Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Collins

One of the experiences we treasure most involves our minds being changed on an issue. If we’re wrong about something, we’d prefer to be nudged in a less wrong direction.We did NOT expect to have one of these experiences when clicking through to learn about a truly modern meet-cute: When Romy Holland met her future husband—and the father of her now-young child—at Aella’s famous birthday gangbang, which she both helped to organize and supported as a fluffer.Anyway, you’ll see for yourself in today’s episode of Based Camp. Happy Monday! Make sure you read Romy’s full essay—the one that ultimately changed our views on misoprostol, which we had previously seen as pretty innocuous; she’s an eloquent and moving writer.Show NotesOne of the fluffers at Aella’s birthday gangbangs paired up and ultimately had a child with one of the guests/participantsCrazier than that, this young woman radicalized me on early-term abortion!The Gist: Romy Holland, a friend of Aella’s, recently went on Slate’s podcast, Death, Sex & Money, to talk about her experience meeting a guy at Aella’s birthday gang bang and eventually falling in love with him. This story was originally covered in the San Francisco Standard. In herWhat Happened* Romy helped organize the famous 42-man gangbang birthday party in 2024* She also acted as a fluffer at this event* In this capacity, she met a programmer she had previously noticed online* They subsequently began dating, had a kid together, and are now engage and—for the time being at least—monogamousUnderrated: Romy blackpilled me on the abortion pillAn underrated element of Romy’s narrative arc thus far is her experience with abortion—something she articulated so beautifully and powerfully that it has totally radicalized me on misoprostol.Her one substack article (as of June 2026), titled What Nobody Told Me About Abortion, describes her harrowing experience attempting an abortion.She describes blithe comfort in the face of lies told to us“On the sort of afternoon full of ripe summer fruit, my new boyfriend and I—still flush with sweat and limerence after some midday sex—stared at an ovulation test strip and realized we’d misread an earlier test.“Uh oh,” I said, lightly amused as a thousand rom com moments flashed through my mind. Cue the clueless horror movie protagonist who fails to notice the axe murder

In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down the rapid decline in support for Pride events and LGBT causes. From NPR reporting on corporations pulling sponsorships to Gallup polls showing consistent drops in approval for same-sex marriage and especially gender transition, they explore why public opinion has shifted so dramatically.They discuss cultural overreach, grooming concerns in schools, transgender issues and violence, the “groomer” label’s effectiveness, and why even many Democrats are turning away. The Collinses offer a nuanced conservative perspective: supporting gay rights as a private matter while rejecting enforcement on others, and arguing why keeping competent gay conservatives in the broader movement makes strategic sense.Plus: family moments with Octavian, the evolution of Pride from fun to corporate/ugly, birth rates and political heritability, Don’t Say Gay bill realities, and a deep dive into the Bricks & Minifigs scandal.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be talking about how corporations- Oh ... have stopped supporting sort of the wider gay and LGBT agenda, to the extent that NPR, NPR of all places, wrote an article titled, and I just have to show you the cover image on this article.It’s hilarious.Simone Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: Pride celebrations struggle as corporate sponsorships dry up.Simone Collins: OhMalcolm Collins: Oh, yeah, also, alsoSimone Collins: in this And this coming at Pride Month when like... Yeah,Malcolm Collins: sad ‘Cause it’s exactly who you expect.Just like the image, the people in the image is like, oh my God, I wanna hateSimone Collins: these people so much.Oh, hold on, I’m looking. Oh, boy. No, if that’s what Pride is now, let’s just let it go. Sorry though, we loved the glasses. We loved the glasses, but we,Malcolm Collins: you know. This is w- hold on, it’s not just that. This is the only other picture in the article, too.Fat old women is, is what I guess Pride is now. Oh,Simone Collins: no, [00:01:00] no.It’s- No ...Malcolm Collins: fat misshapen old womenSimone Collins: No. I will nev- the first time I ever came across, across a Pride parade, I was in Cape Cod I think it’s Provincetown, or Princetown? Provincetown. But yeah, in Cape Cod, and I didn’t, we didn’t know that there was a Pride parade. We were camping there I was camping there with a, a friend and her dad.And then just on the main street of Provincetown just was this really cool parade, and the most beautiful women I had ever seen. And I was stunned and amazed, and I, I didn’t know why al

In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the viral Bricks & Minifigs Lego scandal that’s rocked the Mormon (LDS) community. What started as a $200k consignment dispute involving stolen Lego collections has spiraled into allegations of corporate theft, police corruption, small-town collusion, and a massive cultural reckoning.Malcolm explores why this story is so damaging to Mormon PR, draws historical parallels to the Mountain Meadows Massacre, and questions the Church’s response (or lack thereof). They discuss Mormon cultural tendencies, MLMs, in-group protection, and what this reveals about trusting religious communities when they hold local power.A must-watch for anyone following the drama, interested in religious sociology, business ethics, or cultural fault lines.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be c- talking about the bricks and minifigures story.Ooh ... but I want to take it in a different direction than a lot of people have gone on it, and I wanna g- talk about the meta discussion around it, and the extreme damage. And I’ve noticed that, that one, n- usually, the Mormon Church, and Mormons more broadly, are good at dealing with PR disasters. Like the, the, the way that they, you know, turned, The Book of Mormon into, like-Simone Collins: Oh, yeah.Yeah ...Malcolm Collins: advertising and-Simone Collins: Spinning that Broadway play by Matt Stone and Trey Parker into something where they would just put-Malcolm Collins: Good PR. Well, yeah,Simone Collins: in a way, ... missionaries outside the theaters and be like, “Hey, you enjoyed the play. Why not try the real thing?” I mean, it’s great.Malcolm Collins: Yeah, and in one of the other episodes we did, even the Mormon tendency to come off like creepy pod people to outsiders, To some outsidersthey’ve been able to subvert that into, like, “Yeah, well, we’re just so wholesome,” right? You know, [00:01:00] like, “That’s, that’s why we’re coming off that way,” right? I mean, I still-Simone Collins: Mormon is because they’re just that wholesome. Get over it ...Speaker 3: I heard there’s warm pieSimone Collins: fromMalcolm Collins: my, my cultural background think they come off like creepy pod people.Speaker 26: I don’t remember him being that friendly. He’s obviously one of them. HowSimone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: And we have a whole episode if you’re interested on what causes that reaction, and I don’t think that Mormons have this emotional reaction, which is why they don’t realize that they trigger it so hard

In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins tackle one of the most provocative questions in the age of AI: Does artificial intelligence finally make communism feasible?They explore the structural failures of historical communism (incentives, power consolidation, information problems, and catastrophic mismanagement), why small-scale communism works (families, kibbutzim) but large-scale versions collapse, and whether AI-driven post-scarcity could solve these issues or simply replicate the same human problems of bad actors, bureaucracy, and distorted incentives.Topics include:* The Sam Altman UBI study and why unconditional cash transfers often fail* Why Soviet science succeeded in some areas but governance always failed* Power vacuums in anarcho-communism vs. centralized systems* The future of “techno-fiefdoms,” AI-managed communities, and human reserves for those left behind by AI disruption* Demographic collapse and the likely rise of religious/techno-puritan movementsA raw, nuanced debate that challenges both right-wing and left-wing assumptions about economics, human nature, and the coming AI era.Show NotesWhy Implementations Fail* Economic calculation problem (Ludwig von Mises, 1920):* Without private property and market prices, planners lack information on relative scarcity/costs.* You can’t rationally allocate steel, labor, or grain.* Attempts at “material balances” or cybernetic planning (e.g., Soviet OGAS—an attempted nationwide information network) failed repeatedly.* HOW AI CAN FIX THIS* Adequately and dynamically track supply and demand* Incentive and knowledge problems (Hayek):* People respond to incentives.* Common ownership dilutes responsibility (”tragedy of the commons”).* Local knowledge is dispersed; central decrees can’t match it.* AI can just more adequately monitor dispersed local knowledge* Innovation and maintenance collapse without profit/loss signals.* If AI becomes like a mother and just “handles” everything, then it’s not an issue* Power dynamics:* Enforcing abolition of private property and markets requires massive coercion.* With AI, we’re approaching a place where the majority of the population won’t have anything (or anything to lose), property-wise.* This concentrates power in a vanguard/party, which becomes a new ruling class (see <a target="_blank" href="https://dn790008.ca.archive.org/0/items/TheNewClassMilovanDjilas/The_New_Cla

In this Based Camp episode, Simone and Malcolm Collins dive into the harsh realities of aging alone through a Wall Street Journal article about Amy Kant, a 65-year-old single, childless woman facing health issues, estate planning struggles, and isolation. They explore the growing demographic of “solo agers,” the long-term consequences of choosing career and freedom over family, feminist regrets, and why so many women (and men) end up dying alone.Topics include: the breakdown of intergenerational social contracts, business opportunities in elder care/power of attorney/estate planning/unclaimed assets, pronatalist perspectives, and real listener stories of regret. Malcolm also shares new rfab.ai features like the recipe generator and discusses building liable human services.A raw, unfiltered look at demographic decline, life choices, and turning societal problems into opportunities.Show NotesCan two dark things cancel each other to create a rainbow?* Dark thing: The job market is atrocious and about to get worse* Dark thing: Millions of childless elderly people—and aged parents who moved away from and dissociated from their children—are headed into old age and death without support networks* Rainbow? There are huge business and job opportunitiesWe can use a recent Wall Street Journal article, More Americans Are Aging Alone. One Woman Told Us What It’s Like, for inspiration!(Not reading every paragraph)“Amy Kant initially thought she should name a power of attorney about 10 years ago after caring for a dying friend. She still hasn’t appointed someone to do it.The 65-year-old is single with no children, and bound up in that choice over who should make financial decisions on her behalf are other big questions that are often intensified when aging alone. How to handle eldercare? Estate planning? Where will she live in her later years?”* Company opportunity? Power of attorney for isolated old people?* Easy attorney job* Many elder law and estate planning attorneys serve as POA agents (they charge both hourly and flat fees)* You may not need to be an attorney: Some states recognize licensed/bonded “professional fiduciaries” who can be hired to act as your agent under POA, trustee, or similar roles* You could also take the CPA route:* Some planners recommend using a CPA, financial advisor, or daily money manager to handle money management and, in some cases, to serve as agent under a financial POA.* Financial planners may not advertise as “POA companies,” but they can be named personally in the document* Less relevant: Certain not‑for‑profit care management firms (staffed by nurses, social workers, and care managers) specifically market themselves as agents under POA for older adults w

In this episode of Based Camp, we explore the recent wave of anti-marriage feminist influencers who suddenly get engaged and/or pregnant right after hitting 30. Is “anti-marriage” feminism just mate-blocking by other means? Or is it sour grapes from women who spent their 20s steeped in hookup culture?We explore:• The hypocrisy of prominent “stay single” influencers (MJ Gray, Alex Cooper, Wizard Liz, Danielle Walter, etc.)• Why feminism’s biggest “wins” have mostly hurt women• The collapse in marriage rates (especially by age 30)• Mate blocking vs. status denial• The hollowness of modern hookup/OnlyFans culture and the return to meaningGet ready for a spicy and honest conversation about dating, marriage, female nature, and cultural trends.Show NotesWhat happened:* An influencer named MJ Gray branded herself as strongly anti‑marriage and anti‑kids, framing marriage as “enslavement” and something women should avoid because it primarily benefits men and the patriarchy.* She built a following of nearly 500,000 on TikTok by creating anti-marriage content, often arguing that marriage signifies the “ownership of women” and advising women to avoid it.* After about nine months of dating a man with no public profile, she announces an engagement in a visibly uncomfortable video titled “Yes, I’m engaged. Yes, this is awkward,” while repeatedly insisting she is “in a good situation.”* Timestamped clip: * She claims her stance has always included caveats: marriage can make sense if you plan to have children, share property, or live together, but otherwise it remains a harmful institution.It turns out she is not the only influencer of the stay single movement who turned around and got married. There are other recent and prominent examples that might indicate some sort of pattern.This comes at a time when marriage REALLY doesn’t need negative propaganda. Around 2005–2010, roughly 50–55% of adults were married; by the mid-2020s, it’s around 46–51% (e.g., 47.1% of households headed by married couples in 2024, near historic lows).So what’s going on with women like these? Let’s explore and discuss.MJ Gray’s BrandingMJ Gray frames herself as a supermodel billionaire (that’s her handle on YouTube)Has 419K followers on tiktok (@texasgardenfairy)Has 84.6K followers on InstagramShe shares her thoughts on “The Maneater Podcast”4.9 stars and 44 reviews on spotify (for reference, Based Camp has 3.8 stars and 205 reviews)4.9 s

