentalism. Does your random
Malcolm Collins: care about environmentalism? Does your random person from Bangladesh care about environmentalism? No. Will they tune in if you go on a rant about how much you hate Jews and Israel?
Of course, theyâre Muslim majority countries. And this is what weâre seeing throughout the internet is we have gotten waves and waves and waves of potentially high attention spam, and we can even see this provably. If you look at a channel like Nick Fuentes, there was this thing where it came out that he was being rapidly retweeted after his tweets at a rate that was higher than even Elon, and when it came out where these were based, they were mostly in Muslim [00:07:00] majority countries like- Yes, I
Simone Collins: can br- I can, for those who want receipts the Network Contagion Research Institute reported in December of last year, 2025, that around 50% of retweets on Nick Fuentesâ most viral posts were originated from foreign accounts, though that was from before Charlie Kirkâs death.
And they were heavily concentrated in countries like India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Malaysia, and Indonesia, though there were some additional shares from the UK and Canada among foreign sources. Itâs just- All of which- ... the important thing is that the majority were non-Western countries. And then additionally, the New York Post reported that the pattern matched known engagement farm bot activity, so itâs not just, like, natural interest in those- But, but hold on
non-Western countries. No, the point
Malcolm Collins: Iâm making here- Yeah ... isnât the point youâre making. Iâm saying they might be wrong in this, okay? It might be genuine engagement from these countries. Every one of- Yeah ... the countries you mentioned has a large Muslim [00:08:00] population. The point Iâm making is that across the internet, in both the left and the right, we have allowed ourselves to be heavily influenced by Muslim third worlders, basically.
And itâs caused a dramatic shift in the causes that the left claims to care about and the causes that the right cares about, and this shift has been exaggerated by a secondary issue which is something that weâve been exploring in recent videos. But I have been digging deeper on, and itâs been completely changing my perspective of the right and the internet Which is the amount of large mainstream right-wing creators that are incredibly heavily botted and rely on incredibly heavy inauthentic viewer waves.
And as a result of this, people misunderstand two things. One is, who actually are the most influential [00:09:00] influencers in various intellectual spaces because they accidentally key to the bot farmed ones, not realizing that they donât actually have that big of an authentic audience. And two, the people who are heavily botting because their proportional audience is so low, and if you are botting authentic, e- educated, you know, people from the United States are going to be less likely to go all the way through your streams.
The people who are actually still staying are more likely to be from these developing countries. And keep in mind, like, when we talk about the blatant developing country stuff, weâre not even talking about the ones who are using VPNs and stuff like that. Like, I bet the vast, vast majority of them are at this point, especially after the Twitter leak happened and it basically came out that a bunch of these people were just LARPing as conservatives and progressives and were actually all .
Malcolm Collins: Iâm just gonna call them
Malcolm Collins: even though a lot of them are from India or from- Was it... Hold
Simone Collins: on ... Virginia. I have this vague memory of that word, that term being used in the movie Bend It Like Beckham, [00:10:00] and it was, like, seen as a major slur. Are we, is this part of the basement-
Simone Collins: a slur? If Iâm remembering Bend It Like Beckham correctly, yes.
It was, it was yelled at her, muttered at her on the soccer field. It was deeply insulting and hurtful. Pakistanis. Okay. Yes. Thank you. Thank, thank, thank you. I mean, I was confused by it in the movie because I was like, itâs, itâs a reference to a, a shortening of your country name. You know, if someone called me a Yank I wouldnât be- Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: itâs like Yank or something like that, right?
Like- But then keep in
Simone Collins: mind that, that... Oh, I the term Jap also was a slur. So- Oh, true ... I remember also, like, the shock I heard when I went to GWU in DC for my undergrad, George Washington University, and everyone kept talk- âOh, sheâs such a Jap. Sheâs such a Jap.â And Iâm like like, âWhatâs... One, where are all the Japanese students, âcause I donât see them?â[00:11:00]
Two, oh my God. But it turns out that they had never heard the term Jap because they were referring to Jewish American Princess, and there were a lot of very affluent Jewish students at my s- at my school. We
Malcolm Collins: gotta worry
Simone Collins: about those
Malcolm Collins: Japs taking over the, the- I mean, ... finance industry ...
Simone Collins: sl- slurs, slurs really confuse me.
I donât know when Iâm supposed to feel shocked and alarmed. There, there are, you know, sometimes multiple uses, so Iâm just saying. I mean, itâs not a very biting slur if it is a slur. I, mm, I mean- I know, and neither is yank, and I donât know. I mean, but like I think in the end, the problem with slurs is when theyâre, when theyâre said with, with anger and hate in oneâs heart then suddenly they become bad and full of baggage, and then you canât use them anymore.
Well, I
Malcolm Collins: should be clear. I mean this derogatorily. So I wonât use the term anymore. I will just call them Pakistanis. Ugh. For... And note, here, Iâm not talking about everyone from Pakistan. Surely there are some intelligent people of [00:12:00] Pakistani heri- heritage. And I, and I say to you- Is this... What is happening here?
And I say to you people, I like you even though youâre Pakistani.
Simone Collins: Guys, donât listen. Donât... Heâs... I donât know what heâs doing. I donât know what heâs doing right now. I donât know, I donât know what heâs do- do- I- Iâm being
Malcolm Collins: provocative Donât look at, donât get mad
Simone Collins: at me. I told him my little public service announcement that I learned from Bend It Like Beckham, the girls movie that was like The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants before The Sisterhood of Traveling Pants.
Iâm doing the whole the more you know rainbow, and heâs just not listening to me, so donât come for me.
Malcolm Collins: Anyway, Iâm glad I have you here. Sorry. Like with our kids- Iâm sorry for derailing ... when a kid comes up with a little bird thatâs a robin, and itâs an all red bird, and it has a little black patch around the eyes, and she goes, âWhat are you gonna name him?â
And he goes, âBlackface.â
Simone Collins: Well, and that was after, yes, he wanted to name his cardinal plushie Blackface. This was after he wanted to name one, [00:13:00] one of his, one of his baby chicks Whitey. So, Okay ... great. Th- th- Whitey, yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Th- th- heâs gonna get, heâs gonna get jumped if he goes into the wrong part of town.
Heâs really- Whitey here, the little chick ...
Simone Collins: yeah, I
Malcolm Collins: I- Okay ... I
Simone Collins: donât know what to do. I donât
Malcolm Collins: know what to do. But where I was going with this- Yeah, sorry ...
is that what a lot of people, if you, if you have an audience that is primarily astroturfed you are going to be more influenced by the develop- the developmentally challenged overly because they will watch more of your videos than people from first world countries who are educated.
And, and as, as McGold said, as McGold said, like, âI donât care.â He got kicked off of Twitch for this. What some, you know, like goat farmer in whatever cares about his, naming some third world country. And he got kicked off, but heâs like, âBut you donât care either.â Everybody knows we donât care what these people think.
But the problem is is when you canât tell these people. So Iâll give a good example of somebody who I think is heavily influenced by this. [00:14:00] Did you hear about the Tucker Carlson leak in terms of his actual paid subscriber numbers?
Simone Collins: Tell me, because I had seen allusions to, like, Tucker Carlson, Pakistani icon, and then when I actually tried to look up stuff, I wasnât really-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, so the core, like, that could explain this with Tucker Carlson is can you guess how many paid subscribers Tucker Carlson has?
Mr. Millions of Views on everything that he puts out.
Simone Collins: I, I think I looked it up and, and it was around, like, 7,000, but that thereâs nothing public about the composition of that subscriber base.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, 7,000 is astonishingly low for someone of his view count. It came out because he did a very bad job of securing his, his database and so you could just tell how many- Oh
Bars were in it, basically. Did you... Was his,
Simone Collins: like, email password TuckerCarlson6969 or something?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, he has a user base of 7,000 paid members. That means that his [00:15:00] actual, like, real-world watchers might be astonishingly small at this point. And Iâve noted this with other people. One of the groups that Iâve noticed seem to be, like, the highest bodied of communities is anybody who used to be famous in the conservative space- Mm
um, and then sort of dropped off in terms of you hear anybody talk about them with respect anymore. The, Tucker Carlson falls squarely in that. Like, I used to love Tucker Carlson. My little brother used to love Tucker Carlson. Like, everyone I know in my space, whenever Tucker Carlson would do a video, weâd all, like, talk about it.
Like, it was like, âOh, God, itâs the new Tucker Carlson video,â right? Like, he h- was known as having, like, really intellectually deep and provocative takes. And- Yeah, thatâs fair. That, that tracks with my experience, too and then, like, nobody talks ab- like, o- other than can you believe this crazy thing Tucker Carlson said I havenât heard that much about him, and I think it might be because he allowed his numbers...
And keep in mind, Iâm not talking about botting as a negative thing, right? Like, for some industries in some [00:16:00] platforms, you near have to bot. Mm-hmm. Like, on Twitch, for example, I hear, like if you- Yeah, you,
Simone Collins: you will not be discovered if you donât bot on Twitch. Yes, that is correct.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, you basically have to bot on Twitch, Yeah
from what Iâve heard. The only thing- Unless youâre
Simone Collins: super famous from other platforms and literally youâre just sending all your audiences there, which is like- Or you
Malcolm Collins: built yourself up over absolutely ages and youâre stubborn, like Leaflet. Yeah, yeah. But you know, once you establish a norm around botting, if Twitch doesnât stop it, then if you wanna be discovered, then you have to do it, too, right?
And there becomes a whole ecosystem around this. So Iâm not saying, like Iâm not dispersing aspersions on their moral character by saying... But what I am saying is it does mean that third-worlders have more of an influence on them.
Simone Collins: So, Well, and it seems that Tucker Carlson has been doing more to try to pander to Russian and Pakistani audiences.
Like, in 2025 he did this viral interview where he stated that he had more in common with a sincerely religious Pakistani cab driver than with a secular [00:17:00] liberal Western elite, and this caused this surge of popularity among a Pakistani audience. Not just due to that, but also due to his, his criticism of liberal Western culture in general.
But hereâs where I see some tension, because apparently if you look at website traffic at least as of early 2025 on the Tucker Carlson net- web- Network website, 82% of the traffic is from the US. Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: thatâs actually super suspicious.
Simone Collins: Really?
Malcolm Collins: So Iâll explain why. And that also makes me think the, the, like it leads to botting allegations and further.
So letâs go to our podcast, right? Okay. I am probably one of the most openly bigoted against non-American YouTubers I think that Iâm aware of. Yeah. I, I, I- Yeah ... canât think of another YouTuber who I watch who as regularly casts as- aspersions among non-American groups, whether that is Catholics or whether that is, The [00:18:00] French.
Simone Collins: Always the French.
Malcolm Collins: The French. The- And donât forget the next
Simone Collins: episode we were hoping to outline was titled Donât Trust the Irish. Oh, yeah,
Malcolm Collins: the Irish. I went on a long crash-out about the Irish recently. The Polish being corrupt. The you know, so I, I go off on other countries, right? Like, Iâm explicitly anti-courting other countries.
Oh, my God, did you know that Shoe0nHead are our fourth most oversub- overlapped subscriber channel? Oh, thatâs a good sign. Thatâs new. I didnât... Thatâs, that wasnât there before. Yeah, and itâs been going up. Sheâs up, sheâs well above Leafly. So it goes Asthma Gold Timcast Lotus Eaters, Shoeonhead, Actual Justice Warrior, Trigonometry, Warren Smith, Timcast, Leafless in Asari, Tim Pool, Dad Saves America, Alexander Grace, Clownfish TV.
Now we have, h- higher to the left This implies
Simone Collins: weâre going more mainstream slash becoming more weird Yeah, so Dave LaChute
Malcolm Collins: and Metreon. Yeah, this is very mainstream. All of these people have like millions. Hmm. But hold on. Iâm trying to find out where it shows me our geographic stats. Okay, so our channel- Itâs in [00:19:00] order
our channel has, do you, can you guess what our American audience is?
Simone Collins: I think it was like 56%, something like that.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, itâs gone up a bit. Now itâs at 64%. Wow. So- Good for us ... so considering that, you have to ask yourself, how on earth is a podcast as one, American focused as ours, and two, as jingoistic as ours, okay coming so much lower than Tucker Carlson, which actively is constantly dick cucking Muslims?
Thatâs...
Simone Collins: Huh, okay.
Malcolm Collins: So- So Iâll explain to you how that could happen ... yes, arousing my
Simone Collins: suspicions. Very interesting. Hmm. Iâll explain
Malcolm Collins: to you how that could happen. Oh. âCause there is a way that that could happen.
Simone Collins: Aside from botting, how? Hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Botting. He explicitly is paying his bots to go through American VPNs- Okay
or American accounts, so thatâs why it would appear that much. The, the, basically no other believable explanation I can think of.
Simone Collins: Yeah, thatâs entirely fair. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Hmm. Great. Yeah. [00:20:00] So, by the way, people, people are wondering, like, where we actually, letâs see where we actually get audience from
you, you wanna know our male to female? 90% male. Maleâs like n-
Simone Collins: ninety, ninety, yeah, yeah. Great.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, so, weâre, United States, then Canada, then United Kingdom, then Australia, then... Ooh, good Australian audience. Then Germany, then Brazil, then Sweden. People pointed out that weâre actually, like, really disproportionately large in some of these countries.
Then Poland, then Netherlands, then India, then Finland, then Israel, then France, then Norway, then South Africa, then New Zealand, then Japan. By the way, note Iâm going down this list so you guys can tell something about this list. Do you notice something about all of these countries so far?
Simone Collins: Yeah fair, fair point.
