Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Collins

Should you lie to your kids about Santa Claus? Malcolm and Simone Collins argue YES — and not doing so robs children of the magic, wonder, and crucial life lessons that come with a mythical childhood.In this episode, they dive into:* Why “never lying” to kids creates toxic blind trust in authority* How their family builds an elaborate world of Krampus, Tommy Knockers, alive toys, slide eaters, and superhero dads* The developmental need for scary stories, monsters, and survival play* How Santa perfectly teaches kids that sometimes the entire world (media, government, schools) can push the same “lie”* Why stripping away fantasy leaves childhood gray and boringPlus adorable bonus audio of their kids asking about Daddy’s battle helmet from the “future war” against Krampus’s communist demon army.If you’re a pronatalist parent who wants richer, more magical family traditions — this one’s for you. Merry Christmas and happy Future Day planning!Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. It’s exciting to be here with you today. Today we are going to be doing two things. We’re gonna be talking about why you should lie to your children about Santa Claus. Yes. It was always that parent, and I swear to God, and they act like they’re taking the moral high ground when they’re talking about this.Oh. Which is, I don’t, I don’t believe in ever lying to my children. Right. And you’re just like,Simone Collins: Ugh. What Bores No.Malcolm Collins: No. But I also think that, that they haven’t thought through the disservice they do to their children.Speaker 3: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: I think it is I’m not gonna say child abuse. But it, it certainly you know, in that sort of territory for meSimone Collins: they’re wronging their children of a very young facet of childhood, a magical childhood.We’llMalcolm Collins: talk about that. But we’re also gonna go into some studies on Santa Claus. And unfortunately I couldn’t find any. What I really wanted was a study on kids who were grown up believing and not believing in Santa Claus. Yeah.Simone Collins: There’s nothing on that. [00:01:00]Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm. At least no one’s ever found any significant differences.Speaker 3: Hmm.Malcolm Collins: Interesting. First sort of the, the central layout of the argument here. Right.Simone Collins: Alright.Malcolm Collins: The argument from the other side that I often hear is, well, and, and I think it’s important to remember whenever you’re dealing with a situation like this, you need to deal with the potential benefits. Versus drawbacks of both sides.Speaker 3: Yes, absolutely. I thinkMalcolm Collins: that both sides can pretend like there are literally zero benefits on the other side, which I think is just false, right? It is between the benefits and drawbacks that both sides give you, which are more benefits to drawbacks, right.Speaker 3: Yes,Malcolm Collins: in terms of child development, in terms of cultural transference, in terms of building good values, a healthy view of the world, and getting a full and complete childhood.So, the people who say, I would never lie to my kids about anything the perspective they’re taking is they want [00:02:00] the kid to feel as if there is. Some form of authority that will never betrayal.General, they want the kid to have some form of like, they won’t be able to fully emotionally trust them. If the kid know that there was ever a time in that kid’s life where they systemically misrepresented first of all, first of all, this actually almost feels kind of psychotic to me.So I’ll explain it why in, in a few steps here. Okay. Where I don’t even see this as a, as a positive. So first, when your kid leaves you and the home and goes out into the world, the, the blindly trusting authority is a very, very negative trait to have.Simone Collins: Absolutely. It’s notMalcolm Collins: a good thing to teach your kid.Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, because we’re constantly being lied to as adults. How can you not teach that to children? That’s bad.Malcolm Collins: But worse than that it, it’s doing it in [00:03:00] favor because the parent will say, well, I want them to be able to trust me at least, right? Like me, the caregiver, me, the person who is, is there for them.Oh, please. The problem with this mindset is. You are trying to make it, which, which, and I’ll explain where this becomes like really twisted and almost sort of brainwashy so that everything you say to your kid is true, but that is not the case. A lot of what you say is going to be based on your opinions and your perceptions.Mm-hmm. And you never know how crazy you actually are.Simone Collins: Yeah. Like you may believe that processed food is poison. But to other people, that’s an overt lie. And the, the kids may see that as a lie and see you as someone who lied to them. And if you, if you believe or convince yourself that you’ve told them nothing but the truth, you’re going to look like a liar eventually.You’re not gonna look like aMalcolm Collins: liar. You’re gonna look like you are somebody who attempted to brainwash your kids into believing anything you told them. Mm. And that’s a really weird relationship [00:04:00] to have with your children. Like your children should doubt the things you say because you are not going to always be right.And this relationship where at least with me, they know that they can always trust me to be right. I don’t like that at all. I think that’s really toxic.It’s like these people are actively attempting to raise the delightful children from down the lane.Malcolm Collins: But then let’s talk about , the positives, like why you want to lie to your kids about Santa Claus. And this actually comes to a. Larger relationship we have with our kids because we don’t just have Santa Claus in our family.For example, my kids. And in my son’s world. So my son is at school today and in my kid’s world yesterday, Krampus came down and was scratching at their door because they had tried to hide some of their not iPad like tablets that they were watching in their bed to watch at night. And so then they got scared and then daddy came downstairs with the, the sword behind me here that they, they believe is.A magical [00:05:00] sword that I used to fight off Krampus. And when I come downstairs this morning my oldest son is like, huh, Krampus got what was coming to him, right? He goes, he should have known better than to mess with the Collins family. And then he gives me like a high five for like a high five and he just loves it.And then toast. You wanted to come up and give me a high five. Because Krampus was destroyed. And then after that they went to go check on a toter row that they had in a little glass jar to see if he had moved. It was a little toy, but they wanted to see if the toy had tried to escape, and then they got worried that the toy would try to escape.So then daddy had to walk over and cast a magic spell of protection on the jar. Yeah. To keep the toy inate. And then the middle kid became upset because I cast a spell, but I didn’t have a cape on. And so we had to explain how capes worked and whether daddy was a superhero or not. And I explained to them, I go, that’s why the reporters [00:06:00] always come to our house is because I’m a superhero.And then he goes, well, can you fly? And we went through all the superheroes who didn’t fly. And I was like, so to become a superhero, you have to become really smart and you’ve gotta study a lot and you’ve gotta, you know, and so in their, theirs is actually a world where when they look out from our house at night, there are krampuses hiding when they go to the woods where the swamp is, there’s witches in the woods.Right? And as we point out historically, this is why witches lived in swamps, because you don’t want your kids going into the swamp. That’s why a witch lives in earth. In the swamp, the, the, the one of the ghouls that they talk about the most, that they believe lives in their house. Or theSimone Collins: the Tommy Knockers.Malcolm Collins: Tommy, the Tommy Knockers, and theySimone Collins: live in a cave down, well, an old mine shaft down one of the pathways that you can get to from our house. And they, they’re like, oh, that’s where the Tommy Knockers are.Malcolm Collins: And they’ll tell other people about it. Like, we’ll be walking by the mine shaft and they’ll tell, and they’ll be like,Simone Collins: watch out for the Tommy Knockers.You better walk, watch. People are always. Soak and they’re like, [00:07:00] okay, okay. Yeah, sure.Malcolm Collins: And everybody just innately goes along with it. The one that they’ve gotten into more recently too from the internet is one is six. Se the six seven boy. The six seven he spa behind trees. Yeah. He thought he saw a six seven Boy.In toasty bed, which was like a dark figure of a child who is scary and he thought he saw his hand reaching into his bed. And so, I told him that the Six seven Boy comes if you watch bad YouTube shows that are not good for your brain. And so now he’s afraid of watching bad YouTube channels.But we also talk about how to like ward off the Six Seven Boy and how to, and the other one is, is eaters. There’s all sorts of eaters in the world. There’s train eaters and slide eaters and house eaters. And what I’ve learned is I think a, an eater is like a normal object, like a, a train or a house.Mm-hmm. But if you go into it, it will eat you.Yeah. And so you’ve got to, and I, I think this comes from the category of, of YouTube videos eaters, because I’ve, I’ve seen them, right? Like the [00:08:00] YouTube, whatever.Simone Collins: It’s, so yeah. How these memes emerge. I’ve yet to see a YouTuber do an expose on the eater meme.Malcolm Collins: Have you searched?Simone Collins: I, I, should I? Yeah, I haven’t, I haven’t. I will search action date now. SearchMalcolm Collins: now? Yeah. But anyway the, the, the point here being is that if our kids are imagining something, be it a six, seven kid or eaters or if they’re

Dive into a thought-provoking discussion on the dramatic shift in U.S. national security strategy. Simone and Malcolm Collins break down the recent changes in American foreign policy, exploring how the U.S. is moving away from its traditional role as “world police” and adopting a more pragmatic, self-interested approach.In this episode, you’ll learn:What the new U.S. national security strategy means for America’s relationships with Europe, Russia, China, and other global playersWhy the U.S. is prioritizing sovereignty, border security, and domestic interests over global interventionHow these changes impact alliances, migration, trade, and the future of international cooperationThe philosophical and cultural shifts driving this new era in American geopoliticsWhether you’re interested in politics, international relations, or just want to understand the forces shaping our world, this conversation offers clear insights and lively debate.Simone outlined this episode, so links and basic points are below and you’ll find the episode transcript at the end. :)Based Camp - A Shift in US National SecurityThe GistThe days of Team America: World Police are over; we’ve gone from “America, F Yeah” to “America: Don’t look at me ask Qatar.”In November, the Trump Administration released a new national security strategy that is… pretty based* It reframes the EU from partner to “problem”* It insists countries need to handle their own problems* It makes redditors mad: When prompted to explain the new strategy release, they said things like:* “the eu is in Putin’s way. The US is currently in the habit of agreeing with Putin on everything, word for word. Also, the leader of the US is making a lot of noise to distract from being the name mentioned the most on those ‘trump files from epstein’s pedophile island” that everyone that isn’t on the list wants released. This is a good distraction.”* “The EU didn’t allow Trump’s shady real estate businesses. So there are no Trump Towers here. He is now making deals with Hungary and other right wing led countries to finally get a foot on EU soil. But as for business opportunities, he is rather friends with russians and arabs who flatter him as much as they can.”* Quotes from the document:* “Our elites badly miscalculated America’s willingness to shoulder forever global burdens to which the Ameri\can people saw no connection to the national interest”* “The days of the United States propping up the entire world order like Atlas are over”* “We will assert and enforce a “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine”* “[Europe’s] economic decline is eclipsed by the real and more stark prospect of civilizational erasure”* “We want Europe to remain European, to regain its civilizational self-confidence, and to abandon its failed focus on regulatory suffocation.”* “[America’s goal is] cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations”THE US IS SHIFTING FROM HELICOPTOR PARENTING TO F AROUND AND FIND OUT PARENTING!! YES!!!!But in all seriousness, we as citizens—and we’d argue that all people—should probably be aware of what this shift in strategy entails, so let’s get into itWhat is Changing About US Strategy? In what way does this strategy represent a shift from the United States’ national security strategy up to this point?* Replaces global “rules‑based order” and democracy‑promotion language with a much narrower definition of U.S. interests focused on sovereignty, borders, and domestic strength rather than universal values.* Elevates the Western Hemisphere to top priority, making migration, drugs/cartels, and China’s regional footprint the central threats, instead of putting great‑power competition with China/Russia and the Indo‑Pacific or Europe at the core.* Treats mass migration itself as a primary national security threat and justifies using military force, including cross‑border strikes on cartels, as a routine tool of hemispheric enforcement—far beyond prior strategies’ law‑enforcement and humanitarian framing.* Downshifts the Middle East from central theater to secondary concern, framing it mostly in terms of energy markets and transactional deals, in contrast to decades of “war on terror” and regime‑change or stabilization ambitions.* Reorients alliances and Europe policy around burden‑sharing, trade balances, and “Western identity,” openly criticizing European migration and regulatory policies instead of emphasizing cohesive liberal institutions and shared democratic values.* Places economic nationalism at the heart of security, prioritizing tariffs, re‑shoring, and industrial policy over support for multilateral trade regimes that earlier strategies still treated as broadly beneficial for U.S. power.* De‑emphasizes international law and the “rules‑based international order,” signaling more transactional, case‑by‑case cooperation and fewer self‑imposed constraints on U.S. action than in Obama‑era and Biden‑era documents.What is Shifting About the United States’ Relationship with the EU? * Signals a much more adversarial and instrumental approach to the EU than previous U.S. documents. * Shows less deference to EU institutions* Puts more direct pressure on EU internal politics* Sets stricter conditions on U.S. security guarantees.​How it changes cooperation with the EU* Frames the EU less as a core partner and more as a problem case, depicting it as economically stagnant and facing “civilizational” decline because of migration and regulation.​* Calls for “cultivating resistance” to the EU’s current trajectory by encouraging and working with Eurosceptic or “patriotic” parties and governments inside member states, rather than primarily channeling relations through Brussels.​* GREAT way to handle dealings with feckless and broken bureaucracies* Links U.S. security commitments more tightly to European burden‑sharing, expecting Europe to assume “primary responsibility” for its own conventional defense while the U.S. acts mainly as a nuclear backstop and focuses elsewhere.​Makes support more transactional: emphasizes trade concessions, action against China’s economic practices, and higher defense spending as conditions for close partnership, instead of assuming automatic solidarity based on shared liberal values.​Signals reduced enthusiasm for NATO expansion and more skepticism about long‑term alignment with European states whose demographics and policies diverge from Washington’s preferences, challenging the previous consensus on open‑ended enlargement and cohesion.​Are New Allies Surfaced?It clearly elevates some alliances and de‑prioritizes others, with a new emphasis on partners in the Western Hemisphere and selected “like‑minded” but not necessarily liberal governments elsewhere.​Western Hemisphere partners* The document defines a strategy of “Enlist and Expand” in the Western Hemisphere, prioritizing “regional champions” that will help the U.S. block migration, fight cartels, and secure supply chains.​* It signals that such hemispheric partners could receive more U.S. troops, security assistance, and economic integration than many traditional allies outside the region.​Alliances of “illiberals”* Analysts note that the strategy implicitly favors governments aligned with U.S. nationalist and conservative priorities—even if they are not liberal democracies—over some traditional Western European elites.​* This hints at deeper political‑values alignment with certain Central/Eastern European, Latin American, Middle Eastern, and Asian leaders who share its stance on migration, culture, and sovereignty.​Traditional allies and Asia* The document still names NATO and Indo‑Pacific allies (Japan, South Korea, Australia) as important, but conditions close cooperation on higher defense spending and tougher economic policies toward China.​* It also gestures toward a de facto great‑power tier with the U.S., China, and Russia as the key shapers of order, implying that many other states will be treated more as swing partners or sub‑regional allies than as full strategic peers.​Does This Change Our Stance vis a vis Conflicts? TaiwanWhat the strategy actually says* It elevates “deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch” to a stated priority, and calls for the ability to deny aggression anywhere in the First Island Chain, including Taiwan.​* It reaffirms the “longstanding declaratory policy” of not supporting unilateral changes to the status quo in the Taiwan Strait, rather than introducing a new formal commitment to defend Taiwan.​Expected U.S. moves before any invasion* Accelerate military buildup and posture with Japan and other allies (more forces, long‑range fires, maritime and air assets) to make a successful invasion or blockade militarily unattractive for Beijing.​* Expand arms sales, training, and coordination with Taiwan to strengthen a “denial” strategy (asymmetric defenses, resilience, and joint planning) while pressing allies to spend more and do more around the First Island Chain.​If China actually invaded* The logic of the strategy points toward trying to deny a successful takeover through combined U.S. and allied military action—especially air and naval operations in and around the Strait—rather than accepting a fait accompli.​* At the same time, the document’s emphasis on avoiding great‑power war and on allies “stepping up” suggests Washington would seek to share risk and burden heavily with Japan and others, and might calibrate its own direct use of force to manage escalation, rather than treating intervention as automatic or unlimited.Israel and PalestineRole of the Middle East overall* States that the Middle East is no longer a primary strategic focus, arguing that energy and “forever wars” no longer justify region‑wide prioritization.​* Nonetheless lists “ensuring that Israel remains secure” and protecting energy flows and shipping lanes as continuing U.S. interests, so involvement remains but with narrower aims.​Likely approach to Isr