In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the phenomenon of Professor Jiang (Jiang Qujin) — the Chinese-born educator turned geopolitical “oracle” with 2M+ YouTube subscribers. Is he a modern Nostradamus using psychohistory and game theory, or highbrow conspiracy slop for midwits?We break down his biggest theories: Illuminati coalitions of Freemasons, Jesuits, and Sabbatean Frankists engineering Western decline, Pax Judaica / Greater Israel, ritual child sacrifice in Gaza, secret societies controlling the world, and his mystical AI predictions. Malcolm delivers sharp historical corrections on Sabbateanism, Frankism, Jesuits, and Freemasons, while questioning if Jiang is a CCP-adjacent narrative pusher.Is he Candace Owens for pseudointellectuals? A sophisticated propaganda op? Or just a compelling midwit prophet? We also compare him to Whatifalthist (Rudyard), Peter Zeihan, and more.Join the conversation in the comments — are you Team Jiang or Team Collins?Show NotesBased Camp listeners keep asking us to talk about Professor Jiang, which is difficult, as we see his content to be oppressively boring, bordering on being impossible to consume, but to stop the requests, we’ll relent.How did a Chinese-born man who immigrated to Canada with a BA in English literature suddenly accrue over 2 million YouTube subscribers, the #1 world politics substack (with 44K subscribers in six months) and fame for being a geopolitical oracle and war forecaster?Fan site: https://jiangpredictions.com (“This is an independent fan project tracking predictions for educational and analytical purposes. We are not affiliated with or speaking on behalf of Professor Jiang.”)Is he just a version of Candace Owens for people who like to fancy themselves as a little more highbrow and clever (which is to say, is his success just a result of conspiracy-brained people online flocking to conspiracy slop), or is there are more concerted force pushing forward his content?Who is Professor Jiang?* Jiang Xueqin (江学勤, born 1976) is a Chinese‑Canadian who originally trained in English literature and spent much of his career as a teacher and education reformer in China.* In the 2000s and 2010s he worked on Chinese education reform, taught in various schools, and briefly edited for the New York Times’ China operation; he has also been associated as a researcher with Harvard’s Global Education Innovation Initiative.* Since 2022 he has taught at Moonshot Academy, a private high school in Beijing, and he is not a university professor despite the “Professor” branding.* In 2024 he launched the YouTube channel and podcast “Predictive History,” where he gives longform lectures on geopolitics, history and “structural” analysis, claiming to use game theory and Asimov‑style “psychohistory” to forecast world events.* He gained large international attention after correctly

In this explosive Based Camp episode, Malcolm & Simone Collins dive deep into one of the most uncomfortable topics in Christianity: the Biblical commands to kill infants and civilians during conquest — and why they might actually reflect a coherent (if brutal) longtermist moral framework.From 1 Samuel 15 and the total destruction of the Amalekites, to Deuteronomy’s rules for Canaanite cities, to Jesus’ teachings on mercy — Malcolm argues that modern “peace at all costs” Christianity has cherry-picked the Bible and is actively destroying Western civilization. They explore how true Biblical mercy often looks like decisive action, not endless tolerance of predators and parasites.This is a raw, unfiltered discussion about civilizational morality, the dangers of naive pacifism, and what “love your enemies” actually meant in context.Tract 12: Sociatal Morality & A Genocidal God[00:00:00]Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone, I’m excited to be talking to you today. Today we are going to be digging into morality as the Bible and Christian faith relate to it. Because I am getting really sick of all of these Christians out there that we see within like the wider Christian media influencer ecosystem talking about how Christianity is like the religion of peace and we need to always be peaceful.And if you’re going to, for example make a blanket rule against dropping bombs on schools in a warfare scenario, then all of a sudden terrorists are going to put their headquarters under schools and make society net negative for children.Simone Collins: Oh, you’re not, you, this is purely hypothetical of course.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. If, if at a, a societal level, right, we did something like just always gave out food whenever somebody was hungry you would have groups begin to evolve or [00:01:00] move in close to you that evolve entirely predatory off of this, right? And somebody could be like, “Well, maybe the Bible didn’t predict all of these things, or didn’t really think through difficult moral decisions.”And the reality is is that’s not true at all. The Bible all over the place has God telling people to kill infants. And so we are going to go, because I think that this is one of the clearest, I mean, I could go into the instances where God’s like laying out the rules for selling your daughters into slavery or rules on how to treat slaves.But in this episode, that we’re gonna go more on in the next one, ‘cause this is gonna be a bit of a two-parter. But on this one we’re going to go deeper into specifically where, why, and when does God say it’s okay to kill infants? Because I think it’s through these scenarios we can get a broader understanding of how Christianity should [00:02:00] understand morality.Speaker 6: You know, maybe I was wrong about this pacifism thing.Speaker 8: Are you insane? Pacifism w

In this eye-opening episode of Based Camp, Simone and Malcolm Collins dive deep into the disturbing new reality of modern organized crime. From Iraqi crime syndicates in Australia using Signal and WhatsApp to recruit teenagers for firebombings and extortion, to Mexican cartels (Sinaloa, CJNG) recruiting kids via Fortnite, GTA V, and Call of Duty, this episode exposes how gig-economy crime, encrypted apps, and gaming platforms are transforming criminal operations.They discuss how minors (as young as 11) are being lured with small payments, status, and “missions,” why this model is so effective, real-world cases, terrorist virtual plotting by ISIS, darknet crime-as-a-service, and law enforcement stings like Operation Trojan Shield. A fascinating (and sometimes darkly humorous) look at how technology has supercharged crime in the 2020s.Show NotesWe think of consumers and mainstream corporations as embracing remote work and the gig economy, but did you know there are also, for example, Signal groups, labeled “jobs” that Australian kids are using to get quick cash while doing chores and errands (+ the occasional firebombings) for an Iraqi crime syndicate, largely based over 8,000 miles away in Iraq?This is not just an Australian problem. Mexican Cartels like CJNG (Jalisco New Generation) and Sinaloa are recruiting Fortnite.The Iraqi Crime Syndicate Terrorizing MelbourneThe Broad SceneAn Iraq-based organized crime syndicate (often linked to figures like Kazem “Kaz” Hamad and referred to as “the Cartel”) is directing or strongly suspected in a wave of extortion, firebombings, shootings, and related violence targeting businesses in Melbourne. This has escalated notably in recent years, especially since around 2023 with the “tobacco wars,” and has expanded into hospitality/nightlife venues in 2026.* As reported by the Sydney Morning Herald: Kazem Hamad (an Iraqi-born Australian deported in 2023) and associates in Baghdad are alleged to orchestrate operations remotely. Hamad was arrested in Iraq in early 2026 at Australia’s request. Threats and directions come via encrypted apps from overseas. A 23-year-old Australian in Baghdad (linked to Hamad’s network) is also implicated.* The Guardian reports on how street-level crews (often teenagers or young offenders) are recruited via encrypted messaging apps to carry out attacks. Organized crime figures assign contracts to local “heads of stre

In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the Book of Genesis, revealing surprising alignments between the ancient text and modern evolutionary science. Malcolm challenges common Sunday-school interpretations, showing how Genesis describes a timeline that closely matches scientific understanding: from the early Earth and origin of life, through aquatic creatures and large reptiles, to birds, land animals, and finally humanity. They explore alternate translations of key Hebrew words (like “yom” for “day/era”, “yatsar” for “formed/planned”, and “taninim” for great reptilian creatures), discuss the Big Bang, prebiotic Earth, the evolution of sexuality, and why Genesis stands out among global creation myths.A fascinating conversation blending biblical scholarship, evolutionary biology, and philosophical insight that will challenge both skeptics and literalists.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to talk with you today. In a recent episode, I pointed out, I was like, “It is weird to within a modern context in Christianity and stuff like this, when people are saying that evolution is not coherent with Genesis.”And I would say that at least my readings of Genesis, evolution makes me believe Genesis more because Genesis says a bunch of stuff that aligns with what we know of the, about the evolutionary timeline without saying anything that disconfirms the evolutionary timeline. So we are gonna get into this.And it’s, it’s, it’s such a fun topic for me to get into because when I was a kid, and I believe that Genesis said what, as I call it, Sunday school Christianity, you know? Well Genesis says X, Y, and Z, and and I- if you look at it, and then don’t look up alternate translations of the words in it whenever something looks a little fishy or looks like it may be [00:01:00] factually incorrect or don’t look up how that word is used in other places in the Old Testament you immediately are like, “Okay, that’s believable,” right?And so that’s stupid because that’s an old story for savages.Speaker 2: We will call them cave JewsSpeaker 3: Attacker!Malcolm Collins: And then you come at it with a more modern mindset. I mean, just if you look at the mere timeline given in it, right? It says first you have non-animal life. Then you have the vast array... No, it doesn’t even say, like, fishes.It’s, it’s the vast array of creatures that live in the sea.Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.Malcolm Collins: Along with some form of large reptilian creature. Hmm ... which, which, no- What could thatSimone Collins: be?Malcolm Collins: Yeah, what, what could that be? Now, no, there’s, there’s a lot of really cool... First, it’s not as simple as saying, like, fi- they easily could have wr- f

Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into one of the most paradoxical political alliances of our time: the surprising partnership between modern progressivism and Islamism.Why do groups that claim to champion LGBTQ+ rights, feminism, and secularism repeatedly align with a ideology that often rejects those very values? From the Iranian Revolution to "Queers for Palestine," this episode explores the ideological overlaps, cognitive dissonance, and shared strategic goals that make this alliance stronger than many realize.Topics include:• The "oppressor vs oppressed" framework• Treatment of homosexuality vs. gender transition in Muslim societies• Shared hostility toward Western civilization• Why suffering of "their side" is often irrelevant to both movements• Historical betrayals and future implicationsA sobering and unfiltered analysis of modern political bedfellows.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be discussing Islam and the left, which have been bedfellows throughout recent history. Obviously they were very strong bedfellows during the Iranian revolution, which we will discuss how that ended up happening. And they all were then killed afterwards.It was very much like the sheep siding with the wolves, only for the wolves to feast on the sheep as soon as they got what they wanted. B- pretty witless, and I think could be a sign of... Like, obviously there’s the famous picture of the two young progressive girls in a car cheering the rise of the new ayatollah, and both of...One of them was killed by his regime, and the other one lived their life as a refugee.And so, you know, not good for them historically when they’ve done this. But I wanted to better understand why and how these two things are compatible. And people can just say, “Well, they aren’t compatible, Malcolm,” and I’m like, surely [00:01:00] progressives don’t think that, right?Like, surely progressives have looked into this and have some sort of thesis I just haven’t taken the time to understand. So what I did, and what, what I, what I wanted this piece to be, which unfortunately it can’t be, and I’ll explain why in just a second-Simone Collins: Oh ...Malcolm Collins: is I wanted to go through on some sort of, like, well-reasoned progressive piece on why Islamism and progressive values make such good bedfellows.Simone Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: And that we would go through this piece and I would explain, “Well, this doesn’t really work here,” or, “They actually have some points here.” And very, very interestingly I could not find any such piece.Simone Collins: What? How... That seemsMalcolm Collins: implausible. Right? I assumed they must be out there everywhere, right?Like, I was like, they must have

In this Based Camp episode, Simone and Malcolm Collins dive into the rising anti-immigration protests in South Africa — led by Black South Africans against illegal immigrants from other African nations. From “March and March” and Operation Dudula marches to demands for mass deportations, shop closures, and prioritizing citizens for jobs, this movement echoes familiar themes of economic frustration, crime concerns, and strained resources.Is this “Black MAGA”? Why is the global media quick to label it xenophobia while downplaying similar grievances elsewhere? The Collins discuss unemployment realities (32-33%), government responses, comparisons to US/UK/Canada immigration levels, ethnic economic niches, and why South Africans feel under attack from within Africa.Expect unfiltered analysis, humor, genetic tangents, and real talk on immigration policy that transcends race. What happens when citizens fight back against illegal immigration in their own country?Show NotesWhen I think of “anti-immigration protests” the image that pops into my head is of white people being angry about non-white people entering their neighborhoods and taking their jobsThis happens so much that subconsciously even I sometimes find myself assuming this is a “white people clutching their pearls about their land being taken” thing, when it’s notAnd recent anti-immigrant protests in South Africa are proof of this.South Africa has seen a wave of anti-immigration (often described as anti-illegal immigration or xenophobic) protests and related violence in April–May 2026, concentrated in major cities like Pretoria, Johannesburg, Durban, and spreading to others.Key Details* According to the BBC at least, the main driver is the citizen-led group March and March, which advocates for stricter immigration enforcement, border control, mass deportations of undocumented migrants, and prioritizing South Africans for jobs, housing, and services.* Protests have drawn hundreds to thousands of participants, with marches to government buildings (e.g., Union Buildings in Pretoria), shop closures by foreign-owned businesses out of fear, and some “clean-up” campaigns.* Involvement or alignment from Operation Dudula (a vigilante-style anti-immigrant movement meaning “push out” in Zulu), ActionSA, Patriotic Alliance, and other local forums (e.g., Thokoza Abahambe Forum).* Some political figures, like Floyd Shivambu of the Africa Mayibuye Movement, have endorsed the concerns as legitimate ahead of local elections.* As CNN reports (here’s an Instagram link), protesters accuse undocumented migrants (primarily from other African countries, and some Asians) of taking jobs, engaging in crime/drug dealing, overloading public services (health, housing, schools), and