I see, I see what
Malcolm Collins: youâre
Simone Collins: doing.
Malcolm Collins: All of these countries so far, except for Israel,
Oh, and India, but thatâs only zero point seven percent of our audience
Malcolm Collins: are Christian majority countries until Japan.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Then Mexico, then Russia, then the Philippines, then [00:21:00] Switzerland, then Romania, then Ireland, then Portugal, then Spain, then Chechnya, first non... And this is only 0.3% of our audience, non-Christian majority country.
Then Argentina, then Denmark, then Italy, then Austria, then Belgium, then Singapore. Next, I think theyâre Christian, non-majority. Then Greece, then Hungary, then Vietnam, then Indonesia, then Thailand, then Malaysia, then Serbia, Bulgaria. So you see itâs sort of down at the end here. Weâre 0.- And thatâs interesting because that does not track
Simone Collins: with the, the current...
so I, I also looked, I pulled from Wikipedia a list of- ... sovereign states by number of broadband and internet subscriptions, and then I combined their column for mobile broadband, and then also, like, mobile like, for fixed and mobile. And the top ranked now are China, then India, then United States, Indonesia, Brazil, Russia, Japan, Philippines, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Germany, Mexico, Vietnam, Thailand, Egypt, United Kingdom, Italy, France, [00:22:00] Iran South Africa, Turkey, South Korea.
Like, so there, we really donât... Our audience isnât representative of- The world ... the world. Itâs representative of Christian majority. Well, specifically of internet users of the world. Itâs representative of a specific memetic set.
Malcolm Collins: Mm. But Iâd go further. Itâs representative of, so to go over it just, like, letâs go over the top countries on this list again.
Y- unusually highly educated countries, okay? Mm-hmm. So if you go over the top on our list, United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Brazil, Sweden, Poland, Netherlands. And, and note here, Brazilâs really high on the list. We wanna talk about Brazil âcause we have a big audience in Brazil and we work a lot with Brazilians.
Like, thatâs Bruno who does RFab is, is Brazilian. Brazil is kind of messed up in these statistics, and weâre gonna do a totally another episode on it because Brazil has about half, if I remember the chart correctly, about half of the internet users, if you look at America as a portion of internet users, okay?
[00:23:00] Brazil represents about half of the internet users America does. Yes. Now, this is insane because Brazil is not half of Americaâs population. This- Does not
Simone Collins: make sense. Yeah, itâs thereâs a separate graph that Not All Detox Tea on X sent to us that I also just re-sent to you on WhatsApp. Hey, thanks for this, by the way.
You inspired this episode. This graph shows you that. You can look at it visually, and hopefully you can put it up on the screen for people watching on YouTube. Oh, did you send it to me? I sent it to you on WhatsApp, yeah. And it shows two graphs, total Internet users 1997 to 2007, and then total Internet users 2018 to 2012.
Or sorry, probab- 2018, â12. Oh, so maybe July 1997 versus December 2018. Iâm not sure. But anyway, weâre, like, around 1997 and weâre around 2018. The- Oh, actually,
Malcolm Collins: Iâm surprised here
Simone Collins: What?
Malcolm Collins: Brazil doesnât have as small a population as I thought.
Simone Collins: Brazil is a huge pop- I told you this before. You were like, âIâm [00:24:00] shocked.â
But most
Malcolm Collins: of itâs uninhabitable.
Simone Collins: Yes, but it has insanely densely populated urban areas. Brazilâs massive.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, so letâs see. What are they? Theyâre 64% of Americaâs population, which is about what we see in terms of Internet users.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: So theyâre not disproportionately online, theyâre just a bigger country than the United States.
Thereâs just a
Simone Collins: lot of Brazilians, which is awesome. And I feel like, I feel like to a certain extent, until very recently, people have, like, discounted Brazilians online because of the language gear- barrier with Portuguese. But as weâre now seeing, for example, with Japanese Twitter, a, a lot of those language barriers with just automatic translation are totally disappearing.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, and this is really interesting as well, because itâs shifting leftist discourse online to be more small C conservative in its value set. In some ways, yeah, yeah ... because a lot of the th- the, the rest of the world, like, one, theyâre realizing that nobodyâs woke but them. Like, Japanese people are, like, mortified by them, all these anime creators.
But two, if youâve [00:25:00] noticed, in top of the line leftist discourse, itâs become significantly more Islamist. Like, hard-coded Islamist in its framing. Speaking
Simone Collins: of people whoâve actually pivoted. So Tucker Carlson, I would say itâs a cringe pivot. His whole, âI love Russia, I love you know, like, Pakistanâ thing.
Itâs, it feels forced to me, and it feels cringe and not- Mm-hmm ... like, he canât really pull it off. You know who just, like, took to it like a duck to water and has really nailed it?
Malcolm Collins: H-
Simone Collins: Hasan?
Malcolm Collins: No, Andrew Tate Oh, Andrew Tate has taken to it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I heard the majority of the people who go to his school, you know, the Tate University, are Indians.
Simone Collins: Well, yeah. So I looked, I looked at it a little more. Google search interest and then also anecdotal reporting and reporting from The Guardian indicate higher per capita interest in Muslim majority countries, so parts of the Middle East, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia. As we recall, big internet populations now more than in the UK and the US.
But then also [00:26:00] popularity is noted in India, Brazil, and other Global South areas. And then Tateâs 2022 conversion to Islam, remember that? Yes. Totally boosted this. And a lot of his international reach comes from short form content, which again, really caters to these... Youâre talking about them being less educated and stuff.
I would say if, if you have a less literate, less educated country, shorts do incredibly well versus long form, like podcasts and videos and stuff, because also people are talking or looking at the internet mostly through mobile devices on the go. Itâs, you donât really have people, like, playing stuff on larger TV screens or on their computer monitors.
So shorts make a lot of sense, and that is, like, Tateâs native format. Keep in mind, Tucker Carlson is all about this old legacy Fox News style TV format even though heâs, like, totally digitally native now.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: So Tate really did the short form content in addition to converting to Islam, in addition to really appealing to this like, sort of young radicalized minority male [00:27:00] population diaspora throughout the entire world.
And then audience composition when people look at it, it al- not just highlights all these people in, in developing countries, but highlights young men from ethnic minority backgrounds in the West. So even within his, like, market penetration into the West, he is reaching, like, young disaffected immigrant men and, and also aspiring youth in developing countries that are really into his whole self-made wealth, discipline, and anti-matrix messaging.
Well, itâs these rapist migrants, right? No, he, like, super appeals to that. No, but, like, think ab- like, who has most capitalized on this, like, growth of, of, of dislocated unemployed migrant male youth thatâs somewhat misogynistic? Like, Andrew Tate is nailing the change in internet
Malcolm Collins: composition. And I, I, Iâve noticed now that you, you, you talk about this, I even think that this is a full sort of pipeline, whether itâs Tucker Carlson or Andrew Tate [00:28:00] or Nick Fuentes, where you get popular in the American online right, and this affirms you for these sorts of, Mm.
Itâs kind of like an
Simone Collins: endorsement. Yeah, like third level recruiters ... like, well, the right likes him, so heâs also, like, fancier for that. But then- I, I really do think that Tucker Carlson fell into this through a form of audience capture and reinforcement and possibly some botting. Whereas Andrew Tate, like he was, he was born in it.
Like he really came out of it. And also you have to keep in mind with Hustler University there are some articles that are claiming that it really helps young Indians specifically navigate industry and job challenges that they uniquely face. And then a lot of Indian students apparently talk about how applicable it is with freelancing and various LinkedIn profiles and reviews of Hustler University as like a platform, like should you pay for it?
Is it worth it? Show that Indian participants really, really like it especially. And affiliate [00:29:00] promotion and clip sharing by creators in India have really contributed to its virality. So like even India specifically is this like big Hustler University thing. So- What, youâre like, âItâs
Malcolm Collins: actually good for them.
Yeah, yeah. Like
Simone Collins: Hustler University is good for someone. What is it? Can you explain it to me? Itâs good for Indians. Like so if youâre in some country where youâre making like, you know, cents on the hour,
Malcolm Collins: itâs, itâs great. Can you, can you explain what you mean how itâs uniquely applicable to them? Like what- Yeah, so Hustler University is all
Simone Collins: about
Malcolm Collins: like
Simone Collins: w- a weird combination of freelance work and like white label shipping things, drop shipping things, like very internet native somewhat ephemeral jobs that are not moored to a specific location.
And if you speak English fluently and are kind of have a shady background and are willing to play with different arbitrage games and not necessarily do stuff thatâs prestigious or aspirational- Sheâs saying
Malcolm Collins: Indians are scammers. I didnât say that. And that thatâs why Hustler University is good for them.
I didnât
Simone Collins: say that. Iâm, Iâm just saying [00:30:00] it... And I donât even know if this was intentional on Andrew Tateâs part because I think Andrew Tate was mostly trying to just show various ways that he has found to make money and like h- hereâs how to do it at scale. But it just happens to work really, really well.
A lot of it is, is about a game of arbitrage, and this is something that came up in our episode on clip farming and botting as well, that a lot of clip farm workers, for example, are in Bangladesh or theyâre in India or theyâre in Pakistan because for them the unit economics work. You know, they sit in these Discord servers and theyâre creating numerous n- like clips for Caleb Hammer, for Clavicular, and spamming the internet with them because the, the compensation theyâre getting for it is worth it for them.
No Western country, like developed country kid out doing this is going to find a benefit from doing that. Yet they might be sort of tricked into signing up for something like Hustler University or like these Discord servers that like, âOh, letâs [00:31:00] make clips that go viral,â because they see a lot of people talking about it.
And I think thatâs one of the core themes of this episode is that many of us will see people being really excited about a certain business model or like g- get rich quick scheme or whatever, and guess what? If youâre like in a slum in Pakistan or India, it is your get rich quick scheme. Like itâs actually gonna mean something to you.
But if you live in Chicago, itâs really not. And we donât realize it because everyoneâs speaking English, and we have a basic tendency to assume that like this other dude that we see on the internet is like at least another American or at least another Westerner. But this, this
Malcolm Collins: also explains the ephemeral legacy conservative influencer where- Mm
Andrew Tate sort of perfectly falls into this at like a later stage, more than like a Tucker Carlson or something like this where Andrew Tate is somebody who Iâm like aware that people still follow him. I used to watch some of his... I was never like a fan of his, but like [00:32:00] I, he, he could say entertaining things occasionally and sometimes had interesting points sometimes, right?
Like I, I, I think- He had his moments. No, he had his moments. Yeah, he had, he had his moments. But like nobody that I know has talked about T- Andrew Tate in like a year and a half except for that moment that he had with Kublai Killer. Thatâs the only, Oh ... but I, I was aware also that he was still somehow like relevant, and itâs where?
How? And itâs third worlders. This explains everything.
Simone Collins: Again, I donât think we say th- Third World, we say developing. Am I, do I have to be the PC police? Why, why is this my role?
Malcolm Collins: The, the, the but no, I, I think once you understand this, once you understand, and Iâve actually noticed it more and more and more in the types of people who argue these positions online, So for example, if you watch Asmongold stream, which I do thereâs [00:33:00] occasionally people who try to like s**t stir or something around like, you know, anti-Jewish stuff, anti-Iran stuff.
And donât get me wrong, like we certainly have our anti-Semitic takes. But overall, like we think itâs useful, right? For now. If, if weâre, if weâre... The global elite versus the global non-elite part of the global elite alliance includes Jews. But the, the, the, theyâll regularly attack him, right?
And Iâll watch him like pull them up. Heâs like, âOkay, like explain your full, full point,â right? Like heâll, he does this thing like enhance, like take this one chatter out and be like, âMake your full argument. I wanna hear it.â And I like this. I appreciate this about him because like we try to do the same thing.
Like if somebody can make an argument for us that like weâre genuinely wrong, and people who have watched our content for a long time know that like we update pretty severely on positions when we find new information. And weâre like, âWow, we were just wrong about this.â And, and we try to hear out the arguments of our [00:34:00] opponents as well.
And we also try to apologize when we get facts wrong âcause occasionally we do get facts wrong. A- again, youâre doing an episode every day. You, you canât always get everything right. Although you can if you use the new RFAB
SuperSearch which runs multiple online AI searches against an AIâs output to determine if any of it was hallucinated to get fully hallucination-less responses.
Simone Collins: Yeah, thatâs actually really, really cool.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, itâs, itâs very cool. And if you wanna go on the website in safe for work mode, rfab.ai/demo locks your computer into a... This is our website for people who donât know. We do lots of stuff on it. I recently added like a, a feature where you can talk to people from like the 1930s using AI only trained on that, and Iâm trying to get other ancient AIs working on it that have like a weird collection.
So weâll see. The more I can get working on that, Iâm excited. Iâm excited. I love it. I love it. But we actually have a whole episode where weâre gonna be like interviewing them to get their thoughts on like different estate groups to get like a 1930s- So exciting ... estate game.
Yes.
But what was I gonna say?
Oh yes, I remember. It was, so Asmogold like pulls these people up and heâs [00:35:00] like, âOkay, make the full point.â No. And when they try to make their arguments, and they typically come from like this faction, which before I thought of as like a genuine faction of the American right. Oh my
Simone Collins: God. Oh.
Malcolm Collins: They do not appear to be able to make coherent arguments.
They appear to have like- But it might
Simone Collins: be a language barrier issue?
Malcolm Collins: No, they appear to be like IQ 70 types. Oh. In some parts of the world this is normal, Simone. Having an IQ of like 65, 70 is the average in certain parts of the world. And Iâm realizing th- this explains stuff I didnât get. If youâre just in the online Discord, it looks like, for example, on the right, 50% or more of the online right is anti-Iran war.
