Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Collins

Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Collins

Based Camp is a podcast focused on how humans process the world around them and the future of our species. That means we go into everything from human sexuality, to weird sub-cultures, dating markets, philosophy, and politics. Malcolm and Simone are a husband wife team of a neuroscientist and marketer turned entrepreneurs and authors. With graduate degrees from Stanford and Cambridge under their belts as well as five bestselling books, one of which topped out the WSJs nonfiction list, they are widely known (if infamous) intellectuals / provocateurs. If you want to dig into their ideas further or check citations on points they bring up check out their book series. Note: They all sell for a dollar or so and the money made from them goes to charity. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08FMWMFTG basedcamppodcast.substack.com

  1. 8h ago

    US Financial Data + $$$ + AI = Insane Scandals

    Brian Chau joins Malcolm and Simone Collins to reveal explosive findings from his new AI-powered investigative outlet, Effort.news. The US Conference of Catholic Bishops derives 81% of its operating revenue from federal refugee and migration contracts (primarily HHS/Office of Refugee Resettlement). Total grant volume in the Preferred Communities program exploded from near-zero to over $1.2 billion after 2021, timed with Ukraine supplemental funding—yet GAO data shows the majority of that money went to non-Ukrainian populations. Similar patterns appear across Episcopal Migration Ministries, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, Church World Service, and others. Several of these groups cut or threatened to cut resettlement work rather than assist white Afrikaner refugees. Brian also covers race-restricted prenatal/Medicaid programs that exclude non-Black and non-Brown women (potential Civil Rights Act and Equal Protection violations), the fabricated “Chinese EV dumping” narrative (actual direct subsidies ~1.2%), and more. Effort.news launches with multiple data-driven stories on government grants, religious NGOs, and policy capture. Full investigation and interactive charts at Effort.news. Follow Brian: @BrianChau57. This is independent, primary-source reporting powered by large public datasets and custom tools—exactly the kind of work traditional media has largely abandoned. Episode Transcript [00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Hello, everyone. We are here with Brian Chow again, who’s putting together a very interesting new project. [00:00:07] He was actually trending on X either yesterday or the day before for these drops [00:00:11] Malcolm Collins: And he pitched a few stories that he has found. Like, he, he made an AI company that goes through public records and looks for coincidences and interesting stories, and then digs into it further. [00:00:24] And so he sends me a number of the really interesting things he found, or he sent it to Simone, because they didn’t wanna, they didn’t wanna s- tell me first. And I was like, “I don’t know- Or maybe because [00:00:33] Simone Collins: you never check signal ... should we, [00:00:34] Malcolm Collins: should we do it? Should we do it?” And she goes, “Malcolm, Malcolm, he found out something very interesting about the Catholics.” [00:00:40] And I was like, “Oh, okay, yeah, let’s have him on.” So let’s- Let’s hope he gets- ... let’s get into it. [00:00:45] Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. But Brian, first tell, tell us, yeah, like, a, a little bit about what this is and where people can find it, but also what did you find that was, . [00:00:53] Brian Chau: So there’s a very prominent organization you know, claiming to represent Catholics in the US called the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. What percentage of this organization’s revenue do you think is from refugee and migration contracts from the federal government? [00:01:10] Simone Collins: Malcolm? [00:01:11] Malcolm Collins: Oh, my God. I- I mean, it would be crazy if it was over, like, 10. [00:01:18] Brian Chau: So, so is 10% your guess? [00:01:21] Malcolm Collins: Yes, that’s my guess. [00:01:22] Brian Chau: Your guess is 10%. Do you wanna click bait the, the, the viewers to listen more or do you wanna just say the percent? [00:01:29] Malcolm Collins: What’s the percent? I haven’t seen it. [00:01:31] Simone Collins: Yeah, [00:01:31] Brian Chau: say it. Say it, Brian. It’s 81%. 81%. [00:01:33] Malcolm Collins: 81%. How central is this organization? Like, what, w- are they the, the main bishop’s organization in the United States? [00:01:40] Brian Chau: Yeah. So US Conference for Cath- and for Catholic Bishops, there’s no, S- so there’s not exactly , a, like, official national organization in the, like, Catholic hierarchy. This is my understanding. [00:01:55] But this is basically, like, the largest such organization. It’s, like, a membership-based organization for Catholics in the US, and this is the, this is the largest such one [00:02:06] Simone Collins: Yeah. They’re, they’re nontrivial, and I, I asked Catholic friends of ours because I was like, “I’d never heard of this before.” I’m like, “Well, I don’t know. [00:02:11] Is this some, like, weird splint?” No, no, they- [00:02:14] Malcolm Collins: 81% ... [00:02:14] Simone Collins: they’re well aware of [00:02:15] Malcolm Collins: it. So, yeah So the, the Catholic Church in the United States okay, so the United States of Catholic Bishops is the main and official organization for Catholic bishops in the United States. It is the episcopal conference of the Catholic Church in the US, including the US Virgin Islands. [00:02:28] It brings together the active bishops of the Latin church diocese and the Eastern Catholic some things so that they can exercise certain blah, blah, blah. Its national membership org- Yeah, so it’s the ma- it’s the main one. Yes. Wait, this is so crazy. Th- so are [00:02:44] Simone Collins: they- I think tithing they, they received, like, funding from the Catholic Church from [00:02:48] Malcolm Collins: what I understand, too. [00:02:48] To understand that the, the, the, the majority of their revenue is coming from refugee-based, basically scams on the US government, I guess. W- would most of this be coming from the US government? [00:02:59] Brian Chau: Yeah, so, so all of this is based on federal HHS funding. I believe all of it is under the Office of Refugee Resettlement. [00:03:07] The main grant program that I’ve covered is exclusively from the Office of Refugee Resettlement. All these are classified as, as refugee and migration services. That’s the specific code under the federal grant system [00:03:19] Simone Collins: It’s really crazy. So no, [00:03:21] Malcolm Collins: I wanna, I wanna take a, take a, an aside here to sort of frame this for people [00:03:24] Brian Chau: It, it’s been, it’s been five minutes and you’ve already been truth nuked. [00:03:27] Malcolm Collins: Because I think a lot of people do not realize how much the Catholic Church upper class, the cardinals, the pope, and, and the bishops are profiting from the stripping of the Catholic Church, right? Like, as they lower the numbers of people, like you’re like, “Well, if the Roman Mass is more popular, why aren’t they doing it?” [00:03:49] If they can get a diocese to, like, super low numbers, then they can sell off all the stuff in the diocese and make a lot of money, and they’ve been selling these very frequently recently- Oh ... to become [00:04:00] mosques. And what’s interesting is they’ll take these old Catholic institutions and the SPSX, multiple times, has raised the money to buy these old, you know, cathedrals and, and Catholic schools and stuff like that, but they refuse to sell to the SSPX, and then they convert them into mosques, and they, and they run off with the money. [00:04:17] But it’s not just there. It’s also that they benefit from the leftist policies through bringing in just endless waves of immigration. And so if you’re wondering, like, why is this being pushed so hard for by the Vatican, ‘cause they have written a number of things about like, “No, you need unlimited immigration into Europe and into the United States,” is th- that they are directly fi- not just financially benefiting from this, but it is their primary source of income. [00:04:41] But continue. [00:04:42] Brian Chau: Yeah, you can pull up the auditing here. Actually, what you just said might explain something else interesting that I found. So there’s two revenue numbers here. There’s a smaller one and, and a bigger one. 81% is, is the fraction of the smaller one, which excludes net assets released from restrictions, which is this, like, interesting thing. [00:05:04] It’s not, like, necessarily revenue, but it’s this kind of internal transfer of assets. And that was actually also a massive amount. It was like $80 million. Oh, [00:05:13] Simone Collins: no. [00:05:14] Brian Chau: Oh, no. Oh, no. The, the total revenue is, is a bit over 300 million, and so, so it’s, it’s around 220 million without the net assets released from re- from restrictions, and 180 million of that is from the MRS Migration and Refugee Services contracts. [00:05:29] So around 81% of the total, not including the assets released from restrictions. But the assets released from restrictions, I never really, like... i’ve been kind of rushing to, to do launch and, and get the story published, but I never really fully looked into what the assets released from restrictions were. [00:05:45] And it might be that. It might be what you’re talking about [00:05:48] Malcolm Collins: Well, something that makes this story a little interesting for me, so I’m, I’m digging a bit deeper on this, is I remember that they shut down one of their major immigration branches right when the Afrikaners, the white Afrikaners were looking to immigrate to the United States. [00:06:02] Now maybe- [00:06:02] Brian Chau: Yeah, yeah, that actually that intersects with the story. Oh. Because the, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, that, that was the org that, I believe they, they cut ties with the specific refugee resettlement services under Trump. There, there was this different organization that kind of picked up the grant where it left off called the the, the acronym is CCUSA. [00:06:23] Let me just quickly look up what the organization is. Catholic Charities USA. Yeah. So, so, so that might have been a little overstated, but yeah, that, that, that ties into the story. [00:06:35] Malcolm Collins: Okay, continue. Just, just go with the story. I wanna hear the whole thing. [00:06:38] Brian Chau: Yeah. So, so we can pull it up. There’s a lot of beautiful graphs. [00:06:42] Know you guys love the graphs. We love the graphs. We all love the graphs here. You can put up here the grant size by start month graph,

    US Financial Data + $$$ + AI = Insane Scandals
  2. 1d ago

    The Girl Gooner Apocalypse (Is A Good Thing?)