Did the Communists win the Cold War in America? In this eye-opening Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the 1963 list of Communist Goals for the United States (compiled by FBI agent Cleon Skousen and entered into the Congressional Record). From infiltrating schools and media, discrediting the family, promoting degeneracy, and weaponizing psychiatry and art — they check off how many of these goals have been achieved and what it means for modern culture, politics, and the future.This conversation covers the long march through the institutions, Yuri Bezmenov’s demoralization playbook, Cuba’s ongoing role, why the “Red Scare” was more accurate than we were taught, and how a new tech-right counter-movement can fight back using AI, culture, and high-agency communities.If you’ve ever wondered why everything feels broken — ugly art, broken families, captured institutions, endless culture war — this episode connects the dots.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be asking the question, did the communists win with their goals in the United States? So this rabbit hole was prompted for me by a Chris Williamson clip where he had on a guest, Isabel Brown, who was going over a list that she reported to be the communist goals for the United States circa 1960.She sort of misstated this list implying that it was read into the Congressional Record by the Communist Party. It was not. It was read into the record by a Republican anti-communist, and was a review of the notes on the Communist Party and their goals, circa 1963- Hmm ... by an FBI agent, Cleon Skousen.So not a crackpot or anything like this. This was an FBI agent whose goal was in the FBI, was to track and to understand the Communist Party’s goals circa 1963.Simone Collins: All right? Okay. Yeah, [00:01:00] and it’s not like they were incredibly secret about their goals. So this can’t be that inaccurate.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, you’re gonna be shocked by this list.You’re gonna be shocked. Really? She read a few of them. And I was like, “I need to go into the full thing.” Yes. “I need to look up the history of this list.” Like, I’m not gonna go over every single one of the points that he had read into it, because some of them would just get boring. But we’re going to have enough material to shock you.Oh, gosh. So let’s... And I’m not gonna be reading them in order either. Okay. So let’s start here, okay? “Transfer some of the power of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychologists can understand or treat.” What? This was the 1960s, early 1960s.Psychiatrists weren’t even a thing at that point. L- not, like, commonly.Simone Collins: Oh, wow. Yeah. [00:02:00] Did we

The internet has fundamentally changed — and almost no one has noticed. In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down how the explosion of global internet users (especially from India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Brazil, Bangladesh, Nigeria, and other developing nations) has dramatically reshaped online discourse on both the left and the right.They explore:* Why environmentalism, anti-Black racism, and anti-Hispanic racism faded from leftist priorities while Gaza, Pakistan, Jews, and “Hindu Indians” suddenly dominate* Audience capture, botting, and engagement farming* Why certain right-wing creators (Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, Andrew Tate) shifted toward international/Islamic audiences* The hidden influence of third-world users on Western political conversation* Christian-majority vs. non-Western audience patterns* And why the “online right” often feels disconnected from actual American conservativesA paradigm-shifting look at how the internet is no longer majority American — and what that means for culture, politics, and influence.Show Notes* In terms of sheer internet users (using broadband and mobile internet subscriptions as a proxy), there is only one Western nation—the USA—represented in the top ten countries represented* (top representation = China, India, theU SA, Indonesia, Brasil, Russia, Japan, the Philippines, Bangladesh, and Pakistan).* Contrast this to 2008, when the top users of the internet were:* China (but doesn’t count, due to the great firewall of China)* And then the USA, Japan, Germany, the UK, France, and Brazil* In terms of broadband: Leading countries by total subscribers or penetration included the US, China, Japan, South Korea, Germany, France, UK, and Canada.* So functionally: Mostly Western nations were represented onlineCould this be why the left shifted from discourse about LGBT and climate change to discourse about Palestine?Internet + Broadband Subscriptions: Then and NowInternet/Broadband Subscriptions in 2008Leading countries by total subscribers or penetration included the US, China, Japan, South Korea, Germany, France, UK, and Canada.Mobile + Broadband:* China: ~253 million (June/July 2008; some estimates ~180–220 million by end-2008). China surpassed the US mid-year.* United States: ~220–230 million (active/home users ~150 million in early 2008 per Nielsen).* Japan: ~80–90+ million (active home users ~47–48 million in early 2008).<

Today on Based Camp, we go over the accounts of women who reportedly regret having kids, as covered by New York Magazine, and discuss why they’re so miserable. Among other things, we explore: * How the hardest phase is often the early years, especially infancy and toddlerhood, and that regret can be heavily shaped by sleep deprivation, pain, and the shock of being the default caregiver* How the same events can feel unbearable or manageable depending on whether a person frames them negatively or as part of a meaningful life project* The utility of thinking through failure modes in advance, building contingency plans, and explicitly discussing logistics before having children rather than relying on vague social assumptions* How if someone dislikes themselves or their partner, that unhappiness often gets magnified through children because kids reflect both parents* How online communities like “regretful parents” can reinforce misery by rewarding negative storytelling, though they acknowledge that some parents are genuinely unsupported and hurtingUltimately, parent regret is often driven less by children themselves and more by a mix of poor preparation, weak reasons for having kids, lack of support, bad partner fit, and untreated personal issues like depression, anxiety, ADHD, or body image problems. Many of these risks can be headed off by brutally honest parenting discussions, early planning, and choosing parenthood deliberately rather than as a default life stageEpisode Notes* A lot of conservative-leaning influencers are talking about an article in the New York Times, part of The Cut’s “Oh, Baby” series* Broadly speaking, they’re trashing NY Mag for discouraging motherhood and/or trashing the mothers for various reasons* Though some, like Brett Cooper, have more balanced takes: she argues that the viral “I regret having children” discourse is really about unsupported, isolated mothers and bad matching in marriage, not mothers hating their kids* I disagree with all the takes I’ve seen though* This article is great* These accounts are super important* Anyone who is serious about kids should read them—and moreHere’s why:* The best way to get through something tough is to:* Have a strong reason for having kids* Understand where things go wrong* Heading off serious issues, especially with your first child in their first years, makes the difference between hating parenthood and wanting a huge family* A positive experience with first kids was the top common factor Dr. Catherine Ruth Pakaluk identified when interviewing college-educated American mothers of over five kids* We, personally, have experienced a lot of the negative things (or rough equivalents) the mothers in this article experienced, but because we had a strong “why” b

Today on Based Camp, we discuss the purpose, history, and utility of the UN and NATO. Do they make sense in the modern geopolitical landscape? Do they make sense in the face of demographic collapse? As people who constantly rail on bureaucratic bloat and mission creep, you might be able to guess where we fall… but what do you think? We’re keen to read your opinions in the comments.Show NotesA typical middle-income American household is paying $337.50 annually on the European theatre and NATO-related missions via their taxes* Per household, middle of the income distribution: USAFacts reports that in 2021, families in the middle 20% of the income distribution paid about 10,391 dollars per year in federal income tax alone.* So for a middle‑income household paying 10,391 dollars in federal income tax, a good ballpark is about 1,500 dollars of that going to national defense in a recent‑years sense.* And one mainstream estimate is that roughly 20–25 percent of total U.S. military spending is devoted to the European theater and NATO‑related missions (forces, bases, exercises, enablers, nuclear posture)* With U.S. military spending around 850–900 billion dollars per year in the mid‑2020s, that implies on the order of 170–225 billion dollars annually that can reasonably be tied to European and NATO deterrence, broadly defined* 1500*.225= $337.50Meanwhile, what is NATO doing for us?I vote we not only leave NATO but also leave the UN (roughly $90-100 per year is paid to the UN per tax return / tax paying household—this includes lower-income households).Why NATO Was CreatedBasically to fight commies during the cold war* It emerged in the early Cold War as a direct response to the Soviet Union’s expansionist actions, including the domination of Central and Eastern Europe behind the “Iron Curtain.”* Western European nations were still recovering from World War II, and the U.S. and Canada sought to deter further Soviet aggression through collective strength rather than unilateral action.It operates within the UN Charter framework (explicitly referencing Article 51 on self-defense) but focuses on military readinessWhat Nato Does* Coordinate on defense, crisis management, and cooperative security* Like a neighborhood watch group* Participants voluntarily join* They coordinate on security and defensive action* They sometimes partner with non-members to promote stability beyond their own borders* They meet occasionally to strategize and troubleshootKey functions:* Regular consultations in the North Atlantic Council (NATO’s main decision-making body).* Joint military planning, exercises, standardization of equipment/procedures, and integrated co

Simone and Malcolm Collins expose how viewbotting, clip spamming, and manufactured engagement are completely warping our perception of what's popular online. From Twitch streamers (80% of top creators allegedly botted) to music giants like Beyoncé losing billions of fake views, "woke" games with 200 peak players, Substack subscriber farms, and Kick's massive clip-spamming campaigns — the internet is far faker than most realize.We break down the economics (why botting is a rational business decision), real-world examples (Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder, Caleb Hammer, Clavicular), how algorithms get gamed, and what this means for discovering authentic content in 2026.Dead Internet Theory just got an upgrade.Show Notes* According to some analysts, for the first time in over a decade, bots now generate the majority of internet activity* At 51-53%* This is according to multiple reports and sources (see note at the end)* Note: Breakdowns often separate “good” bots (search engine crawlers, SEO tools) from “bad” ones (malicious scrapers, credential stuffers, ad fraud). Imperva notes bad bots alone rose to ~40% of total traffic in 2025 (up from 37%)* BTW: Cloudflare’s data (which focuses on HTTP requests they observe) shows a lower but still rising bot share—around 31–32% in Q1 2026 (up month-over-month)—with AI crawlers as the fastest-growing segment. Their CEO has publicly predicted bot traffic will exceed human traffic by 2027, aligning with the broader trend. Some analyses of Cloudflare data cite >50% of HTML page requests as bot-driven in 2025* There are literal view farms (this is one Brazilian one that was raided two months ago, in March 2026: * For any platform you can imagine, you can buy viewbots with varying degrees of sophistication, including viewbots that have widely varied IP addresses that have detailed histories, leave comments, mute/unmute while watching streams, etc.Fame is manufactured* Major music labels and artists are using botting to look bigger than they are* An example: Drake accused his own label (UMG) of conspiring with third parties (including Spotify) to bot streams for Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us” to harm him. UMG called it “untrue” and “illogical.” Defamation claims were dismissed; the broader case is ongoing. Drake has also faced separate accusations of using his Stake partnership to fund botting for his own catalog.* When major companies DON’T use viewbotting, you see embarrassing situations like the pilot episode of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, which got ~16,000 views in its first 11 hours after release on YouTube. A separate report also said the live premiere peaked at roughly 1,300 concurrent viewers.* Even major viral figures, like Caleb Hammer and Clavicular, are manufactured to a great extentLet’s explore just how bad it isV

In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down the dramatic decline of The Daily Wire — from massive layoffs (25-50% staff cuts), an 85% drop in Ben Shapiro’s YouTube views, and high-profile splits with Candace Owens, Brett Cooper, and others — to financial flops like the $10M Pendragon fantasy series nobody asked for.They explore Shapiro’s mean-girl gatekeeping, failed attempts to control the conservative movement, allegations of heavy viewbotting, outdated content strategies, and why the old-guard “Boomer conservative” model is collapsing while newer, more vital, fun, and adaptive voices (including Based Camp) are rising.Show Notes* Around May 1st, the Daily Wire laid off around 13% of their staff* At least according to a company spokesperson* Candace Owens claims that 50% were laid off* And LayoffHedge (a third-party tracker) estimates approximately 100 jobs cut in 2026 (that is 50% of the approximately 200 remaining staff)* This is their second round of layoffs, following a 25% staff cut in April 2025* A year in which they also shut down their Bentkey children’s entertainment division* So their team is down over 60%* These changes coincide with a 85% drop in Ben Shapiro’s YouTube viewership* 2023: He had over 170 million monthly views* Now: 18-28 million monthly views* Plus Ben Shapiro and Team Daily Wire is very publicly splitting from major right-wing influencers—after a long history of sanctimonious gatekeeping* And this is in addition to insanely stupid financial indulgences made by the Daily Wire, like dumping $10M on a fantasy series nobody asked forLet’s look at their rise and fall and what it indicates about the right.The Rise of Ben Shapiro and the Daily WireBen Shapiro’s rise began in the early 2000s as a teenage author and columnist, accelerating in the 2010s through campus debates, books, and podcasts.Shapiro published his first book, Brainwashed, at age 17 in 2004 while at UCLA, followed by columns and radio appearances.His national breakout came around 2012-2016 via viral campus speeches (”facts don’t care about your feelings”), resigning from Breitbart in 2016 amid Trump tensions, and The Ben Shapiro Show podcast launch. By 2018, it was syndicated on over 200 stations, peaking his influence during 2016-2020 political polarization.The Daily Wire launched on June 29, 2015, co-founded by Shapiro and Jeremy Boreing with seed funding from the Wilks brothers, building on Shapiro’s momentum post-Breitbart. The Ben Shapiro Show debuted as its flagship in September 2015.* The Daily Wire perfected Facebook‑era virality with clicky headlines and “SJW owned” debate clips, becoming one of the most‑linked news domains on the platform and a powerhouse during the Trump and early COVID years.The company hit its peak in late 2023, driven by Shapiro’s YouTube reach

Malcolm and Simone Collins break down a viral left-wing YouTuber’s video claiming the Left would win an upcoming American Civil War. Instead of dismissing it, they steelman his arguments, examine historical parallels, institutional control, police/military loyalty, supply lines, and urban vs. rural dynamics.They explore realistic scenarios for how a future crisis could unfold (disputed election → secession of blue cities → blockades), why drone swarms and logistics will matter more than armed rednecks, and why the Left’s own demographics, antinatalism, and institutional parasitism may doom their long-term prospects.Includes deep discussion on vasectomy culture, narrative-based vs. data-based thinking, and a fun tangent on next-gen autonomous drone design for home defense and warfare.If you’re interested in pronoia, demographic collapse, institutional power, or surviving turbulent times, this episode is essential listening.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be diving deep into the mind of an individual who some right-wing figures have covered recently for his crazy comments. One of the crazier ones that happened recently is he said that if he transported back to the Pilgrim era, and obviously I’ll play the clip here,Speaker: You suddenly wake up in the 17th century on a ship headed for New England. As soon as we landed, I would use the money to bribe the boatswain to look the other way while I stole all of the muskets and powder on board, and then I would march immediately to the nearest indigenous settlement, give the guns out like candy, and make it my mission in life to murder every single white man, woman and child on the eastern seaboard of the continent.Malcolm Collins: That he would kill w- any white women and children that he found after- Oh, Godbetraying the Pilgrims and giving away all their guns to Indians. Because apparently this makes sense to him, and he’s [00:01:00] also gone viral, which we’ll talk about later in this you know, sterilizing himself. But with all of this stuff, yes, I could go over how crazy this guy sounds. Which is- I think weSimone Collins: all knowsomethingMalcolm Collins: I could do. But as people who watch our channel, I try to bring a unique perspective to what I’m covering, so I decided to go through and watch his videos. So on- Oh, youSimone Collins: went down the rabbit hole.Malcolm Collins: Yes.Simone Collins: Okay. AndMalcolm Collins: one of his videos, which is the one I really wanna talk on in this, is why the left would win an upcoming civil war.Oh ... and he basically lays out the plan that his side has for winning an upcoming civil war. And it’s- Reall