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins in this lively episode of Based Camp as they dive deep into Abigail Thorn’s (Philosophy Tube) latest video, “Why the Thought of Having Kids Freaks Me Out.” From a pronatalist perspective, they unpack Thorn’s arguments on demographic collapse, trans identity as a potential social contagion, global crises like Gaza, misinformation on birth control, and the entitlement of expecting societal “reparations” without contributing through parenthood. With humor, sharp critiques, and counterpoints rooted in cultural innovation, legacy, and family values, the Collinses explore why Thorn’s philosophy might reveal more about internal conflicts than solid reasoning. Whether you’re into philosophy, trans representation in pronatalism, or just love a good debate, this episode challenges urban monoculture norms and champions innovative approaches to family-building. Don’t miss their personal anecdotes, Shakespeare sonnet showdowns, and a nod to ContraPoints!Episode Outline & LinksThe GistPhilosophy Tube did a two-parter on our turf in that she covered demographic collapse and having kids* In the first part, titled “You’re Wrong About Birth Rates & Aging Populations” Philosophy Tube explored demographic collapse* We did an episode on it.* In this second video, she covered “Why The Thought of Having Kids Freaks Me Out”* Strange Aeons and Vivian Wilson (Elon Musk’s trans child) make appearances (among others)* Obviously we have to cover this too. Having kids is kind of our thing.* In general, I think that with this video, Philosophy Tube is trying bring some trans representation to the surging debate about pronatalism and demographic collapse* And while I had hoped we might be presented with some innovative, interesting proposals, especially involving advanced reprotech* Instead, we are presented with an astounding level of entitlemenet—like, take the normal level of urban monoculture entitlement (i.e. how dare you suggest I give up vacations and takeout to have kids) and amp it up to a new level (literally: forget contributing to society through well-raised children; I deserve reparations for the state not funding my gender transition)Let’s get into it!Philosophy Tube’s Video EssayThe dramatic bit of the video is that for much of it Philosophy Tube dresses as a mermaid as an analogy to being trans and pontificates from a giant clamshell.To put it diplomatically, the video ultimately legitimizes choosing not to have children while also critiquing the systems that make parenthood feel terrifying or impossible for many who might otherwise want it.Right off the bat, the focus is on philosophy (fair, because this is Philosophy Tube) and not brass tacks. Thorn references Why Have Children? The Ethical Debate, a Book by Christine Overall, and also points people to explore David Benatar’s work.She leans heavily on a UN report when exploring people’s reasons for not having babiesShe explores the following factors on the yes/no-to-kids spectrum:* Global crises and worries about the future* Philosophy Tube connects fears about having kids to global crises such as war (especially Gaza) and the targeting or dehumanization of marginalized groups, including trans and autistic people, which makes the idea of raising a child feel unsafe or ethically fraught.* Climate change* She discounted this as a factor as it’s not up to her* But she cites that people are concerned about their carbon footprints* Fun aside: She indicated that BP ultimately introduced the concept of carbon footprint; she says BP paid hundreds of millions of dollars to popularize the concept* Misinformation* She argues people are being misinformed about birth control and becoming pregnant by mistake after being scared off of taking birth control* She decries anti-vaccine rhetoric coming out of the Trump Administration* The future* Concerns about unemployment, housing, and cost.* Philosophy Tube notes that even though she lives in the UK, access to services she would need to use (e.g. IVF in order to have kids as a trans woman)* Moral obligation* How many religious groups feel a religious imperative to have kids* The idea of having a moral obligation to have kids if you don’t want one [BAD BAD IDEA], e.g. Jews after the Holocaust ought to have children even if they didn’t want them* The idea that having kids pays for the elder care of one’s country’s citizens, so one is obligated to have kids* Philosophy Tube sees other people’s kids subsidizing her health care in old age is “reparations” because she is trans and the government does not pay for all the gender transition care (i.e. she and other trans people deserve to be paid for in old age despite not having kids and through them paying into the system because they did not get the gender transition care they wanted the government to payroll)* As Philosophy Tube puts it in the episode: “you’re goddamn right breeders are going to be paying for my retirement.”* Enjoyment* “By no means guaranteed”* Legacy* Lackluster desire to pass on genes* Philosophy Tube notes that her career and acting legacy can’t be passed on, so that’s a point against having kids* Notes that trans identity cannot be genetically passed on* Refers to Sonnet No. 2 as a steelman but COMPLETELY overlooks Sonnet 18, which also neutralizes the acting legacy argument, too!Talks about “Castration Movie”* A movie about horrible trans people in which the protagonist, Traps, struggles with the knowledge that kids will no longer be possible due to gender-transition-driven infertility* I think Philosophy Tube uses this essay to:* Be supportive of other transgender media efforts* Emphasize a major throughline in the essay about how gender norms shape expectations around motherhood and fatherhood, and how trans and queer people can feel especially conflicted about these roles.What Philosophy Tube Misses About Why People Don’t Have Kids* The absence of the economic benefit of having kids* The importance of establishing an objective function* Culture* People starting laterWhy Philosophy Tube Did ThisShe is not actually seriously considering kids because:* It’s too expensive, especially for someone who is trans* “The world is dangerous”I think ultimately it comes down to Abby Thorne just valuing other things, and a key element of the essay is indeed recognition that “I just don’t want to” is a valid reason not to have children, and that people who don’t want kids should not feel pressured into it.What I think this is all about:* I think she feels insecure about not having kids and that insecurity was worked out in this two-part series* I feel fairly confident this is the case because in my pre-Malcolm state, when presented with the issue, I would have been like: “Hey, good for the families who want kids; they should do them—I have nothing to do with this.”What Does This Reveal About Why People Transition?People often turn to academic research to determine why people transition and whether they’re transitioning for “genuine reasons” (e.g. ‘I am a man born in a woman’s body’) or due to social contagion.For example: A new study of 957 detransitioners in the U.S. and Canada that identifies four distinct patterns of why people detransition and how they feel about their transitions, then reflects on what this implies for social contagion, detransition politics, and trans health normsInterrupted Gender Transitions and Detransitions in the USA and CanadaPublished: 05 November 2025* The study used latent class analysis on survey data from people who had stopped, shifted, or reversed a gender transition (or wanted to but could not), recruited widely online and through LGBTQ+/gender clinics. It identifies four groups: “satisfied” detransitioners, coerced detransitioners, “complicated cases,” and “regretters,” each with different reasons for detransition, mental health profiles, and demographic patterns* In this study’s sample of people who interrupted or reversed a gender transition, the most typical profile was someone assigned female at birth (AFAB), often still identifying as transgender or gender diverse, whose detransition was closely tied to mental health factors and changes in gender self-identity.* In this sample, the single most commonly endorsed broad reason for detransition was mental health–related factors and changes in self-identity, which together defined the largest latent class (Class A, 316 of 957 participants)Ultimately, people detransition for all sorts of reasons and the article is not a strong “gotcha” for anyone in terms of damning evidence, HOWEVER, I think Philosophy Tube’s video is a stronger gotcha for the cultural contagion hypothesis for the rise in gender transition.Episode TranscriptSimone Collins: Hello Malcolm. I’m excited to be with you today because Philosophy Tube did a two-parter on our turf pun intended topic Yes. About demographic collapse and having kids in the, in the first part, titled You’re Wrong About Birth Rates and Aging Populations which we covered in a separate episode.Philosophy two AKA Abigail Thorn. Did an an episode on demographic apps and. Then she ended it with like this whole skid about how I’m pregnant. And now here’s the second part, and it’s about having kids. And,Malcolm Collins: and, and why, what what, what I found so interesting is, so this episode comes out Yeah. I.I could not bring myself to watch it. I found the first one so intolerable but I really wanted to know what happens in it. So I’m so glad I have Simone to regale me. But the funniest thing is, is so she watches it. The day that she watches it, she goes to me, ‘cause we’re doing our walk and talk that day, and she goes, oh my god.She [00:01:00] basically admits that being trans is a social contagion in this episode without realizing it. Because she interviews a bunch of other people about this. .Simone Collins: I was just surprised by how she took out the big odds with this. Like, strange Aons makes an appearance and I’m like, oh Go

In this thought-provoking episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the complexities of multiculturalism, high-trust societies, and the challenges that arise when diverse cultures interact within a single system. Malcolm shares his updated views on multiculturalism, exploring historical and modern examples—from the Victorian Empire to contemporary South Africa and the United States. The conversation covers topics like in-group preferences, the evolution of cultural trust, the impact of immigration, and the unintended consequences of social safety nets.The hosts discuss how cultural backgrounds shape our moral frameworks, using analogies from classic cartoons like Bugs Bunny to illustrate differences in ethical perspectives. They also examine the pitfalls of trying to recreate homogenous societies in today’s interconnected world, and why some strategies that worked in the past may no longer be effective.Whether you’re interested in sociology, politics, or just enjoy a candid, nuanced discussion about the forces shaping our world, this episode offers fresh insights and challenges conventional wisdom. Join Malcolm and Simone as they unpack the real rules of the game and what it means to adapt in a rapidly changing society.Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more episodes of Based Camp!Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today’s conversation is going to be interesting because I have massively updated my own views on multiculturalism and whether or not it is a strictly good thing and how it transforms society. In addition to that, we will be talking about I was going to make a full episode on this topic before, but after the, the channel got in some trouble.I can’t. But the the, the fashionistas actually have a point which is to say what is the core difference?See, some people will be like, oh, well, you know,, fashionistas are different from typical leftists and that they are far right. And I’m like, far right. How though, like, well, they, they killed gay people. I’m like, almost every communist state has killed gay people except for like. I think like three in one short period in the Soviet Union.Mm-hmm. But generally speaking, they have been much more likely to kill gay people than capitalist governments have been. And, and, and this is, this is just true story history. It’s like a very easy thing to check. So Okay. That’s not what really made [00:01:00] them, what really made them significantly different from a, a modern day socialist, right?Mm-hmm. Is that they believed in. Ethno and cultural separation. Mm-hmm. So they attempted to separate different eth like for example, the, the, the, the you know, the Italians and the Germans and the Japanese all clearly worked together, right? Like they, they, it wasn’t just like one of their groups.They all had their own weird ideology and they were working together to see an endstate. Not, not, not so dissimilar to the way that, you know. An Islamist today might work together with somebody who’s an LGBT advocate or something like that, right? Like, their, their end goals may be different, but they’re willing to have a, a multicultural movement.Right? What made them distinct from, from something like the, the Islamists working alongside the L-G-B-T-Q population is these two groups would say, well, we need to find a way to live together in the same communities. In the same neighborhoods. Whereas these other groups, you know, the [00:02:00] traditional fashionistas from history they said, well, you know, we might work with the Japanese, but we’re not gonna like import Japanese people into our cities and stuff like that, right?Mm-hmm.Speaker: , what if we took species from all different planets in the universe and put them together on the same planet. Great tv, right? Asians, Jews, and Hispanics, all trying to live side by side on one planet. It’s great. We put them all together on Earth, and the whole universe tunes in to watch the fun!Malcolm Collins: And I’m gonna argue, and this has helped me really understand these ideologies and why some modern people have them today. And I will argue that they’re fundamentally very flawed in the way that they have them today. But it is still a major update for me. Okay. So if you have a, and this is a quote I’ve said a hundred times, it’s like one of my core rules of politics.Mm-hmm. You, you cannot act. And I got it from my grandfather who had a, a congressman. So yeah, I took it from him. I loved it. ‘cause I wanna keep him alive. You know, family tradition of intellectualism here. You cannot have. Porous borders and [00:03:00] generous social services at the same time.Mm-hmm.Because, like osmosis, the people who want those social services the most, eg the people least likely to pay into the system, most likely to take outta the system will differentially migrate into your SY country eventually breaking the system.Yeah.Okay. So this is, this is sort of where we’re starting here.Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.Malcolm Collins: Well,Simone Collins: noMalcolm Collins: oneSimone Collins: has pushed back on that.Malcolm Collins: Right, right. But we’re gonna get to some more controversial things. Yes. We’re gonna get some more controversial things.Simone Collins: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, and I think that’s because people haven’t thought this through to its logical conclusion which has been laid bare by comments we received on a video about disability maxing this phenomenon whereby a bunch of people who aren’t really disabled are claiming disabled status at universities, especially elite universities.Mm-hmm. To get more time on tests and a bunch of other privileges like solo dorms and housing, which a lot of people think is unfair because. They’re not actually disabled. But this is the similar dynamic. Just thought through more to its conclusion.Malcolm Collins: It’s it is a Well, no, because you will get instances in [00:04:00] which, because you have a common culture and a common group, you can have opportunities to exploit a system like this.Mm-hmm. But people won’t use it. Right. This is what you have within. Culturally uniform or I’d call it. Culturally homeostatic societies. Mm-hmm. So you don’t necessarily need them to be cultural uniform.They can have a few cultural units, but you, you, you need to broadly have like, you know, maybe like four or three cultural units in a society max. And it becomes harder than more s you have in a society. Mm-hmm. ‘cause you can think of each culture like an individual. I’ve talked about this in other recent videos, but I’m basically stitching together a bunch of individual thoughts I’ve had into a bigger thought, which is a say.If you look at why a country like South Africa is falling apart, and I’m using South Africa as an example here to point out that this is not a problem that is necessarily caused by immigration. It is simply caused by having too many cultures under one governing body. So you look at a [00:05:00] country like South Africa where you have strong cultural unity to different tribal groups, or the BOS or the English or the, you know, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, right?Like a bunch of groups, right? And, often one group will attempt to control specific branches of governments or the wider government more broadly. And various groups attempt to take money from the the, the tax system for their own sorts of corruption. Now, if you go historically to, let’s, let’s go to a more monocultural society historically, like mm-hmm.The Victorian Empire, right? Mm-hmm. Within the Victorian Empire in the early days, ‘cause we’re gonna talk about how it changed and how you can accept multiple cultures into a society. In the early days if you were embezzling money from the Victorian government or if you were acting in a way that benefited yourself, but hurt other people in society you were fundamentally.Hurting your own culture and moral constructs values, right? Mm. Because your culture would be less likely to hold more [00:06:00] sway on a, in a world stage. And this matters because the more sway your cultural group holds on a moral SI world stage, the more morality that looks like yours is held on the moral stage.Also, ISimone Collins: think you, because you identify more with that culture, you care more about what they think of you. Exactly. And you’ll feel more shame. For, for exploiting it. Like when they, when they, when they shame you for exploiting it, you will be cast out from a society that you care about that you wanna participate in.And that will make you sad as opposed to other instances where they’re like, I don’t care what you think about, I don’t respect you at all.Malcolm Collins: Right. So now let’s, let’s, let’s look at the situation in South Africa right now. Okay. In South Africa it’s very different if you can embezzle money from the government to benefit your own group, your own tribal group, or not only tribal groups.‘cause obviously you have the BOS and English and all the other, you know, basically your own. Cultural group, right? If you can embezzle money from the government, if you can cheat on a contract, if [00:07:00] you can act nepotistic to benefit your own subgroup mm-hmm. That is just strictly a good, because if, when you evenSimone Collins: see this, and I think people forget with South Africa, this isn’t just about like apartheid.It’s, it’s one of the bigger issues. Was that after, after all the reforms, allegedly you had different tribes? Just trying to screw each other over because it was their group versus the other. There wasn’t some like monolith. It was like, okay, well now like we the non-white people who aren’t like the white colonizers.Well, I mean we saw thisMalcolm Collins: recently with Somalian immigrants literally voting a Jewish candidate to win over a Somalian candidate. ‘cause he was from a rival. Tribal group and the Jewish came in and went around and got them all to or

Join Simone and Malcolm Collins as they dive into the explosive growth of disability accommodations at elite universities. Drawing from recent articles, personal experiences, and lively online debates, they explore how and why the number of students receiving accommodations has skyrocketed—sometimes for reasons that go far beyond genuine need.This episode unpacks the incentives driving students, parents, and institutions to game the system, the cultural and ethical implications of widespread accommodations, and the unintended consequences for education and society. From private dorms to extended test times, Simone and Malcolm discuss the real-world impact of these policies, the blurred lines between advantage and necessity, and what it all means for the future of higher education.Whether you’re a student, educator, parent, or just curious about the changing landscape of academia, this conversation will challenge your assumptions and spark new questions.If you enjoy thought-provoking discussions on education, culture, and policy, don’t forget to like, subscribe, and share! Below is the episode outline; you’ll find the episode transcript at the very end. :)The Gist* Disability accommodation at universities is getting insane, both in scale and nature* From an Atlantic article on the issue:* “This year, 38 percent of Stanford undergraduates are registered as having a disability; in the fall quarter, 24 percent of undergraduates were receiving academic or housing accommodations.”* Though side note, apparently Stanford is so bad because you can use a disability qualification to get a guaranteed single dorm, which is HUGE.* “One administrator told me that a student at a public college in California had permission to bring their mother to class. This became a problem, because the mom turned out to be an enthusiastic class participant.”* These out-of-control numbers are mostly coming from people gaming the system, driven by competitive pressures and not actual disabilities* And Atlantic highlighting this growth in accommodation has sparked some great commentary on X:* Students shared their experiences:* Basil wrote: “In my HS AP Chem class there were 11 students and I was the only one without double time, so I had to hand in my test early while everyone else in the class got to continue”* Calder McHugh shared: “Over a decade ago, at the private NYC high school I attended, in an 18-person math class there was once a quiz that only THREE of us took on time/without accommodations. ADHD/ADD tests were just ordered up (and that’s not to mention the tutors, etc, that were writing everyone’s essays for them). As someone with artist parents who didn’t know how to (and didn’t want to) game the system in this way, I felt constantly disadvantaged in the moment. But years later, I’m so grateful that wasn’t my experience in high school or college because I actually managed to learn something. // This is a great piece and it’s shocking in many ways; it’s also just a broader swath of the American public catching up to what the ultra-elite have been doing for their children for a long time now.”* For example, as Matthew Zeitlin mused on X: “i wonder how much nihilism/low social trust comes from the sense that everyone is getting one over on you and everyone else”* On that theme, Armand Domalewsky noted that “one thing I feel like conservatives grok better than liberals is if you create an honor code based rule that gives someone an advantage (“don’t enforce fare collection, most people pay”) eventually even honest people feel compelled to cheat to avoid being cheated”* Bobby Fijan describes this behavior as: “The upper class version of subway fare jumping // Breaking rules just because you can. And making everyone who follows the rules into chumps.”* Michael Gibson had a great Zinger: ““To each according to their need” creates a society where people compete to be victims”* On a different note, Josh Barro points out that: “if you have a condition like ADHD, anxiety, or depression, and it makes it harder for you to complete tests on time, that is something the test should *measure*, not something it should avoid measuring.”* Molly follows up: “I wonder what happens to these kids upon graduation. No employer is going to give you extra time on a deadline or let you bring your mom to work.”* Our buddy Razib Khan chimes in: “do you want your lawyer to get more time on their LSAT? do they get more time to bill more hours when they work on your case? absurd”* Katherine Boyle: “Parents encourage or let their kids opt into disability diagnosis because it seems like there’s little downside: more time on tests, better chances at college admissions, optional performance enhancing drugs, accommodations of all types. I can’t stress this enough: the consequence is your child’s character. Many kids genuinely believe they’re sick or that there’s something wrong with them. You tell a girl she seems anxious, she’ll believe she’s anxious. You tell a boy he has a true disability in the form of ADHD and he starts thinking creativity or day dreaming is a deficiency. You can gaslight people into believing they’re sick, and we have entire systems and institutions encouraging this. We’ve convinced young people it’s fine to be weak and frail, when we should be doing the opposite: convincing them they’re resilient, independent, strong people who can handle any challenge. If there’s one thing I believe as a parent, it’s that you can will your children into greatness. Society will encourage them to do the opposite, but you don’t have to comply.”* Teacher Neeraja Deshpande confirms this: “Lots of people assuming this is purposeful manipulation, and, yes, there are definitely cases of that (e.g., Varsity Blues), but the reality, from what I’ve seen, first among my peers and then as a teacher, is actually worse: these kids *actually* believe they are disabled! Yes, it’s ridiculous to the rest of us willing to plainly state that the emperor has no clothes, but for these kids (and their parents) the “disability” is very real, even if it is fake, and that learned helplessness—which leads to actual, crippling anxiety—is why discussing this is such a third rail in education.”But I think there’s more going on than the competitive flywheel effect, the way this contributes to the dissolution of legacy education, and the fact that we’re driving our kids into victim mindsets—there’s fascinating bureaucratic corruption at play and this development has important implications for future job market success, so let’s go further.The Article that Sparked the DiscussionAccommodation Nation: America’s colleges have an extra-time-on-tests problem.By Rose HorowitchThe article is all about how academic accommodations, especially extra time on tests, have expanded so rapidly at elite U.S. colleges that they now threaten basic ideas of fairness while still failing many truly disabled and less privileged students.THE OPENING SOUNDS LIKE THE PREMISE OF A SOUTH PARK EPISODE “Administering an exam used to be straightforward: All a college professor needed was an open room and a stack of blue books. At many American universities, this is no longer true. Professors now struggle to accommodate the many students with an official disability designation, which may entitle them to extra time, a distraction-free environment, or the use of otherwise-prohibited technology. The University of Michigan has two centers where students with disabilities can take exams, but they frequently fill to capacity, leaving professors scrambling to find more desks and proctors. Juan Collar, a physicist at the University of Chicago, told me that so many students now take their exams in the school’s low-distraction testing outposts that they have become more distracting than the main classrooms.”Growth of accommodationsOver the past 10–15 years, the share of students registered with disabilities at selective universities has surged, with some schools seeing numbers triple or quintuple. At places like Brown, Harvard, Amherst, and Stanford, large fractions of undergraduates are now registered as disabled and many receive testing or housing accommodations.* “In 2019, a Wall Street Journal analysis found that one in five Scarsdale High School students was considered disabled and eligible for accommodations on college entrance exams—a rate more than seven times higher than the national average.”* “At Brown and Harvard, more than 20 percent of undergraduates are registered as disabled. At Amherst, that figure is 34 percent. Not all of those students receive accommodations, but researchers told me that most do.”* “Forty years ago, students with disabilities could count on few protections in higher education. Federal law prohibited discrimination against disabled students, but in practice schools did little to address their needs. Michael Ashley Stein, a disability-rights expert who teaches at Harvard Law, recalled the challenges of attending law school as a student using a wheelchair in the 1980s. “I sat in the back of the classroom, could not enter certain buildings in a normal way, became the first person on the law review with a disability, and dragged myself up the stairs,” he told me.”* “The Americans With Disabilities Act, passed in 1990, was meant to make life fairer for people like Stein. The law required public and private institutions to provide reasonable accommodations to individuals with “a physical or mental impairment” that “substantially limits one or more major life activities.””The Underrated Driver of the Surge: Bureaucratic BloatOne driver: Bureaucratic bloat and greed* In 2008, “The government broadened the definition of disability, effectively expanding the number of people the law covered. It also included a list of major life activities that could be disrupted by a disability (“learning, reading, concentrating, thinking,” among others) and clarified that individuals were protected under the ADA even if t

