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. 6h ago

    P***phelia & Pronatalism: How Whites Crashed Global Birth Rates By Banning ****

    In this raw and data-packed episode of Based Camp, Simone and Malcolm Collins ask a provocative question: Are Europeans the only people on Earth historically into adult pairings? While most cultures around the world historically married in the early-to-mid teens, Europeans (especially Northern and Western) stood out by commonly delaying marriage until the mid-20s — even in the Middle Ages. The hosts explore whether this European norm, later exported globally through colonialism and cultural influence, may be contributing to today’s fertility crashes in East Asia, Latin America, India, and beyond. They dive into: * Aella’s “Hotness Curve” study and what percentage of men find different ages attractive * The e-girl phenomenon and why so many popular internet aesthetics look phenotypically 15 * Genetic and regional differences in fertility windows and menopause age (Europeans go into menopause ~2–3 years later on average) * Historical first-marriage ages across Europe, China, India, Japan, Korea, Africa, and the Americas * Global ages of consent today and when different countries criminalized CSAM * Disney princess ages (Snow White was 14, Jasmine 15, Ariel 16…) and why normalizing teen marriage might be necessary for demographic survival This is a no-holds-barred, truth-seeking conversation about culture, biology, attraction, and whether some populations are simply not built for the modern delayed-marriage timeline. If you’re interested in pronatalism, human biodiversity, evolutionary psychology, or why fertility is collapsing everywhere except where European norms never fully took hold — this episode is for you. Show Notes Aella’s Findings Aella also just released a substack post titled The Hotness Curve (how age changes a woman’s appeal). Using photos of women of various ages (some real, some AI generated), Aella asked various questions, including: “Casual Sex: A 200 year old vampire shows up in your window at night. She wants a one-night stand. There are no consequences, and nobody will know. Do you say yes?” Here are the answers: Aella found that “Sexual interest climbs very fast, and generally hits a cresendo around women who appeared to be ~24 years old (or 28yo for the older men).” “15% of men said yes they would have casual sex with a vampire in the body of an 11 year old. This rose to a third of men for the body of a 13 year old, and a half of men agreeing to the body of a 15 year old. By 18 we’re at roughly 70%, and by the time a 24 year old is hypothetically entering your window, ~90% of them were down.” Just a small aside: “One interesting thing to note is that the dropoff in fuckability for women - what we might call The Wall - happens for women in their mid 30’s just as predicted, but only in the eyes of men under the age of 25. For older men, we find the ‘wall’ occurs in a woman’s early 40’s. Older men assigned equivalent ‘yes I’d have sex with her’ ratings to an 18 year old as they did to a woman in her early 50’s!” Also: You should play Aella’s ageguesser game. (Simone got better than 67% of players… not very good.) The e-girl phenomenon From our friend Bruno: “Why does a certain “e-girl” or “internet girl” face seem to resonate so consistently with online audiences across different eras? Highly recognizable women in online subcultures seem to converge around a similar look; why does that look perform so well with netizens? Early internet figures like Boxxy, later YouTube personalities like Shoe0nHead, cosplay and streamer-adjacent figures, and then more recent cases like Belle Delphine and the current wave of TikTok, cosplay, and Twitter/X e-girl aesthetics. The more interesting question is why a particular facial and stylistic grammar keeps recurring: large expressive eyes, youthful proportions, soft or rounded features, dark hair or bangs, a slightly anime-coded presentation, and a mix of cuteness, irony, awkwardness, and sexual ambiguity.” Malcolm’s first answer: BECAUSE THEY ALL LOOK LIKE LITTLE GIRLS AND PEOPLE ARE PEDOS. The sick sad truth: Most of the world is full of pedos Basically, Europeans are the only non pedos. Maybe the concept of pedos wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for Europeans Maybe a contributing factor to falling birth rates involves modern norms around late marriage among groups that, for hundreds of years, married much younger. Let’s explore this! Variation in Fertility Windows A large meta‑analysis across 24 countries estimated the global mean age at menopause at 48.8 years, and by continent: * Europe: about 50.5 years * Asia (overall): about 48.8 years * Africa: about 48.4 years * Latin America: about 47.2 years * Middle East: about 47.4 years WHO similarly notes that most women worldwide experience menopause between ages 45 and 55. Variation in Average Ages of Marriage Average female age at first marriage, approximate, pre‑1800 * England (pre‑1800) - ~22–26 - Many parishes ~25–26; Western Europe relatively late. * Western/Northern Europe - ~20–25 - Late marriage pattern; some locales up to 27. * China - ~14–18 - Legal norms ~14–15; practice mid‑teens. * India - ~12–16 - Strong early arranged marriage; big regional variation. * Japan - ~17–19 - Village data show late‑teen marriage. * Korea (Joseon) - ~16–18 - Upper‑status women mid‑teens; similar for many commoners. * Aztec/Nahua - ~14–17 - Girls early‑mid teens; men ~18–22. * Maya - ~16–19 - Most married by ~20; post‑15 coming‑of‑age. * Sub‑Saharan Africa (major) - ~15–18 - Many societies mid‑late teens for women. Sources: * https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/036319907800300103 * https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1081602X08000894 * https://voxdev.org/topic/institutions-political-economy/economic-shocks-and-age-marriage-sub-saharan-africa-and-india * https://historymyths.wordpress.com/2014/07/06/myth-136-women-married-very-young-in-the-olden-days/ * https://keatschinese.com/china-culture-resources/general-standards-of-ancient-chinese-marriage-age/ * https://childmarriagedata.org/country-profiles/india/ * https://www.aztec-history.com/aztec-society-family.html * https://mayas.mrdonn.org/marriage.html Ages of Consent In the most populous countries: * Pakistan - 18 (requires marriage) * India - 18 * Indonesia - 18 * Nigeria - 18 * Japan - 18 * Ethiopia - 18 * Egypt - 18 * DR Congo - 18 * Turkey - 18 * United States - 16-18 Varies by state * Philippines - 16 (general), 14 for close‑in‑age minors * Iran - 15–18 with marriage required * Thailand - 15–18 * France - 15 (16 in FRA report) * Germany - 14–16 (practical 14–18) * Bangladesh - 14–16 * Italy - 14–16 * Mexico - 12-18 Varies by state * Russia - 16 * Vietnam - 16 * United Kingdom - 16 * South Africa - 16 * South Korea - 16 * China - 14 * Brazil - 14 More detail on Pakistan: Minimum ages for marriage * National framework (historical): The Child Marriage Restraint Act 1929 originally set the minimum age at 18 for males and 16 for females. * Sindh province: Since 2013, Sindh’s own Child Marriage Restraint Act has set the minimum legal marriage age at 18 for both boys and girls. * Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT): The Islamabad Capital Territory Child Marriage Restraint Act 2025 now sets the minimum age at 18 for both sexes, with significant penalties for under‑18 marriages. * Balochistan: In November 2025, Balochistan raised the legal age to 18 for girls (and 18 for boys), banning child marriage in the province. * Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP): Until very recently, these provinces still had 16 as the legal minimum for girls and 18 for boys, though Punjab has now moved to raise the age to 18; advocacy and legislation are ongoing to harmonize all provinces at 18. Despite recent legal reforms raising the minimum marriage age to 18 in several parts of Pakistan, child marriage remains a significant, ongoing problem, especially for girls from poor, rural, and religious‑minority communities. UNICEF and other analyses report that around 18% of women aged 20–24 in Pakistan were married before 18, which corresponds to roughly 20.5 million girls, and about 4% were married before 15 * The Borgen Project reports: Child brides usually come from impoverished families who sell them to older men for a price as high as 2.5 million Pakistani rupees, which is more than $8,000.” Anti-Pedo Laws Japan has had laws against sexual exploitation of minors for decades, but it only criminalized possession of child pornography involving real children in 2014. They really had to ease into it: * 1999 – Japan bans the production and distribution of child pornography involving real minors, aligning partially with other OECD countries but still allowing simple possession. * June 2014 – The Diet passes a revision to the Child Pornography Law that makes possession of child pornography (photos and videos of real children under 18) a criminal offense, punishable by up to one year in prison or a fine. * The 2014 law explicitly excludes manga, anime, and computer‑generated imagery, so fictional depictions remain legal even if they portray minors in sexualized contexts, which is why international observers still criticize Japan as being comparatively permissive about some forms of sexualized images of minors. When various countries instituted CSAM laws * 1973: Germany * 1973–1980s – German Criminal Code provisions against pornography involving minors are introduced and strengthened, banning production and distribution. * 1990s–2000s – EU‑driven harmonization and national reforms explicitly criminalize possession of CSAM (including online images). * 1978: USA * 1978 – Child pornography first becomes illegal at the federal level via the Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977 (effective 1978), targeting production, sale, and transport. * 1980s–1990s – Additional federal statutes crim