Malcolm and Simone Collins break down Helen Andrews’ “Great Feminization Theory” — the idea that the rise of wokeness, institutional dysfunction, and cancel culture correlates with fields tipping majority-female and importing feminine sociological norms (empathy over rationality, safety over risk, cohesion over competition).They explore law schools, medicine, media, management, conflict resolution styles, why organizations feminize and then decline, practical solutions, male-only spaces, and how this intersects with marriage, ambition, and building high-agency families in a declining culture.Show NotesThe theory* presented by journalist Helen Andrews at the National Conservatism conference in Washington, DC in September 2025* Speech got over 175K views* later published as an essay in Compact Magazine in October 2025* Connects the rise of wokeness and institutional dysfunction to higher percentages of women in formerly male-dominated fields* Because women bring feminine values that prioritize empathy over rationality, safety over risk, and cohesion over competition* Notes that many key institutions tipped from majority male to majority female in roughly the same period that “wokeness” intensified:* law schools (majority female since 2016)* New York Times staff (majority female since 2018, now 55 percent women)* Medical schools (majority female since 2019)* College instructors (majority female since 2023)* The college‑educated workforce (majority female since 2019).* Women now 33% of judges (63 percent of those appointed by Joe Biden)* Women now 46% of managers* Cites writers like Noah Carl and Bo Winegard & Cory Clark, saying survey data show women more likely than men to prioritize social cohesion over free speech (one cited survey: 71 percent of men favor free speech over cohesion, while 59 percent of women favor cohesion)* Draws on Joyce Benenson’s book Warriors and Worriers, she reports lab observations that male groups “jockey for talking time, disagree loudly,” then quickly converge on a solution, while female groups focus more on personal relations, eye contact, and turn‑taking, paying less attention to the assigned task* Attributes the rise of cancellations to women’s conflict aversion* That’s interesting—I hadn’t seen it as being that way but it is* References research and primate observations claiming that males are quicker to reconcile after conflict, while females favor slow, covert, ongoing competition within a group, and generalizes this to say men tend toward open conflict and reconciliation, whereas women undermine or ostracize enemies* Examples cited* Larry Summers’ resignation from Harvard in 2006 (after his comments about women in science)* Bari Weiss’ resignation from NYT

Elsa Johnson, a Stanford student and Hoover Institution researcher, was aggressively targeted by a suspected Chinese Ministry of State Security operative. What started as a friendly Instagram DM from “Charles Chen” quickly turned into visa-free trip offers, pressure to move to WeChat, and eventual transnational repression — all while universities looked the other way.In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down the full university-to-CCP pipeline: how massive Chinese student tuition payments create financial dependency, the role of CSSA (Chinese Students and Scholars Associations), Confucius Institutes, the United Front strategy, tech/IP theft in AI, and why American universities are failing to protect students and national security.Show NotesElsa Johnson, a Stanford student, is calling attention to a toxic national security flaw playing out in American universities and the problem is so much bigger than I had imagined.This spring, she testified before the House committee on Education and the workforce, asking them to do something about the problem‘I exposed China’s espionage tactics in The Times. Now I’m being harassed’What Happened to Elsa Johnson?* Elsa attended a Chinese language immersion school from kindergarten through either grade in Minneapolis, Minnesota* Got into Stanford University* Became a research assistant at the Hoover Institution, where she focused on Chinese industry and military tactics* From her congressional testimony:* “In June 2024, a few days after I spoke with one of my supervisors at Hoover about Chinese recruitment tactics targeting American academics, a man calling himself Charles Chen reached out to me on Instagram. He had over 100 mutual followers with me and had photos of Stanford on his profile. I had no reason to believe he was anything other than a fellow student.”* “Over the following weeks, Chen’s messages grew more concerning. He told me he was from China and asked detailed questions about my research and background in Chinese. He offered to pay for a trip to China, sent me a flight itinerary from Los Angeles to Shanghai and sent screenshots of a bank wire to prove he could afford my accommodations once I got there. He also sent me a document outlining a policy that would allow me to travel to China without a visa. He sent me videos of Americans who had gotten rich and famous in China and insisted that I, too, could find wealth and fame in the PRC.”* “Later on, he began incessantly pressuring me to move our conversation to WeChat, a Chinese government-monitored messaging app. When I didn’t respond to Charles Chen fast enough, he would delete and resend his messages. He even referenced the whereabouts of Stanford students who were in China at the time of our correspondence.<

Malcolm and Simone Collins react to Nick Fuentes’ shocking declaration: “I’m a moderate non-woke Democrat in 2026.” Malcolm’s long-standing prediction that Fuentes would align with the Democratic coalition has come true — and the clips prove it.In this episode, they break down Fuentes’ revealed preferences vs. his rhetoric, his pattern of undermining Republican candidates during elections, his obsession with destroying the GOP and harming Israel, his weak stance on immigration enforcement, and why this move exposes his true priorities. They also discuss the “Nazi Democrat” candidate in Maine, accelerationism, the health of the right-wing movement without deontological extremists, and what this means for the future of American politics.A must-watch for anyone following the Nick Fuentes saga, MAGA, or the realignment happening on the right.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we get a big heaping helping of I was right, I called it, it was the craziest conspiracy theory I had ever launched. So people will know there have been a number of episodes where I predicted that Nick Fuentes would join the Democratic coalition.And there was actually one entire episode that was nothing about but this exact topic, but I never aired that episode because I thought it was just too crazy to air as an independent episode. I thought people would say, “Malcolm, you’ve fallen off. This is crazy. You’re going too hard here. He’s never actually just gonna come out.Like, he may act like a Democrat, but he’s not just gonna join the coalition.” And he has.Speaker: 2026, vote Dem- I’m a Democrat now. I’m a moderate Democrat in 2026. I don’t know about ‘28. For 2026, I am a non-woke Democrat. Hi, my name’s Nick Fuentes. I’m an Afro-Latino, non-woke Democrat. I care about affordability. [00:01:00] I care about foreign interventions. I care about the border. I’m a non-woke, moderate Democrat.I think the GOP needs to be destroyed. I think the corrupt criminal government of Trump needs to be slowed down. We need to impeach the orange. It’s time to put this in a peach. Trump needs to be placed inside of a crystal. He needs to be impeached. This fat orange, tiny hands needs to be impeached.And then in ‘28, no Vance, no Rubio. We have to burn down the whole party. We need to elect a dark horse who’s gonna put America first. I’m not listening to anybody else. No Vance, no Rubio, America first. That’s the ma-- And that is all that matters anymore. That is the only thing that matters. I’m not voting for a Democrat unless they’re really, un- unless it’s, like, um, me.Unless it’s a, unless it’s a Nick Fuentes Democrat. Unless a Nick Fuentes Democrat wins the nomination, I won’t vote for a Democrat. I’m, I’m never Vance. I’m never Rubio. I’m an America first guy. So Tucker and all the [00:02:00] rest of them, they’re gonna tr

In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the controversial idea of bringing back the concept of the “concubine” (or courtesan) in modern relationships. They contrast two distinct relationship models: the true wife/housewife — a full business and life partner who advances the family’s interests — versus the courtesan/tradwife/trophy wife model, where the woman’s primary role is pleasure, aesthetics, and appearance rather than deep partnership.Drawing on history, labor statistics, and cultural critique, they discuss how women historically contributed far more to subsistence and family businesses than modern narratives suggest. They examine why many people today unconsciously seek unpaid courtesans, the problems with “ornamental” relationships, and how clear terminology can lead to better-aligned marriages. Topics include trophy wives as a profession, Real Housewives culture, objective-function alignment in relationships, and practical advice for high-achieving men and women.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] what I like about the term courtesan is it helps separate between a true housewife and the more modern tradwife, which I think is closer to a - courtesan.If you look at the tradwife, right, the tradwife makes everything look pretty, right? She, , does up the house. , She does the baking from scratch and everything. And she’s doing all that for appearance. She’s doing all that to, to sell, , that he has a certain type of wife.But, like, she’s not actually managing the family budget, right? Like, she’s not actually managing the deeper parts of the family. And many people who society at large would confuse, they would say, “Well, this woman stays at home and educates the kids , as part of her duties, therefore she’s the same type of thing as this trad woman.”Speaker: Specifically, we will be delineating two categories of relationships. One, the courtesan relationship, where the woman believes that their core job vis-a-vis their partner is just their [00:01:00] partner’s pleasure and reproducing. Whereas the other, the true wife or housewife, sees their job as being fully integrated with their husband’s life and advancing the interests of their family.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be expanding on a concept that a fan came up with in response to a previous video, and it is that we should bring back the concept of concubine. And when I first heard this I was like, well, we don’t wanna normalize sort of, you know, promiscuous behavior in this regards.There’s a lot of negative social externalities for doing it. But after they laid it out for me, I’m like, actually we, we need to start having a conversation about this. We need to normalize this concept. This is a good concept So let me explain. We had a video where w

In this eye-opening Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dismantle one of the biggest historical myths pushed by both feminists and modern “trad” circles: the idea that women historically stayed home doing minimal work while men did everything.Using cross-cultural evidence from hunter-gatherer societies, medieval Europe, Vikings, Spartans, ultra-Orthodox Jews, Islamic traditions, Africa, Latin America, India, China, Japan, and colonial America — plus genetic evidence from modern birds — they reveal the real division of labor: women handled the majority of reliable, grueling calorie production, farming (pre-plow), management, textiles, marketing, and household economy, while men focused on high-risk, high-reward activities like warfare, raiding, politics, and innovation.They introduce the “Sword and Shield” model of relationships and explain how the industrial era, plow, and wage labor flipped traditional dynamics. A must-watch for anyone interested in real history, gender roles, and escaping modern cultural brainwashing.Episode TranscriptSimone Collins: [00:00:00] The researchers say the finding is clear, but the reason behind it is still unknown. On average, men were able to get about one meter, 3.3 feet closer than women before the birds took off. This pattern appeared consistently across Czechia, France, Germany, Poland, and Spain.It also held true across 37 species so Malcolm immediately turns to me and he’s like, “We know exactly why this is the case.”Malcolm Collins: Yes. This is the question that explains everything we’re going to talk about today, and I think proves without a doubt that this is not some malcolm malcolmnipulation of historical facts. You have been in rural Latin America, right?Simone Collins: Yes.Malcolm Collins: Take an image in your head.Simone Collins: Okay.Malcolm Collins: You’re driving down a rural road. You look out the side of a car, okay? You see somebody with a 60 pound jug of something on their head.Simone Collins: Oh, it’s a woman, obviously. Yeah.Malcolm Collins: Always a woman.Simone Collins: Always, always a woman. Yes.Malcolm Collins: you go to Africa, you’ll see this as well. You go to-Simone Collins: China too. Let’s be clear. China too. Right.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. ‘Was it majority women doing the [00:01:00] harder labor when you’re-Simone Collins: Yeah,Malcolm Collins: 100%.Yeah. Yeah. D-Simone Collins: Yeah.Malcolm Collins: Guys, you do not know how brain cucked you are if, if a woman has convinced you, “ We just need to go back to the traditional way and I’ll stay at hom

Leftist academics just dropped a wild new paper titled “Toward Individualistic Reproduction: Solving the Fertility Crisis Could Require a Further Marginalization of Men.” In this episode of Based Camp, Simone & Malcolm Collins break it down — from the evolutionary arguments about why men are now “useless” to women in high-equality societies, to the dystopian policy prescriptions: massive welfare transfers to enable single motherhood, robot nannies, artificial wombs, and essentially declaring bankruptcy on pair-bonding and two-parent families.The Collinses critique the Brave New World vibes, discuss why pair-bonding repair is supposedly impossible, explore real pronatalist alternatives, and go on wide-ranging tangents about immigration & welfare, political violence thresholds, historical gender roles, family business dynamics, and the coming demographic speciation.A must-watch for anyone concerned about the birth rate collapse, gender dynamics, and the radical policy ideas emerging from academia.Show NotesReferring to a research article published in Politics and the Life Sciences from Cambridge University Press, Christian Heiens on X posted: “Checking in on the status of Wokeism, and it turns out Leftist academics are unironically saying that society needs to intentionally “marginalize men” even more to supposedly solve the birth rate. History shows us that what’s normalized in academia becomes publicly mainstream within a generation, and there is no sign the ship is turning or even slowing down.”Christian continues:* If academics are going to unironically argue that society has to intentionally beat down men even more in the name of apparently resolving the birth rate crisis then all bets are off and it’s time to start pointing out the obvious as a rebuttal:* “The way you solve the birth rate crisis is by banning women from most professions they weren’t engaged in before 1965.”* I don’t see how this is any more radical than what’s already becoming normalized within academia. But you’re unlikely to ever see a paper with this kind of abstract published because it transgresses on one of Progressivism’s most holy pillars.* “Artificial womb technology, robot nannies and partners help women and men solo parent, AI-driven date matching”* This entire paper reads like a giant advertisement for Brave New World.Let’s take a look at this article.The ArticleToward individualistic reproduction: Solving the fertility crisis could require a further marginalization of menPublished online by Cambridge University Press: 24 April 2