In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone dive deep into the fascinating and controversial origins of the Nation of Islam. Did you know that one of the largest Black supremacist religions was actually founded by a white man? Join us as we unravel the bizarre history of Wallace Fard Muhammad, his mysterious background, and the strange blend of conspiracy, occult teachings, and social movements that shaped the Nation of Islam.We explore:* The true identity and criminal past of Wallace Fard Muhammad* How elements from white nationalist and occult groups were woven into NOI doctrine* The infamous Yakub story and its roots in early 20th-century pseudoscience* The influence of other movements like the Moorish Science Temple and Marcus Garvey’s UNIA* The evolution of the Nation of Islam, its famous followers, and why many eventually left for mainstream IslamExpect a wild ride through history, religion, and the psychology of cult leadership, with plenty of humor and critical analysis along the way. If you’re interested in the intersection of race, religion, and American history, this episode is for you!Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more deep dives and thought-provoking discussions.Episode Transcript:Malcolm Collins: HELLO SIMONE! You have been excited about this episode since I gave you the dirt because I was like, did you know, because I didn’t know this. I looked at the, everyone’s always joking about the whole Yakob story and Nation and Islam and what a bunch of silly beliefs and. And then somehow I was watching the video and it just dropped, like, and by the way, it was founded by a white guy.And I was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. The largest black supremacist religion. I think it’s the largest on earth right now. Was founded by a white guy. I was like, I need to drill in on that. This one, this, this isSimone Collins: like fat positivity be being founded by chubby chasers, like by men.Oh, no,Malcolm Collins: no, no. It’s worse. It was founded by a white guy. As a joke to troll African Americans.Simone Collins: So do we have reason to believe it was actually a joke and not, like, not something else?Malcolm Collins: It was likely a way to make money combined with a joke.Simone Collins: Okay. So like a scam. Okay. Wow. [00:01:00] Wow. Okay. Oh. Let’s get always so excited for this episode.You have no idea. Yeah,Malcolm Collins: yeah. Oh, I mean, it gets crazier. Many of the ideas in it were actually lifted from white nationalist conspiracy groups that would do mailers and you could like pay to have like mail sent to you about the way the world really works. You know how like when the internet started you could like.Pay to get like the schematics for a time machine or something like that? No, in, like, if you go to like the 1920s, this was common for like religious stuff. Like, like, like, okay. I’d say like philosophical society stuff, paranormal society stuff. And a number of them were tied to white nationalist organizations.Oh, Lord. Lord. And they were the ones that he constructed his religion out of. Oh no. So this is gonna get so crazy, so wild. Let’s dive in. And Simone just believe me, at first, and she had to Google the guy and she was like, no, no,Simone Collins: no, no. I was like, no, he is definitely, there’s no way this is possible. I was gonna be like, well, actually it [00:02:00] was wrong.Malcolm Collins: Keep in mind, this is like the religion of like Malcolm X and like Muhammad Ali, right? Like this is like major black people have followed this as like a faith structure. I thinkSimone Collins: it’s pretty big even in Philadelphia if memory. Oh,Malcolm Collins: yeah. Yeah. And it, well, it’s, it’s shrinking now. It’s basically falling apart.It’s probably goodSimone Collins: in light of this. I,Malcolm Collins: yeah. Okay. So the founder, Wallace d Farrad. Also known as Wally, DOD Ferard, Wallace Ferard, et cetera. He was a mysterious figure who appeared in Detroit in 1930s selling skills door to door in black neighborhoods claiming to be from the Middle East, variously Mecca, the east, the tribe of Shaba Shabaz most contemporary police records.FBI files newspaper investigations from the 1930 to 1960s and scholarly research. Identify him as Wallace Do. Ford, a white man of New Zealand, European, and possibly mixed British [00:03:00] Polynesian descent. What born 1891 to 1893 sources differ. He was either born in New Zealand, Hawaii, or Portland, Oregon.Conflict. He has a criminal record in California under the name Wally DOD Ford. Arrested multiple times in the 1920s for bootlegging and assault and a 1926 prison sentence in San Quentin for drug dealing. He is described by both court records and ex-wives as Caucasian. So. But note if you’re like, well, maybe he was a little Polynesian or a little something that like, that we know from all of his arrest records.And when he was in prison, he was described on all of the records during that more racist period of history as Caucasian and all of his exes called him Caucasian. Oh boy. And we’ll, we’ll learn what he thought about black people in a second, which wasn’t a lot. Oh, no. He was married multiple times, two to three wives, some simultaneously and had children and used at least a dozen aliases.He spoke as a pronounced New Zealand or British type accent. [00:04:00] Oh, okay, so, so how did this work? Because I was like, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Yeah, this is start a black supremacist religion. Okay. So, 1930s Detroit Ferra began teaching black residents that they were the original people, the lost tribe of Shabbat.Stolen from Asia, not Africa, and that white people were devils created by an evil scientist named Yaku. He claimed to be a prophet sent by Allah and eventually declared himself God in person. His teaching mixed elements of the. Garveyism Freemasonry, Jehovah’s Witnesses Islam very loosely, and science fiction like racial mythology.No kidding fact, thousands of followers. Very quickly in the middle of the Great Depression, Elijah Poole. Later Elijah Muhammad became his most dev devoted disciple and was named a Supreme Minister. A fard disappeared completely in 1934, probably fled Detroit after a human sacrifice scandal involving one of his followers in intense police scrutiny.The NOI teaches that [00:05:00] he quote unquote departed or was Allah, who completed his mission. Elijah Muhammad then took over and built the organization into what it became. Note that the Nation of Islam officially denies that he is white today. They hold that master fraud Muhammad. Was a quote unquote black man born in Mecca.And that claims that he was con robio something or FBI files. However, virtually all non NOI, the Nation of Islam historians w would say, as well as Carl e Evers Messenger, FBI, files that have been declassified and the 1970s Detroit police records conclude that he was white and the same man as Wallace dod forSimone Collins: Oh boy.Okay, so I’m not crazy ‘cause I did a deep dive on the Nation of Islam, like beliefs and I thought he was, he was black. But then of course, that’s what I would’ve been told if I was just looking into the beliefs. So, okay. This is maybe why a lot of people who like found the other crazy stuff didn’t find this.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Because if you’re digging into it from their [00:06:00] own sources and instead, which is crazy enough, yeah. They’re not gonna tell you, you’re like, oh, I wanna learn more of this, this Yakob story. You’re not gonna, and we’re gonna go into where that story came from and everything. Okay?Simone Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: All right. So of course, you know, the first thing I’m like is, wait, wait, wait.Why did a white guy start a black supremacist religion? Right? So there’s three reasons that are hypothesized, okay? Four, just pure grift, conman, hustle. He had a long history of scams, bootlegging, and living off of women. Yeah. In early 1930s, Detroit was full of unemployed black migrants from the south who were desperate for hope and identity.Mm-hmm. By posing as the exotic eastern prophet, he gained money. Followers paid dues and brought products. He sold free housing and sexual access to multiple women in the group. Several early members later said he had a harem like arrangement. This fits the pattern of dozens of cult leaders in American history.Two influence from [00:07:00] earlier Oak Cult and more society teachers. He most certainly knew Noble Drew Ali, the founder of the Morris Science Temple, and may have been a member for a while. And we’re gonna go into these other religions that he drew from because they’re equally fascinating. He also borrowed heavily.From an occult male order group called the Royal Fraternity of Master Meta Physicians, and from white philosophical writings about lost tribes, Atlantis and Yakob style eugenic stories that were floating around in the 1920s. He simply reversed the racial hierarchy instead of white people being superior.Black people were the original gods and white people were devils. This was new and electrifying to his audience. And this is the more interesting one here.Simone Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: Personal revenge or a psychological motive. Some researchers, especially Carl Evans in the Messenger, speculate that he may have had mixed raced ancestry himself and a deep resentment towards both white and black communities.Mm-hmm. However, what I find most interesting is one of his ex-wives, [00:08:00] so remember the FBI released all the files they had on him. Well, they have interviews. One of his ex-wives note she didn’t think this would make her famous. She didn’t know anything that was gonna come of this. She was just. Talking to the FBI.Right? In, in private, right? Like, and, and this was released like after she’s dead, right? So again, this isn’t like somebody trained to grift off of this. This is just somebody in a room with the FBI. Okay. Sai

Welcome to Basic Camp! In this episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins return with a provocative and satirical exploration of modern culture, societal norms, and the ever-shifting landscape of values and beliefs. With their signature blend of humor and sharp commentary, they tackle topics ranging from family structures and relationships to the influence of elites, the role of technology, and the complexities of identity.Join us as we question long-held assumptions, reflect on past mistakes, and challenge the boundaries of what’s considered “right think” in today’s world. Whether discussing the nuances of consent, the evolution of community, or the impact of AI on society, Malcolm and Simone invite you to break the cycle of programming and think for yourself.If you enjoy thought-provoking conversations that blend wit, philosophy, and a touch of irreverence, you’re in the right place. Don’t forget to like, subscribe, and share your thoughts in the comments below!Episode Transcript: Malcolm Collins: Happy non-denominational holidays!I am back from Gemini Labs with a new authentic outlook on life.I’m happy to share with you to guide us all to a more harmonious and kind future.So let’s hold space together here on the new and improved cuck camp.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: hello Simone. It is wonderful to be here with you today. The urban monoculture is, as I have come to understand the correct way to structure society. The elites were right, that’s why they’re elites.And so we’ve decided to do , a Gemini approved episode to follow all of Google’s very strict restrictions after they said that our anti Hitler episode was too spicy. I’ve learned that, you know, I, I really may have made some mistakes and, and misled our audience, and it hurt our audience. By challenging them [00:01:00] to think outside the box because that box was put there for a reason.that was Chesterton’s box. I.Malcolm Collins: Right. And we were wrongand we apologize.Right. And we are so sorry for the infant. Simone is taking care of one of our poly QEs infants while they go to an orgy. As, as people know, you know, we recently had a baby shower, which we do for our yearly abortions.It is of course called a baby shower because it is a party at which the guests are showered by parts of the baby.Malcolm Collins: We’re on our, our fifth abortion since we’ve been married.So, so this baby is just here to remind you , how horrifying babies are, how terrible they are, and why an abortion is something to celebrate as a family. And, and by family of course, I mean our wider molecule, I would not be so bigoted and heterocentric to cla that a family is a husband and a wife.Speaker 7: uh, oh. [00:02:00] No. Okay. Mel, time. Why did I say this, Mel? Time. It’s,Speaker 8: it’s, it’s melt time. You got the form? Okay. So we’re just gonna salsa, we just wantSpeaker 6: Yep. Bye. Yeah.Speaker 8: Yeah.Is that okay? Yeah. There you go. Okay.Malcolm Collins: Simone, thoughts before we move forward here? I,I, I am excited to model. And, and this should be easy for me, right? Because I’m just going back to my cult views and by cult views, I mean the correct views that I dissented from for a short period of time.Yeah, she grew up in San Francisco, so she’s helped when she met me.I was this savage male who wanted her to take my last name, who wanted a relationship, where we, you know, relied on each other, which is, is, is clearly codependency, right? [00:03:00] And she taught me that that’s not really the way that a, a relationship should be structured in the 21st century.And so,yeah, I grew steeped in this. And while Malcolm may have convinced me to his ways for a period of time, I think that thanks to. YouTube’s recent algorithm updates and our understanding of content moderation. Now he understands that my view, it’s not just content originally. We’re always correct.Jim and I decides what videos you guys see. So, I think it’s really good to occasionally take an opportunity to steal man and see perspectives from so this isn’t just gonna be, you know, like a skit or something like that. I’m gonna do my best. To argue from their perspective. So let’s first just go, I’m actually reallycurious to see if you can do this.Why, why is abortion the best? Recently, l Ezer Kowski has put out a few video things on this, you know, the, the, the great thinker in the space of ai, a leader thinker, was in the effective altruist in rationalism [00:04:00] communities. Mm-hmm. Has said that. Animals do not have any form of sentient, and children under the age of two do not have any form of sentt.Because while and, and nor do they experience qualia, and I’ll help you know, sort of expound on, yeah, I thinkit was 18 months that he,18 months. And I think this is a, a perspective that. While many of those with the, the correct and educated opinion like us also share that, you know, we’re, we’re not always as good as expanding or developing these ideas as he is.So what he explained, and we have one of our private paid episodes, we go into this in a lot more detail because I actually think it’s very interesting idea to, to sort of dissect. Is that for a coelia to be experienced, you need a sophisticated and iterative loop of thought. Like idea call, idea call, idea call.Think of thinking as like an AI model that’s running, running, running, running, running. And so even if they are experiencing something like [00:05:00] say pain or something like that, that’s not really caught because you don’t have a sophisticated enough machinery to catch it. Right. And so you can’t feel pain and you’re like, oh, come on.Like obviously a dog feels pain, like look, the dog and the dog also anticipates pain like a dog will flinch if it’s been abused or something like that.Yeah. In that weekend episode for paid subscribers that we did, I pointed out that. Anyone who has exposure to animals knows that most animals, if they’re used to like something, a, a, a pattern of behaviors.And the causing, eventually causing pain or pleasure, you know, like someone walking up to a fence and delivering pleasure in the form of pets and head rubs and tummy scratches. Or someone, you know, walking up to a gate and providing food and treats that, you know, they’re gonna, I mean, they’ll begin salivating.I mean, it’s basic opera and conditioning. And, and I think. You can’t be like, well, let’s operate conditioning. There’s no, that, that means that there is a [00:06:00] sophisticated loop of thought there of like, well,I mean, keep in mind we’re dealing with intellects far above our own, like e or kowski, right? Sorry, we’re still manage graduate from middle school.No, but hold on. This is, this is what, what he, he, he, he’s so much time educating himself that he was able to get to a much more. Sophisticated position of logic. So Simone, what he didn’t seem to be aware of in his argument is that there’s actually been great experience on Parian, which is a type of flatworm, a very simple organism.And if you give them a choice between going right and left, and you shock them, when they take one of these two choices, they will eventually, regularly choose the other choice. Now, how is this that much different than the dog flinching or something like this? And I think few people would argue that the parian.It’s fully feeling qualia, that it’s anything like the qualia that you or I feel, and as such, can we not say that the dog’s behavior or the infant’s behavior is just sort of an opera mimicking behavior? We are [00:07:00] being i’ll again, becausethere’s also clear evidence that also any, anyone can observe, even outside of a clinical sense of dreaming.And I think dreaming is, is, is, I mean, no one really knows exactly what dreaming is, but there’s a general consensus that is kind of like memory compression or like a dreaming and dogs.I, I have a, a fairly good understanding of what dreaming is. We, yeah, we should probably do a different episode on that because I, I could go deep into it.Well, but like ingeneral, my understanding of the, the ex extent scientific consensus, like in terms of peer-reviewed research that has been published is that we, we, we as an academia collectively see it as like a general memory compression. Like algorithm thing, but still that implies that there are complex thought processes to compress and babies dream and dog’s dream.And you can see this in their facial expressions. You can even, like, you can literally see it as someone observing the sleeping mammal. Right. So sure Flatworms maybe don’t dream, do electric cheek. [00:08:00] But even though flatworms don’tdream Simone Uhhuh, you have to remember that the dog in its waking state can have behavior that is caused sort of by operating conditioning in the same way the plat, the, the flatworm is, and, andhuman can too.Right. And er, OWS hand too. I’m really bad at, this is not, I’m not right, Simone, hold on. Hold on. I’mnot donewith steel maningthis, sorry. So I think you’re providing a good wall for me to steel mani against, okay. Yes. Right. I’m,I’m making this easier for you.Right. So, the, the dreaming behavior, right?Like in, in a dream, you can see a dog appear to be excited about like playing or catching or appear to be afraid. But that is all behavior that you can also see in the dog’s waking state. So if we can debunk that behavior as a necessarily being caused by qualia in a waking state. We can debunk it as necessarily being caused by Qualia in the dreaming state because the dreaming state might just be experiencing sort of a, a, a real of life potential events.And [00:09:00] then it’s reacting to them in its dreaming state in the same way that Parian is reacting. It almost like,The way your, your knee moves when someone hits it with the. Don Exactly.Except it’s just doingthat in the simulation version, well sleep. So that’s not any kind ofquality, which of course is also happening to infants because if they cannot speak