    In this episode, Malcolm and Simone go deep on the female gooning wave — the explosive rise of erotic romance novels and smut that now makes up a huge share of what women are actually reading. We cover the hard data: romance sales growth, reading frequency stats, and older studies showing romance readers have more (and more satisfying) sex. Simone and Malcolm explain reactive sexuality, why these books can act as exogenous priming, and why the average effect on relationships appears positive rather than destructive. Then they break down the dominant tropes in the biggest current series — Empyrean (Fourth Wing / Iron Flame / Onyx Storm), A Court of Thorns and Roses, The Hunting of Adeline, dark mafia, and Zodiac Academy — and what the power dynamics, possessiveness, and “claiming” language actually reveal about female arousal profiles. Also discussed: the Wicker movie trailer going mainstream, why most men and women want very different things in erotic content, the biblical case against inventing extra sexual prohibitions, and a short closer on premarital sex and the film One Night Only. Episode Transcript [00:00:00] Simone Collins: Your face. What? What? What? So you can see we’ve reached mainstream. No, you, you, you haven’t read these books. You don’t understand what women are reading about- [00:00:14] Malcolm Collins: Did you read those books? ... [00:00:14] Simone Collins: in these books. [00:00:15] Would you like to know more? [00:00:17] Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. We have touched on the topic of the rise of the female gooning wave, but I wanted to go deeper into both the research around it and how that wave is changing, because it’s having an, a much bigger impact on society than people think. [00:00:35] About- [00:00:35] Simone Collins: Excuse me, are people researching female gooners? [00:00:39] Malcolm Collins: Oh, yes. We have many re- Simone, when you say female gooners as if they’re the rare thing, the vast majority- [00:00:46] Simone Collins: No, I know ... are women. Look, trust me, I know. Yes. I just- [00:00:50] Malcolm Collins: Oh yeah, I know you know, because I know what you listen to at night, [00:00:53] Simone Collins: Simone. Stop. I’m listening to the Old Testam- Oh, never mind. [00:00:56] Yeah, that’s pretty messed up, so go on then. [00:00:59] Malcolm Collins: I actually wanna ask it for later. Which industry makes more, this or male ? [00:01:06] Simone Collins: Oh, no, we did this before. The, the romance novel industry makes a ton more money. Are you kidding me? [00:01:12] Malcolm Collins: Well, we’ll, we’ll see, we’ll see. It’s [00:01:13] Simone Collins: not even- But, okay, hold on [00:01:14] funny and funny. Yeah So, [00:01:15] Malcolm Collins: A third- Offended you [00:01:16] Simone Collins: would ask ... [00:01:17] Malcolm Collins: a third of all fiction books is that people are reading right now are- ... female gooning books, okay? [00:01:22] Simone Collins: No one reads anymore except for certain reasons. [00:01:25] Malcolm Collins: This has gone up from 23% w- just a decade ago. [00:01:31] Simone Collins: Oh, oh. [00:01:32] Malcolm Collins: The romance sales industry year over year grew 24% this year in the, in the first half of the year circa BookScan And 26% of survey r- readers reported buying more than one romance book in the prior year. [00:01:51] Now, for, I wanna get to this immediately because a lot of people on our channel are gonna jump and be like, “Oh, this is terrible. Oh, these women, their partners, how terrible is this?” So Coles and Sharp in 1984 did a study. And what they found was that readers had sex twice as often per week as non-readers. [00:02:11] Simone Collins: There was- Yeah, that makes sense ‘cause they’re kinda just getting themselves in that frame of mind. Women have to be, like, reminded that they’re sexually interested, I think, more than men do. Men, it’s like, it’s there for the most part. Women need to be reminded that they can be sexual beings. Is [00:02:26] Malcolm Collins: that your thing? [00:02:26] I, I think that’s an absolutely good point. Yeah. I wanna, I wanna expand on this point after I go into it. The, the am- among housewives specifically, readers were significantly more sexually satisfied than non-readers. [00:02:38] Simone Collins: Hmm. [00:02:38] Well, you know, we, we, when you originally wrote The Pragmatist’s Guide to Sexuality, you, you looked at, you, you didn’t do romance novel readers, you just polled people about their erotic material consumption. [00:02:49] But then you found that people who consumed erotic material who were female, like, so women who consumed erotic material, it had much more satisfying and active sex lives. Like, if you are a boyfriend, a husband, anyone who has intimate access to a woman and you want her to be a little bit more forward i- in her advances, you should get, buy, buy her the best-selling romance novels. [00:03:14] The most perverted stuff [00:03:16] Malcolm Collins: So she’s got perversions on her mind all [00:03:18] Simone Collins: the time. Yes. So you need... Yes, she needs to have a dirty mind. If her mind isn’t dirty, it’s your fault, okay? This is- [00:03:23] Malcolm Collins: And women experiment with these things with their partners. So they, the ones who do this do significantly more fantasy play. [00:03:31] But the reason I wanted to, to put that out there to start with is it’s the same as the pornography thing, right? Like, guys who consume porn have more and better sex than guys who don’t consume porn. This has been shown in, like, multiple studies, right? Mm-hmm. You know, it’s, it, it- [00:03:47] Simone Collins: Look, people who watch cooking shows probably have better cooking techniques and cook more than people who don’t watch cooking shows. [00:03:54] Malcolm Collins: Yeah. It’s, and it’s not- So ... now, I, I, I do wanna make an aside here before I go further. There is [00:04:00] clearly a type of woman and a type of man who cannot engage healthily with this type of content. Oh, [00:04:05] Simone Collins: yeah. No, yeah. [00:04:06] Malcolm Collins: There is a type of woman- [00:04:07] Simone Collins: Well, there’s also people who can’t engage healthily with food or exercise, you know? [00:04:10] Malcolm Collins: That gets one shot and goes full goon cave and never leaves her room after that, right? There is a type of guy- But did you [00:04:17] Simone Collins: want her as a girlfriend in the first place, right? If she’s that kind of person. [00:04:20] Malcolm Collins: I, well, you know, she might get obsessed with you if that was her only alternative. Yeah. I don’t think that’s gonna happen, though. [00:04:27] Simone Collins: No, mm-mm. [00:04:28] Malcolm Collins: These types of women are typically, in my experience, pretty histionic and an issue- An issue ... to date. An issue to date. Hmm. You don’t, you, you don’t want a super horny girlfriend or wife. I, I have done that before. It is very exhausting because you’ve got to remember... Sorry, go ahead. [00:04:44] Simone Collins: You had a Friend- a Fred Flintstone moment with that, didn’t you? [00:04:48] Malcolm Collins: What do [00:04:48] Simone Collins: you mean by that? Someone banging on your door, “Wilma.” [00:04:50] Malcolm Collins: Yeah, [00:04:51] Simone Collins: yeah. Oh, sorry. I always say that with a German accent because I was once locked out of a French hotel. Let me in. And there was a German outside- Yeah ... and he was banging on the door screaming, “Wilma,” but in a German accent. [00:05:01] It’s iconic. So and it was the best moment I ever had in Paris. Seeing German locked out of a hotel Sorry Oh [00:05:06] Malcolm Collins: my God. Okay, anyway. [00:05:07] Simone Collins: Carry on. [00:05:08] But you had a girl literally trying to bang down your door to get to that- [00:05:12] Malcolm Collins: Yes, [00:05:13] Simone Collins: yes [00:05:13] notably perfect [00:05:14] Malcolm Collins: something of [00:05:14] Simone Collins: yours But, but [00:05:14] Malcolm Collins: guys forget when they’re like, “No, it would always be great to have, like, a maximally horny girl.” It’s like sex is majority of the work. 99% of the physical effort is the male. If your partner wants to have sex way more than you wanna have sex, that’s just a ton of extra work for you. [00:05:33] Simone Collins: Mm. [00:05:33] Malcolm Collins: And it gets extremely exhausting. When I’ve been in, in relationships like that, you, you hear them at the door and you’re like, “No.” [00:05:41] Simone Collins: Yeah. “ [00:05:44] Malcolm Collins: Not again. I’m trying to do my homework.” Yeah. “I’m trying to study.” [00:05:48] Simone Collins: Aw, poor Malcolm. “ [00:05:50] Speaker 4: The spirit is willing, but the flesh is spongy and bruised. [00:05:53] Malcolm Collins: I have other things I wanna do right now.” [00:05:55] Simone Collins: Poor Dino. Aw. [00:05:57] Malcolm Collins: No, but the point here being is the, the- these books do not appear to be making relationships less strong, on average at least, right? [00:06:05] Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm, [00:06:05] Malcolm Collins: mm-hmm. They appear to be making them much stronger on average. And I think Simone, like, I think that they’re way more important to a healthy relationship than me being a fairly pro-corn guy. When I say pro-corn, I mean only of non-humans. I think the corn industry is really bad. Mm-hmm. [00:06:22] I think OnlyFans is really bad. I think things of use- using living humans. But if it’s drawn or made with AI, whatever, right? Like, that’s not a real- Yeah ... human that’s being drawn into an industry. [00:06:31] Simone Collins: Yeah. [00:06:32] Malcolm Collins: But even, even having that position, and you can go see our old videos on this and how it relates to the Bible and every