    42 min
  2. NY Times Tries to Rewrite Masculinity and Fatherhood

    1d ago

    NY Times Tries to Rewrite Masculinity and Fatherhood

    In this episode of Based Camp, Simone and Malcolm Collins break down The New York Times’ recent coordinated coverage of masculinity and fatherhood. They analyze four pieces that attempt to redefine what it means to be a dad — including a cartoon about a trans father on Father’s Day, a childless writer’s take on “modern” fatherhood, an attack on Scott Galloway’s views on paternity leave, and Ezra Klein’s conversation with Helen Lewis framing the “New Right’s very old vision of men.” The Collinses argue these articles reveal deep cultural elite contempt for actual fathers and promote unsustainable, self-indulgent views of parenting that prioritize personal identity and emotional affirmation over duty, sacrifice, and long-term human thriving. They explain why pronatalist, traditional approaches to masculinity and fatherhood will inherit the future while progressive narratives collapse under their own contradictions. Expect sharp cultural analysis, personal parenting stories, and a direct challenge to the mainstream media’s attempt to gaslight men about what fatherhood really is. Show Notes @AlexBerenson wrote: Cannot make this up, either. @nytimes opinion has had four recent pieces about fatherhood and masculinity, with six authors: Three women A trans “man” Two childless men Not one father. The cultural elite contempt for dads runs so deep we don’t even get to speak for ourselves. The four pieces appear to be these recent New York Times Opinion items on fatherhood/masculinity: * “To My Daughter, My Gender Was Never Complicated” (guest essay in comic-strip form, by Zach Ellams, a trans-identifying parent writing about being a “trans dad” and fatherhood). * “The Most Important Way That Fatherhood Has Changed” (Father’s Day–timed essay on changing perspectives on fatherhood). * “This Masculinity Influencer Is Loud and Wrong About Paternity Leave” (criticizing a male influencer’s stance on paternity leave and broader masculinity issues). * “The New Right’s Very Old Vision of Men” (Opinion video/transcript focusing on men, masculinity and the New Right, featuring journalist Helen Lewis). “To My Daughter, My Gender Was Never Complicated” https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/21/opinion/trans-dad-parenting-fathers-day.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/21/opinion/trans-dad-parenting-fathers-day.html?unlocked_article_code=1.r1A.oWDB.tcG4utZreGgZ&smid=url-share This shows a series of cartoon panels about a trans father who underwent surgery at 18 and has lived as a father of a daughter, mostly quite out, for some time. It’s about how he found self acceptance through parenting (and I love that, because I—Simone—have also experienced that and can totally relate) The panels include things like: * His daughter yelling: “HOW DID YOU GROW A MUSTACHE IF YOU WERE A LADY?” at a public school * His daughter asking about a pre-transition picture of him in an album and asking: * “Who’s that?” * “It’s me” * “Oh. You look cool.” * “Then or now?” * “Then.” * Him worrying about his daughter outing him at school * “I don’t actually tell everyone I’m trans. I save that for special people” * Eventually she outs him, saying she wants to grow a beard when she grows up, and when told she can’t, insisting she can because her dad did and he was a girl. * Her various sick burns * “You’re slow because you’re old!” * “Maybe I’ll be like you when I grow up” // “Yeah?” // “Yeah. Really short.” The Backlash: * @realBrandonGill: “On Father’s Day, the New York Times decided to promote a cartoon of a woman cosplaying as a father. And they did it for a reason. Because the cultural left knows that the first step to conquering the future is brainwashing the minds of our children— and they’ve realized that strong fathers are the biggest obstacle to that goal. They want to tear the institution of fatherhood down to nothing because, to the left, things that are normal, good, and holy are a threat to their marxist revolution.” * Matt Taibbi: “Today’s NYT editorial on Father’s Day is an all-timer. Again, don’t know where to put it on the funny-vs-horrifying axis:” * @EndWokeness: “The New York Times on Father’s Day. We do not hate the media enough.” * Caitlin Flanagan: “The child’s job was to help the parent feel comfortable with his gender.” * @AfterTheReset: “Message aside, is it necessary for the cartoons to be ugly, poorly drawn, and unappealing?” Is this an affront to father’s day? * Sort of * Mother’s Day in the modern U.S. sense was founded by Anna Maria Jarvis in the early 1900s to create a solemn “memorial mothers day” honoring the sacrifices and care of individual mothers, inspired directly by her own mother Ann Reeves Jarvis’s wish for such a day and by Ann’s community health and reconciliation work. * Anna’s drive was rooted in her mother Ann Reeves Jarvis’s work: Ann had organized “Mothers’ Day Work Clubs” in the 1850s to improve sanitation and reduce infant mortality, and later “Mother’s Friendship Day” events to heal divisions between Union and Confederate families after the Civil War. Ann also expressed in a Sunday school prayer that she hoped someone would someday establish a “memorial mothers day” for the “matchless service” mothers render to humanity, a line Anna took as her guiding mission * In the U.S., Father’s Day is generally credited to Sonora Smart Dodd of Spokane, Washington, who proposed the holiday in 1909 after hearing a church sermon about Anna Jarvis’s newly established Mother’s Day. (her civil war veteran dad raised her and her siblings alone after her mother died). * I find this really relatable as a parent * Many of us have peculiarities and a story about how parenting helps with acceptance and getting someone out of their heads is actually really good * In fact, these panels even demonstrate how the author’s daughter gets him to stop overthinking things * There’s a panel where she’s like: “I spot something that starts with T!” * And all he can think of is “trans” * And he’s like: Termite? Turtleneck? Tiny morsel of wood?” * And his daughter is like: “TREES.” “The Most Important Way That Fatherhood Has Changed” https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/15/opinion/fathers-day-fatherhood.html https://archive.is/Gn93j In this, Frank Bruni, a (childless) contributing opinion writer who has been on staff at the time for over 25 years, talks about how fatherhood has changed between his dad and his brother’s generations (his brother has three kids in their 20s) He talks about fathers spending more time with their kids now an cites an article suggesting one reason fertility is lower is that men want to give the kids they do have more attention. In short, he says modern fatherhood is high effort, high investment, and he says that’s good. He sort of misses that the investment now isn’t in empowering kids but rather indulging them, and he provides a good example: “Mark encouraged his children to let him in by inviting them to understand him. He made sure that they met and mingled with his adult friends and thus observed how he tended relationships and what they meant to him. He also showed his children his passions. “I took Frank to a Grateful Dead concert when he was 12,” Mark told me, referring to his oldest son, who, like me, is named after my father. But that outing wasn’t just characteristically ardent Deadhead evangelism (and, well, unorthodox parenting). It reflected Mark’s sustained effort to expand the time that he and Frank spent together. The more hours, the more conversation. The more conversation, the greater the likelihood of serendipitous revelations, real familiarity, deeper connection.” “This Masculinity Influencer Is Loud and Wrong About Paternity Leave” https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/21/opinion/paternity-leave-debate.html https://archive.is/Zm4Oy In this opinion piece, Jessica Grose denounces Scott Galloway’s stance on paternity leave. It should be noted that Scott Galloway is one of the few progressive-leaning pronatalists out there (center-left liberal or social capitalist rather). In an interview with Derek Thompson, Galloway said: “I think there should be mandatory maternity leave, because I think the species needs to propagate. I’m not sure there should be mandatory paternity leave. I think it sometimes creates resentment. I think sometimes it’s abused. And so I’m a bit of a capitalist here. I think it’s between the company, but I don’t know if I immediately default to oh, the father needs to be there.” Grose added: “Galloway also commented that he doesn’t think men should be in the delivery room. “I thought that was so disgusting and unnatural,” he says. When I asked Galloway if he had a response to the backlash he has been getting over these comments, he said over email, “My comments were intentionally provocative in the context of a friendly/snarky conversation with Derek.”” She also noted: “Poor Derek Thompson tried to push back, and launch a defense of parental leave. “Most of the gap between prime age adult male and female earnings is a motherhood penalty. And so one benefit of paternity leave is that it puts men and women on relatively more equal standing,” to which Galloway replies, “By lowering the economic standards of the man?”” She proceeded to cite research finding that “Paid paternity leave in Quebec did not fix the motherhood penalty for women, nor did it substantially hurt men’s economic standards.” She also attempts to exploit that “not a baby man” aspect of Galloway’s personality: * “It gets worse. Thompson, who is still glowing from the birth of his second child, shares a very sweet story with Galloway about playing “monster” with his eldest child, a 2-year-old, and how he feels “an enormous u