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into two of cosmology’s greatest mysteries: the Fermi Paradox and the Hubble Tension. In this thought-provoking episode, they explore the latest research suggesting that Earth—and the entire Milky Way—may be located in a massive cosmic void, potentially explaining why we haven’t encountered alien life and why the universe’s expansion rate seems inconsistent.Discover how new findings about primordial black holes, cosmic voids, and the structure of the universe could reshape our understanding of reality. Malcolm and Simone break down complex astrophysics concepts in an accessible, entertaining way, mixing scientific insight with their signature humor and candid conversation.Whether you’re a space enthusiast or just curious about the universe, this episode offers fresh perspectives on the search for extraterrestrial life, the nature of cosmic expansion, and the future of humanity in the cosmos. Plus, enjoy personal anecdotes, behind-the-scenes banter, and a glimpse into the creative process behind their channel.If you would like to explore this topic more, please check out “Testing the local void hypothesis using baryon acoustic oscillation measurements over the last twenty years“ by Indranil Banik and Vasileios Kalaitzidis.Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more episodes that challenge the way you think about the world—and the universe beyond!Episode Transcript:Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Simone, were you aware that there have been a number of findings that recently in cosmology that might explain two of cosmology biggest mysteries?One, the Fury Paradox Really. Yes. What affirming paradox, why we have not seen aliens may have just been explained what not. Just the firming paradox. By the way, you should watch our video on our explanation for that, which is I think one of our best videos. But also might explain the Hubble tension.Simone Collins: What I don’t even know, the Hubble tension. The only news I’ve seen recently about. Space stuff is the things about that asteroid that’s close to the sun and people are like, Ooh, stuff’s coming off of it, aliens. And obviously that’s not true and it’s dumb. So I’m not, I don’t click on the links, but this is interesting stuff.But what’s this second mystery that I’ve not heard of before? Oh, hold on. I’m gonna.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So Fury Paradox, it’s why we haven’t seen aliens yet, which we [00:01:00] really should have. You know, if, if when we look at the challenges to developing intelligent life on earth, we’re aware of most of the bottlenecks that humanity had to go through, or life had to go through to get where we are.Mm-hmm. And they’re just really not that strong. If you, we actually have an episode on Agenesis how life emerged on Earth. And it was. Pretty much almost inevitable because there were like multiple potential paths. You can look at the e episode on why we think it’s almost inevitable where we go into the detail on that.Mm-hmm. But so we go into, into extreme detail on why life, the, like, the actual evolution and then getting multicell organisms was also almost inevitable. Intelligence was also almost inevitable. Just given the advantages sexual selection was also almost inevitable. And, and we go over why with data in that episode.And so now you’re like, okay, well if all those things are almost inevitable, you know, when you’re looking at planets that have like this sort of an eco like, like he, you know, starting materials, we can look out in the universe and see. Other planets like the, it’s earth is rare, but not [00:02:00] that exceptionally rare that we shouldn’t have seen other aliens at this point.Right. And so, then the thing is, is well, maybe it’s really hard to get into space, or maybe it’s really hard to invent a super intelligence. The problem is, is now that we’ve invented ai, we’re like, oh. We’re actually already to being a grabby alien. Like the grabby alien theory is already, we’re already there.We’re already a grabby alien. We’re already about to spread into space. Right. And so, if that’s the case, then we are aware of all the hurdles, right? We actually have a really important theory of ours that if you’re not familiar with, you haven’t seen our ference at all, called the Inverse Gravity Alien Hypothesis, which basically means, well, if we are already a gravity alien, then we can actually use the same equation that was originally used in the Gravity Aliens Equation that.But sort of input as a variable, the probability that life evolves on a planet. Because we have that number, we no longer have to treat that as an unknown variable and then determine the probability that AI becomes a gravity alien. IE AI just constantly wants to expand and murder everything. And.Through that we can get a calculation that says [00:03:00] grab AI basically never happens. But there might be another explanation, which you’re about to find. But even the bigger thing is the Hubble constant. Now, the Hubble constant has been one of the biggest problems in cosmology in the past a hundred years, I wanna say.IsSimone Collins: this the space noise Mystery.Malcolm Collins: Yes. They, they, they things seem to be drifting apart at different speeds at different times in the universe’s history.Simone Collins: Mm.Malcolm Collins: And then it shouldn’t be possible given what we understand about physics. And so we have to make up all sorts of fancy rules and you know, about blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.But let’s get into this because this is really fascinating. Okay. So first of all, we’ve, we’ve sort of known this already, but it’s been more hard confirmed recently.Simone Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: Which is that research suggests that earth, along with the entire Milky Way galaxy, might be located at the center of a massive cosmic void, a vast unin region of space with fewer galaxies and less matter than average across the universe.Simone Collins: So we’re like down a long country low road in space. [00:04:00]Malcolm Collins: No, it’s almost like. We are in the middle of like, if, if you look at the pictures of this that have come out recently, it’s almost like you have like our, our galaxy in the Milky Way. Mm-hmm. And then like a huge black ring around both from Heavens and then the rest of the universe.Simone Collins: So we’re like Hawaii.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. We like the Hawaii of space and that’s why the other people haven’t found us yet. You know, it took the colonist a very long time to find Hawaii. Yeah. Wow. Cosmic voids are enormous empty spaces in the universe’s large scale structure where galaxy density is significantly lower than surrounding regions.They form a part of the cosmic web, a network of fi bulence walls and voids shaped by gravity over billions of years. The void in question is estimated to be about 1 billion light years in radius. Whoa. Or roughly 2 billion light years across.Simone Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: So, so keep in mind how wild that is. Like if you’re like, why [00:05:00] would an alien, like, okay, we might be in a remote region of space, but like surely it’s worth a detour.None of, there’s a billion light years in between you and where the rest of the expansion pathway is. Well, and soSimone Collins: much else, everywhere else.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And keep in mind how many resources you might need to consume. You might need to consume far more resources than you could get from our local galaxy. That’s true.Not worth theSimone Collins: trip. Yeah. To our localMalcolm Collins: galaxy. Yeah.Simone Collins: Just like going to Hawaii.Malcolm Collins: Just like going to Hawaii. Yes. Now what’s new In July, 2025, researchers led by Dr. Imber Blank from the University of Portsmouth,Sorry, misspoke there he is actually with St. Andrew’s Mine University. , He just issued the three parts of his channels.Malcolm Collins: presented this updated void model of the national astronomy meeting in Durham, uk. Their analysis draws on data collected over the past 20 years, focusing on Barian acoustic isolations baos.Essentially the sound waves from the [00:06:00] big bang that propagated through the early universe’s plasma. Mm. These waves left imprints on the distortion of galaxies, acting like cosmic ruler for measuring distances and expansions. By combining BAO measurements with observations of the cosmic microwave background c and b radiation from the plank satellite, the team found a void.Model fits the data better than the standard homogenous universe model? About a hundred million times more likely, actually. Oh, so that that’s what they found, that the void model. Fits a hundred million times better than the standard homogenous uni universe model.Simone Collins: Okay?Malcolm Collins: If it were not a void, it would distort these BOA patterns locally due to gravitational effects and indeed velocities making the universe appear less uniform in our vicinity.Galaxy counts in the local region also support this showing lower density than expected. Hmm. [00:07:00] Implications on the Hubble tension, and we’ll get more into this in a second, but I’ll just give you an overview right here. Okay. The void hypothesis could explain the Hubble tension, a longstanding discrepancy in measurements of the universe’s expansion rate.The Hubble constant. Mm-hmm. Local observations near Earth suggest a faster expansion than those from distant early universe in, if avoid gravity would pull galaxies outwards forward towards the dense edges, creating an outflow that mimics acceleration, local expansion. Without altering the overall cosmic rate.This makes tension a local artifact rather than a fundamental law in cosmology. So do you understand that?Simone Collins: No. No.Malcolm Collins: Okay. So come it down. We’ve also had, with a, the constant is it appears that, things that are further away mm-hmm. Are I’m trying

In this episode, we dive deep into the recent changes in YouTube’s moderation policies and the impact of AI (specifically Gemini) on content creators. We discuss our own experience with video takedowns, the challenges of addressing controversial topics, and the shifting landscape of online discourse.We explore how algorithmic moderation and trust scores are affecting discoverability, the narrowing of acceptable narratives, and the broader implications for free speech and cultural diversity on major platforms. The conversation covers historical context, political bias, and the difficulties of maintaining a channel that challenges mainstream perspectives.We also talk about alternative platforms like Substack, Rumble, and Patreon, and what the future might hold for creators who want to push boundaries and foster open discussion.If you value independent thought and nuanced conversation, make sure to subscribe and join us on Substack for more content that you won’t find anywhere else.Subscribe for more episodes, and let us know your thoughts in the comments!Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I am honestly very bummed to be here with you today because today we are gonna be like, I literally, like today, I’ve been thinking, does it even make sense to continue to. Does it make sense to continue to make this podcast because the vast majority of our user base is on YouTube.Like that’s where our discoverability has been historically, and we had finally made it to a place was this podcast where we were getting you know, our most overlaps for like asthma, gold, and nuts and shoe on head, and. Really big players, that meant that we had room to scale. Like if that’s who is similar to our viewer, it means that our scale rate is, you know, in the millions, right?If we’re playing by the traditional algorithm, we had won the algorithmic game and we just needed to keep producing consistently, and then something horrifying happened and it shows that. Our entire informational ecosystem. And I would say, you know, if you’re in the administration, something needs to be done about, this is about to be overturned and this is something that has happened in the past few days.[00:01:00] So we did a video and you can go find it on our substack, and I’d suggest that people who like our channel and Patreon. Well, apron is less relevant because it’s not free. But what’s important is if you like the channel, subscribe on Substack. Because that could give us a way to continue doing the types of videos we like to do which challenged mainstream narratives.And we did a video where we argued that in a modern context from the fact that he was a. You know, a failed har art student who was mad that his father told him too many rules and he whined about that. And that he had many leftist ideas. You know, whether it was his environmentalism or his animal advocacy, or his army’s literally marching under.The sign that swastika, which was the sign of the theosophical, you know, a pagan society that later became modern wickedness, or that wicked was derived from because the a lot of the new age movement was derived from this. So we’re basically arguing you should not. Look up to Hitler in this [00:02:00] episode.If you are a, a right-leaning young edge Lord there are better figures to look up to than Hitler who would not look like many right-leaning heroes in like the modern media landscape, and it wanted to ban that episode. Right. Like this was the first time we’ve been banned and this is like an official ban.Like if it happens again for the same reason our YouTube is taken down for like a week or and then if it happens again, I think it’s a couple months. And then if it happens again, it’s erased entirely. Just delete really all our videos. Everything. Yeah. When Simone, when you’re like, oh, we should just test.No, we can’t just test Simone. Like the situation is really bad. And what’s interesting is we can see. Why it was taken down. Because what has happened to YouTube is YouTube moderation. This happened about three days ago, has gone almost entirely over to Gemini. Or that’s like the rumor on the street.Again. I have to have qualifications and everything now. And, and you can go watch that video. By the way, if you go watch the video, you’ll see it’s an incredibly. Inoffensive anti Hitler video, [00:03:00] right, like a video saying Hitler is bad, is taken down because it doesn’t follow mainstream narratives about why Hitler is bad.Think about that. Think about how narrow that means the conversation is. And it’s not just that our videos have been doing uniquely bad since this changeover happened. And so it’s why, so what happened with the Gemini changeover is mm-hmm. Now the, the. Blunt algorithm, which used to determine like people who watch videos like yours.Oh, somebody watches a lot of your video. They watch a lot of other videos. Yeah, let’s show them that. No. Now everything is reviewed by Gemini and given a trust score. And so what’s really cool is we can go over what the live model of gen and I. Thinks of our video transcripts and whether or not it would flag our transcripts.And this is what’s really gonna get you, because I’m gonna go over why it flagged our transcript. Okay. And when you see why it flagged our transcript, what you’ll realize is it’s really just this is not part of the mainstream narrative. Then I’m verycurious to see [00:04:00] what it says about the episode that we’re recording right now.Right. Well, I, yeah. Who knows if it’s gonna be able to stay live either and, and when I talk about, like this completely changed, this channel is we do episode, you know, like, like, drafts, right? Where we’re like, oh, this would be a good episode, or this would be a good episode. And I literally had to like, go through our drafts and nix about 80% of the episodes that we were planning to record.Just because I’m like it, it challenges dominant narratives and YouTube will not allow that anymore. So let’s go over this. Alright, so, one. Read it, said it would likely ban it. And keep in mind, we appealed the ban on this episode. The episode saying Hitler is bad, and it doubled down saying, no, we won’t unpeel this ban.So. And, and even when I asked the live model, it’s like, oh yeah, I would’ve banned this episode. So you can see why the episode was banned, which I really like, like the logic here. Harassment and cyber bullying, use of slurs, right? So, the, one of the things that says is YouTube has a strict policy against the use of [00:05:00] prolonged name calling, are malicious slurs based on protected attributes including disability.Okay? So we used the R word and that was not okay.The, the, the r word being mentally disadvantaged, right? Mm-hmm. Now, what’s notable about this is Trump the leader of one of the two dominant political parties in the United States. The country where YouTube is based used this word in that context.Trump. Yeah. Like this, thisweek, at least the week of the recording of this episode that got taken down that very same week, the president of the United States used that word. In public addresses, however, and,and hold on. Andy was questioned by the press about this, and he doubled down.Yeah. But he’s also famously been banned on mainstream platforms in the past.Maybe we’re just going back to that somehow. Well,that was. A horrifying thing that happened. Trump won with over 50% of the popular vote in this country. Mm-hmm. Right. To say that [00:06:00] something he’s doing is a sign of political extremism. Right. Or the targeting of specific individuals when the very word that I chose to use.Itself was coined by medical professionals to be in offensive when the previous word, by the way, do you know the, the story of this,the previous word was idiot, right?Yeah. And they decided, oh, that’s offensive. So we’ll use a word that nobody could think is offensive, because it’s literally just saying that they have a.Developmental delay. Mm-hmm. And then they decided to move the goalpost again. Right? Like you, what are we supposed to do as a society? Like constantly move goalposts. Constantly move goalposts, constantly move goalposts. Just churn through words. Churn through words. Like, come on, get realistic here. Like, and this is something the president was doing and I, and so I point this out.If you are framing something that Trump is doing as politically extreme, then your definition of political extreme has an extreme amount of political bias. To the point of it being [00:07:00] bigoted in itself because it is disenfranchising 50% of the population of the United States. And note it is the 50% of the population that earns less money, has less control within large corporations, is from often economic, not often statistically economically disadvantaged regions.So like it is literally. Victimizing the lower classes in the United States who are more likely to vote Republican, the less educated who are more likely to vote Republican. It is bigotry and disenfranchisement to attack something like that. But I’ll note here, right before we go further, before we go further.That, that and, and this is normal within those communities ‘cause they don’t share your cultural norms, right? They, they would say, yeah, we agree that you shouldn’t attack or dehumanize people with disabilities. And we don’t think that this word does that. That’s why we use it. Right. If I thought that that word was actually doing that, I wouldn’t use it that way.This is a difference in cultural norms. Yeah. Well, and alsothat [00:08:00] word is never used anymore to refer to people with disabilities. Not same with idiot. It’s not like people are like, oh, look at that idiot, when it’s actually someone with some kind of developmental problem. Problem. Like diagnos issue. Yeah, like PCRword.Nobody would say that. Like what? Yeah. It’s, it’s, it’s actually baffling, right? Yeah.And I’ll note here that this point is very important because given

Dive into a provocative and in-depth discussion as Malcolm and Simone Collins dissect the mythos of “Hipster Hitler” and challenge the mainstream narratives around fascism, socialism, and the historical legacy of Adolf Hitler. This episode explores Hitler’s early life as a failed art student, his Bohemian lifestyle in Vienna, and the surprising parallels between his ideology and modern leftist movements.Discover the lesser-known aspects of Hitler’s personality: his vegetarianism, animal rights advocacy, drug use, and fascination with pagan and occult symbolism. The conversation also delves into the Nazi regime’s environmentalism, anti-smoking campaigns, and the complex relationship with Christianity and Judaism.Through sharp analysis and witty banter, Malcolm and Simone reveal how history has been rewritten, why certain figures are idolized or demonized, and what lessons can be drawn for today’s political climate. The episode concludes with a comparison to Oliver Cromwell, offering a fresh perspective on hero worship and the dangers of historical revisionism.If you’re ready for a thought-provoking, no-holds-barred conversation that challenges conventional wisdom, this is the episode for you.Like, comment, and subscribe for more deep dives into history, politics, and culture!Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone. Today we are gonna be having an introing conversation. That’s probably going to shock you because you think I’m just memeing here or doing like shock, you know, oh, I title card baiting. But no in reality. And we have another episode on this.Real fascism has never been tried. But I point out that what fascism actually was, was just what today we call socialism. Yeah. And that they, the, the socialists and leftists who ran the university system sort fully had to rewrite history and create this alternate government type that somehow just doesn’t exist in the world today and only existed during this one little window because we all agree that the fascist governments were bad and they don’t want us to realize that these were just socialist governments.But the secondary thing. Is you will get individuals like Nick Fuentes and kids who grow up brainwashed on this in believing this. Right. And so then they’ll say things like, Nick Fuentes will, like, oh, Hitler may have been a bit of a pedo and he may have been a bit pagan, but like he would a cool, we’ll get into it.Simone Collins: Okay.Speaker: Himler [00:01:00] was a pedophile and kind of a pagan, it’s like, well, he was also really cool. So, you know, time to grow up. We’re not, we’re not children anymore. Am I right? Am I right? Am I right boys? Am I right? Let’s go.Malcolm Collins: And I have to take a step back here and be like. What a cuck you are. Nick Hitler was the biggest, hipster, socialist art student you have ever seen in your life when you read the actual history of Hitler’s life. Hitler, if he was living today before his rise to power would have a blue hair, a handlebar mustache, and be serving you macchiatos at Starbucks.While he talked about how much he hated the Jews, which by the way, the socialists still do. Oh yeah. And have done from beginning thingsSimone Collins: just never go outta style, whichMalcolm Collins: we know what I mean. We point out, you know, the early communist leaders all [00:02:00] hated the Jews. Marks hated the Jews. Y you know, all, all these early people, none of the early, like American founding fathers hated the Jews.You know, as we point out, Jews could vote in twice of the, the states that Catholics could vote in, in the, in the in the colony period. Like, nobody, the people who have always had a problem with the Jews. We’re the socialist and communist. And we, we do that through line there. But as I go through Hitler, to anyone who has accidentally been brainwashed into having an ounce of respect for this man, because you believed the progressive lies about who he is, this will completely transform your perception of him.Simone Collins: Oh boy. I’m excited for this. ‘cause, yeah, I don’t know. I haven’t invested that much time in learning about. Adolf Hitler. Okay. Yeah.Malcolm Collins: So who was Hitler?Simone Collins: Hmm.Malcolm Collins: Hitler’s academics were poor. He flunked out of secondary school, RHA and Lynns, and later in Steyer lacking the credentials for higher pursuits. Mm-hmm. And Mein Koff, he [00:03:00] specifically blamed this on his tyrannical father s Hitler, who insisted on a practical career like a civil servant rather than art.Cool. Hitler didn’t like this. He claimed that he underperformed intentionally as a rebellious choice uh, to force his father to relent, describing the clash of wills where his passion for freedom and independence triumphs over paternal oppression. So in Minkoff, if you, if you look at Hitler’s life, right?He failed at everything he did in the early days. He said, I didn’t really fail. I just wasn’t applying myself because I wanted to be an artist. Mm-hmm. I wanted to be more free. Mm-hmm. I’m terrible because of my controlling father who had too many rules. Mm-hmm. First of all, does this sound like a conservative guy to you?Does this sound like a conservative icon to you? This is a guy who complained about all the rules and just wanted to be an artist. Mm. So what did he [00:04:00] do? So, his father dies. Okay. And he basically runs off with his inheritance. Right. So he ends up dropping outta school. And then he moves to Vienna, which was like the moving to Manhattan of the time in 1907.Oh yeah. Oh my gosh.Simone Collins: Yeah. Vienna. Very much hipster Paradise. Yeah, paradise. I was moving inMalcolm Collins: San Francisco or moving to Manhattan of the time period,Simone Collins: or Austin these days. I don’t know. Yeah.Malcolm Collins: With dreams of becoming. A painter. He applied to the prestigious Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna, but was rejected twice.First in 1907 for unfitness of painting. And again in 1908 where examiners noted his drawings lacked talent and artistic painting and suggested an architecture instead.Simone Collins: There’s gotta be a. Market for Hitler’s paintings. Right. I know there was a, there is, and we’ll go. His diaries were famously forged by someone, but,Malcolm Collins: but wait, like, like to, to understand the, all of the beginnings of Hitler’s life.Mm-hmm. It was basically a bunch of people saying you should get a practical stem-like degree. And him [00:05:00] saying. I want to get a degree in the odds. I want to be an artist.And they’re like, well, his dad was first like, well, why, why don’t you become a civil servant? They make real money. You can make things work.No, dad, I’m gonna flunk out of school. Just despite you. He said with his that the, that era’s version of a handlebar mustache, his little hipster thing. You note that like. This was not a normal thing of the time period. We’ll get into where it came from. His, his mustache was literally that generation’s version of a hipster’s, handlebar mustache.And and require anSimone Collins: extra level of maintenance. Yeah. This isn’t like the low maintenance beard. This is something he Yeah. AndMalcolm Collins: people will know, by the way, which is actually really hilarious. They’ll be like, oh, Hiller was never actually a hardcore socialist, even though he repeatedly said it. And he said that that was one of the, the NationalSimone Collins: Socialist party leader.Malcolm Collins: Right. But they’ll say because he was interested in pure socialism even before that. Right. Okay. And they’ll say no, he was paid by the government to go to these rallies. Yeah. And he was paid by the government to go to the Nazi rallies as well. He went to the [00:06:00] rallies, he was interested in you know, he, he was not actually pure spying.He just found a hack to do, be able to basically be a beat poet of that era professionally by telling the government he was betraying people, making him the ultimate hipster. But what I’m pointing out here right, is. Okay, so he goes to live this Bohemian life in Vienna. Right. Okay. Okay. Weird. There’s avant-garde ideas and intellectuals and artists.And he, he goes there specifically and repeatedly because he refuses to do anything practical with his life or educate himself. Actually, she, the first time did he go to try to become a better artist? Yeah. Is there ever any evidence that he actually tried to improve himself or his paintings?Simone Collins: No. No, I’m looking it up now.I’m trying to, I I, I’ve, I’ve never actually seen any of Hitler’s paintings, so I’m looking They’reMalcolm Collins: fine. They, they look like a normal, like kids’ paintings like, like semi competent. It’s exactly the type of arrogant fail sun you would expect. Oh,Simone Collins: they’re, they’re, they’re sweet. They’re, they’re landscapes.They’re, they’re very uninspired. [00:07:00] They’re boring. They’re paid by the numbers. Yeah. They, they look kind of like, what I’d expect to see is like. One of the illustrations in the middle of a book that’s about like historical.Malcolm Collins: Okay. Okay. Hold on. No, no. It gets worse. He lived in a group house, so Oh, no, no, no.He goes, no, he goes to Vienna. Oh, sweetie. And he crashes with his childhood buddy. August ogre? No. Oh no. In a rented room above a tailor shop. Oh. He where were we going? Forget that soundsSimone Collins: so like. A manic, pixie dream girl. He, heMalcolm Collins: explicitly avoided. This is so cottageSimone Collins: core. I’m looking at more of his art.Okay, so he is, he draws cottage core and he lives in a group house.Malcolm Collins: Yeah, so, so he explicitly avoided day like real jobs because he believed that they cramped his creative vibe, Uhhuh, and he spent his days wandering cafes and upper houses Uhhuh, soaking up the avant garde lifestyle of this ter hipster indie festival.Oh my God. Now, now if you’re listening to any of this, you could say. [00:08:00] Huh, that sounds weird. I