    The Girl Gooner Apocalypse (Is A Good Thing?)
  3. 2d ago

    Genesis’ “Random” Numbers Map Directly to 10,000 Years (Unique Discovery)

    In this episode of deep biblical literalism, Malcolm and Simone Collins unpack Genesis 5–11 not as a list of impossibly long-lived individuals, but as a precise civilizational timeline and map. By treating the genealogies as sequential cultural phases rather than personal lifespans, the numbers align with the archaeological record of the Near East with startling precision — from Göbekli Tepe and Çatalhöyük through the Halaf–Ubaid transition (the “Flood”) all the way to the fall of Ur and Abraham. The Table of Nations emerges as an improbably accurate ethnographic map spanning from Spain to the Gulf, matching modern genetic and archaeological data. The Tower of Babel tracks the Uruk expansion and the collapse of its shared administrative “one language.” They also re-examine the Flood as a literary convention marking a real civilizational rupture, the Cain–Abel story as a lesson in emotional control, the Nephilim/Sons of God problem, the rainbow covenant, and why this reading makes far more sense of the text than surface-level literalism. Companion deep-dive with maps, charts, and full ledger:https://technopuritan.com/genesis5 This is “deep literalism” — reading the Bible the way its original audience would have understood its literary forms, then testing those claims against the actual archaeological and genetic record. Episode Transcript [00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: This is not like normal Bible math. This isn’t like I take numbers from the Bible and I assume they’re supposed to be something totally different, or I, I move them around and I add a number here and I add a number here. [00:00:13] We are working with what the Bible appears to be talking about, early human civilization- Mm-hmm ... and just copying and pasting the numbers [00:00:22] To get an idea of just how insane this math is, the Hafal-Unyad transition is bracketed between 5500 BC and 5400 BC. So the boundary is only known to half a century. The computed flood would have happened if you use these numbers at 5444 BC, which isn’t just inside of this bracket. It lands six years from the bracket’s midpoint, which is astonishing when you’re looking at tens of thousand years of human history. [00:00:53] Malcolm Collins: Like, the size of this map, if you’re going to compare it to other maps of the time, would have to be a combination of the Phoenicians’ trading map and the Assyrians’ conquest map, right? [00:01:07] Mm-hmm. Like, the two largest maps anyone would’ve known during that period. If you compare it with the ancient Greek map, it just becomes laughable, [00:01:15] Would you like to know more? [00:01:17] Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. This is a crazy day for me because I decided to just sort of be like, well, if the Bible’s true, ‘cause I was, I was reading it. I was like, it’s probably not gonna have, at the very beginning, a bunch of stuff that just doesn’t matter. Because y- near the beginning of, of Genesis, there’s a few lists of names and ages and there’s... [00:01:43] And, and they don’t, like I think a lot of people when they’re reading ‘em generally just skip over them. Absolutely. They’re like, “Okay, whatever. Let’s [00:01:49] Simone Collins: get to the fun part.” Well, it’s very similar to the Iliad and Aeneid where you’re like, “Come on, like, I don’t need the whole lineage of this one soldier in the war over Trojan...” [00:02:00] You know. Yeah. It’s surprisingly... Okay, yeah, so. [00:02:03] Malcolm Collins: So, so you, you hit that and what this unfortunately does, at least after I went into it and I started trying to match these lists to things- [00:02:13] Simone Collins: Mm-hmm ... [00:02:15] Malcolm Collins: is it means you completely misread Genesis. [00:02:18] Simone Collins: Oh. [00:02:18] Malcolm Collins: You, modern reader, get to it. You read the, the first part, which is important. [00:02:23] Then you [00:02:24] Simone Collins: see a bunch of- And it’s so dense, it’s like, whoa, that was, like the, the world was created. Whoa, the Garden of Eden just came and left. Like, it goes so fast, right? Yeah, [00:02:30] Malcolm Collins: and then the, the whole- There’s [00:02:31] Simone Collins: no [00:02:31] Malcolm Collins: like- ... murder thing and that’s interesting. Then list, and it’s like, ah, boring, tuning out for the list. [00:02:35] Yes. Ooh, big interesting flood narrative happening [00:02:38] Simone Collins: here. Yeah, whoa, the, and I, literally the flood comes and goes so fast that I read it while falling asleep and I nodded off for a second and it just, I missed that whole part. [00:02:45] Malcolm Collins: And then a bunch of lists again. Oh, I’ll skip those. What this does is it causes you to read it in an inverted format to how somebody of the period it was written would’ve read it. [00:02:58] Simone Collins: Oh. [00:02:58] Malcolm Collins: They would’ve said, “Oh, some interesting lists that are telling us stuff.” Then they get to the flood narrative and they go, “Oh, another flood narrative. I’ve read a dozen- ... of those this week. Let’s just skip over that.” And, or, or rather they would’ve understood that the flood narrative meant something. [00:03:15] If you have a flood narrative in the middle of a collection of lists, traditionally in Sumerian writing from that period, what you are talking about is a transitional event, something really big transitioned between these two periods. [00:03:29] Simone Collins: Wait, so you’re saying flood narratives didn’t just turn out, up in the Old Testament of the Bible? [00:03:34] Malcolm Collins: Yeah, flood narratives are everywhere during that period. So [00:03:36] Simone Collins: you weren’t kidding, like they, it was just, it was like a literary convention. [00:03:40] Malcolm Collins: It was a literary convention, yeah. It, it, it was a literary convention that meant something big just transitioned. [00:03:46] Simone Collins: Why does no, why does no one mention this? W- okay, [00:03:50] Malcolm Collins: wow. [00:03:50] I think a lot of people mention this. A lot of people are familiar with Gilgamesh at least. [00:03:54] Simone Collins: Yeah, but... God, I read it back in college. Was there a flood in Gilgamesh? I don’t remember there being a flood in Gilgamesh. [00:04:00] [00:04:00] Malcolm Collins: Yes, and it, it- I just [00:04:00] Simone Collins: remember the bromance. That’s what we’re all here for, ladies. [00:04:03] Malcolm Collins: But what gets crazier is something I didn’t notice when I was first looking at these lists. [00:04:07] Simone Collins: Okay. [00:04:08] Malcolm Collins: And as soon as you notice it, you notice- That you’re actually looking at three different things. So list number one is unlike any list I have ever seen in my entire life or that we have any archeological evidence of. [00:04:24] Simone Collins: Okay. [00:04:24] Malcolm Collins: And a lot of people don’t notice this about it when they read it the first time. [00:04:28] Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. [00:04:28] Malcolm Collins: It does something very, very strange. [00:04:32] Simone Collins: Okay. [00:04:32] Malcolm Collins: Instead of listing, you know, when people were born and when they die, or how long they lived and who they begat, it instead also lists their age when they had the kid The second list, well, rather the third list, the third list also does this. Yeah. So this is Genesis 5 and Genesis 10. [00:04:58] Simone Collins: And it’s really weird because why are some people waiting until they’re in their 80s to have kids? Like, people are just like, “This doesn’t make sense.” [00:05:03] Malcolm Collins: That’s, that’s not as important. Okay. What’s more important is we don’t have a single list like this anywhere in the Mesopotamian archeological record. [00:05:13] This is not the way people record their ancestors. Okay. And it’s a weird thing to do. Even today, you don’t typically record the age somebody was when they have a kid. Why would you do this? Why would you be recording the age somebody was at when they had a kid? [00:05:28] Simone Collins: Mm. [00:05:29] Malcolm Collins: Because if you do that, you have something other than a list. [00:05:34] You have a timeline. It, you, you can know exactly how long the timeline is If you don’t know when a person was born and their parents lived 800, 900 years supposedly, they could have been born anywhere within that 800 to 900 years. [00:05:52] Simone Collins: That’s true. [00:05:53] Malcolm Collins: So you don’t actually have a timeline of events. [00:05:56] Simone Collins: Yeah, okay. [00:05:57] Malcolm Collins: This gives you a very tight, inalterable timeline. So then the question is, of course, is this timeline must mean something if it was recorded in the Bible for that long. What does it mean? Like, like, i- i- i- you could say, “Oh, it’s just a list of people’s ages and when they had kids.” Why is that important information? [00:06:21] And it also doesn’t make sense. They seem to be living an impossible amount of time for a human to live. [00:06:26] Simone Collins: Yeah. [00:06:27] Malcolm Collins: Right? [00:06:27] Simone Collins: Yes. [00:06:29] Malcolm Collins: And they’re also not recorded the way that the Bible often records when it’s talking about actual people. You’ll notice something on these original lists. It’s single names. When the Bible later records a list of actual people, it’ll say Jesus of Nazareth. [00:06:45] Yes. John the Baptist. Oh, [00:06:47] Simone Collins: good point. Basically, everyone’s given- Yeah, it’s, it’s, it’s differentiating them very explicitly ... [00:06:51] Malcolm Collins: yeah, like everyone’s given like a, a, a side hustle thing or a, a, a city that they’re from or something like this. Mm-hmm. So this appears to be talking about a different kind of thing. [00:07:02] So I thought, okay, wha