Malcolm & Simone Collins discuss the viral controversy around the game Pragmata — a title that explicitly celebrates fatherhood and pronatalism. Is “dad corn” (games that stimulate parental instincts) as sinful as traditional porn? How should we think about masturbating evolutionary pathways for bonding with children?In this unfiltered Based Camp episode, they break down:• Why Pragmata triggers leftists• The difference between healthy vs toxic ways to engage with parental instincts• Why gamers actually have more kids than non-gamers (with data)• Hassan’s “gamers are unfuckable losers” take demolished• Deontology vs consequentialism in faith, gaming, and family formation• Historic Christian attitudes toward sex, beauty, and pronatalismA must-watch for anyone interested in pronatalism, video game culture, evolutionary psychology, and building high-fertility families in the modern world.Video Game Developer DadsHere’s the spreadsheet referenced in the episode. It includes:* 30 notable male video game developers* Key games/works* Father status: Father, Childless, or Unknown* Children count where available* Evidence summaries* Source URLs in both the main sheet and a dedicated Sources sheet* A Summary sheet with formulas and a pie chartSummary results:* Fathers: 20 of 30, 66.7%* Explicitly childless: 2 of 30, 6.7%* Unknown/publicly undocumented: 8 of 30, 26.7%Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Corn, what it does is all humans, because of evolutionary reasons, have a collection of pathways that cause pleasure when you do things tied to the birthing and rearing of the next generation.if you’re here saying pragmata is not core, right? Functionally, how is it different? If I’m in my room and I’m playing pragmata, which I’m playing the game, I am fathering a fake child while I have real children downstairs. Mm-hmm. How is that not as ghoulish as masturbating to a fake woman when I have a real wife in the other room?I, I- Hmm.Simone Collins: That’s a really good point.Speaker: And if you’re like, well, it’s not as bad when I engage with it because I don’t have real children yet, and it’s like, well, that’s about the same as saying it’s not as bad when I engage with it because I don’t have a real wife yet.Anything that distracts from your tasks of [00:01:00] getting one of those things is equivalent in its sinfulness.Speaker 8: And if you think I mean Stoji and hair splitting here, one, remember, I can’t make the same take on this that every other conservative commentator has had. I’ve got to have something new and fresh, so keep that in mind. But two, , right now, everyone’s so excit

Malcolm & Simone Collins break down Asmongold’s viral “American History Conspiracy Timeline” — the theory that identity politics and racial tensions were deliberately amplified after Occupy Wall Street to distract the public from corporate and elite power.They examine explosive evidence: skyrocketing funding for the SPLC, NAACP, HRC, and GLAAD right after Occupy Wall Street, massive corporate donors (JP Morgan, Bank of America, Coca-Cola, George Soros, etc.), changes in FBI hate crime training and reporting guidelines, polling shifts on race relations, Google Trends/Ngram data, and more.Is modern identity politics organic cultural evolution or an astroturfed wedge issue? They also discuss antisemitism’s resurgence, Russia’s role in BLM, corporate vs. industrialist interests, and why class conflict was redirected into identity warfare.A data-heavy, no-holds-barred episode that connects the dots between Occupy Wall Street, the explosion of “woke” terminology, and today’s cultural divisions.Show NotesAsmongold’s ThesisOn a YouTube clip of Asmongold’s stream titled Alex Jones was right, in which Asmongold went over the Southern Poverty Law Center’s support of racist groups, he presented his conspiracy timeline regarding racism in the USA.He drew up a timeline (the “asmongold American history conspiracy timeline”)* 2005: “racism basically defeated everyone is getting along generally”* 2011: “lives improve but what about all these corpos? Occupy Wall Street* 2014: “look at that black person, they took your future”* 2025: “omg the jews”I hadn’t heard this before but… it sounds credible? How credible is it?I checked to see how Asmongold’s theory tracks with key word search volume, changes in police training programs, ngram word volume in books, reported hate crime data, polling data, and fundraising data for top identity politics orgs versus Occupy Wall Street.I was surprised by what I found. For example: While most nonprofit fundraising curves I looked at appeared to go up mostly linearly over time, the fundraising for identity-politics-related (e.g. NAACP, SPLC) skyrocketed after Occupy Wall Street. I’ve got graphs and numbers.Checking Asmongold’s ArgumentAsmongold lays out a simple four‑step “conspiracy timeline” where elites redirect public anger from class issues to identity conflicts, moving from “racism basically defeated” in 2005 to renewed racism and surging antisemitism by the mid‑2020s.2005: Racism “basically defeated”* He describes mid‑2000s America as a time when most people of different races got along and pop culture normalized multiracial friendship and cooperation (e.g., movies like Rush Hour 3 with a Black and Chinese lead that everyone was excited to see). He frames this as racism being “basically defeated” and society getting m

Did hookup culture and swipe apps like Tinder create the massive political and cultural divide between young men and women? In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down shocking new polling data showing young women are far more negative toward men than vice versa, explore how Tinder supercharged resentment and radicalization, and discuss everything from MeToo to artificial wombs and potential speciation between the sexes.They cover:• The timeline correlation between Tinder’s rise and women shifting hard left• Why short-term mating markets destroy long-term relationship prospects• Male vs female responsibility in modern dating chaos• The anime that predicted male/female civilizations splitting• Practical advice for men seeking real partners and why “high value” looksmaxxing can backfireA raw, data-heavy, and unfiltered conversation on one of the biggest societal fractures of our time.BTW, here is Revy the MGTOW’s Google Doc guide to having kids via surrogate as an unattached man. Show NotesThe LandscapeNew polling conducted for the New Statesman in the UK in early 2026 found that young women (esp 25–30) have significantly more negative views of men than young men have of women.* The New Statesman poll was carried out by pollster Scarlett Maguire and colleagues on attitudes between young men and women in Britain, published around 14 April 2026.Here’s the polling (archive link): Revealed: the new radicalism among young womenMerlin Strategy’s exclusive polling reveals a growing gender divide among under-30sWhat they found:* About 72% of young men report a favorable view of young women, and only around 7% report an unfavorable view.* Among women under 30, only about half report a favorable view of men, and around one fifth (about 21%) report an unfavorable view.* Among women under 25, only about 35% express a positive view of men at all, and just about 11% describe their view as “very positive.”* Commentary around the poll notes that young women are “three times as likely” to hold a negative view of men as young men are to hold a negative view of women.* 40% of young women say men don’t share their understanding of consent in relationships (only 25% of men say the same about women).* Young women are twice as likely as young men to say they don’t want children (15% women vs. 8% men). Among white women under 30, it’s 20%.* 1 in 4 young women say a partner’s different political views is a red flag.* 60% would find it difficult to date someone who disagrees on Palestine/Israel or Trump.* 74% say the same about disagreements on social justice.* Young women are more likely than men to rule out partners over immig

In this explosive Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down the shocking PS section of the Trump shooter’s manifesto — a rant that exposes jaw-dropping Secret Service and hotel security failures at a major DC event. The assassin details walking in armed, breezing past checkpoints, and being stunned by the total lack of security.Malcolm and Simone explore how this level of incompetence could have allowed a small Iranian team to wipe out much of the Trump administration. They debunk wild leftist conspiracy theories claiming the attempt was “staged,” examine the shooter’s anti-Trump motivations, information bubbles on the left, institutional rot in the Secret Service/CIA/FBI, and why this event reveals deeper societal breakdowns.Topics also include past assassination attempts, cultural trust, and why bureaucratic security theater keeps failing. A must-watch for anyone concerned about presidential security, deep state dysfunction, and political violence in 2026 America.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone. Today we are gonna go into something crazy that as far as I know, is in like our intellectual, conservative talking space we’re gonna be the first channel covering, and I am shocked that no one is talking about this.Have you heard anything about the PS section of the Shooters manifesto?Simone Collins: All I thought was that there were some papers found in his hotel room that expressed displeasure with some of the Trump administration’s policies. That’s it. I don’t know any, I didn’t know there was a manifesto. I didn’t know how to PS section, and I love that there was one, but tell me, it,Malcolm Collins: it makes me believe that somebody in the secret services trying to get Trump killed.Simone Collins: What, what,Malcolm Collins: and we, and, and, and on top of that, if Iran had not been an incompetent country at war with itself, they very easily could have assassinated almost the entire administration at that event. So. Let’s go into it.Simone Collins: Oh. Oh, wow. Yeah. People have been mocking the secret service for letting [00:01:00] the guy Nardo run right past them, butonMalcolm Collins: people haven’t been mocking the Secret Service, the guy, that’s what the PS section is about.It’s him going, let, let’s go into it. PS Okay, now that all the sappy stuff is done, what the hell is the secret service doing? Sorry. Gonna rant a bit here and drop the formal tone like I expected. Security cameras at every bend, bugged hotel rooms, armed agents, every 10 feet metal detectors out the wazoo.What I got, who knows, maybe they’re pranking. Me exclamation mark is nothing. No damn security. Not in transport, not in the hotel, not in the event. Sorry. I’m not even gonna keep going. Now, this is, this

In this spicy Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins tackle a sensitive but urgent topic: why Jews must stop defending bad actors within their communities — and why failing to do so is fueling rising antisemitism in America.With 24% of young Americans now endorsing antisemitic tropes (vs. just 5% of those in their 80s), the Collinses examine welfare fraud in Orthodox Jewish communities, the ADL’s deplatforming of critics like Tyler Olivier, the Chabad-linked push to pardon a $33M healthcare fraudster whose actions killed elderly patients, and the collapse of historic Jewish self-policing institutions (kehillot and beit din) that once prevented exactly this problem.They argue that protecting bad actors creates massive negative externalities, damages alliances with the new right, and threatens the long-term survival of Jewish communities — especially as ultra-Orthodox populations grow rapidly. A blunt, data-driven conversation about group accountability, cultural self-preservation, and why every community (Jewish, Somali, or otherwise) must police its worst members.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. Today is going to be a spicy conversation and it’s going to piss off a lot of people, but it is one that needs to be had right now in America. We, we mentioned this on another episode, but Jews need to be paying attention to this.24% of young people in America today endorse anti-Jewish tropes, right? Like are what you would be seen as antisemitic. Oh, oh, no. If you go to people in the, their eighties, it’s around 5%. Oh. So it’s one in four versus one in 20. This is a massive generational change.Simone Collins: Wow.Malcolm Collins: And I would point out here that the sentiment against Jews among use higher than it is against groups like blacks in the United States.Now where it is 17% have anti-black resentment in the United States where it’s 24% anti-Jewish resentment.Simone Collins: That’s so [00:01:00] funny because I grew up on like seventies, eighties, and nineties content that pretty heavily made fun of Jews. Like, I’m thinking about Mel Brooks Films, the Princess Bride all these shows that would have like a ton of like, seenMalcolm Collins: it as safe because nobody actually, when I used to, ‘causeSimone Collins: no one believed it.No oneMalcolm Collins: edgy fake humor, like racist humor. I would make racist jokes about Inuits. That was like the core commun Eskimos, you know, they, you know, make OhSimone Collins: right.Malcolm Collins: Make, make fun of their fake kisses. They don’t even know how to love, you know, like, everybody thinks Eskimo jokes are funny because nobody is aware of Eskimo discrimination.At least if you’re in the United States,

🚨 The Southern Poverty Law Center — one of America’s largest “anti-racism” organizations — was caught funding the KKK and neo-Nazi groups with millions of dollars. In this explosive Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down the shocking DOJ indictment revealing how the SPLC used money laundering, fake entities, and paid plants to keep cartoonish racist organizations alive. Why? Because the “racism industrial complex” needs visible villains to keep the donations flowing.Topics covered:• How the SPLC funded the Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally• The economics of fear-based nonprofits• Why much of today’s “far-right” extremism appears AstroTurfed• Nick Fuentes botting & relevance farming• The difference between real policy discussion and performative racism• How genuine conversation on race, immigration, and culture gets sabotagedThis is must-watch content for anyone tired of the endless outrage cycle.Show NotesThe Department of Justice’s Bombshell NewsThe Indictment* According to the indictment, some Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) donor funds were used to secretly pay leaders and members of racist, violent extremist groups, and at least part of that money was used to support their organizing and activities, including the 2017 “Unite the Right” rally.* The indictment alleges that, contrary to donor-facing representations about “dismantling” hate groups, SPLC used donor funds to pay a covert network of informants (“field sources” or “Fs”) who were themselves leaders or members of extremist racist organizations.Key uses of funds described:* Covert payments to informants embedded in or leading groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, National Alliance, National Socialist Movement, and American Front.* More than $3 million in SPLC funds were secretly funneled between 2014 and 2023 to these Fs associated with various violent extremist groups.* Funds were routed through fictitious entities and disguised bank accounts (Center Investigative Agency, Fox Photography, North West Technologies, Tech Writers Group, Rare Books Warehouse) to conceal that the money came from SPLC donor funds.* After those accounts were shut down, SPLC allegedly continued to pay Fs via ACH transfers labeled with disguised monikers such as “Rarebooks050” and “IPResearchCON050.”Examples of specific racist/extremist activities supportedThe document gives concrete examples where SPLC funds allegedly enabled or facilitated racist organizing or demonstrations, not just passive “information gathering.”* Unite the Right rally (Charlottesville, 2017)* F‑37 was a member of the online leadership chat group that planned the 2017 “Unite the Right” event in Charlottesville.* F‑37 attended the event at SPLC’s direction, made