Whereas like 40% I get is like pro-war. If you look at like actual polling of MAGA, itâs 90% pro-war, right? So itâs like where is this coming from, right? What, whatâs cre- And at first I thought this illusion was created just by a faction of like intellectual elitists on the right that tried to hijack the right for their own means a Romanist conspiracy if you will.
But now Iâm [00:36:00] thinking no, it really is indicative of people who have been pretending to be part of the online right for a long time, and may even consider themselves part of it, but are you know, Pakistanis or Indians. As we saw, a lot of like based accounts when Twitter did its reveal a lot of right wing accounts were just Pakistani and Indian accounts, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah ... and
Malcolm Collins: this is where- Well, and
Simone Collins: specifically like a lot of, I guess, MAGA rage baby style accounts. Though I think itâs kind of- Itâs unclear whether they... I mean, I think itâs more likely that they didnât really believe in it. They were just going after monetization, and they got the engagement from MAGA rage bait.
Malcolm Collins: I disagree.
Simone Collins: Really?
Malcolm Collins: What do you think is happening? I think some of these accounts, if you look at them, they were somewhat coherent. They seemed to be on message. They just really crash out about Hindi Indians and Jews a lot. And by the way, sorry, you might be confused here. If youâre not familiar with the politics of these regions, you go, âWhy would people in [00:37:00] Pakistan and India keep crashing out about Hindis?â
And the answer is, is because people in Pakistan and India this is where the people who hate Hindis the most of everywhere in the world, except for Canadians, who also really hate Indi- Hindis. Thatâs for other reasons. Simone has crashed out about that before. And maybe, like, San Francisco tech workers also really hate Hindis because they take all the jobs there, and thatâs, like, a, a genuine problem.
But again, like, the scale of the problem is not the scale of dragging people off the street to rape them, right? Like, itâs not the scale of the problem of, you know, randomly murdering people and then getting off scot-free about it. Itâs not the scale of the problem of you try to defend yourself when they are attacking somebody on a subway, and now all of a sudden you actually...
Or walking up to a random young lady on a subway and stabbing her to death, right? Like, itâs not that thereâs no reason for racism. We just need the scale of racism, people. And it just didnât make sense to me, right? Like, when Iâm looking at, like, the actual [00:38:00] social problems weâre dealing with. And when I saw this, except in Canada, right?
There might be genuine... Itâs like, oh, Pakistanis hate Indians specifically the Hindi Indians because they think, âOh, well, if we can make India Muslim, then, well, fine. Weâre, weâre cool with that.â And thereâs a huge Muslim population in India I think itâs about a third of the country who hate...
I mean, itâs like a online pr- practically, like, a religious war simmering beneath in the country right now that could break out at any time, especially with differential fertility rates. Weâll see how that goes. But it would make sense why that would be top of mind to this online audience about scoring racism points.
And then same with Jews. Of course, you know all of these you know, Well, you know the stereotypes weâre talking about here wouldnât have a fond opinion of Jews, right? And wouldnât care if the United States lost geopolitical ground- Yeah, but
Simone Collins: keep in mind, like, itâs not just people in India or Muslim countries.
[00:39:00] One of the most prominent ones, it had, like, 400,000 followers, was, mm, @maganationx, and they were just in a non-EU Eastern European nation. Then there were a bunch from Nigeria, like there was one, @scopemaga. And then there were also a bunch from Thailand, Germany, Egypt,
Malcolm Collins: Right. But here youâre talking about random shotgunning of other places with their own- Yeah
agendas. These other agendas can align with American right-wing agendas. Like for example, most Eastern Europeans, other than being Orthodox Christians or Catholics, are going to align with American values. Like, a Romanian TV it the little troll VTuber- Yeah ... I think perfectly aligns with most American values in pretty much all of his takes.
Thatâs true. But heâs still unapologetically Romanian in his takes. And I think that what we are seeing here is where un-American values are seeping through, people who are unaware of, like, where their [00:40:00] audience comes from or where the loud part of specific parts of their audience comes from.
Mm-hmm. Or where the perception that you get in online circles of, like, half of people care about this, half of people care about this, when itâs actually a 90/10 issue. And it also speaks very interestingly of if this audience continues to influence leftist discord, I think weâre going to see an even more rapid drift away from trans acceptance in leftist spaces and gay acceptance in leftist spaces, which I think weâre already seeing some pullback on.
And I do not think that these communities realize how quickly these groups are gonna pull back against them. And I feel like their only safe space eventually is gonna be in the right, and the right is gonna remember the shenanigans that they pulled for as long as they pulled. And no, weâve had some, some gays who came over really early and have been really good to our side, like Scott Pressler, who played potentially a large part in winning the last election.
And he was explicit about why, as he, a gay, became right-leaning. Heâs like, âWell, you know, I saw the nightclub shooting of the gay nightclub,â and I was like, âWell, [00:41:00] who did this? Whoâs trying to stop them from getting into the country?â Like, thatâs literally all heâs saying. I- at least they donât shoot me on the street, right?
Simone Collins: Yeah ... what, what are they- But I mean, thatâs, I think thatâs the other really interesting bit of Tension here, I guess? Or, like, or, or maybe it just makes sense that, that weâre seeing this shift as well in online discourse because in the end, Islamists and modern progressives are just inherently incompatible, and itâs not just something that intuitively our audience is picking up on.
Like, the Free Press has written about it. They talked about how the phenomenon has historical roots and It, the, it, it goes all the way back actually to Iranâs 1979 revolution before
Malcolm Collins: a bunch of- And then they killed all the progressives. It does go back to then. Yeah. Yeah. But we know from the Iran revolution what the playbook is for them.
Simone Collins: Yeah. But this, this, the, the so-called, like, left, Islamo-leftism or Red-Green alliance is, is definitely strong for a bunch [00:42:00] of really good reasons. I mean, one, they ha- they share a conom- common enemy, that they donât like Western liberalism, they donât like capitalism, they donât like US foreign policy, they donât like Israel.
And- They donât like the Jews ... they, yeah, they donât like the Jews. And they also seem to really like identity politics and this concept of the oppressor versus the oppressed. That framing resonates and is used a lot by both groups. Plus, anti-imperialism is a huge bridge between the two of them. I mean, this is so interesting- Anti-Western
Malcolm Collins: imperialism.
There is no religion on Earth- Yeah, okay, okay ... more inherently imperialistic than Islam. You know? Well, but hereâs the
Simone Collins: other thing, is, is what people cite as also being the core tension between modern progressives and Islam, which is that people are like, âWell, theyâre incompatible because traditional Islam emphasizes theocratic governances and strict moral codes, like on homosexuality and apostasy and gender roles and religious authority.â
And Iâm like, hold on, though. Like, actually many conservatives in, in the modern right see the [00:43:00] modern left as being all about theocratic governance and strict moral codes and being like, âThis is what homosexuality has to mean. This is what you being trans has to mean.â Mm. So actually, like, even in the core areas where we would argue they wouldnât get along, they kind of do.
Like in as many Islamic countries, you know, if you donât wanna, you know, if, if you feel gay or like you feel same-sex attraction, like ah, do not worry, that just means youâre a woman, you know, slash man. Weâll change you. Oh, weâre gonna do a whole
Malcolm Collins: episode on this that I forgot to do, so you gotta remind me- Oh, yeah
of how similar Islamism actually is to progressivism. Yeah. Theyâre, really about the only issue theyâre differentiated on is p- progressivism being pro gay sex, but theyâre not even that differentiated on that because first of all, progressivism is now trying to convert all of its gays to trans- Yeah
which is what Islam does anyway. Yeah. And two, a lot of Islamic countries have major gay sex problems. This was a huge problem for our troops when they were in What? Afghanistan. In our- What? Are you unfamiliar with this? They kept sleeping with [00:44:00] underage boys, like our allies would. And it was super, super common and, but it was like okay because, like, they were underage.
Bro- ... thereâs like tons of videos on this. Itâs a, itâs a very well-known phenomenon, and it was a major problem for our military because we were like, âYou guys need to stop this,â and theyâre like, âBut itâs our culture.â Theyâre like, âDonât worry, itâs okay. Heâs underage.â And weâre like, âNo, that- That makes it worse.
Theyâre like, âDonât worry, bro. Itâs not gay. He- heâs a child.â You know,
Simone Collins: thatâs so Greek. I donât know. Like in the end, I, I, I donât know what to say. Iâm just like, people need to do better. I, I love that line,
Malcolm Collins: Greeks, they invented gayness.
Speaker 4: Good for you, Father. Well, someone had the guts to stand up to them at last. Coming over here, taking our jobs and our women, and acting like they own the
Speaker 5: place.
Speaker 6: Fecking Greeks.
Speaker 4: I donât care who he gets, so long
Speaker 6: as I can have a go at the Greeks. They [00:45:00] invented Guinness.
Malcolm Collins: Weâve been talking about-
Simone Collins: I mean, but you know ... not letting Greeks
Malcolm Collins: into your country.
Th- no, but the, the, what Iâm increasingly realizing is one of the things we also have to think about, and this could be something we could sort of close with, is does it make sense to begin to think of a Western alliance of Christian values from across the world, where like we have differences but fundamentally, like you look at our viewer base, you look at these countries, and itâs not a random smattering of countries that watch us.
Itâs Christian countries that watch us. It is the United States, Europe, Latin America, right? Canada, New Zealand, Australia. You know, thatâs our audience, right? And w- I think that we should be more vigilant around the wider... Because fundamentally that is, you know, Western civilization is Christian civilization, right?
Be more [00:46:00] vigilant of individuals within our wider movement who have been co-opted to fight against the interest of Christian civilization. And where Christian civilization, whether that be, I mean, thereâs many ways you can fight against the interests of Christian civilization. That can be fighting for things that are geopolitically against our interests, or fighting to get Christians to, for example, abandon technology thatâs needed to crush our opponents, right?
Like whether that be genetic technology or AI or anything like that. Technology is power. Those who fight for us to tie our hands in regards to technology, because let me tell you what, the Muslims are. They have no such prohibitions. So, and the Chinese arenât. Although they did arrest that guy for doing genetic e- editing, but now weâve heard that like all of the elites in China are doing genetic editing, so be aware of this.
We
Simone Collins: just heard that Chinese families, wealthy Chinese families are just quietly going about it. So. Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: Who knows? ... for people who wouldnât know this. But the point Iâm making here is we have to be aware of like whoâs trying to subvert us, and [00:47:00] be more vigilant about this instead of just earnestly, like a child, going into online.
And I say this because I was this. I, I went into a child and I was like, âThis is the online Twitter on X. This must be what Americans on the right think.â When I was really being influenced by a bunch of Pakistanis.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, and I think just in general, most people, and even most influencers, are largely unaware of the compositions of their audiences and are maybe not talking to them.
I mean, even we do it. Like, we, we speak still, despite even our awareness and knowledge of the fact that our audience is only by a slight majority, you know, like- American ... 60% American, we still speak like this is a 99.9% American podcast, when thatâs just not true, clearly by the numbers that you just went over.
Yeah. And I think all of us would benefit from just maintaining a little bit more top of mind awareness [00:48:00] and just knowledge of the fact that, look, there are many people with very, very different backgrounds and very different geopolitical positions and perspectives than you who are talking. And when youâre hearing their opinion, you canât just assume that they, like you, went to this kind of school, and that you have this kind of neighborhood, and that these kind of laws and these kinds of taxes, because they donât.
And thatâs very important.
Malcolm Collins: Actually, c-
this reminds me of something that one of our fans said recently, and I just realized, like, I, I donât think that thatâs actually as popular as you think it is.
Mm.
Yeah, so they said they were talking about how many, like, American conservatives donât believe in evolution. And I was like, at least in the influencer class, thatâs, that, like, like, our new right influencer class.
Now, if you go to, like, Tucker Carlson, you go to Candace Owens, like, they donât believe in evolution apparently, which you were shocked about. And Nick Fuentes.
Simone Collins: Yeah, yeah. Nick Fuentes doesnât believe in
Malcolm Collins: evolution. Because, yeah. B- and, and when we first started doing our podcast we would always frame any point [00:49:00] we made about evolution, like, âWell, and if you donât believe in evolution, hereâs the argument.â
And we just stopped doing that, âcause I realized basically none of our fan base doesnât believe in evolution. And- Maybe itâs they
Simone Collins: just donât talk about it,
Malcolm Collins: because
Simone Collins: apparently creationism is alive and well.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, so 55% of American conservatives even today donât believe in evolution. What? Oh, okay. I mean, hey.
Hey. No, but I donât think itâs a, a base that we reach. Because, you know, we talk about this at conferences at The Heritage Foundation. We talk at like... I talk to people all the time about this sort of stuff, and I have yet to run into anyone, like, in, at least in real life, who didnât believe in evolution.
Simone Collins: Yeah, because we discuss things like, well, things adjacent to evolutionary biology all the time. We talk about evolutionary pressures, and thereâs no, like, âI donât know.â Unless there are a bunch of creationists out there who believe in evolutionary pressures but only, like, after God just boomed everything into experience, e- e- existence Well, yeah, I wouldnât have a
Malcolm Collins: problem with that.
But I mean, [00:50:00] the, the interesting thing, and we, we actually talk about this, is if you do believe in evolution, itâs actually very affirming of the Bible being true. Because if you look at Genesis, the timeline laid out in Genesis of the evolution of different clades is It tracks.