    Genesis’ “Random” Numbers Map Directly to 10,000 Years (Unique Discovery)
  4. 3d ago

    US Indian Women Suffer High Rates of __ (The Why is Hidden)

    Simone and Malcolm examine the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls, and Two-Spirit (MMIWG2S) movement and the dominant narrative that frames high rates of violence against Native women primarily as the legacy of settler colonialism, racism, and systemic failures. They dig into historical intertribal warfare and raiding practices, the actual circumstances of Sacagawea’s life (captured as a child, sold, and one of multiple wives of a fur trapper by age 16), National Institute of Justice and CDC data on perpetrators of violence and homicide, Canadian statistics showing the large majority of accused are Indigenous, reservation versus off-reservation patterns, tribal sovereignty and property rules, residential school claims, the smallpox-blanket episode in context, and internal corruption during the Trail of Tears. The discussion challenges the “noble savage” framing, argues that most violence is intra-community, and questions whether preserving certain cultural and legal structures is helping or harming the people living under them. Strong language and dark historical accounts throughout. Show Notes Note: If you want to know how we’ve been gaslit about historical American Indians, watch Matt Walsh’s What Schools Don’t Teach You About American Indians Another note: Acronyms: American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) There’s a movement called called MMIWG2S I first learned about it, ironically, from TheHolyBall, because of his song MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+ I was like… what is MMIWG2S? MMIWG2S stands for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls, and Two-Spirit people. It is a grassroots movement and a term used to describe and bring awareness to the severe, disproportionate rates of systemic violence, kidnapping, and murder faced by Indigenous communities across the United States and Canada According to organizations like the Coalition to Stop Violence Against Native Women, violence against Native women and children is primarily framed as a legacy of Spanish and Euro-American invasion, settler colonialism, and continuing structural forces such as anti-Indigenous racism, bordertown violence, police brutality, and failures within the judicial system. Wow, that sounds bad. Is it true? I thought that broadly speaking, most acts of violence and murder are committed by people with whom the victim is close. National Institute of Justice Findings The most cited national estimate is NIJ’s 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey analysis, published in 2016 * It found that 97% of American Indian or Alaska Native women who reported one or more of these forms of lifetime violence had experienced at least one incident involving a non-American Indian/Alaska Native or/interracial perpetrator; 35% had experienced at least one incident involving an AI/AN/intraracial perpetrator. * These numbers do not mean 97% of incidents were committed by non-Indigenous people and 3% by Indigenous people. The categories overlap: a woman who was harmed by both an Indigenous and a non-Indigenous perpetrator appears in both columns. NIJ explicitly says its analysis measured whether someone had any interracial and/or intraracial victimization, not the count of incidents by each group. * For scale, the same survey found that 84.3% of AI/AN women reported one or more of the measured forms of lifetime violence: 56.1% sexual violence, 55.5% physical intimate-partner violence, 48.8% stalking, and 66.4% psychological aggression by an intimate partner. The report PDF Per this report, what percentage of violence against american indian and alaska native women and men is committed by american indian and alaska native people? * Among American Indian and Alaska Native people who had experienced the covered forms of violence, 35% of female victims and 33% of male victims had experienced violence by at least one American Indian or Alaska Native perpetrator (termed intraracial violence) * The same report found that 97% of female victims and 90% of male victims had experienced violence by at least one non-AI/AN perpetrator. About the National Institute of Justice: It’s the Justice Department’s research and evaluation arm Older US Data An older Bureau of Justice Statistics analysis, using 1992–96 National Crime Victimization Survey data for all American Indian victims, not women alone, estimated that individual violent-crime victimizations involved perpetrators described as: * 60% White * 10% Black * 29% “other”—a category that combined American Indian and Asian perpetrators, though BJS said this group was likely predominantly other American Indians IMPORTANT: This is an incident-based estimate, unlike the NIJ “ever experienced” figures Table 9 from the report: Why This is Suss First: In the older report, they group native americans with “Asians” in a manner that could be done to reduce the percentage of crimes perpetrated by indigenous americans Second: In the newer report, they group non-indigenous people with mixed-race people. * Recall that the National Institute of Justice found that 97% of American Indian or Alaska Native women who reported one or more of these forms of lifetime violence had experienced at least one incident involving a non-American Indian/Alaska Native or/interracial perpetrator * WELL WHAT PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO IDENTIFY AS AMERICAN INDIAN/ALASKA NATIVE ARE ALSO INTERRACIAL? Third: In the newer report, they asked behavioral questions rather than using documented proof How was data collected for this research? * Interviewers called randomly selected landline and mobile-phone numbers. * The relevant analytic sample included 2,473 AI/AN adult women and 1,505 AI/AN adult men, including people identifying as AI/AN alone or alongside another racial group. * The survey used behaviorally specific questions about what respondents had experienced, rather than relying solely on respondents’ own labels for events—for example, questions about force or threats in sexual violence.= What were the exact behaviorally specific questions used? * The questions were asked in respondent-friendly language and were behavior-specific—for example, asking whether particular acts happened rather than asking “Were you abused?” The complete scripted 2010 questionnaire is publicly available from CDC * Below are representative items/wording from the instrument, organized by what the AI/AN report measured. This is paraphrased rather than reproducing the full questionnaire verbatim. * Physical intimate-partner violence: A partner slapping; pushing or shoving; pulling hair; hitting with a fist or object; kicking; slamming the person against something; trying to choke or suffocate them; beating; burning them intentionally; or using/threatening a knife or gun. * Psychological aggression: An intimate partner acting dangerously; calling the respondent names, insulting, or humiliating them. * Coercive control: Threats; interference with family or friends; restricting access to money; monitoring or controlling the respondent’s activities; and controlling reproductive or sexual health. * Stalking: Repeated unwanted calls, messages, emails, or other contact; watching or following from a distance; use of technology such as GPS or cameras; and leaving odd or potentially threatening items—asked in the context of fear or concern for safety. * Completed or attempted forced penetration: Being physically forced into vaginal, anal, or oral penetration; having penetration attempted through force; or being penetrated when unable to consent because of alcohol or drugs. * Made to penetrate: Being physically forced, pressured, or incapacitated and made to penetrate someone else; this measure included completed and attempted incidents for male respondents. * Sexual coercion: Unwanted sexual penetration after nonphysical pressure—such as persistent pressure, threats to end a relationship, or threats to spread rumors. * Unwanted sexual contact: Unwanted sexual kissing, fondling, touching, or grabbing. * Non-contact sexual experiences: Someone exposing themselves or masturbating in front of the respondent; forcing the respondent to show body parts; making them view or participate in sexual images or videos; or sexually harassing them in public in a way that felt unsafe. More Measurable Data: Homicides What percentage of USA-based homicides with American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) victims are perpetrated by American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) people? * In the best available CDC analysis (published 2021, looking at data from 2003 to 2018), 32.1% of homicides with AI/AN victims had an AI/AN suspect. The corresponding figures were 39.6% non-AI/AN suspects and 28.3% with the suspect’s race/ethnicity unknown. * This result comes from 2,226 AI/AN homicide victims recorded in the National Violent Death Reporting System across 34 states and Washington, DC, from 2003–2018. A suspect was identified in 82.8% of these homicides; the 32.1%, 39.6%, and 28.3% figures are presented relative to the full set of AI/AN homicide cases, with unknown perpetrator race retained as its own category. * If you limit the denominator to cases where the suspect’s race/ethnicity was known, then about 44.8% of AI/AN-victim homicides with a known-race suspect were attributed to an AI/AN suspect, and 55.2% to a non-AI/AN suspect. The Reality of Murder and Violence in the USA Using the FBI’s national single-victim/single-offender homicide table for 2019, about 84% of cases with a known victim race and known offender race involved a match within the same broad racial category, and about 16% involved different broad racial categories. This is the closest defensible national “in-group vs cross-race” estimate, but it is not a clean all-race-and-ethnicity measure. Where does violence/murder take most for American Indians and Alaska Natives? About 87% of people who identified as American Indian and/or Alaska Native (AI/AN), alone or in combination with

  5. 4d ago

    Does Genesis Argue NPCs Are Real? (Do Pre-Adamites Still Exist?)