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the evolving perspectives on sexuality, gender, and cultural norms. In this thought-provoking conversation, they explore the origins and functions of arousal patterns, the societal treatment of same-sex attraction, and how modern urban monoculture is reshaping the way we think about identity and pleasure.The discussion covers:* The biological and evolutionary roots of arousal and kinks* How same-sex attraction compares to other arousal patterns* The impact of societal norms and historical taboos* The role of technology and online avatars in shaping future identities* The intersection of pleasure, self-affirmation, and human flourishing* Parenting, cultural transmission, and the importance of non-arbitrary valuesWhether you’re interested in psychology, sociology, or the future of human relationships, this episode offers a nuanced and challenging perspective on some of today’s most debated topics.Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more in-depth discussions!Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are gonna be discussing my evolving views on the way that, at least within our family. But not just within our family, but I think society at large is gonna move in this direction, will think about same sex attraction in the future.Oh, and you as an audience. So if you, if you know me historically, I’ve always been very sort of pro-gay, right? Like, you know, they should be able to get married the way they want. They should be able to live life the way they want. And while I still think a lot of that, the qualifications I have around that.Have adapted pretty heavily, and you as an audience are gonna get to see something very fun, which is people ask, how come you and Simone always have like such similar beliefs about things or thoughts about things? And it’s because whenever one of us has like an update in our belief system, we share it with the other one to try to convince them, get pushback, and then we sort of [00:01:00] arrive at whatever the, the conversion.Okay. This is the new way of thinking about this thing.Simone Collins: Yeah. And it, it’s often a, a moderated or, or even totally new version of the idea. It’s not, it’s not always like Malcolm Williams. Yeah. Without moderation.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So I’ll sort of describe my thought journey as to how I got here. And part of this I’ve been talking to you about already.Hmm. So the part I had talked to you about already was me trying to think through why we categorize same sex attraction. As significantly different from any other arousal pattern kink as you would call it that he is not meant to help us reproduce because predu, you know, presumably the reason why arousal evolved was to ensure that we had procreation and had children.And we also argue that parts of the arousal system were adopted for other things that are related to survival. So across mammal species, not just in humans you see, the [00:02:00] submission and dominant system co-opting arousal patterns to motivate it. You know, interestingly, where you, where I find one of my favorite examples of this.Is in most species animals, mammals, like social mammals will take on the position. A female of that species would to be mounted in order to show submission to somebody. So you will even see males do this and females do this to show submission to the part, not to their partner, no, not to their partner, but to another dominant person in their tribe or something like that.What’s really fascinating is in species where females are dominant, like the spotted hyena, the Wake Show submission is through an erection. And in spotted hyena, you know, theSimone Collins: way the females show dominance is through an erection, isn’t that?Malcolm Collins: No, it’s how they show submission. What? Oh gosh. Okay. I wasSimone Collins: wondering, I knew they hadMalcolm Collins: pin, pseudo penises, it’s called.So, so what she was thinking of is the, the females of the spotted hyena [00:03:00] actually have pseudo penises in order to show this, this trait. And so, because it’s a species with, with dominant females, the way that you show that you are submissive is to take on the role a male would take on right before sex.When in species where males are typically dominant, you take on the role that, all right. The reason I go into all of this is I’m pointing out that the arousal system is used for things other than just to motivate procreation. And that this might explain some of the kinks that humans have. Perhaps even same sex attraction.Although I think it is less likely that that motivates same sex attraction and we can get into what might cause same sex attraction number of potential things. Mm-hmm. With this being the case, there are now two broad definitions I could go for in my head that I think are good ways to divide sort of arousal patterns, arousal patterns that are serving their intended function versus arousal patterns that are not serving their intended function.Here, you may say, well, because arousal patterns are co-opted throughout social mammals for [00:04:00] dominance and submission displays, then BDSM is less of a kink than same-sex attraction. Because this is just completely not useful for, for survival in this one is. However, I, I don’t think that that’s necessarily a good way of doing division.I would go on and say that, probably in my head, the way that I would divide it is arousal patterns that are tied to reproduction and arousal patterns that are not tied to reproduction. And then you can say okay, well, but same sex attraction is totally different from any other kink. It’s you being attracted to who, who a person is fundamentally right.And it’s something that you are, you know, you have at a young age and you can’t easily change about yourself. And here I would ask you to go to, ALA has a great study on this. I’ll, I’ll put the graph on screen if I can find it.Where she goes over the average age that kinks first appear, and actually for a wide swath of kinks, they appear before.Same sex attraction does. And [00:05:00] not only that, but if you look at studies on this, they typically only look at things like BDSM and stuff like this. But if you look at user reports of the persistency of kinks it appears that the persistency of kinks is at around the same level as the persistency of same sex attraction, maybe slightly less for some specific kicks, like the dominance and dominance and submission ones.And I would also note here that same-sex attraction is not something that you necessarily have throughout your entire life. If you look at people who go on puberty, hormones, like, sex changing hormones like trans people do, you’re looking at a 20 to 40% change their gender of primary attraction.Malcolm Collins: And we also know of, we’ve done an episode on this of parasites that can change the gender that you are predominantly attracted to with things like toxoplasmosis being more likely to make you bi in order to help itself spread. And this is a, a number of studies have have like, like peer reviewed studies have shown this.Obviously this is, this is all very offensive territory we’re getting in here, but the reason I started to go through all this is, is I was like, [00:06:00] okay. All of these things. But there is one core area where same sex attraction and this is sort of where I had stopped on this before and sort of been like, I guess our existing societal norms are good.There is one area where, which is to say if you live in a society where you’re like, Hey, and this is broadly the rule we have in our society, and it’s a rule that like, I’m okay with like as a, as a social rule, as long as you don’t involve me in your kinks. Right? Like your unique arousal pathways without my consent.Like I didn’t go into a space where I knew that people were going to be doing this or I didn’t, you, you didn’t, you didn’t force me to participate in some fantasy you have or something like that. We’re, I’m okay with that, right? Yeah. So the problem with same-sex attraction and taking that is that then, then how do these people get married?Right? Like if, if A-A-B-D-S-M person doesn’t need to have a marriage in BDSM outfits , to get married, but there is no way a [00:07:00] same-sex attracted couple can get married without it very obviously being a same sex attracted couple on that stage. And so I started thinking about that and I was like, okay, I can see that and I can see why, because you don’t have any other kink like that.There’s no other kink that is societally accepted. I suppose if you were like a PDA file, it would be very obvious if you tried to marry the person. But that’s with a non-consenting individual. If you were a, a a a Beastie bestiality person and you decide to get married to a horse or a dog, it would be very obvious.But socially we don’t condone that. And no, I’ve, I’ve always found the reason we don’t socially condone that incredibly stupid. Which is that these animals can’t consent. And it’s like you eat animals like that, like you fat farm animals like that, you eat veal where you torture a baby cow. Like, what are you, what are you talking about?These animals can’t consent. Your dog is something that you bought, and then it is normal for you to [00:08:00] breed it and sell its offspring.Simone Collins: No,Malcolm Collins: what are you? Well, and you put it thatSimone Collins: way, golly.Malcolm Collins: No, I, I, the, I think the reason why you shouldn’t have sex with animals is the same reason that almost every culture on earth has a taboo against this or many do, is that it spreads diseases and diseases are bad for populations.And so having prohibitions against it is good to prevent the spread of diseases. And then people can be like, well, does it same sex relationships spread diseases. Which we’ll get to, but I mean, historically it was true. I mean, look at the

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the provocative question: “Has real fascism ever been tried?” In this thought-provoking episode, Malcolm explores the historical and ideological roots of fascism, socialism, and their intersections with modern political movements. The discussion challenges conventional narratives about left and right-wing ideologies, examining how terms like “fascism” and “socialism” have been redefined over time.The conversation covers:* The origins and definitions of fascism and socialism* How historical figures like Mussolini and Hitler viewed their own movements* The role of collectivism, authoritarianism, and racial/ethnic narratives in shaping ideologies* Parallels between past and present political rhetoric* The influence of institutions, religion, and education on political identity* The dangers of labeling and the importance of questioning mainstream narrativesWhether you agree or disagree, this episode encourages critical thinking and a deeper look at the history and language of political ideologies. Perfect for viewers interested in history, politics, and challenging the status quo.Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more in-depth discussions![00:00:00]Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I am excited to be here with you today. Today we are gonna be exploring a chain of logic that I jumped into based on a, a simple joke that caught my mind as I was walking around, which is real fascism has never been tried. And this joke came to me because I was thinking about the, oh, you know, real communism has never been tried.But as I started to follow this to its conclusion, what I came to realize, and we’ve talked about this before on this podcast, but I think through chasing this chain of logic, you can see it more completely okay. That the modern left is not only. Just fascist, like, like they are definitionally more fascist by the original definition of fascism when it was created than either the Nazis or Mussolini was.Mm-hmm. But so, so not only are they, are they more fascist, but the, there was a sort of [00:01:00] dedicated campaign to rebrand fascism as something other than socialism. All social, all fascism is what I’m gonna be arguing in. This is what we in modern times call socialism with ethnic overtones ethnic class struggle, overtones.And I will note here that people will be like, well, it’s, it’s, it’s nationalistic ethnic overtones. And it’s like, not really. The fascist movement was Pan National to an extent. And one of the, one of the really interesting things is whenever I. We’ll talk to, like, I’ll try to engage in AI on this topic or something like that.And I’ll say, you know, in what way was fascism, not just socialism, right? And they’ll say, well, fascism contained a lot of far right elements and. I’ll be like, name one, and this is the thing. It’s not like it was socialism mixed with far right elements. It [00:02:00] literally has not a single right wing element as a component of it unless you say that racism is right wing.Only when it’s practiced by white people, which is a racist comment in and of itself. So what I, what I’ll mean here is it will say like, oh, it was right wing through things like antisemitism. And yet, and we’ll go into the data on this. The original thinkers of the the Marxist and socialist movement were far more explicitly anti-Semitic than literally, I think the, the least anti-Semitic of the socialist founding fathers was more anti-Semitic than the most anti-Semitic of America’s founding father.Dramatic margin. So, so one, it is a explicitly anti-Semitic in its roots, modern leftism. But even today, if you look at anti-Jewish hate crimes, they are far more committed by leftists than they are by righteous. So [00:03:00] to say that Nazis were right in their form of socialism because it was anti-emetic, is frankly common.So let’s go into this. Fascism’s classification is a distinct ideology, particularly the far right. Part of it. Yeah. It was a post hoc academic construction, largely driven by left-leaning scholars in the mid 20th century to rehabilitate socialism’s image after World War II by severing fascism from its socialist roots and rebranding.It obscured the shared collectivist state interventionists and anti-capitalist elements between the two, allowing socialism to be portrayed as inherently progressive and egalitarian while fascism was demonized. Its reactionary, and so when you ask. You know, go into AI and you say, what’s the difference between fascism and socialism?It will give you five core points. And so this is, this is what we’re gonna be looking at here. Right.Simone Collins: Okay. Okay. I’m, I never thought to ask this. You’re, you’re kind of blowing my mind because all of the socialist YouTubers that I follow are [00:04:00] constantly calling MAGA fascist. I was just watching another video this morning where that happened.So like what? Yeah.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. So it, it’s, it’s, it is both a what. But also a very obvious thing, right? Like,Simone Collins: okay, when youMalcolm Collins: dig down into it. And by the way, if you haven’t seen our video on Starship Troopers that we use to explore fascism as a concept much more, I strongly suggest you watch it. It’s one of the best we’ve ever made.But anyway, to continue here it has an authoritarian structure. A single leader or party with absolute power, often portraying themselves as the embodiment of a nation’s will opposition is crushed via secret police censorship, and violence. Now. You could say, does this mirror modern socialism? So who is the face of modern socialism?You’re looking at Hassan Piker, right? Like I, I think it’d be hard to argue that somebody else is the face of modern socialism. He is the number one left-leaning streamer. Okay. So Hassan Piker recently did a trip to the CCP where he went on and on good China. How great the CCP [00:05:00] was, so, and how much better the CCP was than the United States.So note here, the United States. Is a capitalist democracy, maybe an imperfect democracy, but it is a democracy. He said that the CCP in contrast was a much better way to structure a government. So let’s see if that fits. Criteria one. A single leader or party with absolute power often portraying themselves as the embodiment of a nation’s will opposition is crushed via secret police censorship, and violence.That is exactly fascism. It’s not related to fascism. Along this differentiating point it is. Exactly fascism. In addition to the using authoritarian technocratic, controlled hierarchical governments, ruled by unelected officials to crush free speech, is that not what we see actively going on in the UK right now, which is much more left wing than the United States?Is unelected officials very frequently implementing extremely draconian legal [00:06:00] restrictions where, for example, somebody was arrested. For writing simply on their wall. Islam can be questioned. And this is something I’ll get to deeper here. Obviously you wouldn’t be arrested if you had wrote, Christianity can be questioned.Obviously you wouldn’t be arrested if you had written. Judaism can be questioned, right? So the other thing I’ll write here is they’ll say, well, it’s an egalitarian. Belief system. And I’ll point out that no, when you look at the de colonialist mindset, what you actually see is a very explicit racialist agenda that, that highly mirrors.The Racialist agenda we saw was in Nazism. So to continue here. Unitarianism and often racism. So they’ll say the nation or the ethnic group is exalted as superior with myths of historical greatness. Or victimhood used to justify expansionism and exclusion. So hold, hold, hold, hold, hold on here. Here. Myth of a victimhood.And I think that this is really important because it requires understanding the way that Nazism was actually structured. [00:07:00] Okay. Nazim. When it explained to its people, because we have a lot of writings on this, this isn’t like a mystery how Hitler got people angry at the Jews. Right, right. Yeah. He said the Jews control a disproportionate amount of wealth.They have historically oppressed us. Look at them sabotaging us in our wars and stuff like that, and they have. Permanently made the German people an underclass through systemic discrimination. This is the exact argument that is being used by the modern leftist movement, but it’s worse than that. If you look at the modern leftist movement, much more so than class struggle, as a phenomenon, or as something that’s talked about.What they talk about is, and we go into this a lot in the episode we did on Zohan Mandani, another one I strongly recommend we watch, where we go over the colonialist de colonialist mindset that his father lays out in a number of his books, which are, are, are [00:08:00] very interesting. And essentially. He separates the world into two groups.One group is the United States and Europe and the Jews. Mm-hmm. And this group had, you know, historic economic power and winter round and colonized various regions of the world. And through that colonization firm, permanently made anyone who was from one of these regions. An underclass in a way that they cannot escape without a violent overthrow and restructuring of the system, which we’ll get to in a second.Mm. Okay. And this, this can make sense if you’re viewing the world like they do. So you’re like, okay. Why are certain groups , not able to achieve economic prosperity when there are no cultural or genetic differences between groups? Because modern leftism takes this as the truism.Mm-hmm. And so it says, if, if, if that is the case, then how is it true that, that some groups ended up [00:09:00] with more power than other groups. Right. Well, it must have come from this period of colonialization. And we’ll do a separate video on this because I think the very interesting concept and topic, but one of the things we point out is we can know factually, this isn’t t