Simone Collins: It tracks with historical geology- Assuming this-
to a great extent ... it,
Malcolm Collins: it, it, it, it tracks more than you would, like it, it tracks stupidly well. Itâs like- Yeah, it surprised
Simone Collins: me. I was like, âHold on. Wait.â Like, if you just donât take year counts or day counts totally literally, and who would, thatâs
Malcolm Collins: usually- Itâs actually a good description of evolution.
More than just being a good description of evolution, itâs a description of evolution in like a way that you wouldnât expect. So for example, why would God make the fish first? Right? Like that doesnât, I, I canât imagine why somebody however many thousand years ago would think, âAh, yeah, obviously the fish come first.â
Yeah. Yes. Right? Like now if you understood evolution, that would [00:51:00] make sense. Absolutely. But I canât understand how somebody at the time the Bible was written would have known that.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: But anyway.
Simone Collins: No, itâs impressive and compelling. Love you. I love you too
Malcolm Collins: And have a spectacular day. And you guys can tell us what you think.
So new, new theory unlocked for me, new world perspective unlocked for me, and Iâm gonna start discounting a lot of the chatter I see online a lot more and focus much more on what the people I consider to be intellectually cogent are saying.
Simone Collins: Are we... I donât know. Are we having... Are we in the middle of a paradigm-shifting crisis?
Like, first weâre like, âOh, God, everythingâs botted,â and then a bunch of additional stuff has been clip farmed into fake relevance. Like, itâs not actually relevant. Thereâs just a bunch of people being paid to spam social media feeds with clips to make the algorithms think that theyâre relevant, so weâre all talking about clavicular when itâs just a kick paid for clavicular to be a thing.
And then on top of that, even the few people who are actually real people on the [00:52:00] internet arenât even from, like, what we consider to be our community talking about our issues from a perspective of an American. Theyâre talking about American- No.
Malcolm Collins: What, Iâm going through an anti the crisis where itâs the crisis in my understanding of reality because Iâm realizing that the internet as I thought it exists or as it appears at surface level is no longer representative of what I thought it was representative of.
But in realizing that, I have re- realized the reach of our wider community, which I thought was smaller and more niche, if you actually compare unbotted numbers, un- you know, foreign numbers, whatever- Mm-hmm ... is actually much further than I anticipated. That individuals like Leaflet, who obviously we talk about a lot, we have on the show a lot, much broader than I had thought.
Figures like Asthma Gold much str- farther than I had thought. Figures like Nuts much farther than I... Rev much farther than I had thought. I guess that is
Simone Collins: really encouraging. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. The, that the wider part or faction of the online community, and [00:53:00] this explained things I didnât get. I didnât get how our subreddit- So Tucker Carlson is
Simone Collins: fake and gay, and Leaflet is, is real.
Yeah. And, I didnât get
Malcolm Collins: how our subreddit ended up beating r/Relationships in terms of daily interaction before it was shadowbanned. Yeah. Like, that didnât make sense to me. Yeah. I didnât get why our Discord is orders of magnitude larger than the largest in terms of, like, regular interaction, the largest effective altruist Discord.
It did
Simone Collins: seem somewhat confusing, and I guess itâs less confusing in light of all this.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Iâm like, âOh, I just wasnât faking it.â
Simone Collins: Hmm. Okay. Well, welcome to the narrow influencer class based campers. Yes. Youâre among the elite, the chosen, the few. But actually, weird. Anyway. Yes.
Malcolm Collins: And we need to I think get better at building alliance between the factions represented within the wider conservative world.
Yeah. [00:54:00] Against the real threats to our cultural regional hegemonies.
Simone Collins: Fair.
Malcolm Collins: And this means being open to, you know, allying with sort of the wider Romanist world, allying with the more traditional, the Jews, allying with more traditional conservatives where it, where they donât try to impose their value system on us.
And I think that we d- like thatâs been being accomplished more and more and more without the lie that weâre actually all the same, and thatâs always disgusted me. Weâre not all the same. Weâre different. Mm-hmm. Iâm nothing like you. Different is good. Different is good ... we can, we can be allies without being secretly the same group, right?
That, that psyop has really scrambled my brain. I donât like it.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, thanks Malcolm. I love you.
Malcolm Collins: Love you too. Looks terrible. I need to get my hair cut immediately â
Simone Collins: Cause you always get really mad at me when Iâm like, âI have to cut your [00:55:00] hair,â and then you get mad at me before, during, after. No, youâve gotta cut my hair. Youâve gotta cut my- I feel like Iâm being punished for trying to make you look better You wanna do it tonight.
I think it has to happen tonight. I donât think we have a choice. This canât continue. But you canât keep, like, getting all sully and mad at me. So- I get much more mad when you cut the kidsâ hair than my hair Oh, God. Can I c- Because they canât- Can I not make this family somewhat presentable? Youâre so... You guys are all so awful.
Like, I try to get Tai Jin dressed, and sheâs like, âAh.â And she decides that she has to, like, run away. You knew what you were signing
Malcolm Collins: up for, gene-wise. Hmm. God. You
Simone Collins: knew it. I wasnât ready for this. This is,
Malcolm Collins: I didnât, I didnât hide anything about what you were gonna get with these kids.
Simone Collins: We need to create some kind of basic training boot camp for all of our future in-law children to, like, prepare them for everything.
Malcolm Collins: Theyâre there just hanging out with all the, the young, the younglings. They have [00:56:00] no idea. Yeah. Whatâs,
Simone Collins: whatâs that... Thereâs some, like, movie series, right? Is it called Knives Out, where, like, someone marries into a family, and then, like, all try to kill each other or something? Yeah. Hmm. We, we
Malcolm Collins: basically...
Simone Collins: Weâll just do that.
Actually, I feel
Malcolm Collins: like itâs a lot of two movies.
Simone Collins: Yeah? Well, I mean, itâs, itâs, I guess itâs compelling to people because they realize itâs kind of true for some families. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Okay. Do, do I need to go get Octavian? Yeah.
Simone Collins: Yeah. I think... Whatâs so funny about that toy Chinook helicopter is that itâs all in English, but itâs very clearly some beleaguered Chinese factory worker.
Malcolm Collins: Go play somewhere else. Youâre too loud out here. Weâre trying to record and youâre making lots of noise.
Simone Collins: All right. Iâm done beating him. Itâs supposed to be this, like, patriotic Chinook helicopter, and yet itâs clearly this beleaguered Chinese factory worker recording the sounds for it. âFire! Fire!â And it just sounds really bad. And I love it. I love it, [00:57:00] but I also... I need a little bit more of, like, a redneck accent on my Chinook helicopters.
Weâll just have to fix that someday. Would you like me to do the intro? Oh, also, for dinner tonight, I can probably make things go either way. Like... But I can either do another night of Thai red curry, or I can do gourmet hot dogs that were gifted fr- to us with pesto pasta. Whatâs your preference?
Malcolm Collins: Honestly, if I can, I donât know if this is too much, is just pesto pasta
Simone Collins: I can do that. Yeah. And then gourmet hot dogs with french fries tomorrow, and then Thai curry. âCause I feel like the more days... If it can sit up to three days in the fridge, then itâs amazing. It seems to, like, stay- Well, it definitely
Malcolm Collins: needs more curry paste.
Itâs, itâs very bland right now.
Simone Collins: Well, Iâm trying to... I, you know, Iâm making for guests too. But yeah- Mm ... Iâll just... [00:58:00] Okay, fine. Who cares what our g- guests can tolerate? Actually, the last time we had guests and we did the Go- gochujang chicken, they were like- Yeah, they liked it a lot ... they can take, they can take it.
Yeah. I mean, I think someone was like, âOh my God.â But then everyone else was okay, so.
Malcolm Collins: Right, how hot it was?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: All right. Just for the site where I am right now, Iâve sort of given up on one feature. Iâve been trying to make a bunch of different historic models that are only trained on historic AI- Oh, yeah
That you can, like, experiment with them on the site. But I only have two really working, âcause I have to host them in super unique ways. I might need to make them all local only, which is very frustrating for me.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. But it would save people money, so thatâs kinda cool.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, but nobodyâs doing a long chat with a historic model.
These are mostly for experimentation.
Simone Collins: Mm.
Malcolm Collins: Just to see what people of that time period would have thought about things.
Simone Collins: I donât know... So how would you do, like, a 1790s one? Because people during those time periods, like, there wasnât a person. Like, [00:59:00] now itâs easier for there to be someone- Yeah ... because thereâs only, as weâve said, one story left.
You know, people are sort of dealing with a shared community to a certain extent. But, like, the experience of someone in 1790s England versus France, despite a lot of their close bonds would have been very different. Very different mindsets and cultures. How are you planning on approaching that anyway?
I mean, I donât know, like, how feasible it even is, unless you want to do, like- For sure the literary
Malcolm Collins: culture of the elite is captured in the r- the AIs. Like, the one thing that I noted that was very interesting about the 1930s model, which is running right now and that it was very antisemitic, but not very anti-Black.
And I think this shows something that is genuinely forgotten in history, which is that elite society was not particularly anti-Black racist, and it was actually very trendy to be like, âThe Blacks are actually really cool and can do great things once theyâre freed,â in elite circles in the 1930s.
Whereas in elite circles in the 1930s, it was still very trendy to hate the Jews. See Karl Marx [01:00:00]
Simone Collins: Weâre gonna do a whole episode on, on that, right?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: Good. Iâm excited. Iâm also thinking about doing an episode... I mentioned how we are setting up matchmaking networks for, like, our future, you know, for our kids and future kids- Mm-hmm
and we, we already have a big database of parents to participate in it. Someone saw me mention that on the Chris Williamson podcast, and sent me on Instagram literally a dating platform that they had made that is for parents to matchmake for their kids. So you go on this website, and then you skeeze on other peopleâs kids- Mm
and then try to match them up with y- like, your son or daughter, your adult son or daughter. Really? Yeah. Whatâs it called?
saw their DM. Itâs called Seony, S-E-O-N-Y, seonyapp.com.
Malcolm Collins: So,
Simone Collins: and- By the way, they, they explicitly reached out to me. Theyâre like, âThis is not an ad. Iâm not self-promoting. I just, I know your, your kids are still kids, but you might find this fun.â So theyâre not, this is not a sponsor. No, itâs a very good
Malcolm Collins: community
Simone Collins: thing to
Malcolm Collins: promote.
I, I,
Simone Collins: I love the idea and- [01:01:00] 100%, yeah. Iâm just wondering if I should do a whole episode on, on what I ... Well, I mean, a weekend- What I think- ...
Malcolm Collins: episode on it might be interesting if you go on, see the way people are presenting- Or VHS ... their kids within a modern context. Yeah. âCause
Simone Collins: we have, I think we have some, a decent number of community members whose kids are adults, and might be...
We, I mean, we really need to get parents more involved in matchmaking. This ainât gonna solve itself, this problem. Donât leave it to your kids, you know. If you wanna become a grandparent, youâre gonna have to make that happen all on your own. Youâre gonna have to smash them together. Now kiss. Itâs, yeah.
Iâm, Iâm... Okay, maybe weâll do that.
Speaker 7: Savion, come on. One.
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 -
Today on Based Camp, we go over the accounts of women who reportedly regret having kids, as covered by New York Magazine, and discuss why theyâre so miserable.
Among other things, we explore:
* How the hardest phase is often the early years, especially infancy and toddlerhood, and that regret can be heavily shaped by sleep deprivation, pain, and the shock of being the default caregiver
* How the same events can feel unbearable or manageable depending on whether a person frames them negatively or as part of a meaningful life project
* The utility of thinking through failure modes in advance, building contingency plans, and explicitly discussing logistics before having children rather than relying on vague social assumptions
* How if someone dislikes themselves or their partner, that unhappiness often gets magnified through children because kids reflect both parents
* How online communities like âregretful parentsâ can reinforce misery by rewarding negative storytelling, though they acknowledge that some parents are genuinely unsupported and hurting
Ultimately, parent regret is often driven less by children themselves and more by a mix of poor preparation, weak reasons for having kids, lack of support, bad partner fit, and untreated personal issues like depression, anxiety, ADHD, or body image problems.
Many of these risks can be headed off by brutally honest parenting discussions, early planning, and choosing parenthood deliberately rather than as a default life stage
Episode Notes
* A lot of conservative-leaning influencers are talking about an article in the New York Times, part of The Cutâs âOh, Babyâ series
* Broadly speaking, theyâre trashing NY Mag for discouraging motherhood and/or trashing the mothers for various reasons
* Though some, like Brett Cooper, have more balanced takes: she argues that the viral âI regret having childrenâ discourse is really about unsupported, isolated mothers and bad matching in marriage, not mothers hating their kids
* I disagree with all the takes Iâve seen though
* This article is great
* These accounts are super important
* Anyone who is serious about kids should read themâand more
Hereâs why:
* The best way to get through something tough is to:
* Have a strong reason for having kids
* Understand where things go wrong
* Heading off serious issues, especially with your first child in their first years, makes the difference between hating parenthood and wanting a huge family
* A positive experience with first kids was the top common factor Dr. Catherine Ruth Pakaluk identified when interviewing college-educated American mothers of over five kids
* We, personally, have experienced a lot of the negative things (or rough equivalents) the mothers in this article experienced, but because we had a strong âwhyâ behind having kids and we had prepared for a lot of the potential downsides, we were able to weather the hazards
What we would encourage:
* Going through r/regretfulparents and cataloging all the things that go wrong
* Building contingency plans for those things
* We did this with our relationshipâin building our relationship contractâand prospective parents would be wise to do this before having kids
* I.e. build contingency plan items into a parenting contract, or adding them to a relationship contract
The Article
The article opens with: âParent regret is more common than you might think â the r/regretfulparents sub-Reddit alone gets around 70,000 weekly visitors who anonymously commiserate â though stigma makes it hard to admit in real life. Below, three moms of young children talk about why they wish they could go back to their old lives.â
The Cut - I regret having children: https://archive.is/BF3zn
34-year-old Rhode Island mother of a 6-year-old and a 3-year-old
* Didnât have kids for a strong reason
* âWhen my husband and I were dating, his deal-breaker was having kids. I didnât feel the same way, but I didnât see life without children as an option. It always felt like the next stage of life for us. I remember telling my husband, âIâm worried; I love our life now and Iâm not sure what itâs going to look like with a child.ââ
* Has personal issues which she now has to contend with in her kids (easy to be frustrated, colickey, etc.).