In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into robust, replicated studies on fertility, intelligence, politics, and religion. They explore why progressive (”dysgenic”) fertility patterns are clearing out high-IQ individuals faster than conservative ones, while certain religious groups — especially Latter-day Saints (Mormons) — show neutral or even eugenic selection for intelligence.Key topics include:- The landmark study “Will Intelligent Latter-Day Saints and Smart Conservatives Inherit the Earth?”- New 2024 findings from the Vietnam Experience Study on how conservative religiousness reverses the typical negative intelligence-fertility link- Why “moderately” religious people often have the highest fertility (not the fanatical ones)- Cultural and structural reasons behind Mormon success in building high-trust, low-corruption institutions- The Quaker origins of modern “woke” culture- Enlightenment ideals vs. 1960s–1970s cultural shifts- Implications for civilization, space colonization, and the future of humanityThey also discuss Techno-Puritanism, corruption in religious institutions, and why fanatical, high-agency groups are best suited for building utopias (including on Mars).If you’re interested in pronatalism, dysgenics, cultural evolution, or long-term civilizational strategy, this episode is packed with data, graphs, and unfiltered analysis.Watch the full conversation and let us know in the comments: Which religious or cultural group do you think has the strongest eugenic fertility patterns today?Studies referenced:- Kirkegaard & Dutton (2022) on LDS and conservatives- Dutton (2024) on conservative religiousness and intelligence selection (Vietnam Experience Study)Subscribe for more Based Camp episodes on the future of humanity, fertility, and culture.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be talking about a number of studies that were reconfirmed recently. Mm-hmm. So this is the, the third time that these studies have been tested and reconfirmed. So this is a, a very robust finding at this point.And I wanna talk about them and talk about the, the implications of this for civilization. It is strategies, culture, and how society’s going to change in the future. So, a study that a lot of people are aware of is the study titled will Intelligent Latter-Day Saints and Smart Conservatives Inherit the Earth?And what this study looked at, ‘cause a lot of people were familiar that it looked at Latter Day Saints versus Non Latter Day Saints. And when I heard the results of this study initially. Some people misframed it as saying Latter day Saints are one of the few religions that has eugenic effects. Like the, the culture of the latter day [00:01:00] saints has eugenic effects on the people who fo

Russia’s Health Ministry just issued new guidelines: during routine reproductive health checks, doctors are now supposed to ask women how many children they want. If a woman says “zero,” the recommendation is to refer her to a medical psychologist to help form “positive attitudes toward childbirth.”In this episode of Based Camp, Simone and Malcolm break down the policy, Russia’s broader pro-natal cultural offensive (including the new ban on childfree propaganda, revived Mother Heroine medals, and “Year of the Family” initiatives), and whether framing voluntary childlessness as a psychological issue worth treating is a smart move or dystopian overreach.They explore:* Why this targets culture rather than just throwing money at the problem* The surprisingly recent history of “aspirational childfree” as a celebrated lifestyle* How societies throughout history viewed women who didn’t want children* Whether therapists could actually help shift mindsets (or if the real power is in the framing)* Bold ideas like no income tax for parents, school choice, and normalizing motherhood againProvocative, data-rich, and unapologetically pro-family. If you’re tired of the “childfree is empowerment” narrative and want to talk seriously about reversing fertility collapse, this one’s for you.Episode TranscriptSimone Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Malcolm. I’m excited to be speaking with you today because Russia has introduced a new health ministry guideline saying that women who say they don’t want children should be referred for psychological counseling.And, and Russian officials present this as a prenatal measure to address, you know, their,Malcolm Collins: and I was like, I heard it and it generally was multi totalitarian things. I don’t like this much. This when I’m like. My gut says yes, I like this. I like framing it as a psychological disorder for a woman to not want children.Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. And you, you actually like it, it was fairly late at night. You just burst into my room and you were like, Russia’s making like aspirational dinks, go to see therapists. And we both had a good laugh about it, but then I, I went and I looked up what the policy actually does. So basically during reproductive health assessments, doctors have been told.That they should ask women how many children they want to have, which is a little dystopian. And then if a woman [00:01:00] says that she does not want any children, the guideline says it is recommended or advisable to send her to a medical psychologist, quote, you know, from Russian quote, to form positive attitudes toward childbirth and reports so far.Describe this as part of clinical guidelines from, from the health ministry and, and not, they’re not like a formal criminal or administrative mandate with explicit penalties for refusing counseling.So this is

Reese Witherspoon just dropped a truth bomb: women’s jobs are 3x more likely to be automated by AI, yet women are using it 25% less than men. Instead of applause, authors and the literary world slammed her for saying “It’s time to learn AI.”In this episode, Simone & Malcolm Collins break down the controversy, why Reese is right (and surprisingly based), the hilarious meltdown from writers like Roxane Gay, and what it means for the future of filmmaking, creativity, and women in tech.They also dive into:* Reese’s earlier call for “more girl bosses in AI”* How AI is transforming Hollywood (and why fighting it is self-sabotage)* The gender divide in AI adoption — and how approachable agent tools can help* Milla Jovovich’s impressive open-source AI memory palace* Why refusing to learn AI is the fastest way to get left behindIf you want to stay relevant in the AI revolution — whether you’re a creator, professional, or just don’t want to be replaced — this is the wake-up call.Watch until the end for a fun chat about high vs. low camp, family life, and why the people embracing AI will dominate the next era.💡 Want to get started with AI the easy way? Check out Reality Fabricator for powerful, approachable agents that anyone can use.Drop a like if Reese is right, comment your favorite AI tool, and subscribe for more unfiltered takes on tech, culture, and the future!Streamyard - Reece Witherspoon_ Women_ Learn to AISimone Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Malcolm. I’m excited to be speaking with you today because women freaked out after Reese Witherspoon said that women should learn how to use ai. OhMalcolm Collins: my God. Now one, I love the learn to code thing. Yes. So for people who forgot, learn to code.So journalists used to always like tell. Coal miners and stuff in West Virginia with a very smug act, learn to code whenever, like a coal mine would get shut down or whatever, right? Because. Of course they’re arrogant. They see these people as subhuman. Mm-hmm. They are just like, get a real job, basically.Right. Like,Simone Collins: yeah.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Like a high. Anyway, when all the journalists started being laid off the new Right. Gamer gate, post gamer gate online. Right. Came out and started yelling at them to learn to code, or not yelling at them, but tweeting at them, and they got super triggered to the. Accounts could get banned for telling a journalist to learn to code after they had lost their jobSimone Collins: 100%.And once again the primary people who had a bit of an aneurysm in, [00:01:00] in the face of Reese Witherspoon politely recommending that this is kind of an important and big deal.Speaker 2: What? Like it’s hard.Simone Collins: We

Having been given the impression as young Americans that China was “socialist,” providing abundant services and safety nets for its citizens, while the US was “capitalist,” leaving its citizens to fend for themselves, we were in for a surprise when we discovered that, relatively speaking, the United States is a socialist utopia.Today on Based Camp, we explore the United States’ (admittedly unsustainable) socialist utopia Americans enjoy and the (put diplomatically) bare bones support provided to citizens—especially rural citizens—by the CCP.If you’re a parent in the US looking to avail themselves of more of the United States generous services oriented around families, please refer to Pronatalist.org’s summaries of and links to State resources for parents.Show NotesI grew up thinking the USA was a land of pure capitalism, where people are on the hook for everything. Turns out that’s only the case if you’re middle class.If you’re poor in the USA, you’re arguably living in the best communist world imaginable, because you’re enjoying socialist-style support (for food, childcare, healthcare, etc.) but getting capitalism-style goods and services (e.g. going to the same private hospitals that rich people go to; going to the same grocery stores that rich people go to, etc.)Case in point: State resources for parents (We created detailed guides for Pronatalist.org)* See Minnesota as an exampleIf “communism” means “this country has a significant social safety net”, then the USA is more communist than China.Even China has disparities in its benefits: urban formal workers receive significantly better protection than migrants and rural residents.Old-Age Income* USA: Social security* Going to stop working* Based on what you contribute as a worker… sort of* For a typical retiree claiming at full retirement age, Social Security is designed to replace around 40 percent of pre‑retirement earnings, with replacement rates higher for low earners (roughly 60–80 percent) and lower for high earners.* The Social Security Administration indexes each year of your past earnings to national wage growth and takes your 35 highest‑earning years to compute your Average Indexed Monthly Earnings (AIME)* For people first eligible in 2025, the formula replaces 90 percent of the first slice of AIME, 32 percent of the middle slice, and 15 percent of the top slice (with “bend points” around 1,226 and 7,391 dollars of

Malcolm Collins drops a bombshell: modern “woke” culture didn’t come from the Puritans — it evolved directly from the Hicksite Quaker movement. In this explosive Based Camp episode, we trace how a 17th-century religious group birthed today’s urban monoculture, complete with performative morality, call-out culture, virtue signaling, and a parasitoid mindset that kills its host.We dismantle the sanitized schoolbook version of Quaker history with hard stats: Quakers owned slaves at dramatically higher rates than Southern colonies or Puritans, yet rewrote themselves as the heroes of abolition. We compare them to Calvinist Puritans, explore “justicle” (morality based purely on feelings), the origins of deplatforming, child moral authorities, bureaucratic meeting-house governance, and why this “super virus” spread so effectively through the U.S. education system.If you’ve ever wondered why progressive spaces feel like a mix of endless rules, theatrical protest, and zero accountability for results — this is the deep historical root.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be discussing how what we today call woke evolved out of the Quaker. And a lot of people have posited many potential starts to woke them as a metaphysical framework, as a moral framework, as a collection of behaviors and patterns.And they’re just wrong. They’re just wrong. Like there’s a very clear. Trace of where the movement emerged, specifically from the Hicksite Quaker movement, Uhhuh how it grew, how it used the Quaker foothold was in the Northeastern education system in the United States and the West Coast education system in the United States to indoctrinate a generation and how it killed its original host generations ago.At this point, the Hicksite Quaker tradition is dead. And it we’ve mentioned it. Some of those things is woke as a cultural parasite. [00:01:00] It’s parasitoid it. Does not care about the host surviving it. You know, a parasitoid, if you’re not familiar, is like, have you ever seen one of those worms or insects where you can see like the worms crawling underneath its skin and then it explodes?It’s a parasite that doesn’t, that that goal is to kill you as part of its lifecycle. So, while all of this evil came from the Quaker movement, we still have to mourn what happened to it as well. All right. And I will just be reading from one of our books, I think our best book, the Pragmatist Guide to Crafting Religion.And it’s at the end of the section on how you determine what is true and what isn’t true.Simone Collins: Question though are you going to address what if all hiss. Strong assertions that it was the Puritans and not the Quakers.Malcolm Collins: And to, to say that woke is evolved from Puritanism requires a cartoonish understanding of history.

Simone and Malcolm Collins break down Inez Stepman’s viral essay “The Myth of the Independent Girlboss” from First Things. They argue that the modern “independent woman” ideal isn’t true independence — it’s heavily subsidized by the state through taxpayer-funded programs, policies, and cultural shifts that externalize costs onto society.Topics include:* State-subsidized childcare and education* Student debt (women hold ~2/3 of it)* Lawsuit-driven affirmative action and HR bureaucracy* Child support and alimony as hidden subsidies* The explosion of “email jobs,” DEI, and nonprofit activism* Cheap immigrant labor enabling two-income households* The decline in teaching quality and volunteering turned into paid activismThey discuss how the “girlboss” has been replaced by cultural backlash (tradwife leanings on the right, anti-capitalist vibes on the left), why most “successful” girlboss stories in tech are illusory, and what policy changes (many already happening under the current administration) could shift incentives back toward family and real independence.Show NotesThe entire concept of the girl boss may have been a lie.In other words, the concept of an independent professional woman who depends on nobody is a farce, and so-called girlbosses are actually state sponsored.This is the proposition of Inez Stepman in her essay The Myth of the Independent Girlboss and it really resonated with people.Inez Stepman’s First Things Essay: The Myth of the Independent GirlbossThe Myth of the Independent GirlbossStepman writes: “The Atlantic published an essay by Helen Lewis declaring the “Death of Millennial Feminism,” while in Slate Jill Filipovic defended the girlboss ideal against what she calls an “absolutely enormous antifeminist backlash within which we are all living.” They both take for granted, however, that the girlboss has declined from her cultural primacy. That may be so, but she’s taken no comparable hammering in the world of public policy.”“Whether the Millennial image of the girlboss, with its shrill first-person confessional style, is fading into cheugy-ness with the inevitable generational pendulum swing, the cornerstone of her appeal, “independence” from men and family, has never been so popular. On Reddit’s infamous r/relationships subreddit, half of all advice given amounts to “leave,” up from 30 percent in 2010 and still climbing. Nearly half of Gen Z <a target="_blank" href="https://nypost.com/2025/0