    In this Based Camp Tract, Malcolm and Simone Collins tackle one of their most provocative religious questions: What does it actually mean to be “human” in God’s view? They dig into classic Genesis puzzles—Cain’s fear of being killed, the sudden appearance of his wife, the city of Enoch, and the strange language of Romans 5:12-14—and argue that the Bible may not treat every Homo sapiens as a full moral agent. Drawing on a techno-puritan reading, they place the Adam and Eve story at the dawn of moral accountability and civilization roughly 10,000 years ago near the Tigris-Euphrates, link it to the sudden explosion of human development, and explore what this means for death, the Tree of Life, pre-Adamite populations, and the difference between biological humans and those God holds accountable. Along the way they examine traditional explanations (incest, rapid population growth, pure allegory), Isaac La Peyrère’s pre-Adamite theory, Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2, early urban death rituals, God’s treatment of groups like the Egyptians and Canaanites, and modern implications—including NPCs, civilizational decline, and fertility collapse as a kinder “second flood.” A spicy, wide-ranging conversation about moral agency, civilization, and what the Bible might be saying about who counts as fully human. Episode Transcript [00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Simone, I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we might be doing one of our most offensive religious episodes, because it’s a thought that came to me so for people who like sort of Bible mysteries one of the ones that most people are broadly aware of as like a fun little rabbit hole to go into is it appears from the perspective of Genesis that there were other humans around at the time of Cain and Abel. [00:00:31] Mm-hmm. So four lines that suggest this. Genesis 4:14, “Whoever finds me will kill me.” If only Adam’s immediate family existed, who would pose a threat to Cain afterwards? ‘Cause he’s saying this to God. Cain’s wife she appears, but isn’t given a genealogy. Yeah. In, in the Bible, you’re not supposed to sleep with your sister. [00:00:52] This is, like, one of the rules that God sets up. And it’s never put out that there’s, like, an exception here. Mm-hmm. Now, he was doing this before that law was set out, but that law still would have applied to all of the sons of Ad- kids of Adam and specifically Romans 5:12-14, no matter how you interpret it means it would apply. [00:01:13] The the city in Genesis 4:17 it mentions Cain building a city, the city of Enoch. Now the word used for city here in ancient Hebrew can mean, like, a fortified collection of dwellings, but it still requires, you know, some people, more people than we are aware of at this time. [00:01:33] Simone Collins: Yeah. [00:01:34] Malcolm Collins: Then, and this is not as seen by people, but we’ll go into it, because then it is actually interesting. [00:01:38] Some read Genesis 1:26-27, humanity created male and female, as a different event from Genesis 2:7, Adam formed from the dust, and then Eve formed from a rib, right? Then there is Romans 5:12-14. So this isn’t just in the Old Testament where you find this weird stuff. If you go to Romans 5:12-14 and note here I’m also gonna go through all the traditional explanations to try to get around this. [00:02:04] But the correct explanation I think is so - spicy and I am so excited to drop it, because it makes so many other things make sense. [00:02:14] Simone Collins: Yeah. [00:02:14] As soon as you said this to me I was like, “Ah, of course.” ‘Cause I’m reading Genesis again, or I just read Genesis again and was so confused. Just was like, wait, ‘cause y- all these descendants, you know, so and so and then they had this kid, but then, and then they married so and- like, wait, where did they come from? [00:02:29] Well, we, we [00:02:30] Malcolm Collins: could- Yeah ... [00:02:31] Simone Collins: huh? [00:02:32] Malcolm Collins: So , if we start here, “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and in this way death came to people because all sinned, to be sure sin was in the world before the law was given. But sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law.” [00:02:54] Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. [00:02:54] Malcolm Collins: “Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a, a pattern of the one to come.” Hmm. So the problem here being is there are two ways to read this both have problems. One is that, well, even though Moses hadn’t handed down the commandments yet, right? You were still capable of sinning before that period, right? That said it doesn’t really make sense in context., If you think about the line as it’s put out here, him pointing out that death entered the earth through sin entering through Adam, then the law he’s talking about here must be the law handed to Adam, right? [00:03:46] If that’s the case, then it’s implying that people were sinning but without a law, without somebody telling them not to, before Adam came to existence. So I’ll, I’ll read it again so you can see how you can get this [00:04:00] interpretation. “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people because all sinned, to be sure sin was in the world before the law was given. [00:04:12] But sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is the pattern of the one to come.” [00:04:28] On rereading, this is by far the weakest of these claims, but this verse is still important because what it lays out is that the rules set out within the mosaic laws are what counted as sin even before those laws were laid out, even if you take the most traditionalist reading of them, which has a lot of importance in just a second [00:04:48] Malcolm Collins: So That creates a problem, right? If there were other humans around during this period, how did they get there? Mm-hmm. And we’ll, we’ll get to this as well, but what, what do we know about Adam and Eve, first of all? Because if people are aware of the techno-puritan framing around all of this what we generally believe is we think the Bible, and you can watch our episode on this, does a very good job, a, a supernaturally good job of setting out the evolutionary timeline. [00:05:18] Mm-hmm. Of describing that in a way that a person of that period, a cave Jew, could understand that would make any sort of rational sense to them, that would be able to be transmitted. And then it lays out in the story of Adam and Eve mankind beginning to... Because I, I don’t think that God would actually punish humanity for trying to learn right from wrong. [00:05:39] That seems psychotic to me. Like it seems like God would want us to know right from wrong, right? Yeah. Yeah. But I point out that we know from the story that that’s not really what Adam was punished for. Because the moment he eats the... Well, he doesn’t eat, touches, which is also important. See our original episode on that if you want us to go deeper on it. [00:05:58] Or has the intent to disobey God. It’s not even touches. It, it, it’s reaching out for it. It was the intent to disobey God around that fruit that made that fruit important. It was not the fruit itself. The fruit didn’t actually need any magical powers. The fruit was set apart in that it was the only thing that God had made any sort of a ruling around at that point in human history, right? [00:06:20] Mm-hmm. And, and the thing that Adam did that was special there was to go against what God wanted him to do with that. And I was like, a- and we know this because the first thing that Adam does is tries to clothe himself which doesn’t make any sense. Because it said that he they, they, they... [00:06:36] God let Adam be naked in the garden. Like, clearly God didn’t think it was a problem. And in nowhere in any Bible, in any Old Testament would any, either in ration or in Christian or Judaic tradition is it sinful to be naked in front of your wife and God. That’s like the very thing you’re supposed to be naked around, right? [00:06:59] Like, that is not a, a... He’s not like in a city or something, right? Like, so it’s showing that he what is meant by knowledge of good and evil is a knowledge of good and evil in opposition to God’s knowledge of good and evil. Like man thinking that he knows more than God about what is good and evil to the extent that he would do stupid things. [00:07:23] So the moment Adam gained the capacity to think in terms of morality, like, “This is what I should do, this is what I shouldn’t do,” all of, like, what laws applied to him and made up sin at this point in time, [00:07:38] that line in Romans tells us it’s the [00:07:41] mosaic law that would be handed down later. [00:07:44] So the question is, why didn’t God, like, give Adam a list of the rules, the Mosaic laws, as he was leaving the Garden of Eden? , And I think the answer to this is he thought they were so obvious that any sentient entity, , now that man had [00:08:00] gained true sentience, should have been aware of them. , I mean, they’re, they are really quite basic stuff, like not stealing, not murder, stuff like that. [00:08:10] , But being aware there is a God, but then worshiping other gods above Him. , But then, , Adam and Eve leave. They have a kid, and right away, the kid goes and kills his brother. And you can tell that these laws are already in effect because God comes down and, , Cain is aware that... You know, he tries to cover it up at first. [00:08:30] You know, the, , “Am I my brother’s keeper?” and everyth