* Struggled with postpartum depression
* Perfectionist
* Got diagnosed with ADHD after suspecting her oldest had it.
* âWhen my younger daughter struggles to get dressed, I try to distract her or make compromises, but in the end, sheâs screaming, and I donât know how to make it stop, so I just shut down.â
* Is admittedly in the âhell zoneâ of parenthood (after six, things get awesome)
* Sheâs not wrong that parents of especially young children are less happy
* But thatâs not the point
30-year-old European mother of a 3-year-old
* Grew up sheltered with a stay-at-home mom; married at 22
* Mother said she would help out with a new baby
* Was constrained to bed rest in her fist trimester
* Horrible recovery from birth (painful to move)
* Mother and husband didnât help that much
* âMy husband had a month and a half of paternity leave, but the only helpful thing he did during that time was change her diapers, though he did it with a reluctant expression on his face; I had the feeling he never believed how much pain I was in. My mom helped, but she didnât like being disturbed at night and even during the day was afraid of holding the baby or changing her. I hallucinated from lack of sleep. It felt like Iâd been tricked into this. Everyone who wanted me to have a child â my husband, my family â knew they werenât going to lose much, while my freedom and identity went down the toilet.â
* Had a history of depression and anxiety
* Turned down a job offer that would require moving because they didnât want to change their daughterâs preschool
* Worries a LOT about her daughter (i.e. what would happen if I were not here and something happened?)
27-year-old North Carolina mother of a 1-year-old
* Didnât want kids
* âMy husband and I met in middle school. He was always interested in having a big family, and I told him I wasnât quite sure.â
* Has a history of depression and is now dealing with it in her son perhaps:
* âMy son has a low tolerance for frustration and doesnât communicate other than whining, screaming, crying, throwing things, and pulling my hair.â
* Has body dysmorphia issues
* âDuring pregnancy, I felt embarrassed. Iâve had body-dysmorphia issues since I was a kid, and I felt so massive. I used to be a track athlete and have always been fit and active, so I didnât like feeling so heavy and restricted when trying to do the things Iâve always done, like hiking. During my third trimester, I didnât want to leave the house so that people wouldnât see me.â
* Different contextualization would have made a huge difference re: body dysmorphia
* Horrible birth experience
* âMy sonâs birth was also traumatic. His shoulder got stuck in my pelvis and the epidural kept wearing off; the nurses told me it was fine, that I was overthinking. They held me down and jumped on my pelvis to dislodge his shoulder while the doctor reached up and got him out; I still have pain from it. When my son was placed on me, I didnât feel anything. It was surreal. I told the nurse, âYouâve got to put him back in the bassinet, Iâm about to puke.â Then I did, all over myself. No one helped me to the bathroom or showed me how to wash myself.â
* Felt erased as a human being
* âI felt like Iâd disappeared as a human being. Clients called me âMama.â Friends and family asked me how my son was; they told me how excited and overjoyed I must be. I tried telling them I wasnât coping well with motherhood and was still processing the birth, and theyâd tell me, âThatâs what motherhood is.â One of my friends texted my husband, âWow, sheâs changed, and not in a good way.â It came from a place of care â she and many friends and family told me I had postpartum depression, to seek therapy and go on medication. But at the same time, theyâd quickly flip it back to, âYou need to be there for your son. Pick yourself up by your bootstraps. Move on; itâs over with and done.â Everything I went through, was just like, No big deal, because the baby is here. Your existence doesnât matter.â
* Withdrew from fellow parents because her son is developmentally delayed
* âI stopped talking to my friends with kids. They wanted to exchange baby photos and milestones and, while I was happy for them, my son is delayed and is in early intervention services, so he wasnât meeting his.â
* Plans to leave her husband and son
* âMy husband and I are taking steps to separate, and heâs willing to take on the role of a single parent, which makes me feel incredibly guilty. But I canât live this life with him anymore. Iâm not the parent my son needs.âSimone & Malcolm Collins react to the viral New York Times / The Cut article âI Regret Having Childrenâ â three anonymous mothers share raw, dark stories of resentment, isolation, postpartum struggles, and lost identity.
Instead of the usual outrage, we treat this as an important warning and planning document. We break down why these regrets happen, how strong reasons for having kids + radical honesty + contingency planning can prevent them, the power of contextualization, genetic self-awareness, partner compatibility, and why the early toddler years are brutal but temporary.
We also discuss:
* Why hating yourself or your partner makes parenting hell
* Polygenic selection & mental health
* The importance of realistic expectations around birth, sleep, and infant care
* How to build a âparenting contractâ before kids
* Feminismâs impact on womenâs identity in motherhood
A must-watch for anyone considering children or already navigating early parenthood. Brutally honest, optimistic, and solution-focused.
Episode Transcript
Simone Collins: [00:00:00] hello Malcolm. Iâm excited to be speaking with you today because we are gonna be talking about a New York Times article published in the Cut called I Regret Having Children Telling the very dramatic Stories of three mothers who genuinely regret becoming mothers and have these dark and very ominous tales.
And most of the conservative commentators Iâve seen covering it, and basically I feel like Iâm seeing this everywhere online. So we have to talk about it.
Malcolm Collins: No, what I love about this is so many people, theyâre like, oh, Malcolm and Simone, think about how itâs gonna affect your kids. That it is really publicly documented that you really wanted to have them and, and love them.
Iâm like, what, what, what about these peopleâs kids? Like this is part of the, the historical,
Simone Collins: well, itâs anonymous. So the idea is that hopefully these children will never see it. And even the mothers have said this, like they wouldnât want their children to know how much they resent this. But most of the people who are talking about it are saying This is, wait, one
Malcolm Collins: of you?
Simone Collins: Hmm?
Malcolm Collins: Was one of âem, you.
Simone Collins: No, no, actually. But a lot of the people are saying, this is [00:01:00] Antinatalists and this is terrible. Or like Brett Cooper thinks that the, the discourse is really about unsupported isolated mothers and bad matching in marriage and not really about mothers hitting their kids.
Whereas I think really everyoneâs missing the point. And hereâs the thing, I actually think this article is. Fantastic. And that the, the accounts that these mothers give are actually really important. And that anyone who is really serious about kids should read these and read a lot more. And, and hereâs why.
Basically the, the best way to get through the tough parts of having kids and having kids isnât necessarily easy, is to have a strong reason for having kids. And also know ahead of time everything is gonna go wrong. And you and I did exactly this. But not with kids with getting married, remember we went instead of on like regretful parenting subreddit, we went on the relationship subreddit and we very miss fastidiously cataloged everything that could possibly go long wrong with our relationship.
And we built plans, contingency plans around those
Malcolm Collins: things and, and documents. But the thing is, is this is different because the people [00:02:00] donât know what their kids are gonna be like. Right?
Simone Collins: Oh no, they do. And weâre gonna get into that. No, they super do. And thatâs the
Malcolm Collins: thing. Oh, youâre right. I mean, genetically our kids are just us.
Like, and I
Simone Collins: see, and again, in these stories, so weâre gonna go over the stories, but the bigger story here is, no, this is good. We should be talking about this. These problems are real, but theyâre also very easy to navigate. In fact. Many of the things that these mothers talk about, these nightmare scenarios are things that, at least on a similar level, we are have as parents experienced.
This is not, theyâre not like having universally terrible experiences. Theyâre just going through the rough parts of being early parents. And most of these have kids like, you know, that are still in their toddler years. Itâs, it can be rough at times. And the point be talking about this shouldnât
Malcolm Collins: actually difficult
Simone Collins: parenting.
Malcolm Collins: I have a different reason why I like articles like this. And I do like reading articles like this because you
Simone Collins: love the snark
Malcolm Collins: because itâs the same reason Iâm like really into like red pill content about how horrible somebodyâs girlfriend was to them or something like that. Of course.
Simone Collins: Right? â
Malcolm Collins: cause it just makes me appreciate you more and make you feel like more of a treasure.
Simone Collins: Oh, and how, like before you, youâd [00:03:00] love to see what happened to like old classmates on Facebook so that you could be feel
Malcolm Collins: superior. Yeah. Just be like, okay. Okay. No. But no, I think a lot of people they think that like, Iâm, Iâm watching like. Super misogynistic content and itâs gonna make me misogynistic.
And itâs like, no, it just makes me appreciate how unique and special you are as a wife. And I think our kids are pretty unique and special too. So hopefully this, this reframes that as well. And I think for a lot of people, when they end up hating their children or being parents, itâs because they donât really like their partner.
They donât really like themselves because
Simone Collins: thereâs a lot of that in that, in this,
Malcolm Collins: by the way, just the mix of the two of you Personality wise. Yeah. Like when I see my kids play itâs just me plus Simone. Like thereâs, thereâs not a lot of. Exogenous personality in there.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. And I think thatâs, thatâs one of the really big themes in this actually, that we.
Donât talk about it enough as a society. But the article, it itself opens with parent regret is more common than you might think. The our regretful parents subreddit alone gets around 70,000 weekly visitors who anonymously commiserate [00:04:00] through stigma. Makes it hard to admit it in real life. Below three moms of young children talk about why they wish they could go back to their old lives.
And so Iâm gonna just pull some. Highlights from each mother who gives their account. And weâre gonna talk about how this, this is stuff that people actually really should be planning around and talking about. And that if you do adequately plan for these things either one, you could just avoid becoming a parent if itâs really not for you.
But two, you can really. Make something that could be terrible, totally surmountable by just planning for it because itâs pretty, like the writing was on the wall for most of these issues that these women encountered. And thatâs a really big thing. And the most common problem for all of these women is that they lacked a strong reason for having kids.
So letâs start with a 34-year-old Rhode Island mother of a 6-year-old and a 3-year-old. First off, she did not have a strong reason for wanting to have kids. She wrote, when my husband and I were dating, his deal breaker was having kids. Totally relatable, right? I didnât feel the same way, but I [00:05:00] didnât see life without children as an option.
It always felt like the next stage of life for us. I remember telling my husband, Iâm worried I love our life now, and Iâm not sure what itâs gonna look like with a child. And I think this is, I. One super, super common. I mean, you, we can tell from the polling that women are far more ambivalent around having children than men are men put having a, a, a child and, and, and becoming a parent is one of the top things that they need for a fulfilling life, whereas, mm-hmm.
Especially conservative men, whereas progressive men and all women,
Malcolm Collins: and it just famous polls recently that showed that conservative men having a kid is the number one thing in terms of life fulfillment and progressive women. It was like the absolute bottom. And that mean, I mean, that cultureâs just gonna go extinct, right?
Like thatâs, thatâs what happens when you, which is a weird place to be, where you can see that the cultures that weâre opposing and the people weâre opposing control elite institutions and have power within our society, but theyâre. Failure is also inevitable, which makes things feel so weirdly [00:06:00] comforting.
Because I, I like being both the underdog in a fight, but I also donât want the risk of thinking that we could lose.
Simone Collins: Yeah. The other really big thing, and Iâm so glad you pointed to this, is that if you hate yourself or you hate your partner. Youâre gonna have a lot of trouble with your kids. And this also shows up in all three of the stories.
So this particular Road Island mother, did you hate
Malcolm Collins: adopt?
Simone Collins: What
Malcolm Collins: if you hate yourself? Adopt.
Simone Collins: I guess, yeah, if you hate yourself, you are a good candidate for adoption. This particular mother had personal issues that now she is contending within her kids. Like, itâs super obvious. She says she struggled with postpartum depression.
Sheâs a perfectionist. She got diagnosed with a DH ADHD after suspecting her eldest had it. And then, you know, she turns out she had it too. And she wrote, when my younger daughter struggles to get dressed, I try to distract her or make compromises, but in the end sheâs screaming and I donât know how to make it stop.
So I just shut down. And so one, yeah, you could adopt two, you could genuinely, like, you could just do polygenic risk score selection like we did and [00:07:00] select for different behavioral traits. You, you can do that. Weird, I mean like risks of behavioral traits. Mm-hmm. But I think more importantly than that actually is, and I have to be careful about how I say this, right?
âcause weâre, weâre not, weâre not big on therapy culture. Weâre not big on like working through like your mental health issues, but like, how can I put it? Raising kids has forced me to give myself a lot of grace and forgiveness around, for example, my sensory issues, my autism. And while thereâs a world in which I could have seen that in my children and freaked out and everything got way worse instead I see it in my children and it teaches me how to be more forgiving with myself.
It also way more understanding of my children. And I think for parents who do things like struggle with depression and frustration and perfectionism like she does, for example, she has chosen. To like have this turn into this vortex of pain and suffering for herself of like, oh, oh, my daughterâs experiencing.
âcause her daughterâs her, like her daughter has her same tendencies âcause. Theyâre, you know,
Malcolm Collins: theyâre very valid. This is, I wanna [00:08:00] you know, illustrate for the fans what you mean when you say this because itâs something that you, you know, focus on a lot.