    53 min
  3. What's the Intergenerational Effect of Cousin Marriages? (5 Cousin = 1 Sibling Marriage)

    2d ago

    What's the Intergenerational Effect of Cousin Marriages? (5 Cousin = 1 Sibling Marriage)

    In this raw and data-driven episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins tackle one of the most uncomfortable topics in modern discourse: what happens when cousin marriage is practiced across multiple generations? While a single first-cousin marriage carries moderate risk, repeated generational consanguinity causes the inbreeding coefficient (F) to compound nonlinearly. After just 4–6 generations, offspring become as genetically similar as full siblings. The hosts walk through the math, real-world population data, IQ impacts (10–30+ point drops), elevated rates of genetic disorders, miscarriages, and neurological conditions — all without moralizing or hedging. They cover: * Pakistan (50–65% consanguineous), Gulf states, Egypt, Jordan, Afghanistan, and UK Pakistani diaspora rates * Historical European examples (Hapsburgs) vs. modern British royals * Jewish rates and cultural adaptation to science * Why chain migration amplifies the practice * The strategic/political angle some conservatives quietly consider * Brief but pointed detours into halal slaughter myths, Sharia consistency, grooming gangs, and Maimonides on late-term abortion edge cases The episode ends with a characteristically Based Camp discussion of cultural sovereignty, techno-Puritanism, and why evidence-based cultural evolution beats top-down bans. If you value brutal honesty over comfortable narratives, this one’s for you. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit basedcamppodcast.substack.com/subscribe

    52 min
  4. How The ADL Became an Anti-Semitism Factory (This is the Fastest Cultural Shift of Our Lives)

    3d ago

    How The ADL Became an Anti-Semitism Factory (This is the Fastest Cultural Shift of Our Lives)