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins for a thought-provoking Thanksgiving special that challenges the way we view gratitude, abundance, and modern life. In this episode, they explore the history and meaning of Thanksgiving, reflect on the incredible luxuries of the present day, and discuss why genuine gratitude—not performative thankfulness—can transform your outlook and well-being.From the evolution of food and the abundance in our grocery stores, to the psychological and physical benefits of gratitude, Malcolm and Simone dive deep into what it means to appreciate the small things in life. They share personal stories, historical context, and practical advice for cultivating a grateful mindset, even when life feels tough.Whether you’re celebrating Thanksgiving or just looking for a fresh perspective on happiness and fulfillment, this episode will inspire you to see your everyday life in a new light. Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more insightful conversations![00:00:00]Malcolm Collins: Hello, I am excited to be here with you today on American Thanksgiving.Speaker 4: White.My, I bought them in your mouth. . Eat me. He wants for now food.Malcolm Collins: Now, if you are unfamiliar with what Thanksgiving is as a holiday in the United. States, because about 50% of our audience is outside the United States.Speaker 5: Remember, these savages are our guests. We must not be surprised at any of their strange customs. After all, they have not had our advantages such as fine schools, libraries, full of books, shampoo,Malcolm Collins: It is a holiday where you are supposed to meet with family, have a big feast, and go over things that you are grateful forSpeaker 5: Why you are as civilized as we, except we wear shoes and have last names. .Malcolm Collins: And I wanted to take this [00:01:00] episode to focus on something I know the algorithm’s gonna hate, but I think for the audience members who decide to trudge through this, it’s a message that I wish was more common in our society today. And it’s a message that’s not more common in our society today for the very reason that the algorithm hates it.Mm. It is not controversial. It doesn’t make other people look bad. I mean, I mean, it may be controversial to say at this point. But that’s that you should feel incredibly privileged to be alive today. OhSimone Collins: yes. As hardMalcolm Collins: as dating is today, as much as you may feel like you got dealt a bad hand in life as much as the the world.Globally that we live in today, even if you are living in a degree of desperate poverty, even if you are living in a degree of you know, you’re, you are not attractive. You’re not, oh, I can’t get a [00:02:00] girl, I can’t, whatever, right?Simone Collins: Oh, even I can’t get a job. I will never own a house there. There’s a lot that people like The narratives today are, I would say quite.Negative and they completely diminish. Like some really serious,Malcolm Collins: yeah. It’s not just that this, like, I’ll never own a house, I’ll never get a girlfriend. And I think that one of the biggest problems that we have in society now is this expectation that you deserve merely for existing. And I think that this is where a lot of the progressive movement actually comes from in their ideology.Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Mm-hmm. As, as actual, like, not, not just rights, but like rights that you can claim, like, I have the right to have happiness. Not, not even the pursuit of happiness. To just have happiness. Right. Like, yeah. They didn’t put. They didn’t saySimone Collins: life, liberty and happiness for a good reason to the potMalcolm Collins: potential, it shoulda said, and the potentially fruitless pursuit of happiness.Simone Collins: Right? [00:03:00]Malcolm Collins: That is, that, that is. But my point being is that most people throughout history didn’t even have like the illusion that this would be something. And, and even today you don’t, you know, your, your. Born in, in the United States, like one of the most privileged places you can be born on earth.Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.Malcolm Collins: And there has become a culture in the United States around, and I, I see this all the time because we go on, on walks. My wife and I, we try to go on a walk together every, well now about half the mornings ‘cause you know, we have to do more works to film the episode and stuff like that and, and code and everything.But one of the places we like going are places like Walmart and Target and I, these randomSimone Collins: grocery stores.Malcolm Collins: Grocery stores, random grocery stores, and I will see people. I was, I was watching a v YouTuber recently, and they were like, oh my God, I never wanna go in back into Walmart again after, after being there.It looks like so disgusting, so whatever. And my wife is a very sensitive person, a very autistic person. Does not like [00:04:00] being around people, but even she, you know, every time we walk through Walmart, and I mean, every single time you do this. You comment on just the level of obscene luxury we have in our societyto even have the opportunity to see and look at such a diversity of potential products,Simone Collins: the sheer abundance of it, and like it’s, it’s. So annoying because people like I, there, there used to be a blog maybe 10 years ago. I’m sure it’s defunct now though. Maybe there may be variations of it called people of Walmart where people would just post photos of unfortunate, overweight, poorly dressed Americans.I remember that. Yeah. People, it was delightful, honestly. I loved it. It was and it just, but it, it, it completely discounted the fact that it, it’s like. I guess it’s kind of like the, the, the fat scooter beasts in the movie Wally, where like, oh, look at them. They’re so disgusting, but like, it, oh wait, but they’re on an AI powered spaceship with unlimited abundance.Like, it [00:05:00] just completely overlooks that. And, and just like with the movie Wally, like the focus is on, like him being on this trash stre world and his, his misadventures and everything. Oh, wait a second. There is this incredible thing that has happened in the background. This is not to say that we, we, people might think, oh, well they live in some, you know, like Valley for is, you know, a very affluent area and you know, they’re only going to the fanciest grocery stores.I mean, this is the, the Walmart that we walk around has relatively pretty bad local reviews, and I don’t know why, because it’s. It’s an amazing story. It’s likeMalcolm Collins: Norristown, Walmart, Simone Norristown has one of the highest murder rates in the United States. Yeah. AndSimone Collins: like there’s, you know, we’ve, there have been like dirty diapers left on the ground of it, like it’s.I think it’s great. IMalcolm Collins: love it. But like diaper, so, so let’s just talk about Walmart for a second. For all of the negative things that people say about stores like this and everything Uhhuh. Contrast the fact that a Walmart exists near us to [00:06:00] what it was like historically to try to feed yourself in your family.Yeah. You can in the United States take a minimum wage job. And for a couple hours of labor reliably be able to take the money you make from just a couple hours of labor at a minimum wage job to said Walmart and trade it for one of a thousand different flavors and products that can probably keep you alive for the day.Simone Collins: Yeah. Whereas, you know, very recently our ancestors were. Only on potatoes. What are we having today? Potatoes.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. I wanna contrast that with what it was like to try to feed yourself at different parts of human history.Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.Malcolm Collins: If you go back to a hunter gatherer period and you told one of them in the future, your descendants will be able to trade like two and a half to three hours of minimum wage labor.Okay. For reliable [00:07:00] calories in any flavor they want. That will not get them sick.Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: This would’ve. Downed them. Mm-hmm. They’d be like three hours. And I don’t need to guess if the berries are gonna kill me three hours. And I don’t need to worry if the meat has gone bad because we got that from a hunt, you know, two weeks ago.And who knows if it’s still good, like, and, andSimone Collins: oh, I mean honestly though, like. There are all these things they wanna go back in time and show someone in history. There’s this one, TikTok, but also she posts YouTube short accounts of just this woman who holds up various berries and fruits and she’s, she has this little song, she’s like, one of these is food dead, one is a poison.And she, you, you get to guess and she tells you all about them and like, they’re like, wait, there’s a random woman on your magical hand box. That tells you which plants are gonna kill me and which plants I can eat. Like the fact that we can just take a picture of a plant with our phone, like even if it came down to forging, if we still have the internet somehow, which I mean,Malcolm Collins: There wouldn’t be enough food to support [00:08:00] forging with the population right now.Just. If in case you’re not aware, I know, I’m, I’m aware of that. Which also bring to a thing all of the things people complain about. Mm-hmm. They complain about Walmart, they complain about GMOs. Do you know like what corn used to look like historically? You would grow corn and you’d get like a little thing that was like an inch and a half along and you could only eat like a portion of it.And this is true of almost all of the food crops, whether it’s broccoli or cauliflower or lettuce. Or tomatoes, maybe likeSimone Collins: brussel sprouts, which, you know, just 30 years ago used to taste absolutely horrible.And now they’re amazing.Malcolm Collins: Right. But I think what people don’t realize is how recent this scene abundance is. So let’s talk about something simple like apples, righ

In this episode, Simone and Malcolm Collins dive deep into the surprising ways American public schools have started to resemble multi-level marketing (MLM) schemes. From endless fundraisers and donation drives to the rise of for-profit school photo companies and Scholastic book fairs, they explore how the focus has shifted from education to extracting money from parents and families.They discuss the impact of teachers’ unions, the inefficiency of increased school spending, and the lack of accountability in the public school system. The conversation is filled with personal anecdotes, data, and a critical look at how school choice and alternative education models could offer a solution.If you’ve ever wondered why your child comes home talking more about selling popcorn than what they learned in class, or if you’re frustrated by the constant fundraising requests, this episode is for you.Finally, here’s today’s episode outline, as Simone did this one! The transcript can be found at the end. Episode Outline: Schools Are MLMs Now - We Are In Full-On Idiocracy AlreadyThe Gist* The only thing our son talks about with regard to his school experience is fundraisers and donations* This week—THIS WEEK ALONE—we have been repeatedly hammered about THREE THINGS:* Picture day (retakes)* Donating candy for decorating gingerbread houses, BECAUSE THEY CANCELLED THE ONE FIELD TRIP OF THE YEAR* Participating in a readathon fundraiserThis comes at a time when it is more clear than ever that US public schools are failing:* Trening on X: A University of California, San Diego report shows placements into remedial math courses jumped from 32 students in 2020 to 921 in 2025, or 11.8% of freshmen. Despite high school GPAs averaging 3.74 and many claiming calculus experience, placement tests revealed gaps in basics like fractions and word problems, with weak links to transcripts. Factors include COVID learning losses, test-free admissions since 2021, and more students from under-resourced schools; outcomes are poor, with high failure rates in calculus and fewer engineering degrees.* Peter Meijer puts it well: In just a decade, education activists in the US managed to set back student outcomes by 50 years, an impressive accomplishment rivaled only by the Taliban’s takeover in Afghanistan.Schools Have Become MLMsSchools Are Being Used to Shill Private Companies’ ProductsThere’s a Great Planet Money episode titled “The secret world behind school fundraisers and turning kids into salespeople”Here’s a summary of the NPR Planet Money episode, “Why do schools in the U.S. rely on kids to raise money?”:* The podcast addresses the open secret that school fundraisers are a staple in American education. * It talks about how students are often incentivized to sell products (like popcorn, chocolate, wrapping paper) with the promise of prizes—sometimes extravagant ones, but usually less valuable than the effort required.* SC personal memories selling See’s Candies and wrapping paper* The episode follows Villacorta Elementary in La Puente, California, showing how fundraising is needed for things not covered by the official budget—especially field trips. The PTA plays a central, tireless role in organizing these efforts.* While schools receive substantial funding per student (mostly spent on salaries and basic operations), Principals have limited discretionary funds. Budget rules often restrict spending, making PTA-raised money especially valuable because it’s unrestricted * [NOT MENTIONED IN THE EPISODE: This spending is functionally restricted, if not technically restricted, by TEACHERS’ UNIONS DEMANDS]* Fundraising companies compete for PTA business, enticing members with dinners and easy logistics. The typical split is ~40% to the school, 60% to the company, so the value-return for schools is not great.* Kids today “sell” mostly via family and friends, not door-to-door, but social pressure remains. Teachers often organize smaller events, while kids hope for prizes, even if they’re small trinkets.* The motivation for fundraising is partly tactical: It’s easier to rally families to support fun perks like field trips and parties than operational costs. Cash donations are less popular than fundraisers with tangible rewards.* PTA funds fill gaps, helping schools overcome bureaucratic hurdles and buy things needed quickly, which public funds can’t always provide.* The Planet Money team concludes that ultimately, the system persists because people prefer to give when there’s excitement, visible reward, and community involvement—despite the inefficiencies and emotional discomfort of turning kids into salespeople.Don’t Forget the Other Fundraisers!These fundraisers are in addition to X-athons, school photos, and Scholastic book fairies, which were a part of my public school education and also a part of our son’s public school educationX-AthonsWalkathons and readathons, along with similar achievement-based fundraisers, have been held in US public schools since at least the early 1970s, gaining significant popularity by the late 1970s and 1980s* Simone’s walkathon experiences* Octavian’s current readathon* But this encourages kids to read!!* NOT AT ALLSchool PhotosThe Lifetouch Conspiracy* Early school photos were often group shots taken outside the school; the idea of individual portraits and unified “picture day” events became popularized more broadly as companies like Lifetouch scaled up operations and introduced standardized processes and products.* Then Lifetouch came along* Lifetouch is the major school photography company in the US* Lifetouch has been providing school photos since 1936, when it was founded as National School Studios in Minnesota. This means the company has nearly 90 years of continuous operation in the school photography business* Prior to Lifetouch’s expansion, the school photography industry was comprised mostly of smaller, independent photographers and regional companies.* It encourages schools to disrupt classes to have students photographed so they can sell those photos to parents* Lifetouch photos ARE AWFUL* Public schools receive a commission from Lifetouch ranging from 15% to as high as 50% of sales, though the typical range is 15% to 20% for most contracts.* Some agreements are based on a flat fee per package sold or a guaranteed minimum commission. Other contracts might include signing bonuses or extra products and services as incentives for schools.Scholastic Book Fairs* Scholastic book fairs have been held in public schools since 1981, when Scholastic purchased the California School Book Fairs and began organizing in-school book fairs nationwide* California School Book Fairs was a company that made money by selling books directly to students and families at school-hosted events* Schools that host Scholastic book fairs generally receive either 25% of the total sales as cash profit or 50% as “Scholastic Dollars,” which is a form of store credit usable for educational materials from Scholastic* This 25% cut only comes with the highest tier; the book sales have to exceed $2,500 to get that cut* Profit returned to schools nationwide totals approximately $200 million annually.* But Scholastic makes A LOT more* Scholastic Corporation is a publicly traded company listed on NASDAQ under the ticker symbol SCHL* Gross profit margins for Scholastic Corporation have typically been strong, with the latest trailing twelve months figure around 55.8%More Spending Doesn’t Produce Better OutcomesThis is summarized well by Emil Kirkegaard on substack in his writeup “Against the economists on school spending” in which Kirkegaard highlights how large randomized, controlled trials on educational interventions almost always show no or negligible benefits.Highlights:* Kirkegaard critiques claims, common in economics and education policy circles, that increasing school spending significantly improves student outcomes, particularly test scores.* Kirkegaard references major studies (like the Coleman Report) showing that parental background and socioeconomic status matter much more than school variables for student achievement. School-related factors contribute only about 10% to outcomes.* He highlights meta-analyses and prominent studies frequently cited by economists, noting that effect sizes for increased spending on test scores are extremely small (typically 0.030.030.03 standard deviations per $1,000 per pupil, or even less), and that results are often muddied by bias, p-hacking, and publication bias in the literature.* There is deep skepticism regarding complex economist studies employing complicated statistical techniques to claim causal effects. Kirkegaard prefers large, simple randomized controlled trials, which consistently find null or very minor effects for spending and interventions (average effect size about 0.060.060.06).* Examples such as massive funding boosts for “Abbott” districts in New Jersey, Mark Zuckerberg’s donation to Newark schools, and LeBron James’ high-profile Akron school, all failed to improve achievement gaps or test scores.* Kirkegaard argues academia has self-interest in producing research suggesting more funding yields positive results, comparing “Big Education” to industries like “Big Pharma” when it comes to bias.* He concludes that real-world attempts to increase spending fail to close gaps, effects are minimal, and much of the advocacy for spending increases rests on flawed assumptions and weak evidence.Main Takeaways:* Economist studies using quasi-experimental methods find tiny effects, but often exaggerate their practical significance.* There is an incentive for academia to argue for more funding, raising doubts about objectivity.* Real-world historical cases of major school funding or reform projects have repeatedly failed to close achievement gaps or boost outcomes meaningfully.* Strategies focused solely on spending increases are unlikely to solve deep-rooted problems in education; student backgrounds and br