    Does Genesis Argue NPCs Are Real? (Do Pre-Adamites Still Exist?)
  6. Aug 7

    Did Woke 2.0 Already Fail? An Evolutionary Anthropology of Woke

    In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins break down the evolution of the culture wars — from Woke 1.0 (SJW/Tumblr era) to Woke 2.0 (post-George Floyd radicalism) and the rapid emergence of Woke 3.0: the anti-AI movement. They argue Woke 2 is already over. The new front is a performative, high-anger rejection of AI that is more central in left online spaces than race, trans issues, or immigration. Key topics include: * The edginess pipelines on left vs. right and how the “terrorist left” evolved * Why anti-AI posting now dwarfs traditional woke content * Hank Green’s very public apology for using ChatGPT and the forced productivity collapse that followed * Extreme backlash against AI tools (Leaflet’s VTuber generator, etc.) * The core arguments the anti-AI side uses (stealing, environment, critical thinking, mental health, creativity, bias, surveillance) * How this creates a self-selected permanent underclass that deliberately opts out of productivity tools * Intentional ugliness in media, media fracturing, and the Brave New World “savage reservation” parallel * Strategy for the pro-AI side and why anti-AI Luddites (left and right) are a liability This is the real culture war happening right now in the meme minds — the one most offline commentators still haven’t noticed. Show Notes The new culture war is between those who are pro-AI and anti-AI, except this is worse than Woke 1.0 and 2.0 because those on one side of the battle are intentionally opting into a permanent underclass. Headlines: Vulture: Hank Green Can’t Apologize Enough for Using AI Mashable: Hank Green apologizes for relying too heavily on ChatGPT TechCrunch: YouTuber Hank Green says his AI usage is ‘not healthy’ Business Insider: YouTube star Hank Green says he’s relied ‘too heavily’ on AI in an apology to fans. “Hank Green, one of the internet’s most steadfast and reliable content creators, said he’s slowing down production after fans criticized him for using AI. “Expect less hankschannel. It may need to pause for a while,” Green wrote. “It may be that Hankschannel comes back with writing and research support. It may be that it comes back with just way fewer videos.” Green said SMUSH and 4x3, two online daily word games he produces, will be paused. The fresh discourse surrounding Green’s use of AI was sparked earlier that day on X, where he told users he had used OpenAI’s ChatGPT to research a script. The revelation shocked some X users, who suggested that Green undermined his credibility by using AI without disclosing it to viewers. As tensions grew on X, Green deleted that post and pivoted to Reddit to address the situation. He told Redditors he’s “mortified” that he’s “let so many people down.” “I have been relying too heavily on AI as a research aid. It can be very useful for this task, giving me access to a lot of papers I didn’t know existed really fast, but I think that has been to the detriment of my work because it has not given me the freedom to find all of my own ways into and around a topic,” Green said. … Green told fans that he’s not anti-AI but understands some of their concerns, such as how the tech is trained, its environmental implications, and the consolidation of economic power by tech companies. He ultimately apologized.“It is very likely that you (the reader) and I disagree on how or even whether AI should be used,” Green said. “I think it makes sense for that disagreement to exist. But I have also always believed that my audience is more likely to be right than I am. You know what this feels like in a way I can’t. And I am so sorry for diluting myself in this way and harming the thing that we have all built together.” In the post, Green said he feels pressure when creating content and will strive to manage himself more effectively. He’ll also address his interactions with AI, which he described as unhealthy. “But mostly I need to come to terms with the fact that the level of dopamine I’ve been getting from interacting with LLMs...with doing more and more and more and more...is not healthy for me or good for the world,” Green said. “It is careless, and has disconnected me from where people are on this.”” Woke 1.0 and 2.0 According to Shoe0nHead, She frames “woke 1.0” as the 2010s SJW/Tumblr/early BuzzFeed culture-war era, and “woke 2.0” as a potential new, post‑2020 wave that would repeat the same patterns in a more intense environment shaped by bigger structural crises and surveillance/war politics. I think Woke 2.0 happened as it’s already beginning to fall, becoming subsumed to the next culture war. * Woke 1.0: * SJW era * Anita Sarkeesian discourse * Tumblr culture * Oppression olympics * Early “manspreading” wage gap discourse * Gamergate * Destructive rot that paved the way for reactionary Trump-style populism * Woke 2.0 * Per Shoe0nHead: * George Floyd protests * Abolish the police * I’d add: * Capitalism is evil * “Globalize the intifada” The New Culture War: AI Hate We realized this was a growing war when Leaflit released her AI Vtubing tool. Then, Katherine Dee released a short substack post titled “Woke 2” in which she writes: “One of my running under-theorized theories (that, naturally, I still psychotically want “credit” for calling, whatever credit means, I think in my head it’s being invited to conferences or invited to expand on whatever idea in publications more articulately than I’m doing here) is that we’ll eventually have a “Woke 1.0”-style culture war about technology. I mean, it’s just been in the water for a long time. Just like we’ve always had backlashes against feminism, we’ve also always had techlashes— but I mean, a techlash that has the features of peak woke. Moral panics, opportunists selling “workshops” about how to stay human. I’ve historically been too hard on Jon Haidt—a guy I don’t want to make an enemy of, for whatever it’s worth, please chill with the age-gating stuff man—but in a way, he’s like the Robin DiAngelo of anti-tech sentiment. I just mean that in a market position way—This has been coming in the mail since before the gen AI stuff—see: what’s happening to Hank Green (he accidentally said “I appreciate the pushback” in a YouTube video and now his fans are freaking out, but really, this is becoming about what’s socially sanctioned, I think Ruby Justice Thelot on “Americans love chat and hate AI” is also important here). Like Woke 1, I think Woke 2 is predicated on perfectly legitimate complaints—I’m speaking here about the conversation—not saying “people concerned about AI or tech are somehow ridiculous”. I don’t think tech companies should get free rein to do whatever. I started noticing the whole tech-as-culture-war thing back when I started paying attention to events like NatCon, there was this weird tension between the right wanting to bring Big Tech to new cities in an attempt to revitalize the economy—see: Miami, and then talking about “transhumanism” derisively in the keynotes. It was obvious to me that the next “cutlure war-y” topic would be tech — that’s an unsustainable tension — the right would go luddite, the left would go luddite, then there’d be right and left coded techno-optimists.” This is what AI racism looks like: A YouTuber openly saying that if he learned a supposedly great video essay used AI for parts of its script, his interest would vanish, because he’d feel he was consuming productivity software rather than a person’s genuine thoughts. What the permanent underclass says about AI: * It will reduce critical thinking * Also from the Business insider article: “In 2025, a survey published by Workday found that nearly half of respondents worried the tech would cause a decline in critical thinking.” * It will undermine mental health * Causing AI psychosis * Encouraging self harm * It erodes “genuine creativity” and “authentic human expression” * They view AI as part of a marketing narrative (“frictionless creativity”) that treats the hard, painful parts of creation as a problem to be eliminated, rather than as the very thing that makes creativity meaningful and produces good work. * AI hallucination is possible * It will create dependence and deskill people * It can reproduce or amplify bias in training data * It will trigger job loss and inequality * A lot of training data is ultimately repurposed mass surveillance and AI exposes people to new levels of surveillance * AI is trained on “stolen information” (i.e. copyrighted stuff, human work, etc. * AI can fuel misinformation and power bad actors (fraud, slop, etc.) What this culture war will look like * Death threats * Apology tours * Cancellations * Performative ugliness * Increasingly fractured media environments * The permanent underclass * Resembling the reservation* *In Brave New World, the Reservation is a stark contrast to the controlled World State: people are born naturally, age normally, practice religion, and live with pain, disease, family life, and social conflict. It’s called the “Savage Reservation,” and Huxley presents it as both more human and more brutal than the civilized world. What it was like * It was remote and largely cut off from the World State. * People there still had marriage, childbirth, motherhood, and religion. * Life was harsher: illness, poverty, aging, and emotional suffering were part of everyday existence. * The culture is depicted as a mixture of Native American traditions and Christian elements, filtered through Huxley’s fictionalized, outsider perspective. Episode Transcript [00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be talking about woke one, woke two, woke three. People have been talking about this concept of woke two, where it was first really elucid