    Malcolm and Simone Collins break down one of the fastest cultural shifts they’ve seen: the collapsing power of the “antisemitism” card and the ADL’s controversial attempt to label “Goy Slop” as hate speech. In this episode, they explore the history and modern usage of the term “goy,” why the ADL’s statement backfired spectacularly, the hilarious internet reaction (including Asmongold’s meme list), and what this reveals about changing attitudes toward Jewish organizations, identity politics, and cultural trash talk. They discuss: * The real meaning and evolution of “goy” * Why policing language like this increases antisemitism * Sentiment analysis showing overwhelming pushback * Broader cultural realignment on the right and in the mainstream * Advice for the ADL and Jewish advocacy groups A raw, honest conversation on group identity, noticing patterns, and why the old rules no longer apply. Episode Transcript Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today, we are going to be talking about one of the fastest cultural shifts I have maybe seen in my lifetime- ... towards the inability to play whether it’s the anti-Semite card or the racist card or the homophobe card of- of that being a card that has value in our cultural landscape. Okay. And a lot of this comes downstream of a recent ADL announcement. Or- How Simone Collins: recent are we talking? Like, this year or just now? Like, Malcolm Collins: yesterday. Simone Collins: Oh, okay. Malcolm Collins: Like, it, it’s just blowing up on Twitter right now. People are, are clowning on it. So basically what the ADL decided to do is attempt to define goy slop, which is a term that a lot of people are using now for unhealthy food that is not good for you to eat, and there’s a fun [00:01:00] video of, like, a sweet old Jewish guy going around and showing, like, kosher foods and being like, “You gotta eat this stuff and not this other stuff. Look at all the bad chemicals.” Like, “You guys need to know this.” Speaker 7: Sent this to a friend who loves eating goy slop. I wouldn’t touch this stuff. Anything over two ingredients is goy slop. Nothing but chemicals. Malcolm Collins: But- Simone Collins: Okay ... Malcolm Collins: the ADL came out and tried to define this as hate speech. And we’ll go into their statement, we’ll go into the history of goy, everything like that. Mm-hmm. But they tried to define it as hate speech. And then you get people like Shoeonhead where one popular tweet said, “Shoeonhead claps back at the LDA... the ADL referring to goy slop as a slur. Wait, wait. Goy, the Hebrew word that refers to non-Jews. So you have your own little slur for us-” “... but we’re bad for using it ourselves? LMAFO.” And you- Simone Collins: Yeah, that’s like banning the N-word from rap, right? Malcolm Collins: Well, no, it’s, it’s, it’s worse because it is a Jewish- Worse ... [00:02:00] slur- Simone Collins: Yeah Malcolm Collins: for non-Jews. Simone Collins: Yeah. Malcolm Collins: And it is absolutely a derogatory word. Like, you can say, like, you as a Jew can try to define it as non-derogatory. Yeah. But if you’re doing that, you’re just going to make people more antisemitic because it looks like you’re treating them like idiots and they’re too stupid to be aware. And I’m okay of you know, Like gringo. Right? Like, I go to, I go to Mexico, people call me a gringo, right? Like- Yeah, Simone Collins: or gaijin. Malcolm Collins: Or gaijin. Simone Collins: Which is Malcolm Collins: fine. Or- Simone Collins: Don’t care. Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Most cultures have a derogatory word for people outside of that culture. Mm-hmm. This isn’t a Jewish thing. This isn’t a problem- No endemic to Judaism or something like that. No. Speaker: And to be clear here, if you are Jewish and regularly hear Yiddish, you would be very aware that there are multiple idioms that use the term goy in a derogatory manner. It is clearly a derogatory word. And again, it is normal for words to mean outsider to eventually become derogatory, even if they didn’t originally have that connotation.[00:03:00] Consider the word barbarian in ancient Greek that originally just meant outsider, but eventually came to mean, uh, a lot of derogatory contexts And Jews will come out thinking we’re f*****g idiots and say things like, “Well, Goy in the Torah is used in a non-derogatory context to mean nation.” And it’s like, yeah, back when it also referred to the nation of Israel. But since about 300 BC in Talmudic writings, which we all have access to, by the way, it’s not just Jews who get to read those, it’s been used in a negative context. In the same way barbarian originally didn’t have a negative context, but eventually developed one. That’s fine. Don’t treat us like idiots Speaker 8: And I’m beginning to realize how much anti-Semitism was kept down by the self-deprecating Jewish comedian like we see in the original clip here with the guy actually [00:04:00] talking about Goy slop who’s being honest, , and how much it is risen by the Jewish Karen. And we just don’t have that many self-deprecating Jewish comedians anymore and a whole lot more Jewish Karens Speaker 9: And the Jewish Karens seem to be completely unaware of American culture and how angry it makes Americans to be told something that we obviously know isn’t true, like that goy in a modern context is not a derogatory term. And if you are a Jew who is unaware of this, because I’m g- gonna give you the benefit of the doubt, maybe you are just unaware of this because you have no Jewish friends. But I have a lot of Jewish friends. I interact with the Jewish community a lot. I regularly see the term used in that way. In fact, if you read private communications of Jews, as people have done in the Jeffrey Epstein emails, they see it used in that way regularly. , This is even known to [00:05:00] Jewish children. , There was a clip that I have here of, , a Jewish kid talking to a non-Jewish kid, , saying, “ You don’t know sh- about my friends and family, so you should actually shut the F up. You think I’m going to act towards someone, an arrogant little swine white b***h who S talks Israel knowing nothing about them? Shut up, you goy C word. Go defend terrorists. Laugh my ass off post your face. Then you’re effing embarrassing. Take your shishka...” This is another Jewish slur for non-Jewish women, , that is way more derogatory than goy, but it’s used interchangeably. Go defend the terrorists like a good little Western goy girl.” And then he says, “Goy fake ass profile.” , But the point being here is it’s used interchangeably with words like the C word or shishka or, you know, any of these other words. A- and, and we see this in plenty of videos. Again, if you are unaware that this term is used in a derogatory fashion [00:06:00] and you are Jewish, go, like, research it, I guess? Speaker 3: זה תספורת של גוי או של יהודי? גוי. תספורת שוקו וניל זה יהודי או גוי? גוי. בלורית זה תספורת של יהודי או גוי? גוי. And when you point out that at one point in history it wasn’t derogatory, that has the same energy as a person claiming the N-word isn’t derogatory because just look at how you say black in Latin languages. Clearly it doesn’t have or didn’t originally have a negative context. And it’s like, bro, that, that doesn’t, um, help your case at all. That makes you look insane and dramatically worse. The fact that a word wasn’t always negative doesn’t mean it’s not negative in the current context. And in the same voice, the fact that even at the height of the N-word’s use, [00:07:00] it was majoritively used just as a descriptor for black people, not with malice intended, that doesn’t mean that it was not a slur. , And that is true, by the way. During the height, like if you’re looking at the s- the slave trade and stuff like that, when the N-word was used the most, it was mostly just used as a descriptor. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t pejorative as well. Essentially the way the defining of a slur works is not the majority use of a word, because almost all slurs when they are made slurs, their majority use is not necessarily derogatory but descriptive. It’s in the minority is the term used in a derogatory context. And almost every word in every language for non-X that’s not non-X becomes derogatory. So like let’s take Christians for example. There is no word for a non-Christian other than just saying non-Christian that doesn’t have a derogatory context now. Whether it’s heathen, heretic, [00:08:00] pagan, , all of these within a Christian mindset are gonna have a derogatory context and that’s fine. It’s pretending that they don’t that is what is freaking people out. Malcolm Collins: however, to take that word and then say that other people can’t use it themselves, the groups that it is... It, it would be as if- when you said it would be like banning the N-word- Oh, it’s- It would be like whites were still allowed to use the N-word- Simone Collins: Oh my God. Yeah, okay. Yeah ... but they ban Malcolm Collins: Black people from using the N-word in rap Dear Black Simone Collins: people, you are no longer allowed to use the N-word. Wow Malcolm Collins: Like, don’t you know the history of that word, Black people? It might make white people look bad. Simone Collins: Oh. Malcolm Collins: I mean, of course we still use it regularly and with impunity, but we don’t want other people reminded of that. No ... and this is coming down because we’ll go over the reactions to this. Asmogold made another, a big list of like other goy words that you can use because it’s been taken and, and mixed culturally in many ways. Like goyim [00:09:00] beam. I, I think that’s a hilarious name for the anti-uh- Simo