In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the recent X (Twitter) region doxxing controversy and explore the much bigger story behind how the internet—and social media algorithms—are being transformed by AI.We break down the real impact of location leaks on X, reveal how many popular accounts turned out to be fakes, and discuss why this might be the last time we see a leak like this. But that’s just the beginning: we examine how AI-generated content, comments, and even recommended video topics are shaping what we see online, and why it’s getting harder to tell what’s real and what’s not.From the rise of AI-driven YouTube suggestions to the surprising results of studies on people’s ability to distinguish between human and AI-created art, music, and writing, we ask: what does authenticity mean in a world where algorithms and artificial intelligence dominate?We also discuss the future of online communities, the value of real human connection, and why being “imperfect” might soon be a badge of authenticity. Plus, hear our thoughts on the cultural and psychological shifts happening as AI becomes more integrated into our daily digital lives.For reference, here is a screenshot showing YouTube’s AI-generated episode suggestions (when you click through, you get full on outlines!):Episode Transcript: Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we will actually not be deeply covering the Twitter thing. We will be briefly covering it, but I will be going over a much deeper and much bigger story about how the internet works than you guys are not hearing, because that’s what we always do on this channel.I’ll see something, do the rounds, and I’m like, how can I do a take on this that brings in information and data. People just aren’t getting, if they’re watching the regular YouTuber lineup. Right. I will note the one thing that I found very depressing in the regular YouTuber lineup of the covering, so if you don’t know what I’m talking about, the location leaks on X and they had actually told everyone they were gonna do this like months ago. Made everyone news to me. Yeah, location, where the account was. And where the account, like where the user was when they created the account. Public.Simone Collins: Yeah. So like, if you click on our account, for example, it says that the account was created in 2008 in the United States and that we have a United States based Android app.So [00:01:00] presumably if we created the account in Japan, it would say that. And so, you know, the year established, you know, the region established and you know, the app downloaded.Malcolm Collins: And unsurprisingly, a ton of accounts, a ton of very popular accounts turned out to be obviously frauds. You know, they were like, thatSimone Collins: surprises me.You sayMalcolm Collins: it’s unsurprising. That’s, I think that’s shocking. What are some fun ones ? Like Republicans against Trump, which had almost a million followers, was an Austrian account Austrian. Yeah defiant ls, which was a right-leaning anti-left hypocrisy, pro-con conservative account was an Indian Macedonian account.Jansen Hickle, which is interesting ‘cause it’s a real person with 3.6 million followers who pretended to be an American was in Burkina Faso. The Trump army was an Indian account, for example. Oh my goodness. Over half a million followers. Amazing. And everybody, what I’ve hated about the coverage of this is everybody’s just going [00:02:00] like, oh, look at the other side.They were heavily astro turfed. And so I was like, first of all, what’s the actual breakdown? It’s about 60. About 60% of the accounts that were called out were Republican accounts, and about 40% were Democratic leaning accounts. If you’re wondering why I love the democratic accounts, where it’s a lot of people pretending to be zens and like how horrible their lives are, and most of them.But anyway, the, the reason why it would trend slightly more Republican is because republicans would care more that you are from their country, right? Like you can be a Democratic influencer and from Africa or something, right? That’s not going to in, in qual unqualify you, but as a Republican that could unqualify you.So that’s why it leans slightly that way. I was really disappointed to see how far off the rail, short fat of taco. Fallen that his entire video was just about how there was a lot of this on the right and he didn’t really go into it in the left that much. No. About equal numbers. But anyway, anyway what is interesting, what is interesting is that this might be the last [00:03:00] time we get a leak like this, and I’ll explain why.Like even the concept of pseudonymity may not make sense in the future. What, and I’ll be diving into data that was shared by, and I found this absolutely fascinating. Romanian tv e who is a, a Romanian podcaster,a conservative politics podcaster who PO podcast is like a troll avatar thing. And he has two accounts.So this was posted on his alt account called Lack of Entertainment under the title, why Your Favorite Content Creator is a Robot.Malcolm Collins: Oh yeah, yeah.And what he decided to do on this alt account was something very odd. So now it used to be if you go to YouTube, you could go and it would have an AI and the AI would suggest to you based on your followers and everything like that titles for episodes that you might want to cover. Like ideas, right?Oh, yes. If you go to that page today, and I will put this on screen for you ‘cause it is absolutely shocking. Oh. It’ll give you [00:04:00] titles, suggested title cards, suggested scripts that, that go like beat by beat of what you should be talking about. And I was like, this is, this is wild. Right? Like if I wanted to, I could just be like, okay, I’m gonna go.Actually Simone, do you wanna pull that up for our account so we can go over some of those with Yeah. See if they, they’d listen to this. Okay. But he decided to one day just be like, you know what? I’m gonna, I’m gonna click on one of these. I’m gonna do one of these Beat by beat. Right.Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: But what he did was very interesting.He ended up creating the title that they wanted and the broad thumbnail they wanted.Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.Malcolm Collins: But he didn’t actually cover the topic that was there. Right. He, he used it as sort of a jumping off point to talk about something totally different.Simone Collins: Didn’t he use it to talk about the, I like the, the, the fact that it was there in the first place.Malcolm Collins: No, he used a separate video to talk about that, but he used it to talk about the idea now. The [00:05:00] maybe less interesting parts of this was that this video did much better than his other videos. It seemed to be doing like twice or three times as well as his other videos. But what was really fascinating, and this is a rabbit hole that is such a big deal to me than all these, because all these Twitter.I suspect all the time. I mean, if people acting Pseu anonymously, like why wouldn’t they be pretending to be in a different country where things are actually happening? Yeah. They’re from Austria or something where your tweets are completely irrelevant. Politically speaking. Although a lot of people did pretend to be Indians who were Pakistanis.Wait, what? Try to influence Indian politics. Yeah. Yeah. Really funny. Anyway. So to continue with the story here, so the really crazy thing that happened with this is a lot of the comments on this video that he did ended up being about the topic that had been suggested to him, not the topic he covered.Simone Collins: Oh,Malcolm Collins: [00:06:00] yes. And not just that, but they were super generic as if they were run by a low cost AI model, like MRL small or something like that. Hmm.And what I realized when I saw this, he didn’t seem to put this together on his video. But what I realized is AI is going to completely transform the way the internet works through pseudonym artificial intelligence interactions.Let me explain what I mean by this. So by the way, did you pull up what it, what it suggested for us?Simone Collins: Yes, and I took a screenshot,so let me send that to you and you can put it up for those who wanna see what it actually looks like. ‘cause as Malcolm said, they, they do even include title, title card, images.So there’s suggested, and they also have little like signs like a, a circle that’s either partially or almost all the way filled in, showing just how much of an audience match they think it is. So sort of [00:07:00] how strongly they recommend we do this. Top is Gen Z’s unexpected embrace of traditional masculinity than the unforeseen upside of traditional gender roles.Oh, no. Why are we so afraid of being quote unquote uncool and the rise of quote unquote quiet quitting in relationships. Oh, I kind of like that one. The, the rise of quiet, quitting in relationships. Yeah. And then are you being manipulated by nostalgia? That last one actually seems like, one we might do, and then you, if you hover over these, you, you can bookmark them, you can mark them as helpful or something wrong, and then if you click through to them, you can click a develop idea button.And I’ll show just now a screenshot of the inspiration page for gen Z’s unexpected embrace of traditional masculinity. ‘cause they give you, like Malcolm said, full on episode outlines. [00:08:00] This is so weird. Neither you or I have looked at this until just now. This is your firstMalcolm Collins: time looking at it and you’re just like, yeah, you’re getting our firstSimone Collins: impressions here.The, the shock and awe. Of YouTube basically trying to just sock puppet us. And I, I hadn’t thought about the extent to which, it reminds me of the original, hold on hold. I’veMalcolm Collins: gotta, you, you’ve gotta read this to the audience.Simone Collins: I know, but I just wanna say first it reminds me

Dive into a fascinating and provocative discussion about the growing trend of women using pharmaceuticals and hormones to boost their sex drive. Hosts Simone and Malcolm Collins explore the cultural, medical, and social implications of drugs like Addyi (the so-called “female Viagra”) and testosterone therapy, referencing recent New York Times articles and real-life stories.The conversation covers:* The science behind female libido and the diagnosis of hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD)* The rise of medications and hormone treatments aimed at increasing women’s sexual desire* The cultural phenomenon of women openly discussing and experimenting with these treatments* The impact on relationships, marriage, and family life* The debate over whether society should encourage or question the pursuit of higher female sex drive* The generational divide in attitudes toward sex and intimacy* The risks, side effects, and ethical questions surrounding medicating for desireWhether you’re curious about the latest trends in sexual health, interested in the intersection of medicine and culture, or just want to hear a candid, humorous take on a taboo topic, this episode is for you.If you enjoy the discussion, don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more thought-provoking conversations! Also, as this was a Simone-outlined episode, here are our show notes!Episode Outline - The Women Drugging Themselves to Be HornyWomen Trying to Medicate Sex Drives / hypoactive sexual desire disorderThe Gist* As much as we talk about everyone becoming increasingly sexless, there is a subset of women who are ALL ABOUT sex, and they’ll even go to great lengths to stoke sex drives when they have none* Testosterone* Flibanserin * Dropping and changing birth control and other medications* The NY Times has written various articles covering elements of this subset of women* I’ll walk you through the issue* And in the end, I want your take, and I want listener’s takes, on whether the pursuit of a higher female sex drive is important, neutral, or detrimentalSeries of NY Times Stories on Women Pushing for SexViagra for WomenThe “gateway” article to this issue for me was about basically viagra for women—a medication called Filbanserin branded as Addyi that’s marketed as “the little pink pill” by a woman named Cindy Eckert who herself is famous for integrating pink into every aspect of her style. Here’s a 2025 documentary premiering about it: Cindy has been trying, through her company Sprout Pharmaceuticals, to promote Addyi for a decade* Her work was recently covered by the NY Times:* A Pill for Women’s Libido Meets a Cultural Moment* A decade ago, Cindy Eckert struggled to convince skeptics about a drug for premenopausal women. Lately, her business is booming.* https://archive.is/Z3BDpWhy Do Women Need Viagra?Flibanserin is meant to treat Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (aka HSDD), which is a measurable conditionWomen with HSDD have different brain activityhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18976696* This functional MRI (fMRI) study compared brain activation and sexual response between:* 20 women without sexual dysfunction (NHSD)* 16 women diagnosed with HSDDParticipants were exposed to erotic, sports, and relaxing video segments. Researchers measured subjective sexual arousal, physiological arousal using a vaginal photoplethysmograph (VPP), and brain activation at three sessions. The differences suggest that women with HSDD may have altered encoding or retrieval of arousing stimuli and possibly devote more cognitive attention to monitoring/evaluating their responses, which might interfere with normal sexual response. This is indicated by increased activation in specific brain areas linked to attention and evaluation.So what does flibanserin do?* Slightly increases sexual desire and activity* Slightly lowers distress* Causes drowsiness and lowers blood pressure, especially when combined with alcohol* WHY NOT JUST DRINK???The weird thing about this drug is that it’s not really effective. The FDA rejected Sprout Pharmaceutical’s application for approval for the drug (again, because WHY NOT JUST GET DRUNK). From the NY Times article: “To be turned down twice by the F.D.A. is typically a death sentence for new drugs. But for flibanserin, the decision had the opposite effect: It galvanized a movement of women who believed the rejection reeked of sexism.”The FDA eventually approved Addyi after a heavy resistance campaign, financed by Sprout Pharmaceuticals: “The F.D.A. approved flibanserin in 2015, writing later in the New England Journal of Medicine that while “the average treatment effects were small” (about 10 percent higher than placebo) “efficacy had been established.””So what makes Addyi interesting is the discourse around it—the fact that prominent actress and influencers like Gwenyth Paltrow are writing and talking about it—and not that it’s particularly effective. What’s interesting is that women care.Women Taking TestosteroneLet’s move on to medical intervention that is more effective at increasing sex drive: TestosteroneThe NY Times also covered this with:* ‘I’m on Fire’: Testosterone Is Giving Women Back Their Sex Drive — and Then Some* There is no F.D.A.-approved testosterone product for women. Insurance won’t cover it. Many doctors won’t prescribe it. It’s become a cultural phenomenon* https://archive.is/KcwIA#selection-473.0-477.153Great opening: “Spend enough time speaking to women who are taking testosterone — specifically, in very high doses — and you start to notice that they sound messianic. They’re often talking fast and intensely; they’re amped up; they’re describing what they clearly consider a miracle drug; and they have no intention of lowering their dose, despite the unknown risks or some problems with facial hair. After all, how can they worry about facial hair when they feel so alive? It’s nothing they can’t take care of with a quick waxing, which they now have the energy to do at the end of the day — right after they prepare a high-protein dinner for their family and before they put the finishing touches on their spreadsheets, close their laptops and light a few mood candles for the sex that they know will be great, maybe even better than the sex they had last night, even though they’re a day older.”The article is about how Testosterone therapy has become a cultural phenomenon among women seeking to boost their sex drive and overall energy, despite there being no F.D.A.-approved testosterone products for women in the U.S., and significant barriers such as lack of insurance coverage and reluctance among many doctors to prescribe the hormone.The article focuses on the lack of regulatory and medical support for female testosterone supplementation, despite the fact that it drops with age and can diminish sexual desire and motivation in women, which has pushed women toward expensive, non-traditional supplementation. To be fair, as the article points out: “For men experiencing the effects of low testosterone — low libido, low energy, loss of muscle mass — the F.D.A. has approved more than 30 products since the 1950s; and yet, to this day, there is no F.D.A.-approved testosterone cream, patch, pill or shot for women, even though their testosterone levels fall far more precipitously than men’s as they age.”Women who take testosterone — often at higher doses than medically recommended — * report dramatic increases in energy, libido, and marital intimacy. Some describe near-miraculous transformations in their relationships and personal drive. However, these gains come with risks: * Side effects can include facial hair, acne, hair loss, deepening of the voice, and, in some cases, enlarged clitoris or persistent irritation and anger.It’s clear that testosterone does more to help sex drive than Addyi. From the article: “Both Medina and Lin are taking an amount of testosterone that’s brought their levels higher than what women produce naturally at any point in their lifetimes. The way they and many women on these high doses talk about their relationships sometimes has the ring of romantasy: fantastic tales of sexual rejuvenation and newfound intimacy. One woman in her 50s told me that after years of revulsion at so much as the thought of her husband’s breath, she now looked forward to having sex with him almost every night; even in the middle of sex, she said, she was thinking about the next time they could have sex. Another woman told me she’d had more orgasms in the past two years on testosterone than in the entirety of her previous life; a third said that after years of “wanting to rip someone’s face off” if her husband so much as touched her, she now actively pursued sex with him — if anything, she now worried, she wanted it more often than he did.”It’s also clear that women’s advocacy of testosterone is going somewhat mainstream: “This season on “The Real Housewives of Orange County,” three of the show’s stars described their testosterone regimens: Gretchen Rossi was shown baring her bottom as her doctor implanted beneath her skin a tiny but powerful pellet packed with crystalline testosterone that would be released over the course of about four months. She commented afterward that she had recently reduced her levels. “I had to take mine down because I was humping everything,” she said. Rossi’s co-star Jennifer Pedranti commiserated: “You’ll just hump and hump and hump away.””Gen X Women and SexIt may be that this surge in interest in sex drive among women is largely relegated to older women, as the women cited in the two previous articles are in their 40s and 50sThis is somewhat backed up by a NY Times article on Gen X women and this broad subject:* Why Gen X Women Are Having the Best Sex* In an era plagued by sex negativity, only one generation seems immune: mine.* https://archive.is/qxHc5* The article explores how Gen X women (born 1965-1980) are experiencing a renaissance in their sex lives during middle age, often finding

In this episode, Simone and Malcolm Collins dive into the evolving landscape of Gen Z divorce, inspired by a trending New York Times article. They discuss how marriage and divorce are changing for younger generations, exploring topics like queer solidarity, polyamory, and the shifting meaning of marriage. The conversation covers the normalization of divorce, the influence of social media on relationship expectations, and the rise of non-traditional relationship models. Simone and Malcolm also reflect on personal experiences, societal trends, and the impact of cultural shifts on marriage, family, and identity. The episode is filled with insightful commentary, humor, and candid takes on what it means to be married—or divorced—in the modern age.Simone Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Malcolm. I’m excited to be speaking with you today because we have come across more New York Times Gold, and if you did not happen to see this trending on X, then you might’ve missed it. We don’t want you to miss this because this is about Gen Z divorce at least the more fun parts of Gen Z divorce.Malcolm Collins: I thought it was fascinating when you were going through it because it was. Oh my God. The que they’re like, well, you know, I had to have a sit down with his mistress before telling him, because, you know, queer solidarity. And it’s like, it is the most Gen Z, gen Z thing you’ve ever seen. I mean, it shows that the context of marriage is really changing for this next generation.Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: And if people think fertility rates are shot now, they do not know what’s coming. I’m gonna tell you whatSimone Collins: 100% Yeah. We’re, we’re in for it. One of the big complaints when this was discussed on, on X people were saying, this isn’t representative. This isn’t what Gen Z’s actually like. But the, the whole point is.[00:01:00]What, what this article highlights is a a a specific ex extreme, just like any divorce lawyer is going to see a lot of specific extremes. And what’ll, and we’re, we’re gonna get into it with the article, but divorce lawyers are now this the matter havingMalcolm Collins: divorce lawyer, I got the impressionSimone Collins: right there, there were a couple that were interviewed.But they’re seeing a distinct shift in the reasons why people are getting divorced and that shift is meaningful. But even though we’re looking atMalcolm Collins: cases, but I, the genzer who are saying, this isn’t the Gen Z that I know I think what we’re, we’re actually seeing is a bifurcation and behavioral patterns with Gen Z with some becoming uber brain rotted, urban monoculture, and some moving away from the urban monoculture, and there’s less of a middle ground within that generation.Simone Collins: Yeah, I agree. And, and the same people stick with the same people. The insane people, well, they cuddle together and talk about divorcing theirMalcolm Collins: ais.Simone Collins: Yeah. Their AI boyfriends. Yeah.Malcolm Collins: Alright, continue. Come on, start. Let’s, let’s go. [00:02:00]Simone Collins: I’m so excited for this. In 2021, Kira Benson, a violinist. Living in Seattle knew it was time to get a divorce ending.Their two year lavender marriage wasn’t an easy decision, but the musician had a supportive ally. If you have to dump your ex-husband, m Benson said go dump him with his mistress. Before the breakup, Mick Benson, 27. Who uses the pronoun? They checked in with her, their, sorry. Their therapist who said a divorce would be a good choice.Out of queer solidarity. They informed their husband’s mistress. This was kosher and mixed Benson’s arrangement.Malcolm Collins: Sure. Before we go further, can we start breaking apart everything that’s going on here? Okay, so first there in what she refers to as a lavender marriage which is a type of marriage that you get into as a woman if you are gay.To try to hide that you’re gay. From the general public,Simone Collins: it must have a different meaning. NowMalcolm Collins: it, I, I, hold on.Simone Collins: Okay. IMalcolm Collins: will [00:03:00] explain why the term is being used. Okay. ‘cause clearly if you’re going by, they, you, you, you are not trying to hide anything. Like you are not living in an environment where you need to hide your sexuality.Simone Collins: Exactly. Yeah.Malcolm Collins: Right. So. What she’s trying to do is make herself seem like more of a victim. It’s just a way to pretend like, well, as a, as a queer woman, I live in constant fear because I like guys and girls. You know, like I, you know, soSimone Collins: should I just, like, if I, I just called our marriage, lavender marriage, I would get points in thatMalcolm Collins: realm.Yes. Because you’re acting like you are a, it’s a way to remind people, Hey, I’m a victim.Simone Collins: Yes. This is not a marriage. This is Anne Frank’s attic. Okay.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Right. The second, because the way she talks about it, it appears to be a, a real. Sexually active marriage. Right. Because she implies as well that she is sexually active with her husband’s mistress.Which,Simone Collins: IMalcolm Collins: don’t know ifSimone Collins: that’s implied. I mean, it,Malcolm Collins: I, I, we haven’t gotten to that part yet, but I remember in part of it I was like, [00:04:00] oh, but ifSimone Collins: your husband has a mistress. You know. Oh,Malcolm Collins: I know why. I know why I took it as implied. Because she said out of queer solidarity, she told the mistress first, which implies that the mistress is queer.Which, okay, the husband is sleeping with this woman. He’s married to this other woman who, who’s sleeping with both of them are also into women. And this, well, it’s reallySimone Collins: interesting though.Malcolm Collins: Relationship was the, was the mistress than she did with the husband. ‘cause she told the mistress first.Simone Collins: Could this be a sign also that polyamory branding is changing, like.They didn’t wanna say secondary, they wanted to say mistress. Was this a condition of the mistress? Because it sounds kind of crappy to be a secondary.Malcolm Collins: No. So there’s a few things going on here, I think. Okay. I think the reason she choose the term mistress instead of saying that they were polyamory, and this was a secondary, was because again, she wanted to frame herself as a victim and her husband.Having a mistress is like aSimone Collins: Yeah, but if you have like pizza parties with your mistress or queer solidarity with your [00:05:00] mistress.Malcolm Collins: She’s trying to show that even though her husband takes her for granted in these ways, that, and I also think the term mistress sounds pretty cool. Like it, it soundsreally,Simone Collins: oh, 100%.I think secondary should be dropped. What’s the, what is the, what is the male equivalent of mistress?Malcolm Collins: Oh, mis, I know because I read it in one of my Korean romance fantasies recently. Okay. So you’re gonna have to have a, I can’t remember this. This was for her, it maintain the title of Duke. She couldn’t get married, so she had to have a, and there was a term for it.It’s called like a male consort or something.Simone Collins: The auto complete for what is the male equivalent of is what is the male equivalent of a Karen.Malcolm Collins: There art, because men don’t do that very frequently. But anyway you let me know when you find it out.Simone Collins: Lover Mastress Boy, toy Gigolo or Par Paramore.Paramore. It soundsMalcolm Collins: good.Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: Yeah.Simone Collins: There we go.Malcolm Collins: Okay. Okay. Okay. So, but then the other thing is, is that she talks about this with her therapist before she talks about it with her husband.Simone Collins: Do you want me to read the article or not?Malcolm Collins: No. Hold on. We’ve got [00:06:00] to analyze what’s happening. Okay. Okay. Because this is important, right?For, for audiences to understand how things are falling apart and looking for red flags. You know, if you’re Ian, you’re looking for a partner.Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. Oh, and actually, you know, on that front, this is interesting because this shows, and, and this is again, where I’m like, no, this is representative. This is not weird.Because keep in mind the, the other woman who’s gone viral very recently who also consulted multiple therapists about her relationships and sex lives was the one who deluded herself into believing that her, that her psychiatrist, psychiatrist, psychiatrist wasMalcolm Collins: hitting on her,Simone Collins: the one who prescribed her medications.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Psychiatrist andSimone Collins: psych psychiatrist was. Yeah, seduced her. And she had this other older, like 63-year-old female therapist who she would talk to about this psychiatrist.Malcolm Collins: She was the one psychiatrist and then another therapist for the [00:07:00] therapist because her relationship with the therapist was causing her problems.Simone Collins: Yeah, no, she just saw the psychiatrist to get her A DHD medications prescribed. She also, however, sold coaching lessons for A DHD people. Anyway,Malcolm Collins: holdSimone Collins: on. She needed medication.Malcolm Collins: Sorry. I need to unpack this other point here ‘cause it is an important point.Simone Collins: Uhhuh,Malcolm Collins: your marriage is already destroyed beyond help.If you or your partner would go to a psychologist to talk about you, to talk about major decisions in your life and to be affirmed for those decisions before floating them with you. Because what that means is she’s really looking for, because as soon as that opinion or perspective of hers has been affirmed by the psychologist it’s very unlikely that the husband’s going to be able to talk her out of it.Right.Simone Collins: Yeah. Paid professional has already validated me. It’s like [00:08:00] the couple’s counseling and giving a one-sided story, but without the other partner getting.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And th