Simone Collins: Uhhuh
Malcolm Collins: is you will see some behavior in our kids, like the way theyâre picky with food and X way or
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Really into systematizing or, or something else.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: And you will reflect on, oh, like I can. More forgiving of myself for those traits.
Simone Collins: Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: because that was genetic. That wasnât like a personal failing on my part.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Like it helped me, yeah. Hate myself less for that. And I, with this mother, for example, if I were speaking with her in person, Iâd be like.
I mean, wow. This is, you know, an amazing way to give yourself grace for struggling with these things and just kind of deal with it together. Okay. And
Malcolm Collins: you get, get getting a little,
Simone Collins: I know. I, I donât
Malcolm Collins: getting a little therapy as, as they would say in the gamer rooms. Youâre getting a little gay here, Simone.
Iâm gay.
Simone Collins: I, itâs a, itâs a, itâs a little fake and gay, but also like it. Itâs kind of, it can be beautiful. Iâm just saying like, the way you contextualize things really affects how you [00:09:00] can process it. And thereâs a world in which this mother would be able to navigate her own struggles with perfectionism and depression as her daughter struggles with them in a way where they can both navigate it better.
And thereâs also a world in which itâs worse. But anyway the other, the other part is again, she has a 6-year-old and a 3-year-old, like especially three year olds are really, really difficult
Malcolm Collins: to point fun, start.
Simone Collins: So because she has a really young kid, itâs also just gonna suck. And the problem is, I mean, after both her kids are over six years old, things are gonna go get a lot easier.
And I think itâs really unfair for and this is where I think itâs unfair with the media and also probably our regretful parenting is riddled with parents who have. Toddlers and probably doesnât bring a lot of older kids.
Malcolm Collins: Well, and Iâm taking it back. I mean, imagine how much that must make you dislike your kids to be constantly in an environment like a Facebook group or, or regretful parenting where this hatred is being boast rewarded and re.
Forced by the community you have chosen to surround yourself with. Yeah. If the water cooler talk every day is how much you hate your kids, youâre going to begin to hate [00:10:00] your kids more and more. The same thing happens with partners. If you surround yourself with a community, thatâs poor conversation point is how much you donât like your partners, or even you get social credit for challenging yourself or for being the beleaguered mother, then youâre going to project that more.
But letâs get to what the actual article says.
Simone Collins: Okay, weâll move on to the, I I just wanna point out though, like you, youâre missing my point that when you actually look at these parents and being like, oh my God, Iâm not happy, and thatâs bad one. Itâs a very short term period where on average parents, especially women, are less happy.
And thatâs specifically when they, they have really young children and it passes. And it sh it should be just better understood that this isnât a period thatâs like necessarily full of joy. Okay, so moving on to the 30-year-old European mother of a 3-year-old. She says that she grew up sheltered with a stay-at-home mom.
She married at 22. Her mother said that sheâd help out with a new baby which turned out to not be so true. She felt like she was [00:11:00] one. She had a terrible pregnancy and delivery experience. She was constrained to bedrest in her first trimester. She had a horrible recovery from birth. Like it was painful to move.
There was something like an incision made that was just. Incredibly painful.
Malcolm Collins: Everybody whoâs had a number of kids always has a few bad pregnancy stories. I think when people are like, I stopped having kids because of a bad pregnancy then you were never gonna be in a sustainable population. If, if that was what prevented you from having kids.
Youâve had really terrible pregnancies in the past.
Simone Collins: Yeah. And again, it comes down to contextualization. She, I think, experiences this in an isolated way where people were kind of gaslighting her into like, everythingâs gonna be great. Everythingâs wonderful. Itâs all magical. And the worst thing for her, and this is one of those things where had she looked at everything could, that it could go wrong and actually looked at regretful parenting before she had her baby.
She could have basically headed this off. But she was in a situation where both her mother and her husband didnât help that much. She wrote, my husband had a month and a half of paternity leave, but the only helpful thing he did during that time was change her diapers, [00:12:00] though he did it with a reluctant expression on his face.
I had the feeling he never, never believed how much pain I was in. My mom helped, but she didnât like being disturbed at night and even during the day was afraid of holding the baby or changing her. I hallucinated from lack of sleep. It felt like Iâd been tricked into this. Everyone who wanted me to have a child, my husband, my family knew they werenât going to lose much while my freedom and my identity went down the toilet.
And thatâs something that she could have if theyâd all discussed it, anticipated and had off. Like I think itâs horrible what happened to her. And it didnât have to do that. No, I
Malcolm Collins: mean, I think thatâs an an Iâm, Iâm gonna be honest we tried to do for the younger years with kids do more gender equal breakdown in terms of care, and it just doesnât work very well.
It ends up being so contrived the way you do the split care for the infant. Yeah. It like. Infants really was in our house. The infant is always Simoneâs like total responsibility. And Iâm in charge of the fallback for anyone over that age, and that works really well. But if youâre just going into [00:13:00] this and you just have one kid and youâre in that infant stage when the mom bears and it is hard, I mean.
Youâve gotta remember guys, if youâre watching this, what itâs like to be a new mother you are in enormous pain often because you just underwent some form of surgery or something like that. The kid could die at any moment because kids of that age do die. Just die randomly.
Simone Collins: Itâs horrifying. Yeah.
Especially your first time parent and you, you donât necessarily, I mean, if you didnât grow up with very young siblings, you also have no idea what youâre doing and youâre like, oh my God, this is the human and I feel like Iâm gonna kill this human.
Malcolm Collins: Youâre not sleeping like at all up, all. Night and day. Yeah, if you are breastfeeding, that is very painful.
Simone Collins: It can be for some people they just love it, but for a lot of people itâs not the best.
Malcolm Collins: I,
Simone Collins: I hate it.
Malcolm Collins: So, so the, the, the, you know, you are in both constant pain, but also your brain is hypersensitized to the needs of the baby.
I can see in Simoneâs face how distressed she gets. When we have the infants, I think the reason why you donât contextualize all [00:14:00] this, this as horrible as she is contextualizing it, is one, you know that your sacrifice is appreciated which is really important for guys to make sure that you are signaling that, that you understand and it is appreciated.
Yeah,
Simone Collins: and thatâs the thing she pointed out, right, that like her husband didnât seem to really believe her, that it was like
Malcolm Collins: tough
Simone Collins: for her.
Malcolm Collins: And two, you see the outcome. In the, the older children, like when I, I see my kids, I hug my kids, my kids jump on me. I see how awesome this, what to me is honestly a very boring stage of life.
The infants Iâve, Iâve, Iâve been, I do not like infants. Itâs zero
Simone Collins: interest.
Malcolm Collins: But I love, love toddlers.
Simone Collins: Like, but I mean, parents should talk about that because I think that that also. Some women may grow up exposed to what I call like baby men who just like, thereâs five to 10% of men just seem to be baby crazy.
Like they absolutely beloved babies. I wanna hold the baby, theyâre the baby whisperers. And then every other man, like zero interest like they, I. You know, like theyâd rather hold a wet stray [00:15:00] dog covered in trash.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: You
Malcolm Collins: know, babies disgust, Iâm not a fan of babies. Yeah. And on newspapers. When, when I first said that, as you said, you know, we need to normalize it.
You can feel like, Iâm not a big fan of babies, but I itâs worth it for when theyâre toddlers newspapers. When that went viral for me saying that, theyâre like, oh, he doesnât even like his children. He doesnât even, you know, like being around them or enjoy parenting. Mm-hmm. And Iâm like, what a sick reason to have kids because youâre going to enjoy it.
Right? Like this isnât
Simone Collins: well, but also again, it, women need to be aware of this. Like women shouldnât be gaslit about like.
Malcolm Collins: Oh yeah.
Simone Collins: Oh, you know, like your, your husbandâs gonna be in love. And also like, keep in mind the, the men who are referenced in by these women in this article typically were like, yeah, I really wanna have kids.
Like, kids are a must for me. Like they act like they really wanna have kids, but then theyâre not into kids below three years. Like, thatâs actually super normal. And that doesnât mean they donât wanna have kids that actually theyâre probably gonna be great dads.
Malcolm Collins: Is this me with the dog and, and chickens.
Simone Collins: The dog and chick. Oh, you,
Malcolm Collins: you, you always, you
Simone Collins: Right. [00:16:00] Malcolm has been the one whoâs pulled the trigger ultimately on us getting a bunch of pets. And then who ends up being the only person who takes care of the pet, who feeds the pet, goes out.
Malcolm Collins: Iâm sorry, Simone. I will endeavor to lighten your load there where I can Yeah,
Simone Collins: sure.
Itâs been how many years now? Okay.
Malcolm Collins: It is, it is appreciated though, Simon phone and Iâm just, Iâm just airing that so that you know, that I, I know that you likely feel similar to them just in other domains of our life.
Simone Collins: No. Well, no, but also like youâre not into babies, like you donât. Have youâve changed, I guess when you, you, you did, you did take texts to the diaper, so youâve changed his Sorry.
To the doctor. So youâve changed his diaper then, but you donât, you have not Once,
Malcolm Collins: when we started with kid number one, we shared bi diaper changing, but we stopped doing that pretty soon after kid. We
Simone Collins: just dropped it. Yeah. Like, because it didnât make sense, but itâs, I just, I, I, I think itâs great that this is being discussed because it should be discussed because.[00:17:00]
If you, hereâs the thing. So we had on the podcast at one point, the author of Hannahâs children, Dr. Katherine Ruth Balak, she interviewed academically and then published a book on college educated mothers of five plus children.
Malcolm Collins: Okay?
Simone Collins: And she told us that the top factor, determining whether or not someone was like, oh my God, I am all in this.
I wanna have so many kids, was whether or not they had a good experience with their first kid. And if they felt, you know, well supported and it was, you know, what they wanted and they had a great experience, they were way more likely to wanna have a lot of kids, even if like they came into it being like, I really like keep, I will, I mean, you didnât read the book, but many of the mothers who or interviewed in the book had similar starting points to these three women.
Who regret becoming parents were like, I donât know. Like,
Malcolm Collins: okay, letâs, letâs get to the next one.
Simone Collins: But my point is though, that like if you come into it the right way, you know, if you come in prepared, you can be super into it. So, anyways, so she had this terrible [00:18:00] experience. Her husband, mother didnât help much, but another common thread here, she had a history of depression and anxiety.
And I think, again, if youâve got a lot of mental health problems, especially as a woman. I, I do think that you need to plan extra for that. Well, this
Malcolm Collins: is I think one of the biggest arguments for polygenic selection Yeah. Is a lot of people who have major depressive disorders or anxiety disorders these are the things that I have heard the technology being used for the most.
Yeah. Is ensuring that they do not pass major depression onto your kids. Yeah. People. Are out there imagining that itâs gonna be people like us selecting against autism or something. Weâre like, no, we donât select against autism. Like, or, or selecting against you know, some sort of like ethnicity or something.
And itâs like, no, itâs people who have gone through some sort of major psychological challenge in their own life who do not want to bring kids. To undergo because depression isnât like a cool, like, nobodyâs like, oh, theyâre, theyâre trying to genocide depress people. Everyone whoâs actually undergone like depression or anxiety or [00:19:00] something like that understands why you may not want your kids like, like that is an uncontroversial thing to not want to pass that down.
Simone Collins: Well, and, and hereâs the really tough thing is, is, is itâs one thing to deal with ongoing, like with postpartum depression and then with the anxiety of being a new parent like that, that you can kind of anticipate if thatâs. Already your tendency, itâs gonna happen to you as a new parent, especially âcause youâre under all this additional stress.
Yeah. Also dealing with that in your kid, like having it magnified in that way is really rough and like Yeah, theyâre depressed. And youâre depressed. Yeah. Super ready for that. Or you need to. You know, like do yeah. Try to reduce the odds of it happening in the first place. Something like polygenic risk or selection.
Malcolm Collins: But actually this is interesting because you have traits that people could contextualize negatively. Well, itâs not depression. You need an incredibly controlled environment or you become very stressed about things. Yeah. And that can be seen in the setup of our house and the way that we make decisions.
Simone Collins: Everything. But itâs also, itâs, itâs something that so cool. Iâve been able to, adapt with our children.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: So one, I donât think itâs maladaptive for a modern society, like actually itâs much, [00:20:00] itâs much easier for people like me to get by, so I donât think itâs, itâs like a, a bad thing to bring children in with those traits.
But like, it makes me as a parent really, you know, I, Iâm able to anticipate that in them and accommodate it. I take custom orders for everyoneâs dinner every night, like everyone gets to do a lot of things in their own special, unique way that they have to do them, because I know that thatâs how they need it to be.
And theyâll be happy as long as thatâs the case, and they are like, itâs good.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah,
Simone Collins: so number three, woman number three. Sheâs a 27-year-old in North Carolina, and sheâs a mother of a 1-year-old, and sheâs the most dark ending. She
Malcolm Collins: donât start there when youâre talking about kids. Come on.
Simone Collins: Oh, well, okay.
Yeah. And not, not, not Simone trigger dark meaning that like your child is getting hurt. Itâs actually the, the outcome is best for the children, but is still pretty dark for the child. She didnât want kids. She wrote, my husband and I met in middle school. He was always interested in having a big family, and I told him, I wasnât quite sure.
So already kind of a warning sign. Like, really, if, if youâre not into it, you know, itâs, itâs, you should get through that first. Before you, [00:21:00] you werenât
Malcolm Collins: into it either, and now youâre super
Simone Collins: No, but you, you convinced me. And I was like, yeah, Iâm all in. Based on the conditions. And that was it. We were all set.