    52 min
  5. Sins Aren’t Equal: Ranking Activities’ Sinfulness (Erotic and Otherwise)

    4d ago

    Sins Aren’t Equal: Ranking Activities’ Sinfulness (Erotic and Otherwise)

    Are video games the most efficient sin? Malcolm and Simone Collins rank modern sins by their real-world damage — from video games and sports gambling to shopping addictions, plastic surgery, skydiving, OnlyFans, kinks, and more. They break down how to evaluate sins by time cost, financial drain, health risks, negative externalities, addiction potential, and alignment with long-term flourishing. This episode offers a practical, first-principles framework for thinking about hedonism, temptation, family traditions, and moral trade-offs in the modern world. Topics include gambling vs. heroin, why some “harmless” hobbies are more destructive than others, rechanneling vices into virtues, the value of different lives, and techno-puritan views on self-defense. Episode Transcript Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to have an interesting conversation around ranking the severity of various modern sins so that we can understand which ones are worse for an individual in, terms of, well, just broad effects they have on your life. Like, as I’ve pointed out in other episodes, sins are basically a list of things, you know, like don’t cheat on your wife, don’t be mean to people, don’t murder people, like listen to your parents. Stuff that’s just gonna F up your life if you don’t follow it i- in a, in a general format. It’s like a big list of don’t piss on the electric fence and then a- some humans are just like, “But if I just goon all day every day, that’ll feel fantastic, right?” And it’s like, no, it won’t. Maybe for like a half a day you get to year two of that and you’re living the life of Anna Valen. See our episode on what happened to her life, right? Like going through her [00:01:00] private diaries in our Life of the Sinabyte episode. Speaker 5: you were an interesting study. Must, greed, deception, fertile ground, but rather mundane. Speaker 6: Doors to the pleasures of heaven nor hell. I didn’t care, which I thought I’d gone to the limits I hadn’t. The center bytes gave me an experience beyond the limits pain and pleasure. Indivisible. Malcolm Collins: it is not happiness at the end of the hedonism maxing tunnel. As I often point out, if you look at the people in our society who have access to everything they could possibly want, your movie star, your music star, when they indulge in that, when they indulge in the, you know, endless chain of, of women and drugs and everything like that, they often crash out as some of the least happy and satisfied humans alive. Whereas people who often do not have much, and I’m sure many of you, you know these individuals pious [00:02:00] individuals who just work to give back to the community they’re often some of the most fulfilled people you will ever meet. And so this is, this is paid off to us, but whatever religious teaching you’re using, and I’m gonna try to keep this, while this is one of the track series, I’m gonna try to keep it useful to not just Christians or Orthodox Jews or anyone, but just broadly anyone because- the, the set of laws that, like, Christians follow seems to generally be useful for other people as well. That’s why they seem to perfectly overlay with, like, the Noahide laws when Jews are like, “Well, I just want everyone to follow the Noahide laws.” And it’s like, all observant Christians already follow all of those. Like, why are you making this a separate thing? It’s just good rules for life and, and being a member of a community. But we’re going to start, because where this came up was in a fan call which we have for our paid fans who get [00:03:00] our extra weekend episodes. If you don’t know about that, that, that’s a thing. And they somebody was talking about the relative sinfulness of video games, right? And we’ll be using the Romans quote that’s in here, which is like anything you don’t do for God is sin. Basically anything you don’t do that you can’t be like, “This is something I am doing for...” whatever for God means to you. Like, for goodness, to, to, to promote humanity, the, you know, moving forwards. Whatever you wanna, you talk, it’s, it’s, it’s something that’s an object to that. Like, purely selfish action, right? And they were like, video games is a very, very expedient sin. Like, of, of the various sinful things you can do. And, and to give an example of what I mean for this, let, let’s contrast two things, okay, here. Let’s contrast the relative sinfulness of video games versus watching sports, right? Like, both of these things are things you’re fundamentally doing for yourself, for your own self-gratification. But they have [00:04:00] different impacts or potential impacts on your life. Now, obviously you can engage with either too much in a way that just completely destroys your life. We all know the person who crashed out on Warhammer for five years and then came out of a hole one day and was like, “Ugh.” World Simone Collins: of Warcraft, not Warhammer. Malcolm Collins: Yeah, War- World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft. That was like a thing- Yeah ... that if you lived through that- In a- ... a bunch of us nerds- Simone Collins: In a college dorm, like in a certain period of time, there was at least one kid. Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Or, and, and, and here I’ll add another one here. Magic: The Gathering card collecting. Or, or, or no, no, well, let’s just say, yeah card collecting more general. So like non-playable card collecting. No, we’ll use Magic: The Gathering ‘cause it allows us to talk about a, a, a variety of things together. If you are really into, let’s say s- sports, and so you have to, you wanna watch the games the moment they come out. Now, that already makes it relatively more bad than a video game that you can play at any time, day or night, right? [00:05:00] Because now you’re having to, even if you’re spending the same amount of time on it, that time is not variable, and therefore is going to be more intrusive on your ability to do things that are actually like a net benefit for society or God or whatever, right? Like you’re, you’re, you’re going to have to maybe not go to the thing with your kids, or not go to the things that you can slot in at any time, day or night. The, the flexibility of a sin is really important to that sin. Then you have the cost, the relative cost. But this is where something like trading cards can get really big because the relative cost of entertainment hour per dollar spend is of, of just about anything you can be into I think the lowest on video games. Now this is assuming that you are into single player video games rather than either loot box type games, which can be incorporated in single player video games if you are [00:06:00] susceptible to loot boxes. Now note, not everyone is susceptible to loot boxes. Some people can play a game with loot boxes forever and never spend on them. I think that this is something that you have to ask yourself and, and, and from your own historic behavior. If you know you are susceptible to loot boxes don’t, don’t engage with them. Right? Like d- d- don’t engage with any game that has them. And I’m sorry if that’s like taking things out for you, but one of the most dangerous you know, of all the various things we’re warned not to do, gambling is I think one of the most dangerous. And the reason why gambling is w- I, I put gambling above something like heroin. Oh Simone Collins: yeah. It’s just so quickly and easily ruinous. Malcolm Collins: Yeah. It’s- While heroin can kill you in a day, it’s much less likely to, like even, even if it does kill you, like your assets are still inherited by other people, right? Like [00:07:00] i- i- it, when gambling ruins your life, it typically, one, it can ruin multi-generations of life savings just like that. But two, the people who have an issue with it often borrow against other people when they do it. And the happiness you get from it doesn’t feel very long-term satisfying. It’s like not a good... Like this is the other thing I’ll keep into account when we’re like rating sins is how good is the happiness you get out of it? The happiness that you get out of gambling is Incredibly low-grade, superficial most basal of hungers. There isn’t any sort of deep satisfaction like you may get out of beating a really hard video game or something like that, right? And so that’s where keep in mind is the pastime that like when you’re judging the potential sin of a pastime, what other sins come attached to this pastime? So if you look at something like being into [00:08:00] sports gambling is very commonly attached to being into sports. Simone Collins: Oh, so what, what, what is also the constellation of related things that you might get into? Malcolm Collins: Right. So like this is when it comes to something like hur- Yeah, Simone Collins: like if you really like going, like clubbing, the odds of you getting a drug habit, non-trivial, right? Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah, explode. Yeah. Which is Simone Collins: like- Or like developing alcoholism ... Malcolm Collins: if you go into a bar- Yeah ... this is why we would aga- tr- even if it’s the same amount of time- Mm ... even if it’s the same amount of cost to both go to a bar or go to a nightclub, the nightclub has a much higher probability of leading to an escalatory cycle that is going to do more deleterious impact to your life. Simone Collins: Yeah. Gosh Malcolm Collins: But also, but by the way, so an interesting, but I find this to be an interesting, like, broader conversation here. Yeah because it’s something that, that’s, that’s not often thought about, but the moment you begin to frame things like this, you can be like, “Oh, this is a good way for me to think through.” Also, like, whether you want to engage with something to begin with. Simone Collins:

    1h 25m
  6. Kirsche: How To Actually Win The Culture War

    Jun 19

    Kirsche: How To Actually Win The Culture War

    Kirsche joins Based Camp for an in-depth conversation on her journey from TERA PvP gamer to one of the most influential conservative VTubers. She discusses surviving a major cancellation attempt by Vice, her deep research exposing “Bridge” (the successor to DEI initiatives), why boycotts alone aren’t enough, and how the VTuber community helped turn the cultural tide. Malcolm and Simone Collins dive into tactics for defeating woke capture in gaming and corporations, the power of parallel institutions, AI tools for creators, building alternative economies, and why nerdy weirdos are winning the culture war. Topics include abortion radicalization stories, pronatalism, free speech, and practical ways conservatives can create better systems. Episode Transcript Malcolm Collins: it Hello, everyone. I am so excited to be here with you today. Today, we actually are doing a collab with Kirsche, which is so exciting, ‘cause I’ve wanted to do this one forever. It’s like everything’s coming in at once. And the context on Kirsche, if you are not familiar with who she is or her cultural relevance, because it’s m- hugely outsized, I think. My entire life within nerdy cultural niches, we had the wokes and the proto-wokes come in, whether it was video games, whether it was, you know, cons, whether it was trading cards, whether it was y- you know, anime. They’d come in, and they would screw it all up, and they would take it over, and they’d push us out. And every time it happened, it just felt like th- there was this endless tide, and it was gonna forever happen to everything I ever had an interest in. And then one fateful day, a sort of the [00:01:00] last wave, this happened in the VTuber community. And it happened specifically targeted at Kirsche. And when this happened, we did a number of videos on it. And Kirsche, unlike every other person before her, h- held her ground and held it in a way where they actually holistically retreated. And they retreated to such an extent that post this, a conservative VTuber scene has begun to grow. And I mean, it was there beforehand, but now it feels much livelier and much more like a core part of the wider conservative movement, and it’s been beginning to regain crowd. So, like, after your attempted cancellation, you then had the guy who tried to do this to the horror space in, in favor of shadows. I don’t know if you remember this whole controversy. I do. But he tried to claim the horror space, and he got absolutely eviscerated immediately. Yes. Absolutely thrown out i- i- immediately.[00:02:00] And so her being in this, it felt very much like Speaker: And then we’ll know how to beat them. One day it will all be over, and everyone will forget that this was the moment. This is when it turned. And it wasn’t the mighty Daily Wire Speaker: , it wasn’t Some fancy Heritage Foundation report Speaker: There’s a Speaker 4: Vtuber Speaker: named Speaker 4: Kirsche Speaker: Do Speaker 2: now! Yeah. Good job, Speaker 4: Reporter. Speaker 3: Thank you, sir. That would be Speaker 4: fox girl Speaker 3: , sir. Speaker 2: Carry on, . Speaker: Yes, sir. Malcolm Collins: or, Malcolm Collins: But, but after this point while... And, and this is something w- I, I wanna talk about. While culturally we seem to be winning more, like, our ability to do something like boycott Harley Davidson or [00:03:00] Tractor Supply... By the way, they’re super woke, Simone. I don’t know if you know this. Oh, yeah. To the extent that they’ve actually changed their policies has not been effective. But in the spaces we’ve been closer to, like the video game space, like the Ubisoft boycotts basically we learned we have to put these companies out of business. Mm-hmm. And so I wanna talk with you about that experience, like you getting into this space before the, the big cancellation attempt How you thought about and managed that and how the culture has changed post that Kirsche: All right. Okay. So I guess the starting point is, like, how, how did I feel during the cancellation? No, Malcolm Collins: no, how’d you get into VTub- Like, when you got into VTubing, did you intend to be a political Vtuber? Kirsche: No, not really. I mean, I first got into VTubing back in, like, 2018, and I w- I wasn’t even, like, a Vtuber proper then. I was just, like, a PNGTuber. I or- originally started, like, without even a microphone. Like, two weeks of streaming, [00:04:00] no microphone, no nothing ‘cause I had just quit my job at an insurance company after an elongated period of my anxiety being incredibly bad. And so at this point in time I was hopped up on, like, three different anxiety medications and I was just like, “Well, I don’t wanna just sit around and do nothing all day. I feel like I should at least try to do something that could help my anxiety get better.” Well, my name is pretty well-known in the Tera community, so if I started streaming I would already have, like, a small audience of people who would be there, and then I could use that as, like, I’m gonna interact with people more frequently. I’m gonna, you know, get a bit out of my safe bubble of, like, I only wanna do text communications. And so, like, eventually, you know, obviously I started using my microphone. I got a PNG. So, so basically- I d- got a, like, animated GIF Malcolm Collins: How did you know the Tera community? What, what, w- w- what was your, your experience there? Kirsche: I was one of the best PVPers on the server for many, many years. I was frequently rank one on the rank board whenever like, Fraywin Canyon would have its, like, [00:05:00] rollovers. I didn’t do threes as often, but I absolutely loved Fraywin Canyon and I loved doing like, guild PVP and whatnot. Like, it, it was really weird, like, coming into a streamer scene and seeing people like Lakari, who I had healed for, like, years before, already being huge streamers, right? I was just like, “What the heck?” Zenosas Vex, I, I played with him in, like, Final Fantasy XIV raiding as well. So, like, to see all these people who, like, had been in, like, raid groups or PVP groups before in different games with me, I was like, “Oh. I was streaming. Streaming’s got pretty robust, is it not?” So it Malcolm Collins: was like a- ‘Cause, like, Kirsche: previously I never paid attention to it ... social thing. Malcolm Collins: It, it was like an alternative to what people used to do. Like, I’m, I’m gonna get out there and, and build a social life. It was like- Kirsche: Yeah ... Malcolm Collins: that... Okay, so that’s fascinating. Okay, so now describe how you go from there to, like, what radicali- what, what got you on the I’m actually gonna start talking, because we didn’t start talking about politics either. We, we had no interest in that to start. A- in fact, we started with pretty progressive political beliefs, Ooh ... getting into the space and everything. So what w- what hap- [00:06:00] was it that you were a conservative during this time or you had conservative-like beliefs, or were these beliefs that you developed over time in the space, or you just felt more comfortable talking about over time? Kirsche: I would say I was probably already on the conservative path at this point. For the 2016 election I had been registered independent basically since I could register to vote, and for the 2016 election I changed my registration from independent to Republican so that I could vote for Trump in the primary And I, I guess I had been talking about, like, the nonsense with transgender targeting children probably since about 2011, 2012 or so. Oh, that was impossible back then. Like, just in my personal life. Yeah. Malcolm Collins: Yeah, that was like- And I- ... you’d get canceled, fired for talking about that- Yeah ... like, 2011. Kirsche: Yeah. And, and I, I’d post about it, like, on my Facebook, you know, which I didn’t have many p- friends on Facebook, ‘cause I’m not a huge social media person. So I would just, like, post about it occasionally there. And so when I started streaming when my friend who would come and voice chat with me, my [00:07:00] old head moderator, Tangerine, he he would get our groups together. So he would either put us in Duty Finder and we would wait for ages, or he would, like, put it up in an LFG and we’d get other human beings. While he was doing that, I would just read articles on stream. And so sometimes I would get through, like, a paragraph. Sometimes I’d get through, like, half of it. Sometimes I would have enough time to finish it. But it was like I would read that in between, like, waiting for dungeons because I just, I enjoyed reading the news in my off time. Mm-hmm. And I didn’t have anybody in, like, real life to talk about the news with because they were all, like, either apolitical or like, “Yeah, I just don’t care. I just... It doesn’t matter to me.” So it was nice to like, you know, talk to this few people in my audience then who were also interested, like, in what was going on politically in America. And it kind of shifted once a lot more of, I guess, leftist policy kind of stuff started being her- heralded in the VTuber community as apolitical. And so it’s like you could see all of the leftist rot coming in like it did to comics, like it did to video games- Yeah ... like it did to other things, and everyone being like, [00:08:00] “Well, that’s not political, but Kirsche is political.” And it’s like, you know what? Let’s talk politics even more now because I don’t want what happened to all of my other favorite things to happen to VTubing. Malcolm Collins: That’s fascinating. So, one story I’ve heard from some other VTubers we’ve talked to about this is there was like, there was a big shift after the release of the Harry Potter game. Mm-hmm. Because a bunch of people hadn’t realized how captured the space had become- Kirsche: Yeah ... Malcolm

    1h 22m
  7. The Trump Iran Deal is Genius & Changes The Game (+ Why We Need Sharia Law)

    Jun 18

    The Trump Iran Deal is Genius & Changes The Game (+ Why We Need Sharia Law)