In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive into one of the most provocative cultural shifts happening today: the growing inclusion of polyamory as a protected sexual identity alongside the LGBT+ framework.They explore:* The historical “slippery slope” arguments from the gay rights movement (and how the left once fiercely rejected them)* Why polyamory is now being mainstreamed in progressive spaces* Biological, psychological, and cultural variance in monogamy vs. polyamory* Striking parallels (and differences) between polyamory and same-sex attraction* Why Malcolm now argues we should treat polyamory similarly to being gay — not as something to celebrate or condemn, but as a neutral biological/psychological variationThey also discuss family structure, reproductive fitness, leftist organizations like Black Lives Matter, legal changes in cities like Somerville and Cambridge, historical quotes from Dan Savage and Evan Wolfson, Catholic priests and lesbian nuns, biker culture in gay history, and much more.A raw, nuance-heavy conversation that challenges both progressive orthodoxy and conservative reflexes. Expect tangents on everything from Mormon cuckoldry porn searches to ramp foraging and steak dinners.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we’re gonna be talking about L-G-G-B-D-T-T-T-I-Q-Q-A-A-P-PWhich was used by the Canadian Teachers Federation materials as example, wait noSimone Collins: wait.That there wasn’t a joke.Malcolm Collins: No, that’s not a joke. One. That’s a, that’s a real one.Speaker 2: They provided $0 to deal with the ongoing genocide of M-M-I-W-G.Malcolm Collins: I could go through it all, but I think it’s probably more interesting for me to just get to the point of all this, which is the recent and, and increasing inclusion of polyamory as a discriminated sexual identity within the whiter, urban monocultural, or progressive framework.Simone Collins: Okay. That’s interesting. Yeah. That it’s like, I guess, well, it is. Some people frame it as [00:01:00] a sexual orientation, so. I guess then it belongs there.Malcolm Collins: Yeah, well, I, I wanna talk about this, I wanna talk about it from a few angles. One, we are going to talk about it from the perspective of the early days of the gay rights movement.Sorry, not even early days until around 2009, 2000, like 13. So, so up until like more recently the LGBT movement was fervent about the, this slippery slope argument on the right, that if we normalize. Same sex relationship today. We’ll be normalizing polyamorous relationships tomorrow. And they were very aggressive.We’ll go over quotes and stuff. This is not the case. The m

In this deep-dive episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins examine the provocative claim that gender dysphoria—the intense, modern experience driving today’s trans movement—has no precedent in recorded human history before the 1920s.They contrast historical examples of cross-dressing, third-gender roles, or gender-nonconforming behavior (two-spirit, hijra, sworn virgins, Elagabalus, etc.) with the core modern trans experience: profound discomfort with one’s birth sex that often leads to demands for medical transition, pronoun changes, and access to single-sex spaces.Malcolm and Simone argue that gender dysphoria resembles culture-bound syndromes like anorexia—intensely felt but socially influenced, disproportionately affecting autistic individuals, emerging around puberty, and exploding via social contagion and media stories.They respond to critics like Short Fat Otaku (Dev), discuss the shift from 1990s liberal “live and let live” assumptions, the role of bad actors, sports/prisons/restrooms, detransition, and why new evidence (Cass Review, WPATH files, UK data) demands updating views. Simone shares her personal experience with anorexia to illustrate how real these feelings feel even when culturally shaped.A data-driven, empathetic, and unflinching conversation on human flourishing, consent, and ideological capture.If you’re interested in history, psychology, culture-bound illnesses, or the trans debate, this episode is essential.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be going deeper down a rabbit hole that I have pulled on in the past, but I was called back to it by an episode I watched of the rapidly declining in viewers short fat Orta. I, I think we now do better than him in terms of, of view count by probably like 20%.That’s insane. Which is pretty exciting because I used to really like him in his videos and he sort of got, he, he actually represents a, a wider phenomenon that I wanted to grab onto on this topic because he, in its recent video, he was critical of leaflets debate performance, whereas almost everyone else says that she won dramatically.I even had this moment where he’s like, I think she lost the trans debate she was having. And I was like, to go to an AI and be like, is it general? What’s the general consensus on who won this debate? And it’s like overwhelmingly leaflet. And it, and then it went through all of the reasons. It was overwhelmingly Lisa.So I was like, okay, just checking on that crazy.Simone Collins: Yeah, yeah. Just so yeah. To, to even override your, your bias still.Malcolm Collins: But [00:01:00] he said one thing that really got under my skin at the beginning because a trans person was saying to somebody who was in this debate that was happening on X y

In this Based Camp deep dive, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore one of the most fascinating figures in online culture: Shoe0nHead (June Lapine). Why has a self-described social democrat, Bernie supporter, and pro-union leftist maintained massive popularity and respect in right-wing and anti-woke spaces for over a decade—while most other left-leaning creators from the early skeptic/atheist era lost their audiences?We break down:- Her unique journey from Gamergate-era anti-SJW commentary to Catholic trad wife and mother- Why she never needed to “convert” her audience or pivot dramatically- The vitalistic, entertaining style that keeps her relevant across the political spectrum- The broader split in the old atheist community: truth-seekers vs. resentment-driven dunkers- Why the modern right can embrace ideological diversity (and why the left struggles with it)- Shoe0nHead as proof that the new right is a big-tent movement built on reality and forward momentum rather than purity spiralsIf you’ve ever wondered why right-leaning creators constantly react to and platform Shoe0nHead (even when she criticizes Trump mildly), this episode explains it.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be pulling a thread that we got to in another video and in this other video we were talking about the. Community of early online skeptics slash atheist, which was like the core of sort of YouTube culture in the earliest days of YouTube.And how the individuals in this community that went right, they first became anti-feminist and anti woke, then went into Gamergate and then became the seedbed that the new right movement grew out of.Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.Malcolm Collins: And then another group of them drifted in another direction. They drifted left and the group that drifted left like they, they were in the early atheist anti theist movement.And then the movement went either at the anti-feminist or anti woke stage. Yeah. They lost their audiences. Notably, we didn’t talk about it in that video, but there is actually one that drifted left [00:01:00] even after that stage. He was there for anti-feminist, he was there for anti woke, and he only drifted left at the trans stuff.This is dev slash short Fighter Taku, who has co off his views are way lower than ours now. If you look at like weekly countsSimone Collins: has he overall drifted left?Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Yeah. Well, I mean, he has refused to really call out the trans community as a serious problem. And something that needs to be in some way, you know, the, like it legislatively something like that, a addressed.Speaker 3: Inspector, do you know if the killer was a man or a woman? Well, if ca I know that

In this episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into a fascinating question from a viewer comment: Why did the early 2000s-2010s online atheist/skeptic community splinter, with many becoming the seed crystal for today’s online right-wing culture—while those who shifted left (Atheism+, socialism, Democrat alignment) largely lost their audiences and relevance?We explore the two major “seed crystals” of modern internet culture:* YouTube skeptic/debater/edge-lord style (truth-seeking, anti-woke evolution, Gamergate → new right)* 4chan’s shocking authenticity and owning-it energyAnd on the left: Tumblr’s vibe/aesthetic-driven culture (memes, cancel culture, performance over truth).Why did right-leaning creators like Thunderf00t, Sargon of Akkad, The Amazing Atheist, and Armored Skeptic stay relevant, while figures like Laci Green and iDubbbz crashed out? What makes ShoeOnHead the notable exception who kept a right-leaning audience without fully adopting the politics? And how does ContraPoints prove the rule with her theater-kid, BreadTube style?We also touch on:* Vibrant optimism vs. nihilistic pessimism* Truth-seeking vs. aesthetic vibes* Why conservatism now feels like “the new atheism”* Trump’s unique “Christianity,” religious evolution in the community, and moreIf you lived through the New Atheist era, Gamergate, or the Tumblr-to-mainstream-left pipeline, this one’s for you. Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to explore a question that actually came up through a comment on one of my previous videos. So on one of my previous videos, somebody was pointing out, because I pointed out there was this evolution within online culture of the online atheist slash skeptic community, which then transformed into the online anti-feminist community.‘Cause first it was dunking on Christians, then it was dunking on feminists, then it was dunking on. Woke people and then that transitioned into Gamergate. And then that became the core of what became the new right. Or at least like the online right culture. And he pointed out, he goes, well, hold on.There were also people, in fact, you could argue about half of the people involved was that original atheist community, that original you know, online skeptic community. Yeah. That went in the opposite direction. They went. Into the atheism Plus for anyone who [00:01:00] remembers that, that was like atheism plus socialism or something.And then they became Democrats and they became left-leaning. And, and this is true but one that doesn’t discount the fact that the ones who went to the right ended up forming the seed crystal that became online right-leaning culture. Mm-hmm. But two a

OpenAI just dropped their big “Industrial Policy for the Intelligence Age” document — and it’s clear they’re battening down the hatches for AGI/superintelligence. In this Based Camp episode, Simone (2) establishing a pilot program of fellowships and focused research grants of up to $100,000 and up to $1 million in API credits for work that builds on these and related policy ideas; and (3) convening discussions at our new OpenAI Workshop opening in May in Washington, DC.”* There is no actual information about this workshop out there* Maybe an indication of their not being serious?They propose AI governance and industrial policyThey imply their proposals will help keep people at the center despite a transition to superintelligenceThey put forward an initial portfolio of policy ideas in two areas: “building an open economy” and “building a resilient society,”What they say they’re optimizing for:* Broadly sharing prosperity* Mitigating risks* Democratizing access and agencyTheir case for new industrial policySociety has navigated major techno

In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore a viral Asmongold take: VTubing as a “hack” that lets women (and others) influence online discourse without traditional appearance-based barriers. They dive into how anime avatars and VTubers have transformed the online right—opening doors for older, intellectually mature women, introducing female perspectives, and boosting the post-GamerGate “nerd right” faction.Topics include the evolution of the online right from edgy atheists to the modern conservative scene, why traditional female influencers were often young and impressionable, the rise of conservative VTubers like Kirsche, Leaflit, Rev Says Desu, and more, plus the cultural shifts around age, attractiveness, parasocial relationships, and factional dynamics within the right (deontologists vs. consequentialists, anti-nerd sentiments, etc.).They also touch on Anna Valens drama, anime’s role in conservatism, censorship, coalition-building, and why this VTuber phenomenon strengthens the right’s adaptability and intellectual depth. A fun, wide-ranging conversation on how technology is reshaping ideology and influence.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to hear with you today.Today we’re gonna be talking about an interesting phenomenon that came from a viral moment that Asma Gold got himself into. Oh, what? ASG Gold was I think, reacting to a tweet. And the tweet said something like, there is no point to male v tubers and Asma Gold said this is true. And then he went further, which is to say the key benefit of VT tubing for women is he said it’s like this crazy hack that they found out where you can be a hot woman without having to be a hot woman.And then he said the thing that was controversial, but many female vt tubers have reacted to this and been like, but this isn’t controversial, it’s just true. Oh no. Which he said is, if you look at not hot female influencers. The vast majority of them are v tubers to, to the extent that almost all of them are v tubers.Right.Speaker 6: To be clear, I am not saying that V tubers are predominantly unattractive. I actually do not think that this is the case. I think that they’re [00:01:00] well more attractive than the average person. , like the real people are more attractive than the average person. But we lived in an era where, women who were.Let’s say top 25%, but not top 10% of attractiveness were frozen out of being able to start to rise as intellectual influencers. , And this doesn’t just have to do with genetics. It was also really any woman who is over the age of 25 was frozen out of being able to rise as an intellectual influencer because men think younger women are attractive, generally speaking., And. It’s worse than all of that because even if a woman is in the top 5% of attractiveness, but she is shy or she is insecure and doesn’t want peopl

In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dissect the viral chaos from the 2026 NDP Leadership Convention in Canada, where “equity cards” turned policy debates into a full-blown oppression Olympics. What started as yellow cards for “gender equity” (letting anyone not identifying as a cis man jump the speaking queue) quickly spiraled as delegates printed their own colored cards for race, indigeneity, disability, and more—leading to endless bickering over who was the most oppressed and deserved to speak first.We laugh at the absurdity (and yes, they still elected a white guy), but we go deeper: How do these systems develop? Why do progressive coalitions inevitably fracture over hidden hierarchies of oppression? And most importantly—how can this self-sabotaging dynamic be strategically triggered to expose the contradictions in identity politics?From the “progressive stack” to real-world examples like Occupy Wall Street and internal leftist schisms (Palestine vs. Black activists, anyone?), we explore how allowing even one group special privileges creates a cascade that destroys institutions from within. A masterclass in why equity isn’t equality—and why this parasitoid-like behavior accelerates the collapse of woke-infected organizations.If you’ve ever wondered how to make the left eat itself without direct confrontation, this one’s for you. Grab your popcorn (and maybe some colored cardstock).Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] I think too often we see something like this and we laugh about it, and what we don’t see is.Oh, oh. That’s a trap that we can lay out in the future. You say, well, as a cis man, I believe that trans women. Should always be able to speak first due to their oppression was in our society.Simone Collins: You just gotta kick it off. Yeah. You know, you just, you drop in. Yep. Yep. Mm-hmm. And you walkMalcolm Collins: out,and then, but as a white man. You know, you can’t understand what it feels like to be black and to see a trans woman speak before me and then I say, whoa, you are right.We need to create a table with a hierarchy of oppressed categories. Mm-hmm.And of course, I will recuse myself because. I have no role in thisSimone Collins: conversation. No. Yeah, no.Would you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you [00:01:00] today. Today we are going to be diving deep into, we have seen it on other rightwing YouTubers, commentators, podcasters. There was a sort of viral conference or a series of events at a conference where points of privilege cards were assigned at the NDP.Conference, which is the Canadian political Party, which is in the process of falling apart right now. It helps very little power at this point in fighting where one speaker, and I won