I was 100% bought in. What happened to her though was she got a positive pregnancy test and sheâs like, well, I guess Iâm doing this. Her, her husband was like, I, I really, really, really want you to keep the baby. Like, I think she was even thinking about having. An abortion. Okay. She has a history like the others of depression and is now dealing, probably dealing with in her son, she wrote, my son has a low tolerance for frustration and doesnât communicate other than whining, screaming, crying, throwing things, and pulling my hair.
So again, like this is one of those things just to highlight
Malcolm Collins: that itâs how you contextualize it. But I mean, I guess you could say like, Octavian constantly climbing on me and hitting me and everything like that is like this horrible thing.
Simone Collins: Well, but you contextualize it positively. And thereâs an even better example with her in contextualization because she has.
She has body dysmorphia issues she wrote during pregnancy. I felt embarrassed. Iâve had body dysmorphia issues since I was a kid. I, and I felt so massive. I used to be a [00:22:00] track athlete and have always been fit and active, so I didnât like feeling so heavy and restricted when trying to do the things Iâve always done, like hiking.
During my third trimester, I didnât wanna leave the house so that people wouldnât see me. So she, like, I also have body dysmorphia. I hate the way Iâve looked. I, Iâve always. Hated my body, but like the way I contextualize pregnancy is like, well, all right, I am stuck in this body. Iâm resentful of it. Iâm going to like wear this thing into the ground.
Like it is the ultimate revenge of like, all right, well, weâre just gonna. Where like, you know, use it the full capacity until I literally break it until I break my uterus, until I break everything. Which is ultimately more satisfying for me than like getting a hysterectomy, which is the first thing I thought about doing before I met you.
And so there are ways to deal with these things. You, you could have body dysmorphia and respond like she did, or you could have body dysmorphia and respond like I did. And theyâre both ways you can deal with it, but I think weâre having a lot more fun with my method. So Iâm just saying like, contextualization is everything.
She also had a horrible birth experience. Iâm not gonna, I donât have to [00:23:00] describe it too. I can, I can read it, but like, I also have had horrible birth experiences and it sucks and I think that it.
Malcolm Collins: Well, you one I would say was all of this. You donât know. Some people just contextualize everything horribly.
Like,
Simone Collins: yeah, yeah.
Malcolm Collins: You, you know, whatever their experience is, itâs going to be a horrible experience because they have learned
Simone Collins: based on like, so her, her she had an epidural, but like it kept not working. I, I also, I didnât have an epidural and I, I was bad. Anyway,
Malcolm Collins: continue
Simone Collins: with the
Malcolm Collins: story,
Simone Collins: but they, they had to like.
Jump on her hip to make, dislodge him from like a place where he was stuck before he entered the birth canal or something. And she still felt pain from that. So it was, it was bad. It was like genuinely bad. It wasnât just her whining about it. Malcolm.
Malcolm Collins: Okay, continue.
Simone Collins: But yeah, she also, more importantly for her is she felt erased as a human being.
She wrote, I felt like I disappeared as a human being, clients. Called me mama. Friends and family asked me how my son was. They told me how excited and overjoyed I must be. I tried telling them I wasnât coping well with motherhood and was still [00:24:00] processing the birth, and they tell me thatâs what motherhood is.
One of my friends texted my husband, wow, sheâs changed and not in a good way. It came from a place of care. She and many friends and family told me I had postpartum depression to seek therapy and to go on medication, but at the same time, theyâd quickly flip it back to, you need to be there for your son.
Pick yourself up by move on. Itâs over with and done. Everything you went through is just like no big deal because the babyâs here. Your existence doesnât matter. And again, thatâs contextualization. And I think that one of the most toxic things about our modern society, and I I do think this has to do more with culture than it does with like preparing, is that the more you focus in on yourself and get into your head, the more miserable youâre gonna be.
So even if you wanna optimize for hedonic pleasure. Doing what sheâs doing is kind of like an exercise in frustration and suffering. And I mean, if, if sheâs such a miserable person, the idea that she would want to identify more with herself to me is so odd. You know, like you could just become more expansive and identify with [00:25:00] your family and enjoy the joys of a child, which is so
Malcolm Collins: interesting.
I mean, itâs, itâs, itâs.
You are supposed to stop being the point of your life. Yeah. Your kids are the point of your life, right? Like the, the focus shifts. And for somebody who adopted the urban monoculture, that can be horrifying because theyâre taught in this sort of atomized self being the most important thing. And this idea that you would sublimate that either in a marriage or through children is one of the most mortifying things they can imagine.
And yet we had already, I mean, when we got married. There was a period where we stayed more atomized at the beginning. I, I think you were really afraid of this idea of No, weâre just one person now.
Simone Collins: Yeah. I was much more hesitant around it than you were. I, I think also though, because women. One, lose more just traditionally than men do, like physically logistically, especially in the younger years, like to your point, [00:26:00] right, like Iâm doing most of the infant care, your life changes the least as we get new infant.
So women, women do feel like they have more to lose, especially in the early years, and they do. But also theyâve been uniquely conditioned to be like, no, donât ever give those things up. Itâs a bad thing if you give those things up. Whereas men. Have never really been told that.
Malcolm Collins: Actually, hold on, this could be like a whole other episode, but you could almost argue that feminism conceptually was fighting against.
The, the womanâs role as a mother that societal framing of a womanâs position like we, and, and, and you see the people who have fully adopted feminist framing, you even suggest, well, thatâs a womanâs role, and they freak out. Right?
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Well, and you can also argue, which I think is interesting, is that.
Women are so concerned about losing their identity, but men never had them. Like, men donât really get to be full men until they have their families and identify as their families, which is so weird. Whereas, like for women, they feel like they lose everything by getting their family, which is I think, a really interesting piece of tension and [00:27:00] interplay that you get with relationships.
Itâs not, itâs not what I would expect. But I, I, yeah. Now that, thatâs kind of, thatâs kind of occurring to me that like men, men arenât losing. Men. Men donât even get to be anything like an incel is nothing, they donât have an identity. They, they mean nothing in society. Thatâs
Malcolm Collins: actually a really interesting point.
Yeah. Men do not matter until theyâre married and, and then really until they have kids. Yeah. From a societal
Simone Collins: perspective and then sort of women kind of cease to, cease to, well, yeah. I donât know, like, not that they cease to matter, but they kind of recede into it and they feel like theyâre losing something, whereas men.
Feel like theyâre finally getting their identity. It, itâs a very weird thing.
Malcolm Collins: Thereâs a Well, and this is seeing that the, that the mother is lesser in the eyes of the urban monoculture
Simone Collins: uhhuh. Oh yeah. No, you, you definitely take a downgrade, a
Malcolm Collins: single
Simone Collins: woman.
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs the, the, the, weâve read other articles as women, like identifying as single, even when theyâre in a relationship because itâs seen as cooler or something.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Or identifying as a divorcee just to be
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Yeah. Even after she was remarried, [00:28:00] she still identified primarily as a divorcee.
Simone Collins: Yeah. My, my cache is in rejecting marriage actually. Speaking of which so she. A after withdrawing from fellow parents. âcause she just hated so much people identifying with their children.
Decided to leave her husband and actually her son too. She wrote, my husband and I are taking steps to separate and heâs willing to take on the role of a single parent, which makes me feel incredibly guilty. But I canât live this life with him anymore. Iâm not the parent my son needs. And I, one, I think itâs kind of based, like she actually isnât the parent of her son.
She, she seems to really hate it. And that would be not good for a kid to grow up around.
Malcolm Collins: Sheâs not the person anyone needs. She seems.
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. No, she, she, she seems genuinely, she, she needs to work on a lot of things and, and I donât think she can do that with her husband and her son. Also, like single dads statistically do really well.
So Iâm not worried for the kid and Iâm not worried for the husband. And, and I didnât read these parts, but the husband was also incredibly gung-ho about this kid really wanted to be a dad. Heâs super on board with being a single parent, so. But itâs still a [00:29:00] very dark ending, right? This is a woman who rejected parenting so much that sheâs literally just going to end it.
Sheâs not gonna be,
Malcolm Collins: I would say that kids. More broadly, and I, I really cannot make this point loudly enough, is I donât know what this kid is like, but like there are bad kids out there, right? Like, there are unpleasant kids. Iâve seen our kids, Iâve, Iâve seen our kids interact with âem. We, we have other kids who I, Iâve, Iâve like, oh my God, if that was my kid, Iâd like smother them in their sleep.
Like they, theyâre a, a net. Burden to society And I maybe,
Simone Collins: well, I, so you put it that way, but like in act, and so what this mother complained about was her son was not meeting the same developmental milestones that her peers children were and that he was in early intervention. Our kids have been in early intervention, our kids have been diagnosed with autism.
Our kids have gone through pretty extensive therapy. Like at first we were made to feel a lot of shame about that by some people in our. Family and stuff, but then
Malcolm Collins: Oh, no. And the wider,
Simone Collins: like, we ultimately realized like, oh no, youâre just messed up like we are. And like [00:30:00] we all get along really well here.
So I think, I donât know.
Malcolm Collins: But whatâs interesting to me as well is, and I think you make this point well, the things that she complains about are all things I notice in our kids and, and love. I love the way that theyâre vitalistic and crawl all over me and fight me and
Simone Collins: donât, yeah. And like weâre, weâre
Malcolm Collins: donât
Simone Collins: always about our kids not meeting the developmental milestones of
Malcolm Collins: like, when Iâve seen kids and I was just like.
Like the, the kids that have given me that, it, itâs interesting, theyâve always been like either like genetically obsequious you know, like very needy attention, wanting clearly like unsure of themselves. Itâs interesting that to me that would be like such a trigger in seeing a kid whoâs unsure of themselves and being like, Ugh, disgusting.
Or they, they, are
Simone Collins: timid and afraid. You canât, timid
Malcolm Collins: and afraid
Simone Collins: children that are timid and afraid.
Malcolm Collins: And thatâs like a big ick factor for me. And itâs interesting that I like, have kid icks like that. Iâve like,
Simone Collins: God,
Malcolm Collins: I now know what women mean when they say this. Right. You know, Iâm like, Ugh.
Like that Is [00:31:00] that, that, thatâs cringey to be around that. But our kids just donât have any of that. And I donât know how Iâd feel if we ever had a kid who was like that. But I, I also donât know how. You and I could produce a kid like that.
Simone Collins: Yeah, itâs, itâs unlikely. But I mean, you and I talk about this a lot and I donât know how much weâve talked about it on our podcast we have a little bit, but like.
If you do not like your partner or you do not like things about your partner, youâre gonna really struggle with your kids. âcause those kids are gonna exhibit those behaviors. Itâs gonna be really tough for you. Whereas if you love your partner, youâre gonna be crazy about your kids, at least if you are also a forgiving of your yourself.
And I think where I struggle most of our kids at times is when they exhibit behaviors that that. Bother me about myself, and I see that in them and Iâm like, oh no. But, but then seeing you show grace around that, I feel like youâre showing me grace and itâs just all over again. You show me how much you love me and
Malcolm Collins: I feel thereâs the other weird thing that Iâve, I talked to Simone about when I see her being a really loving mom to our kids, [00:32:00] and she is, sheâs a phenomenal mother. Like when I go down on a weekend, âcause she gets the kids first on weekends and she has, you know, made them all like individual dishes and, and musicâs playing and the kids are all roughhousing around and sheâs, you know, reading them a book or something and sheâs doing all these nice things for them and she does these things for them.
At least she tells me because, you know, she. Likes the kids, but somehow my brain doesnât register it as that. My brain, every time I see her being nice to the kids is seeing her going out of her way to do me a favor.
Simone Collins: Well, I mean, the, the kids are just like, I mean, not to sound spiritual or like emotional, but like the kids are fragments of our souls and theyâre, theyâre definitely little pocket Malcolms.
I see so much of them in you that Yeah, I mean, if, if you love your partner, youâre gonna love your kids. And thatâs, I mean, you can see this with, with these parents. I think that these mothers who really re regret becoming parents, I think are really also struggling with not just themselves. Itâs clear that they have self hatred [00:33:00] issues or depression or anxiety or all of those things.
But then theyâre also really struggling with your husband. And like, imagine what a nightmare that is. If you hate yourself, if you donât like your husband either, and now youâre alone with like a version of the two of you magnified and also pooping and you know, totally out of control like that. That sounds.
Yeah. Like a complete nightmare. And
Malcolm Collins: well, I also think another thing thatâs that, that weâve, weâve skirted on here, but I think itâs really important to drill into
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Is the role of contextualization in all of this.
Simone Collins: Yes, thatâs
Malcolm Collins: right. You know, we had reporters here today asking me about like when people were.
Dog piling us online for using corporal punishment with our kids and saying that weâre child abusers and everything like that. And like asking me like, do you feel? And I was like, no, I donât really feel bad about that. Like, I can choose how I can textualize these things that happen in my life. And when I was in that debate with Steven meu and he kept trying to get me to be like, well, look at these things your parents did.
Like you should reject them and condemn them. And I was like, I like who I am as an adult. Iâm not gonna condemn them. Like, itâs fine. Right?
Simone Collins: Yeah. The outcome was good. So,
Malcolm Collins: yeah. And I, I, [00:34:00] I realized that. Like at a pathological level, if you look at me and, and my outlook on life, I just choose not to contextualize things negatively, right?
Mm-hmm. And I, âcause I donât see any purpose in it, right? Like, it doesnât help me. Yeah. And society will reward you for contextualizing things negative because everybody wants a sob story. But if you can, you know, internally was in your family culture, steal yourself against that. You will just be like way happier with your life and way more productive.