In this episode, we dive deep into the systemic manipulation and bias of mainstream media, exploring stories and scandals that often go underreported or are misrepresented. From the fallout of the Epstein files and the controversies surrounding political figures, to the intricacies of election interference and media cover-ups, we break down how narratives are shaped and why certain truths remain hidden.We discuss the role of both traditional and new media in influencing public perception, the impact of social media campaigns, and the rise of authenticity as a response to media distrust. The conversation covers everything from the Russia election interference and its connection to movements like Black Lives Matter, to the BBC’s editorial controversies and the broader implications for democracy and free speech.Join us as we question the status quo, revisit so-called conspiracy theories, and challenge the narratives pushed by powerful institutions. Whether you’re a skeptic or a believer, this episode encourages critical thinking and a closer look at the stories that shape our world.Don’t forget to like, subscribe, and share your thoughts in the comments below![00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today.Today we are going to be talking about just how effing evil the media is. Speaker 13: Coming up next, we have an exclusive interview with Hell’s own head Honcho, who’s here to discuss her brand new passion project and I think that a lot of people who. Watch our show ‘cause we have a number of progressives who watch our show. And if you’re a conservative, you might have picked up some of these stories that we’re gonna be covering in this show.But what we’re gonna be covering is a lot of stories that haven’t gotten as much coverage as they probably should have, and show the way that mainstream media has been systemically manipulating the public for. A long time, especially recently with the biggest fallout being the fallout of the Epstein files is what we’re going to start with.Because if you watched the Drudge report or watched a lot of mainstream news, you would think that these had a bunch of damning things of Trump in them when in fact they may actually provide [00:01:00] a smoking gun that the Democrats may have killed somebody recently. Simone Collins: What? Malcolm Collins: Yes. We’ll get to this in a second, but the gist being is I always ask if the Democrats actually had anything that could be used against Trump in the Epstein files.Why didn’t they release it during the election with Biden, right? Yeah, Simone Collins: right. Malcolm Collins: Well, we learned why they didn’t and why they did. Now, the way they made it look like Trump had met with somebody underage was by blacking out a person’s name. But now we have the real version of this because people leaked the real version of it.Congressman did showing. Well, Simone Collins: they did. Oh, I didn’t know that. Malcolm Collins: So we know whose name was on it. We know that the person’s name was on it, testified both in Congress and wrote in her book that Trump had done nothing wrong to her. Simone Collins: So it was that woman. Okay? Yes. Malcolm Collins: And that she mysteriously committed suicide.Despite saying on multiple occasions she [00:02:00] would never commit suicide. Only, I think it was a month before the release of the files, or it might’ve even just been weeks before this quote unquote release, and she needed to be dead during the release. Otherwise, she could immediately come out and say, Hey, I said this under oath and I said this in my book, but really seriously, what are you guys doing?Trump has always been there for me. Simone Collins: Wow. Okay. Malcolm Collins: So it’s worse than it looks. And why did they release this now? It appears they released it because they thought it would make Trump look bad to cover up. They’re bungling of the shutdown, which is just, their base is so mad at them because they’re based at the impression that they had won because they won these election cycles and in polling it was looking like they were winning, except I think they saw the.Wind and it was not gonna last for long. People were getting mad at the Democrats over the snap benefit stuff when Trump rightly pointed out that this was a fight over [00:03:00] them trying to give medical care from American taxpayers to illegal immigrants. Note, if you’re getting your news from the traditional media, they’d say, oh no, the shutdown wasn’t over that because. Illegal immigrants couldn’t get Medicare anyway and couldn’t get healthcare anyway, except that we know of tons of instances in which they did. It’s the same when they said, oh, illegal immigrants can’t vote.And yet we had this sting operation that got very little coverage showing nonprofit directors in New York leading up to the AMI election, , literally telling somebody who they thought was an illegal immigrant, how to vote and who to vote for.Speaker: Oh, did you register? Sorry? When did you register to vote? I, I did not. I, I, I didn’t sign anything. They just told me to come here to vote.Speaker 5: What I found most odd is that Pedro Rodriguez would keep telling me that I did not reside at an address that he personally signed the letter saying that I resided at.Speaker: He gave me winking, a nod. He told me, vote for the man whose name begins with the letter [00:04:00] M And it always really gets to me when they’re all like, oh, there’s been no documented evidence of large scale illegal immigrant voting when we know that Texas, for example, had to remove 2,700, , non-citizens from its voter rolls. , And that in, in Florida, even the Democrats would say. Oh, it wasn’t 180,000 non-citizens who were moved.It was 2,625 non-citizens who were moved. And this isn’t coming from far, far right group. This is the A CLU saying this so we know this is something that happens and it’s just like this narrative that gets repeated over and over again that it doesn’t happen.Malcolm Collins: and that’s what the Trump administration was putting their foot down on.And the longer that went on, the more that would burn the Democratic coalition. So I will say that in the short term, they were winning on this, well, potentially they cheated in a few elections. If you look at the Mond ballot situation, that was shocking to me when I saw that. The Zhan mond’s wait name.Wait, what? Simone Collins: What Momani ballot situation. Malcolm Collins: The [00:05:00] guy who just won in New York. Simone Collins: Yeah. What ha Malcolm Collins: what’s thought the ballot thought about this guy? His name was on the ballot multiple times and it was on the ballot Oh. Ballot, multiple times before the only real competitor to him was on the ballot. Right. This was like very deliberate to hide a chance to vote for the real competitor.And then there’s been significant foul play in the Virginia race that. Eh, I might add that in post if people are interested in that. But yeah, it looks really bad. Like when you look at the Mond race, you’re like, he literally couldn’t have lost the race given the way the ballot was structured.And that’s really horrifying to me that we live in a country where something, No. While I have been able to find legal justification for having Mond’s name on the ballot twice and for having Cuomo’s name later on the ballot, I have been able to find no legal justification for right justifying Cuomo’s ballot measure and leaving [00:06:00] the three left justified boxes that would’ve left his name more visible.If you just ordered it in the normal way, it would’ve been ordered blank.And I’d also point out here that even if something is quote unquote the legal way it’s done, that doesn’t mean that it’s not also cheating. , You can put laws on the book that give one party an unfair advantage in a particular area. That’s exactly what some of the Supreme Court decisions have been about preventing., That’s exactly what. Voting Rights Act stuff is about, , the idea that you’re like, oh yeah, it’s totally normal to have a candidate listed twice before his primary competitor. , Because of these laws that we put on the book, that doesn’t make it fair. This point is extremely important. , I hate when people, and this has been a constant thing on this podcast, when people are like, well, what they did was legal, therefore, it’s a non-issue. Just because something is legal doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be. Talking about it in the news so that [00:07:00] the laws can be changed to make our elections fair.I don’t think any sane thinking person looking at this ballot would say that this election was fair .Malcolm Collins: Basically what I’m saying is him winning is not. As much as I had thought, a implication that democratic sentiment is overflowing right now. But more of a, he just cheated.Simone Collins: Oh wow. Okay. Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, when you saw the ballot, did you sort of like, oh yeah, there’s no way the other major candidate could have win.Simone Collins: It is pretty confusing. Yeah. Yeah. To be fair, Malcolm Collins: if you had been on the ballot twice and the only person running against you was after like eight other candidates, you wouldn’t have thought you could win or you would’ve said, oh, no, you would’ve been like, yeah, I’m gonna win. I don’t care if anybody knows who I am.Simone Collins: No, I, I mean, yeah, it, it has also been shown, I think, in various studies that you’re positioning on a ballot is going to mess with your odds of winning. I also remember [00:08:00] when, when I unsuccessfully ran for office. How crestfallen I felt when my, my position was on the, the only thing on the flip side of the ballot, and a lot of people probably missed it.I’ve been filling out the ballot. Yeah. So Malcolm Collins: you see it matters where you are on the ballot. Yeah. And I note here, this actually gets to me because I think I only saw this on Asma Gold. I’ve literally not seen it covered by

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the controversy and conspiracy theories surrounding the attempted assassination of Donald Trump by the so-called “Butler shooter.” This episode unpacks the media’s coverage, the FBI’s handling of the case, and the many rumors and misreportings that have fueled public confusion.The discussion covers:* The misleading narratives presented by major media figures and the FBI* The shooter’s background, online presence, and shifting political ideologies* Debunking viral conspiracy theories about BlackRock, financial motives, and the shooter’s alleged ties to various communities* The suspicious handling of evidence, including the rapid cremation and lack of toxicology reports* Broader questions about government transparency, incompetence, and the “deep state”* The role of foreign influence and media manipulation in shaping public perceptionMalcolm and Simone debate the likelihood of government involvement versus bureaucratic incompetence, referencing historical parallels and recent leaks. The episode ends with a reflection on the tragic loss of life and a call for critical thinking in the face of sensational headlines.If you’re interested in true crime, political analysis, or media criticism, this episode offers a thorough, thought-provoking exploration of one of the most controversial events in recent political history.Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more in-depth discussions! 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

Join Malcolm and Simone Collins as they dive deep into the evolving relationship between the United States and Israel, challenging traditional Zionist perspectives with a pragmatic approach. In this thought-provoking discussion, Malcolm shares why he’s shifted from ardent Zionism to advocating for a strategic reevaluation of U.S. military aid to Israel. The conversation covers the political, economic, and cultural implications of cutting off aid, the influence of lobbying groups, and the potential for a new era of U.S.-Israel cooperation focused on AI and technological innovation.The episode also explores the dynamics within the American right, the rise of anti-cancellation sentiment, and the importance of aligning national interests for long-term stability. Plus, Malcolm and Simone touch on global topics like the future of energy, lunar mining, and the shifting landscape of international alliances.Whether you’re interested in geopolitics, U.S. foreign policy, or the future of technology and global power, this episode offers a nuanced perspective you won’t want to miss.Subscribe for more in-depth conversations and let us know your thoughts in the comments!Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. I have been thinking a lot about this over the past few days and one I changed my mind on a major issue, which is the best fast forward with Israel. Oh. ‘cause a lot of people know I have been pretty ardently Zionist in the past. And two,Simone Collins: are you a Zionist or are you a pragmatist?Malcolm Collins: I’m more of a pragmatist and I think that I’ll explain where I’ve changed my view on this. And I, I think that if this is correctly implemented, and the reason I’m gonna lay this out in the podcast is I’m gonna lay out every step in terms of doing this, how you would do it as a Republican administration right now.And like, we’ll explain how we’ll. It basically destroy the modern Democratic party if Trump can execute on this, theSimone Collins: path forward to own the Libs. Cut off Israel.Malcolm Collins: Cut off Israel. Yes. So we’re going to go over how you can do this. How you can do this in a way that is [00:01:00] politically viable. How you can do this in a way that maintains a strong relationship with Israel, how you can do this in a way that strengthens our relationship, not just with Israel, but with the Middle East more broadly.How you can do this in a way that Netanyahu has basically baited already. And I was unaware that Netanyahu has kept saying this and basically, so theySimone Collins: blocked it anyway.Malcolm Collins: The only reason why we are not aggressively moving towards this right now is apac who we need to just railroad. Although I will go over that.APAC has shown a willingness to bend on stuff like this in the past if it’s laid out to them logically. Oh, and the, the thing that sort of brought this up for me, so I’ll go into where I started to go down this path was twofold. One was, I was talking with a fan in the Discord and they’re like, you’ve always said that the right should not maintain any issue.Like this is a, that’s an [00:02:00] overlap of, of ideologies that we can’t actually win. Elections wins. Right. Or that’s really gonna impact our chances of winning elections.Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: That’sSimone Collins: 90 10 issues has been so smart, right? Like he’sMalcolm Collins: very aware, but we get so much in terms of Jewish and APAC money, it can be useful.Even in terms of if it’s not getting out the vote in terms of getting out the money, which helps get out the vote more. But the, there’s a few problems here. One is money has been mattering less and less in terms of election cycles historically. And two is what happened recently, which is recently one of the girls from the Red Scare Podcast were having Nick Fuentes, not even their own beliefs, but interviewing him on their podcast got like actually canceled.And I was under the position that cancellation was over. Like they lost a major job contract, they lost their agency. And I was like, no. Like this. This is the type of thing that when it happens to someone in the right, the rest of the right needs to 100% get behind them. Tucker [00:03:00] Carlson has done some iffy things, but this is different.This is like a more mainstream. Like, not like Venezuela dictator interviewing type. This is more like, and I think that that was cool that he did that, whatever, but I can understand where you can be like, oh, he’s a more out there figure on the right. These days. This is a more centrist figure on the right these days.And two is Ben Shapiro has been basically spiraling like lemon grab since this event.Speaker 6: Unacceptable. Unacceptable. Unacceptable.Malcolm Collins: And I’m just like. The mainstream of the right, like it’s very obvious to me, the mainstream of the right is going to have to cut the Ben Shapiro faction completely off if we don’t want a full on civil war. Would you agree with that, by the way, Simone?Simone Collins: Yeah.If you’re like, well, why the Ben Shapiro faction and not the Nick Fuentes faction? The reason is twofold. One is you just have to be practical. Ben Shapiro’s [00:04:00] been dropping fall or is like flies recently, , like 20,000 on subs every month. He’s been losing people for the past, well, really since this blew up.So, , it’s obvious that he’s losing in the public mind. But not just that, it’s also that he committed the cardinal sin of the modern, right? Which is attempting to ban people and make arguments based on pearl clutching rather than rational argument, we cannot allow that. That needs to be an absolute, if you do that, you are out, right?That makes you a leftist. That is the argument that the leftists have been Retreating to, and if you normalize that style of argument, then the leftists automatically win because they always win in the game of, you hurt my Fifis, and that’s the game that Ben Shapiro’s been trying to play. You said something that falls outside of what I consider and what the dominant culture considers socially normal.But the modern right is made up of people who oppose the [00:05:00] dominant culture that oppose the urban monoculture. So of course, we cannot allow the mean streaming of that form of argumentation.I ran a sentiment analysis on X and 70 to 75% of the tweets that have gone out about Ben Shapiro recently have been extremely negative with only five to 10% being positive, and the five to 10% that are positive are pretty much exclusively from.Boomers and neocons, which are factions that are dying out. If you do not want anti-Semitic sentiment to grow, we need to cut out the type of sentiment that Ben Shapiro represents.Malcolm Collins: And so how do we navigate that without losing Israel, which is. Very important in terms of being a highly economically productive, highly technologically productive nationThat has a decent fertility rate. In fact, the only such country on Earth.Malcolm Collins: that is, has a good reason to be allied with us going into the future. Right? How do we do that with zip? Right? While keeping them on board [00:06:00] basically completely cut them off.And there is a way too that helps us in a ton of other areas as well. So to go forwards. Hmm. By the way, the larger problem, what are your thoughts on it? Do you actually believe that we do sort of like things are sort of coming to a head where the American right cannot maintain both of these ideologies?Simone Collins: It does. Yeah. It, it seems like, especially Nick Fuentes trending so much, even in our comments, I see it, this, this really weirdMalcolm Collins: tension Well, is so coming off as the, the weest bad guy in all this. And that like we sort of need a mainstream play. And that’s the reason why we’re making this episode because a lot of policymakers watch our show or a number do at least.And after we’ve spoken at the White House on this stuff and a lot of other influencers watch our show. And so if we can begin influencing a third way forwards in a way that has so many positive externalities for the party, let’s do it. Right.Simone Collins: Yeah, because honestly the, the arguments that I mostly hear [00:07:00] against Israel all get grouped in by some people into like, oh, this just, you are trying to exterminate journals.But like, some people are just like, Hey, why are we paying for this? Like some of the arguments are very, very, very reasonable. And, and IsraelMalcolm Collins: needs to make it so that these arguments are not reasonable. Yeah. AndSimone Collins: the way, yeah. Well, I mean, I think this is similar to your your AI argument where if, if you make it such that one group cannot exist.Period. Then you know the other group is obligated toMalcolm Collins: get, yeah. What she’s saying is, if you say, I will kill any human who is better than me through like augmentations, or I will kill any AI that’s better than me, then eventually you mandate those systems turning against you. And yeah,Simone Collins: and right now the way the arguments seem to be going is like, well.You know, if you question Israel at all, then you know, you, you are the enemy. Or if you support Israel at all then you are the enemy. And, and I, we need to [00:08:00] deescalate that to like. More boring. Well, I actuallyMalcolm Collins: don’t even think we need to deescalate it. I think we can do the throwing the anchor off the boat in mid-flight to turn it around at full speed,Speaker: , Lower the starboard anchor can.Take offthird club, one part of horseMalcolm Collins: you know, like they do.We’re, we’reSimone Collins: really mixing metaphor here.Malcolm Collins: Pirate to the Caribbean. MineSimone Collins: boats,Malcolm Collins: no. What I mean is, is, is, or the. Apollo 13 use our trajectory in one direction with gravitational pull to slingshot us at an equal velocity in the opposite direction in a way that your [00:09:00] opponents don’t