    Did Woke 2.0 Already Fail? An Evolutionary Anthropology of Woke
  7. Aug 6

    Black Humans vs. Gay Socialists: The DNC Civil War

    In this episode of Based Camp, Simone and Malcolm Collins unpack the Democratic Party’s multi-layered civil war and institutional mess. The DNC just fought an open racial and ideological battle over which state goes first in the 2028 presidential primary—South Carolina (Black voters) vs. Nevada (Latino voters)—while the party sits millions in debt, faces donor flight, phone-throwing drama from Chair Ken Martin, and a delayed, incomplete 2024 election autopsy that buried a chapter blaming Biden’s refusal to step aside. They cover: * Why the first primary state matters so much (and how it historically blocked Bernie and could block AOC-style candidates) * Open racial primacy sniping between Black and Latino Democratic factions * Establishment/moderate Black voters as a firewall against the DSA/progressive left * DNC financial collapse versus the RNC’s cash pile * Gen Z’s extreme salary expectations and accelerating demand for socialism * Younger Democrats’ sharp leftward shift on capitalism, policing, and institutions * Whether the party can hold or is heading toward collapse/replacement by something more radical * Speculations on 2028 candidates (including the Hunter Biden “banished prince” theory) Plus the usual Based Camp mix of data, personal political experience, and unfiltered analysis of identity politics, donor incentives, and what comes next. Show Notes Intra-Democratic Fight * The conflict was triggered by DNC’s choice of which state goes first in the 2028 presidential primary The Dispute * Black voters make up a large share of South Carolina’s Democrats and have long been the party’s most loyal national base * Nevada is a diverse battleground with a substantial Latino population. * Black leaders treated keeping South Carolina first as a non-negotiable recognition of Black voters’ centrality—especially after recent Supreme Court rulings that weakened Voting Rights Act protections and triggered redistricting fights that reduced Black representation in the South. * South Carolina Democratic Party Chair Christale Spain put it bluntly in comments that went viral, elevating Nevada over South Carolina “would be because of their Latino vote. So you would then be telling Black voters that you matter less than brown voters.” * Al Sharpton and others echoed the “slap in the face” framing. * Some countered, saying things like: “The earliest primaries should be in competitive swing states. Not South Carolina. Honoring the importance of black voters to the Democratic base is also valid, but that still shouldn’t be South Carolina, it should be Georgia and Michigan” … “The purpose of a primary is to choose the strongest nominee to win the general election. It does us no good to show us a candidate is popular in a state that will be irrelevant when it really matters” * Latino advocacy groups (Voto Latino, Latino Victory Project, etc.) and Nevada Democrats pushed hard the other way, arguing Nevada better reflects the modern coalition Democrats need and that Latinos deserved the symbolic first slot after their 2024 shifts. * This produced open, racially charged sniping between Black and Latino Democratic factions right before the committee vote—exactly the “giant fight between blacks [and] Hispanics” described. * The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee ultimately recommended South Carolina first (on or around Jan. 22, 2028), followed by Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Michigan, and Virginia. The full DNC still needs to ratify it. The Broader DSA/Progressive Struggle * Progressives and DSA-aligned voices viewed the South Carolina-first outcome as an establishment move to disadvantage left-wing or socialist candidates. * Here’s how one person in that camp, Christo Aivalis, put it: “South Carolina is an early state for 1 reason only: to block any challenge to right-wing Democrats. It’s got nothing to do with the Black vote. Georgia has a higher proportion of its population that is Black, it’s a swing state, and its Black population is more representative of the national Black population” * South Carolina’s Black primary voters have repeatedly rejected far-left figures (Bernie Sanders lost the state badly in both 2016 and 2020). * Many on the left saw SC as a filter that favors more moderate/Black-establishment-aligned candidates and makes it harder for an AOC-style or DSA-backed contender to survive the opening round. * Nevada was seen as more favorable terrain for progressives (stronger unions, different demographic mix). * Axios reported progressive anger after the vote: some explicitly framed putting South Carolina first as the establishment trying to “shut down” a progressive presidential candidate and fight the party’s leftward shift. Online, DSA/progressive accounts went after the decision as protecting the “Black, Jewish, and Moderate alliance” (a common left shorthand for traditional Democratic power centers that progressives often criticize as insufficiently radical or too tied to certain institutional interests). This is the “DSA and progressive types go at the Black, Jewish, and Moderate alliance” part and the “left is eating itself” dynamic. DNC Money Troubles I did not know the democratic party was having troubles: NY Times: Inside the Phone-Throwing Drama at the Troubled, Broke Democratic Party https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/26/us/politics/ken-martin-dnc-democrats.html?unlocked_article_code=1.0lA.7wDs.OpuSYQKTgP8r&smid=url-share * “So much is going politically right for Democrats these days. President Trump’s approval is down, gas prices are up and an unpopular war with Iran drags on. But dysfunction and debt inside one of the party’s key institutions — which is getting crushed in fund-raising by its Republican counterpart — are creating rising anxiety for top Democrats.” * “Mr. Trump controls a $400 million super PAC, and the Republican National Committee is sitting on nearly $130 million. Mr. Martin’s D.N.C. is $2 million in debt.” * “For more than a decade, the D.N.C. has transferred millions of dollars every election to sister committees responsible for winning the House and Senate. But the national party is now so short on cash — even after taking out a $15 million loan last year — that officials have privately conveyed to congressional leadership that there will be no such transfers in 2026.” * “Some of the problems are a hangover from 2024. While Vice President Kamala Harris raised record sums that year, her loss left many big Democratic donors disillusioned with the party. Her campaign also had millions in debt that the D.N.C. spent much of last year paying off, with Ms. Harris’s help.” * Part of me wonders if the strategy is good, though? They’re giving all the money to state/local committees to WIN ELECTIONS. They shouldn’t be sitting on cash, they’re spending it, and they are… so maybe I think they’re doing the right thing. * “Mr. Martin’s pledge to increase monthly handouts to state parties has been the centerpiece of his spending agenda. But his inclusion of the territories has caused consternation.” What Can We Expect from the Future of the DNC? Some donation troubles: There was a sharp post-2024 pullback by DNC megadonors frustrated with party direction. Overall Democratic funding has faced real headwinds in 2025–2026 relative to Republicans, especially at the party-committee level, but it is not a simple “drying up.” Turnout is good: Democratic primary turnout has generally outpaced Republican turnout in 2026 so far, reversing or narrowing patterns from recent midterm cycles (especially 2022). This is based on state-level results, multi-state analyses, and reporting through mid-to-late July 2026. Primary turnout is an imperfect enthusiasm signal and does not automatically predict general-election results, but multiple independent reviews describe a clear Democratic edge. Broad Gen Z sentiment is… worrying? A 2024 Empower survey of 2,203 U.S. adults found an overall average salary of about $270,000 to feel financially successful, with generation-specific figures of: * $99,874 for Baby Boomers * $212,321 for Gen X * $180,165 for Millennials, * $587,797 for Gen Z. Younger Democrats (Gen Z and Millennials) tend to be more progressive, more critical of institutions and capitalism, more skeptical of the Democratic establishment, and more left-leaning on foreign policy (especially Israel/Palestine) and criminal justice than older Democrats (Gen X and Boomers). * In Pew’s 2026 political typology, adults under 30 (and Democrats under 30 specifically) are far more likely to fall into groups like “Leftward Progressives” (very progressive across the board, skeptical of the party) and “Left-Out Left” (Democratic-leaning but disillusioned). Older Democrats are more concentrated among “Loyal Liberals,” who feel better represented by the party and its leadership. * Gallup data show Democrats under 50 have become notably less positive about capitalism over the past 15 years, while older Democrats’ views shifted less. Positive views of socialism have risen among Democrats overall, with younger cohorts often more supportive. Younger Democrats prioritize issues like housing costs, student debt relief, and broader economic precarity more intensely. * Younger Democrats are more skeptical of police and the criminal justice system. They are less likely to view police as essential and more supportive of major reforms or rebuilding systems for racial equity. Older Democrats tend to hold more conventional “law and order” or institutional-support views while still favoring reforms. * Younger Democrats often prioritize climate change more strongly and support more aggressive policies (e.g., faster phase-outs of fossil fuels or gasoline vehicles), though Democratic support for climate action is high across ages. On race, younger cohorts (especially White Democra