In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive into the viral controversy surrounding Kristi Noem’s husband, Bryon Noem, and his alleged involvement in the bimbofication fetish scene — including leaked messages, photos, payments to sex workers, and the couple’s apparent marital mismatch amid long-rumored infidelity on her side.They explore why this story hasn’t blown up into a bigger scandal on the right (or left), how society has normalized “degenerate” kinks like furries, transformation fetishes, and bimbofication, and whether this shift has positive or negative externalities. The conversation covers:* The psychology and arousal pathways behind bimbofication (loss of autonomy/control, body transformation, escapism)* Why people on both sides are mostly shrugging it off* Misunderstandings in the Noem marriage (she reportedly thought he was gay)* Comparisons to other fetishes (vore, ification, etc.) and how common they actually are* Dangers of stigmatizing kinks vs. engaging with communities that can warp identity* Advice for parents: de-romanticize sex, teach impulse control in a world full of “sirens,” and avoid feeding kids to ideological capture* Cultural observations on the Trump administration’s “Mar-a-Lago face”/bimbo aesthetic and broader societal vibe shiftsExpect unfiltered talk about human sexuality, evolutionary misfires, AI roleplay as a safer outlet, and why old-school shame tactics no longer work in the internet age.If you enjoy deep, nerdy dives into taboo topics without performative outrage, hit like, subscribe, and drop your thoughts below — what’s your take on bimbofication and cultural normalization?Show NotesIt was recently revealed that Bryon Noem, husband to Trump’s former Homeland Security secretary Kristi Noem is involved in the bimbofication scene, something which he CONFIRMEDCoverage of this has been extremely disappointing: Either “ew what” or “leave this poor man alone” (e.g. NY Times: “In South Dakota, Neighbors Feel Sorry for Kristi Noem’s Husband”)* Though I do appreciate that people are being pros to Bryon, who has no doubt been through it* “In interviews with locals and friends of the couple before and after The Daily Mail published its pictures, the prevailing sense that emerged was this: People can’t help but feel sorry for Bryon Noem. His marriage had been the talk of the prairie since long before Tuesday.”* On the edge of Castlewood, there is a gas station that sells AR-15s. Dozens of animal heads hang from the walls. “Kristi for Governor” stickers stick to the countertops. One man who was in there Tuesday morning looked at the report in The Daily Mail and shook his head sorrowfully. He didn’t know what to believe about Bryo

In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the sharp rise in Black women’s unemployment in 2025, the backlash against DEI initiatives, and why efforts to elevate specific groups as “minions” of dominant cultural powers often backfire—leaving the broader group to face the consequences.They discuss OkCupid dating data showing Black women receive fewer responses than even many incel-labeled groups, cultural tropes and archetypes available to Black women, historical patterns of favored minorities (Tutsi in Rwanda, Protestants under Cromwell, etc.), and the personal essay by Sesali Bowen (”Black Women Aren’t Just Unemployed, They’re Being Erased”).The conversation covers financial habits, work ethic signals, shifts from “Black Girl Magic” to post-DEI realities, AI automation, government job cuts, and why merit-based systems might ultimately benefit everyone—including those previously disadvantaged by tokenization.Provocative, data-driven, and unfiltered—watch for a deep dive into how “well-intentioned” favoritism can intensify backlash and what this means for cultural resilience and family formation.Would you like to know more? 👀Show Notes* If I were a black woman in America, I’d be going off the grid* Right off the bat, black women have the cards stacked against them the worst in dating markets* And now, whether or not they ever bought into it, black women may have the cards stacked against them* Here are some choice stats from an article I came across covering this:* “In December 2025, “Black women were spending an average of 29.7 weeks, or more than seven months, unemployed—the highest rate among every group of women and among all men except for Black men, who had a slightly higher average,” The 19th* reports.”* “At the height of the summer volatility, Black women accounted for 54.7% of all female job losses, despite making up only 14.1% of the female workforce,” according to an analysis by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research.* What’s sick is that the racket that caused the backlash which may be hurting a lot of black women was due to special treatment that was largely exploited by a small subset of already-privileged women* We’ll go through the experienced of one of those privileged women* And look at examples of other instances in which well-intentioned efforts to help specific groups have backfiredOne Women’s Experience of Lost PrivilegeThe Purse published a guest essay from Sesali Bowen titled Black w

Malcolm and Simone Collins sit down with Leaflit Mitsuha (slime-girl VTuber, guild receptionist, and master worldbuilder) for a deep dive into her massive collaborative TTRPG universe in the Lyrian Chronicles / Angel’s Sword RPG.From 10+ years of running campaigns born out of depression, to building a live-service West Marches-style canon campaign with 140+ players, to magic systems, corrupted zones, divine power through belief, player-driven politics, fiend drama, and how AI is supercharging communal storytelling — this is one of the nerdiest, most optimistic conversations we’ve ever had.We explore how online communities are prototyping the future of entertainment, why “cringe but free” vitalism beats shame culture, the power of shared worlds vs. solo gaming, and why asynchronous friendships and player agency matter more than ever.If you love worldbuilding, anime-inspired lore, tabletop RPGs, VTubers, AI creativity, or just watching smart people geek out — this one’s for you.The game can be found at:https://rpg.angelssword.com/If you’re interested in joining the Mirane Campaign you can find it on the Patreon for the game (This is how they fund development, since it’s free to play):https://www.patreon.com/c/angelsswordrpg/homeEpisode TranscriptSimone Collins: [00:00:00] Prefer it?Malcolm Collins: No, actually this is what, so I was just saying that Leaflet is like one of my top three sources of news, and Simone was like, this is the way news should be. And like if you had told me as a young man, well when you grow up, you see it turns out the New York Times, nobody trusted anymore. You know, you, you go to, uh, wall Street Journal, nobody trusted anymore Uhhuh.But you see there’s like these anime characters online and um, a lot of people really trust them. Not, not only that. And it’s like, oh, what, what’s their credentials? Like, how does everybody know that they, you know, are they like work correspondence or something? And it’s like, no, it’s just like everybody starts lying.And so like the five people who aren’t like everybody takes super seriously.Simone Collins: Yeah. Basically. AndMalcolm Collins: they’re just like, that sounds. Insane. And it is like, no, no, no, it’s weirder. You see, it turns out that like the type of music you listen to is going to regularly feature these random anime characters. [00:01:00]Leaflit: Oh, God.Oh. Like the whole, like sky, like,Malcolm Collins: oh, it’s so funny. Leaf flip. We had, uh, one of our kids, uh, who’s watching Sky, because I, I play Sky Browns all the time while I’m working or whatever. I, I like his songs. Yeah, I think they’re pretty good. Mm-hmm. Um, and, uh, you know, and so our daughter likes to identify with every female character she sees.Yeah. So she goes, oh,

In this provocative episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into a taboo topic: slavery—both historical and modern. Is slavery “good” at a civilizational level? They explore why more people are enslaved today than at any point in human history (~50 million in forced labor or marriage), critique selective outrage over past vs. present slavery, and examine cultural attitudes toward wartime rape/slavery across groups (Puritans, Quakers, Backwoods/Appalachian Scots-Irish, Cavaliers, Spanish Catholics, Vikings, Muslims, Japanese, etc.).Key discussions include:* Genetic and cultural legacies of “rape slaves” vs. conquest without integration.* Why certain Protestant subgroups showed remarkable restraint (no recorded cases of raping Native captives).* How slavery economically stifled innovation (Rome, the American South).* Maps showing slavery’s concentration in Cavalier regions and its overlap with modern socioeconomic struggles.* Why reflexive disgust toward status-signaling and a preference for strong partners may have given some groups a long-term edge.They argue that, even setting aside morality, sex slavery and post-conquest integration often backfire genetically and culturally—while loving your own people and culture drives lasting success. A data-heavy, counterintuitive take that challenges both left- and right-wing sacred cows. Not for the faint of heart.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone Collins. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are gonna be talking about a concept that was way more interesting than I expected it to be as I started to dive into it. Okay. Is slavery good?What, and what brought up this concept is like, obviously this is not a topic we were allowed to talk about growing up, or we’ve been allowed to talk about more broadly as a society. No. And so, then Tucker Carlson and, but the left has been hugely glazing recently places like Qatar. Oh. And I’m like, well, Qatar’s a slave state, right?Like, so if, if he can talk about how great Qatar cities are, at least the faction of the right that like, doesn’t like this weird Tucker faction. They think slave slave states are awesome now. And the left thinks slave states are awesome now because, you know, a, a, a across the, middle East. This is just something that we see.Fun fact, by the way, in Gaza the neighborhood where blacks are kept is called [00:01:00] slaves or like slave neighborhood.Speaker 11: But more specifically, ‘cause I wanted to check this just to make sure that’s right. Yeah. It’s called The Neighborhood of the Slaves is where black people live in Gaza, , because having slaves is so common there. , And there were around 11,000, Afro Palestinians are around 1% of the population of Gaza was black.Uh, and, and brought there to be slaves.Malcolm Collins:

In this hard-hitting Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the “Us vs Them” framework that’s essential for any society’s long-term survival. Why does attempting to build a world without in-groups and out-groups inevitably lead to eradication? From the Mass Effect genophage dilemma (where 96% of gamers make the “moral” choice that dooms the galaxy) to real-world immigration, fertility rates, and cultural resistance, they unpack why shared culture, laws, and realistic alliances matter more than feel-good universalism.Topics include:* Why high-fertility, low-assimilation groups shift societies over generations* The scorpion, snake, and panda metaphor for incompatible cultural scaling* Strategic allyship in a collapsing urban monoculture era: who can conservatives actually work with?* Charter cities, space colonization, and preserving high-agency lineages* Why purity spirals and suicidal aesthetics fail civilizationallyIf you’re tired of bleeding-heart policies that ignore math, biology, and history, this is for you. Malcolm drops unfiltered red pills on why “enforcing existing laws” has become controversial and how groups like Orthodox Jews, Mormons, or even certain Latin American conservatives might make better tactical allies than expected.Would you cure the genophage? Drop your take below. Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Like you can’t just invite somebody into your society without them agreeing to any conditions, you know, have no shared culture and no conditions at all.And just be like,Simone Collins: well, it, it, and it, and once it wasn’t even that anymore. It was also though like, okay, but at least you, you promised to follow the law, like to, to adhere to our rules and laws. Yeah. And what’s so interesting about the current divide between. Democrats and Republicans in the United States is that right now it seems to be boiling down to whether or not we are going to enforce laws.So now exactly, that’s, it’s not even, we don’t expect you to adhere to our culture. It’s, we don’t even expect at least these privileged groups to adhere to our actual lawsWould you like to know more?Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. It’s exciting to be here with you today. Today we are going to be going back into the concept of us versus them in our [00:01:00] society. And the reason I want to dive into it is because it’s not e like, okay, you’re a random conservative influencer out there and you’re gonna be like, yeah, we should be more us versus them in the way that we see reality.Who saying which, which is true, but how do you define us is us. You know, Americans is us. People who are genetically similar to you is us. Some sort of ethnicity is us, a religion or a cluster of religions. And so this matters a lot. How, how we think about this. And I’m gonna point out

In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into Carl Jung’s analytical psychology — explaining the ego, personal unconscious, collective unconscious, archetypes, shadow work, and more. Malcolm (who is openly not a fan) breaks down why Jung’s ideas sound profound but lead to disempowering, unscientific views of the mind that have quietly infected conservative and manosphere thinking (hello, Jordan Peterson fans).We contrast Jung’s mystical “deep state” model of the psyche with a more pragmatic, first-principles understanding of consciousness, unconscious processing, memory, trauma contextualization, and emotional framing. Learn why repressed memories are mostly myth, how you can choose your emotional reactions (and why that’s empowering), why shadow work can manufacture problems that didn’t exist, and how over-mythologizing the self leads to cognitive abdication.If you’ve ever felt pressured into “integrating your shadow,” doing dream analysis for growth, or treating archetypes as destiny — this episode will give you the tools to spot the woo and reclaim agency over your mind.Timestamps below. Like, subscribe, and share if you want more no-BS breakdowns of influential ideas that shape culture.Episode TranscriptMalcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we’re going to be talking about Jungian psychology, which people know I am not a fan of, but I want to explain what his psychology is, and it’s important to know about because if you are consuming. Manosphere content. What you may not realize or even conservative content more broadly is a lot of conservative intellectuals recycle Jungian theory without telling you that’s what they’re doing.Simone Collins: Hmm.Malcolm Collins: Famous person for doing this is Jordan Peterson.Simone Collins: Well, Jordan Peterson talks about young a lot. I think just not that many people necessarily understand how much young has influenced him.Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And so it’s useful to be able to note, call out when you’re having Jungian BS thrown at you and to understand why it’s wrong, because a lot of it can sound like, oh, shadow work or something like this.I can see. How this is useful. And it’s fundamentally bad because it leads you to bad conceptualizations of how [00:01:00] your brain works. Mm-hmm. That lead you to psychological places that can be more difficult than they need to be to resolve. So let’s dive in. Hmm. The structure of the psyche, in Young’s perspective is that you have the ego, the center of consciousness, your sense of i identity and everyday awareness.It is an important part, but not the whole self, and it can become rigid or inflated if it ignores the unconscious. And this is where you talk about people with like. An inflated ego, and we’ll get to more what he me