And this is and I think for a lot of these people, itâs just a choice of negative contextualization, right? Yeah. Of things that happened to me and you and I contextual. And I never have, like, I never like made some deal with you around that you have to do this, but it seems like you have organically adopted this as well.
We
Simone Collins: organically did it. But what do you think about the idea of. Like we did with our relationship also doing stuff like this with parenting because it does seem to [00:35:00] be a really big deal breaker in life in. In a relationship that, that people do. I mean, we, we did some things like what will we do if our kids ask for porn?
What will we do if our kids misbehave? What religion will we make? But we didnât do it about parenting, logistics.
Malcolm Collins: The idea of parenting choices in a parenting contract.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: Being something you create before having kids is a failure.
Simone Collins: Really, I like the idea a failure.
Malcolm Collins: So
Simone Collins: why?
Malcolm Collins: Everything that would be in a parenting contract should be in the outset of the relationship, the relationship contract.
You should. Okay,
Simone Collins: thatâs fair. But like, instead of just looking at how relationships fail, also look it up. Parenting fails.
Malcolm Collins: Exactly. Thatâs
Simone Collins: okay. Okay. Okay. So we are on the same page. I was like, what are you talking about?
Malcolm Collins: And we had done all of that with our relationship contract.
Simone Collins: No, not all. No. What Iâm saying is all we did actually was.
Religion, porn and punishment. And like where we spend family holidays, we didnât do, those are
Malcolm Collins: core things [00:36:00] parenting
Simone Collins: wise. Yeah. Those are core things that relationships end over. But what we, we didnât do was like, you know, how are we gonna handle infants? Whatâs gonna happen? You know, if Iâm really injured in like pregnancy, whatâs, whatâs gonna happen?
Like. With you know, whoâs gonna do overnights, et cetera, like, whatâs gonna happen. Now, we did have an agreement on like, whatâs gonna happen if, if one person has to be a stay-at-home parent and it was gonna be you. But like, I donât know. I, I feel like we could have done more. I just, I want, my thing is I, again, I think this articleâs good.
I think people should be aware of what can go wrong, and I think people should plan for it as theyâre beginning the outset of a relationship. Do you agree?
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, it needs to be agreed at the outset of a relationship because the kids are ultimately the purpose of human relationships, sexual relationships, romantic relationships.
Simone Collins: Well, I mean, per our view, people are welcome to have different objective functions and decide to only do pairings based on
Malcolm Collins: No, no, no, no. Biologically, Iâm speaking here.
Simone Collins: Oh, biologically. Yeah. That
Malcolm Collins: is, that is why the [00:37:00] concept of a relationship evolved. That is why the institution of marriage evolved. That is why the institution of dating evolved.
It was to produce the next generation. It has been co-opted as a l rrp by, by other groups. But it is fundamentally thatâs what itâs about. Right? Yeah. Now obviously you know, now you can be like, well, does this mean that like. Gay people arenât really in a relationship. Itâs like, well actually that could change as science changes, right?
Like yeah. If, if, if they can you know, artificial wombs and have kids on their own. Yeah. Then even for them, right? If a faction of like, letâs say gay culture survives by making itself above repopulation rate was most of the cultures that are above repopulation rate being very you know, homophobic, transphobic, et cetera but if some faction of, of, of a gay culture finds out how to make it.
Self stable through science from the perspective of that faction of gay culture? Yeah. Relationships will still be about kids. Theyâll still be about forming a stable household to bring the [00:38:00] kids into.
Simone Collins: I actually, I think of what Iâve seen of gay parent social media influencers they may actually be in a better position coming into this âcause they are approaching parenting from a more.
Thoughtful and first principles approach because instead of just being like, oh, I guess weâre just gonna default to like the gender norms or whatever.
Malcolm Collins: Well, and you know, huge bonus they donât have to be married to a woman.
Simone Collins: Yeah, but also like if itâs two women they, they still, you know,
Malcolm Collins: okay, Iâll, Iâll, Iâll put it this way, of the gay parenting influencers.
Yeah. I see a lot of wholesome male, male partners. I do not see many wholesome female, female, gay parenting influencers.
Simone Collins: Thereâs thereâs one that I watch a lot. They just had a, well, not just, but they recently had twins after having one boy and they talk about it a lot. Sheâs, sheâs I mean like both of them show up on the podcast, but she does a lot of like, just cultural commentary.
I canât remember her name now, but sheâs a, a disabled ginger vintage fashion wearing. Woman whose, whose [00:39:00] look I love, I love her look. And
Malcolm Collins: Iâm disabled.
Simone Collins: She talks a lot about her disability. Other, I wouldnât say that if it werenât like part of her identity. âcause otherwise that would seem like Iâm, I donât know, trying to shame her or
Malcolm Collins: a weird thing to talk about, you know?
Simone Collins: Yeah. But no, she, she grew up with like crippling pain issues and, and like, I think sheâs partially deaf perhaps, or something like that. But then, yeah, sheâs a, just always think of that Everest news clip to the top of Everest. But heâs gay. I mean, heâs gay. I mean, heâs blind.
Speaker: Right after the break, weâre gonna interview Eric Weihenmayer, who climbed the highest mountain in the world, Mount Everest. But heâs gay. I mean, heâs gay... Excuse me, heâs blind. So weâll hear about that coming up. Okay. As we head to the break, a look at the s-
Simone Collins: Sheâs both, sheâs both deaf and gay.
So maybe she just needs to climb Everest and finally fulfill the prophecy. But anyway, the
Malcolm Collins: most disabled person to ever do a thing. But so you think that they, they, that she comes across as like wholesome.
Simone Collins: Very, no, no, no. Like [00:40:00] theyâre, I mean, tired as being a parent of, of twins, but like, thatâs kind of normal when you have like young twins and everything and like, they had a complicated pregnancy and everything and they shared a lot about it openly.
And I like, I like that people do that. But yeah, theyâve, theyâve I think very intentionally thought through, you know, how theyâre gonna balance things and how theyâre gonna manage. And I like that. So, you know, thatâs the, the great thing about. When you the, the problem, and this is something we talk a lot about in the practice guide to relationships, is that when people donât explicitly negotiate terms in a relationship, each person is going off a social contract.
Now that makes sense if you grow up in some medieval fiefdom where everyone has lived with the same culture in isolation for hundreds of years. But when you live in our culture and everyone is dealing with a slightly different tat. Social contract, you, youâll get into a marriage and like one person expects like one set of things and the other person expects a totally different set of things.
And then itâs this huge shock when youâre not on the same page.
Malcolm Collins: What, what I find so funny is you know, I, I have to choose my words because thereâs different factions in [00:41:00] our audience. And the ways the different factions relate to ideal marriage set setups. Like thereâs a huge chunk of like the online right, where when weâre talking about like a single father raising a kid, theyâre like, thatâs awesome.
Thatâs the only way to raise kids, and it can be a great
Simone Collins: way to raise kids.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Yeah.
Simone Collins: The faction, like, you could never raise kids without a mother and a
Malcolm Collins: father on the, on the men who are doing this, and theyâre like, thatâs great. And then weâre like in. And now you have the, these male, male partnerships where theyâre raising kids.
Oh, thatâs awesome. And then the other faction is like, no, traditional familyâs all the way, you know, the kids need a mother.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: And weâre just like, whatever. It works like. Well,
Simone Collins: I think a big thing, some people have actually asked us to do a podcast on this. Thereâs the famous Olympic ice skater who is the, daughter one, one of five via IVF to a single Chinese father who chose all like Caucasian Jewish women for the egg donors. And itâs just this very like, very great example of like, a, a a based single dad just being like, yeah, Iâm gonna like raise five [00:42:00] children via IVF and theyâre all gonna be exceptional and amazing.
And he, he has this like Olympic gold medal winner. Whoâs like super cool as a person too, by the
Malcolm Collins: way. Oh, really? One of his kids became an Olympic gold medal.
Simone Collins: Yeah, no, she was like one of the most talked about and famous people in the entire Winter Olympics. I donât know how you missed this. Sheâs super cool.
Malcolm Collins: Did she fight for China team or America team?
Simone Collins: I think she was on Chinaâs team. But yeah. Anyway, IVF. Did dad, Chinese chose Caucasian egg donor, so sheâs like mixed.
Malcolm Collins: Thatâs a, thatâs a pretty good mix. We did the episode on average racial attractiveness. And Asian White, from the perspective of many ethnicities is the top attractiveness ethnic group.
Simone Collins: Yes. With us concluding that the holy grail is Japanese Irish, which many of our viewers have come to agree with,
Malcolm Collins: what was it? I, I think it was that white people marked them as even more attractive than other white people and generally groups. Yeah.
Simone Collins: And then just anecdotally, like people have sent actually pictures of like their Japanese Irish friends and thereâs like [00:43:00] just impossibly, you know, beautiful.
So, who knew? But there you go. But yeah. Okay. Well, yeah, anyway, Iâm glad the New York Times is, is doing this series and I, I think that, being thoughtful and not sugarcoating things is important. So. There we go. Well, did
Malcolm Collins: they, any, any other choice quotes from the article or just
Simone Collins: No, just these, these are deeply sad women.
It, itâs mostly a very depressing article.
Malcolm Collins: Well, I actually think the bigger takeaway is the toxicity of environments like, you know, regretful parents where people are like, oh, these people affirm you, but you shouldnât be affirmed for wallowing in this stuff. Right? Like, thatâs only gonna make things worse for you, even if youâre really experiencing it.
Simone Collins: Oh. Although, I donât know, I, I feel conflicted about that because these women were also surrounded by people who said exactly that and who were like. Man, like stop wallowing, like snap out of it. Like be positive, think about your kids. Like, enjoy the things they enjoy and it just, that didnât work for them.
So as much as I can empathize with your marriage, I also, also, sorry, sorry. With your, with your message. I canât, it didnât work [00:44:00] and I like things that work. So. I donât know what to say to that. Like, I, I, the, and unfortunately I donât have a solution for women who once they get in this position aside from like, Hey, maybe you can contextualize this a little bit differently.
I think the only real solution is to head off these problems before they become problems. Unfortunately, like thereâs no saving. The ones who have already come to regret becoming parents is only saving the future parents, which is not convenient, but thatâs how I feel. So it goes. Anyway, I love you. Iâm gonna make you Bullock tonight with the mozzarella cheese, and if the mozzarella cheese doesnât look good, weâre doing cheddar instead.
Malcolm Collins: The mozzarella cheese will be good. Itâs only like a week and a half old.
Simone Collins: Look, if thereâs mold on mozzarella cheese, because it is a soft cheese, it just goes all the way through. You canât cut it off. Like you donât really know where it ends, the veins of those. So itâs not considered safe when itâs a hard cheese, you can cut off the, the mold and youâre, youâre more, itâs like easier to safely do.
But Iâm not, Iâm not doing that. If your mozzarella cheese looks off, I donât wanna, I donât wanna kill you weirdly. [00:45:00]
Malcolm Collins: Well, you are my wife.
Simone Collins: Right? So
Malcolm Collins: itâs one of these things where everyoneâs always like, your wife could die having a kid. And Iâm like, and thatâs, thatâs like a big problem for me. âcause now Iâve got five in kids that Iâm raising alone.
Right? Like I would much rather, when I think of one of us dying. Like, thatâs the one who got out of the hardship, right? Like thatâs the, thatâs the if, if I died at any point in the next few years I, I, I feel like I, I, I screwed over Simone, right? Like I got the easy out. Sheâs got the hard dealing with five kids.
Simone Collins: Youâre not allowed to die. Look, you just. Youâre not allowed to die until we have all of our kids are set up and thriving. Then. Then like we can go whenever we want, but you gotta hold on. Until then, Octavian like rediscovered his mortality. Yesterday as we were driving back from the doctor, heâs like, wait, Iâm gonna die.
And Iâm like, yeah, thatâs why you need to be careful with how you spend your time. And heâs like, hold on, wait. Actually, and Iâm like, yeah, dude, youâre gonna die. And Iâm [00:46:00] like, youâre not res responding. And he is like, whoa,
Malcolm Collins: whoa.
Simone Collins: Itâs, itâs kind of hard for kids to discover that they, they, they donât re respond because thatâs,
Malcolm Collins: thatâs an interesting thing to discuss with first time
Simone Collins: metaphysically.
Like,
Malcolm Collins: yeah, youâre eventually gonna die.
Simone Collins: Yeah, now, now heâs aware of it that I was like, youâve got like probably considering modern science like about a hundred years. Heâs like, oh, okay, whatever. Like, thatâs a lot of time. You know, when like one day for them is eternity. So heâs not too worried about it yet, thank goodness.
But he is like, also, I donât want you to, thatâs like, thatâs toasty wave saying I love you by the way. You know how heâs always like, I love you and I donât want you to die. Because theyâve heard me so many times being like, please stop jumping off the bed. Like, please stop doing all these things. I donât want you to die.
And they just think that thatâs like this generic way of expressing fondness when Iâm really like, no, please stop trying to kill yourself. Like, oh. Anyway, I I love you and I donât want you to die. [00:47:00] Bye.
Malcolm Collins: All right. We gonna join the meetup for fans.
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. Iâm
Malcolm Collins: looking for, do you have people filming? You still Uhhuh.
Okay.
Speaker 4: Are we going deep into the jungle, guys? Yeah, are we digging in the jungle? Is this a jungle or woods? This is a wood. It looks jungle. Oh, huh? It looks like it. It looks like it. And thatâs called a temperate rainforest, guys.
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 - Laat meer zien