    Black Humans vs. Gay Socialists: The DNC Civil War
  8. Aug 5

    As Community Erodes, Women Find New Ways to Bully & Cheat

    In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins unpack the “Cheating Coven” — the TikTok-to-business pipeline of proud cheaters who turned affairs into a coaching brand, private community, and alleged harassment operation. They dig into the Mary Sue’s coverage of Chelsea Smallwood (“The Other Woman and the Wife”) and the lawsuit filed by a betrayed spouse after private texts, photos of children, health details, and claims of using her sex toys were shared inside a paid cheater community for mockery and humiliation. From the evolutionary psychology of female infidelity and “mean-girl” dominance displays, to the breakdown of real-world community spaces that once contained this behavior, the urban monoculture’s “love justifies everything” framing, code-switching, and practical advice for men navigating modern dating, this is an unfiltered look at a cultural phenomenon that even progressive outlets found too degenerate. Would you like to know more? Episode Transcript [00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: everybody complains that as we’ve broken down our sense of community, that it’s removed the opportunity [00:00:06] Simone Collins: for- To bully and [00:00:07] Malcolm Collins: terrorize [00:00:07] friendships, for, you know, love, for a sense of community. But it also removed the ability for people who get turned on by, like, cheating with people and then harassing their spouses from having a community of, like, mean girls they can do that with, right? Yeah. So they’ve had to reinvent these spaces for the new world of the internet. [00:00:29] Would you like to know more? [00:00:31] Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Today we will be talking about an incident that the Mary Sue, the Mary Sue, the most leftist, you know, degenerate thing you can imagine, right? [00:00:43] As a, as a news article. [00:00:44] Simone Collins: Okay. [00:00:45] Malcolm Collins: Their title on this is what I can only describe as pure degeneracy, Proud Cheaters Sued For Allegedly Using A Cheating Coach Business To Bully Betrayed Spouses. [00:01:01] Simone Collins: Wow. I mean, whoa. I... Wait [00:01:07] The, no, th- this is peak girl... No, this is, okay, I- I’ve come to a conclusion. The, the gear has to finish processing. This is peak girl boss feminism, right? Because what you saw was a whole bunch of influencers all selling their courses, and all the courses on legitimate things, well, they ran out. And so then they went to MLMs, but then all the ML- MLMs, like, they ran out. [00:01:25] Like, they, they’ve gone bankrupt or become scandalous or people have gotten smart to it. So the only thing left for them to sell courses on is cheating. [00:01:34] Malcolm Collins: And the communities that they created, for some examples of the what we’ll get into here- Okay ... and what, what we’ll be able to take away from, ‘cause it’s important to try to learn some lesson from this, avoid this, et cetera, right? [00:01:48] Simone Collins: What’s the lesson? Maybe don’t create a course on how to cheat? [00:01:52] Malcolm Collins: Well, so they would go into the private paid community for cheating women and share stuff like stories about how they had slept with the partner while the other partner was, like, asleep i- in the bed or in the same [00:02:07] Simone Collins: house. Oh. [00:02:07] Malcolm Collins: Or- [00:02:08] Simone Collins: This is a, is this like a cuck thing? [00:02:10] Malcolm Collins: Or that they had used the other partner’s sex toys, or that they had taken pictures of the original partner that included their kids and put them next to pictures of herself [00:02:23] To ask which is more attractive in the community. Like, and th- this is what eventually caused the lawsuit was all the shared private information. But it’s a fascinating phenomenon that I wanted to dig into, that it has even mortified the Mary Sue. And it’s been developing for a while. [00:02:44] It’s been developing as a situation over a number of years. People have been covering it for a number of years, but now we basically have the full story and where things are. All right? [00:02:52] Simone Collins: Well. [00:02:53] Malcolm Collins: So Chelsea Smallwood, a TikTok creator who made being a cheater her entire platform, is now facing a lawsuit after her cheating business shared private information and betrayed spouses to further bully and mock them. [00:03:05] Now note here this is from the Mary Sue article, so you know it’s maximum lefty slop here. They’re... I, I’m not pulling any punches. And what’s also fascinating about this is, is what it really appeared to be. When they talk about bully and mocking them you say, “Is this a cuck fetish?” It appeared to genuinely be a fetish, a, a fetish around basically the other side of an NTR fetish, like getting turned on by the thought of humiliating somebody’s partner by sleeping with their, their partner. [00:03:35] Yeah ... a- a- and in that way, the paid community where they could, without judgment, talk about this the, the, that sort of heightened the erotic nature of what they were doing in their [00:03:54] Simone Collins: mind. Yeah, they seemed... They, they liked this. It wasn’t like, “Oh, phew, I’m glad I got away with that.” [00:03:58] Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah- It was- And [00:04:00] we’ll go over. [00:04:00] It’s also very funny, like what a, what a cheating coach does. Like, the idea that she would like sit down with these people and like talk them through like all the emotional parts of, of cheating with some- Right? Like, you need a psychologist for this, but somebody who won’t judge you, right? So you talk through the emotions of like, “Well, is he spending too much time with her?” [00:04:25] It’s like, well, it is his wife. [00:04:29] Simone Collins: Oh, I thought it was for practical things, like make sure that you guys communicate using this app, and if you wanna receive gift from, gifts from him, make sure that you do it this way so the wife doesn’t find out or things like that. The, no, the [00:04:40] Malcolm Collins: core thing seemed to be about like the bragging and humiliating part. [00:04:43] Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. [00:04:44] Malcolm Collins: But there was stuff on like how to get around tracking apps and stuff like that, and we’ll, we’ll get around that, onto that. So Smallwood started gaining traction on the social, on social media for posting, quote-unquote, “cheating content,” calling herself The Other Woman and the Wife. [00:04:58] She made several TikTok videos bragging about her affair. One such video was titled Things Your Husband Did While He Was in an Affair With Me. In the video, she dances joyously while bragging about things she and her cheating partner did, such as going on a trip with her on his and his wife’s anniversary and setting up a secret bank account to hide all the trips and gifts he was buying Smallwood. [00:05:21] Smallwood made dozens of similar TikToks talking unapologetically about her affair and demonizing victims of cheating, claiming it was relatable affair content. She eventually decided to turn The Other Woman and Wife into a business featuring podcasts, retreats, and private communities for cheaters to congregate and exchange tips and resources. [00:05:45] And I’ll post a video of one of her TikToks here so you guys can get an idea of what these looked like. [00:05:50] Speaker 9: Phone while he was with me, and I could hear everything. [00:05:53] Lied to you repeatedly about where he was. And again, just to check in on the video that she’s posting with, it’s her cheersing while she drinks cocktails with this music. Didn’t tell you the actual full truth when you caught him. “Technically I cheated. I will admit that. I turned away from my spouse of three years and I hurt him because of that choice, but that doesn’t mean I define myself as a cheater. [00:06:14] To this day, I reject the motto of once a cheater, always a cheater. It’s reductionist and judgemental.” [00:06:20] Malcolm Collins: She isn’t the first person to have the idea of turning cheating into a business platform. , From Smallwood to Ashley Madison to the incest spotlight on Amie Roach or TJ Holmes, there have long been pushes to normalize infidelity, provide resources to cheaters, and profit off of affairs. [00:06:37] However, normalizing infidelity wasn’t Smallwood’s only mission. She took things to another level when she allegedly attempted to make cyberbullying and harassment of victims’ infidelity part of the business, too. Chelsea Smallwood and Her Businesses Sued by Cheating Victim. Part of The Other Woman and the Wife actually a coaching business. [00:06:54] Smallwood, who has a BA in economics, has no qualifications to serve as a l- life coach or counselor. I love when leftists gatekeep around counseling. Yet her website has an application form in which individuals can get one-on-one coaching. Oh, no. You’d say, basically The Mary Sue’s problem here is that she wasn’t... [00:07:19] To teach women how to better cheat on their husbands, that she needed to be a licensed psychologist. Like, that seems to be, for them, the bigger problem. Like, how dare she? I, I would assume, actually, that a woman who spends her entire career talking about cheating would know more about cheating than a psychologist would, right? [00:07:45] Like- [00:07:45] Simone Collins: Truly. No, I- if I wanted to cheat on you, Malcolm, I, and I wanted a coach for it, I would probably go with the woman who cheats a lot, l- allegedly. Yeah, I mean- I guess I’d want proof of the cheating, ‘cause we don’t know this is all just some rage bait she made up [00:08:00] to get followers. [00:08:01] Malcolm Collins: Oh, no, no, no, no. The relationships broke up, everything like that. [00:08:04] We’ll go over it. Oh, [00:08:05] Simone Collins: okay, okay. Well, as long as she has a track record. [00:

    As Community Erodes, Women Find New Ways to Bully & Cheat
4.4
out of 5
157 Ratings

About

Based Camp is a podcast focused on how humans process the world around them and the future of our species. That means we go into everything from human sexuality, to weird sub-cultures, dating markets, philosophy, and politics. Malcolm and Simone are a husband wife team of a neuroscientist and marketer turned entrepreneurs and authors. With graduate degrees from Stanford and Cambridge under their belts as well as five bestselling books, one of which topped out the WSJs nonfiction list, they are widely known (if infamous) intellectuals / provocateurs. If you want to dig into their ideas further or check citations on points they bring up check out their book series. Note: They all sell for a dollar or so and the money made from them goes to charity. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08FMWMFTG basedcamppodcast.substack.com

You Might Also Like