    Malcolm Collins breaks down the Iran conflict and the Trump administration’s surprising diplomatic masterstroke that most pundits on both left and right completely misunderstood. Instead of “giving away money” or weakness, the deal creates powerful economic incentives and on-the-ground leverage from Iran’s angry neighbors (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, etc.) that makes cheating far more dangerous than the weak Obama deal. We also discuss why boots-on-the-ground predictions failed, Israel’s role, the collapse of Iran’s military and leadership, and the long-term strategic wins for America. Later in the episode, Malcolm makes a provocative case for allowing Sharia law applied specifically to Muslim communities in the West as a way to reduce crime, create a forcing function on integration, and let communities see the real preferences of high-fertility Islamic subgroups. A raw, high-signal conversation that challenges mainstream narratives on both foreign policy and domestic cultural issues. Show Notes Headlines on June 17th https://drudgereport.com/ OBAMA DEAL BETTER? TRUMP HUMILIATION MAGA HAWK MUTINY TEXT LEAKS NY Times Above the Fold on Iran: Live Updates: Trump Speaks at G7 Sumit After Renewing Threats on Iran https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/06/17/world/g7-summit-trump-france Stars of Israel’s TV Channel for Bibi Fans Turn on Trump https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/17/world/middleeast/israel-channel-14-trump-criticism.html You have to click through on NY Times to get any “what’s going on with negotiations” update, and the headline is: What to Know About the U.S.-Iran Framework Agreement: The full text of the deal that could pave the way to ending the war has not been published. Initial details suggest that it defers the most contentious issues. Generally, from only scanning headlines, one gets the impression that Iran may be reaching some sort of conclusion, but it’s one unflattering to the Trump administration. What has happened as of June 17th A preliminary framework agreement (memorandum of understanding or MoU) was reached and virtually signed around June 14–15, 2026, between the US and Iran to pause the ongoing conflict. Key elements (based on public statements and reports; the full text has not been widely released yet): * Immediate ceasefire extension: Halts military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon. This builds on earlier shaky ceasefires (e.g., from April). * Reopening the Strait of Hormuz: Iran agrees to clear restrictions/mines; the US lifts its naval blockade of Iranian ports. Shipping has begun resuming, contributing to falling oil prices. * 60-day negotiation window: For broader issues, primarily Iran’s nuclear program (e.g., enrichment freeze or limits, sanctions relief). A formal signing ceremony is planned for June 19 in Switzerland (or possibly another venue). * Other reported aspects (with some conflicting claims): Possible phased sanctions relief, asset unfreezing, and a reconstruction fund (potentially $300 billion, mostly from Gulf states/private sources rather than direct US payments). The key point per Malcolm: The powers surrounding Iran being directly invested in its recovery and improvement, and Iran’s stable future being contingent on not pissing them off. Primarily Gulf Arab states (Iran’s key neighbors across the Persian Gulf), through a proposed private ~$300 billion Reconstruction and Development Fund, will be involved in Iran’s reconstructed and therefore directly invested in Iran going forward Details from the Framework Agreement * The fund is not direct US government money or reparations but a private investment vehicle designed to attract capital for Iran’s postwar recovery (infrastructure, energy, logistics, manufacturing, etc.). * Gulf states (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, and others in the GCC) are positioned as primary backers or facilitators (”Gulf Coast Coalition”). They were attacked by Iran during the conflict and have a strong incentive for regional stability. Contributions could include loans, credit lines, or direct investments. * Why these neighbors? * Economic interdependence: Rebuilding Iran reduces future conflict risks, secures energy routes (e.g., Strait of Hormuz), and opens markets. * Mediation role: Qatar and Oman played key diplomatic roles; broader GCC involvement aligns with their security and economic goals. * Already committed: Over half the fund has pledges from companies in Gulf states, Asia, US, etc. Other international private investors (Asia, Europe, Africa, South America) are involved, but Gulf neighbors are emphasized for their direct stake and proximity. The fund unlocks only if Iran complies with nuclear limits, inspections, sanctions relief phases, and other terms. Full details await formal signing (expected ~June 19) and implementation. This structure gives neighbors leverage and investment upside in a stable Iran. What remains pending: * Israel getting on board: Netanyahu has indicated Israeli forces will not fully withdraw from Lebanon, creating friction. * How to work out sanctions and rule enforcement going forward: Loose ends on nuclear talks, sanctions, regional proxies, and enforcement. Trump has noted dissatisfaction could lead to resumed action. * Iran’s future armament: Iran’s nuclear capabilities, ballistic missiles, and broader regional influence are deferred. Is Iran Less of a Threat Today? Yes. Various ways Iran is nerfed: * Nuclear Program Setbacks: * US/Israeli strikes heavily damaged key enrichment facilities * (Natanz, Fordow, Isfahan) and related infrastructure. * While Iran retains some highly enriched uranium stockpiles and knowledge (underground elements were hard to fully destroy), its ability to rapidly advance toward a weapon has been delayed by months to a year or more. * The framework agreement includes commitments to non-proliferation and further talks on limits, reducing near-term breakout risk. * Ballistic Missiles and Conventional Forces: * Large portions of Iran’s missile launchers, production facilities, air defenses, naval assets, and drone capabilities were destroyed or degraded. * This limits its ability to project power, threaten US assets/bases, or sustain prolonged attacks. * Proxy responses (e.g., from Hezbollah, Houthis) were limited and ineffective in shifting the balance. * Economic and Logistical Pressure: * The conflict devastated Iran’s economy and defense industrial base. The recent agreement reopens the Strait of Hormuz (previously restricted by Iran, causing global oil disruptions) and lifts the US naval blockade, but under monitored terms with sanctions relief tied to compliance. This reduces Iran’s leverage via energy chokepoints while exposing it to ongoing oversight. * Leadership and Regime Strain: * Strikes targeted senior figures, command structures, and internal security (e.g., Basij bases), contributing to morale issues, desertions, and recruitment problems. * The regime survived but is in a more defensive, weakened posture. Episode Transcript Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today, and this is one of those days where I just need to be like- Everybody doesn’t seem to understand what happened at all, and I’m talking about on both the left and the right with this current deal with Iran, which is actually one of the more brilliant negotiated deals that I’ve seen maybe in the past 100 years in terms of us getting pretty much everything that we really want. And it’s shocking to me that you keep hearing, well, outright false claims that we’re giving them money, which we’re not. But money is involved, but in a way that really, really matters, and in a way that has a lot more teeth than the Obama deal did which is another thing that people are getting really wrong. So a bit of context, because I- I don’t even know if you fully understand, and I’m gonna get the, the gist of this out of the gate. The big problem we have with Iran and wanting to pull out of the war, right, is that Iran, due to something called a Mosaic Defense Force, [00:01:00] essentially split into independent warlords who don’t exactly follow what’s coming from the top. We know this because there was one instance where the president said that he apologized for all the strikes on other countries that are their allies presumably, and then the, a few days later he was like, “I, I, I didn’t say... I didn’t mean that. We’re not even doing that.” You know, which implied that one, they’re not listening to him, and two, the independent warlords have more power than he does in this arrangement, because he had to back down from this position. So this has led to a scenario where even when we do negotiate with people at the top, right? They can then th- they need to be able to, and in a, in a strong and forceful way, have a reason to tell all the people below, “Follow along and stay in line.” Right? And then we have the secondary problem with Iran, which is even if you make a deal with them like Obama did, they basically just ignore it, like they did with the Obama deal. Because the enforcement of that deal was that you know, the [00:02:00] UN or whatever would send its inspectors in, and Iran just wouldn’t show the inspectors the, the places where this is at, freaking obviously, right? Like we’re, how are they gonna figure that out, right? So that creates a huge negative incentive. Speaker: Mr. Eel, I was supposed to be allowed to inspect your palace today, and your guards won’t let me into certain areas. Hans, Hans, Hans, we’ve been through this a dozen times. I don’t have any weapons of mass destruction.. I’m sorry, but the UN must be firm with you. Let me see your whole palace or else. Speaker 2: Or else what? Speaker: Or else we will be very, very angry with you, and we will write you a letter telling you how angry we are. Malcolm Collins: Okay. So functionally, what Trump created was a scenario

    52 min
  8. Did Spencer Pratt Really Lose? (Making Sense of Election Fraud Claims)

    Jun 17

    Did Spencer Pratt Really Lose? (Making Sense of Election Fraud Claims)

    Dive into the controversy surrounding the Los Angeles mayoral election with Malcolm and Simone Collins on Based Camp. Spencer Pratt appeared to be on track for a runoff spot but was suddenly overtaken by a third Democratic candidate amid massive late mail-in ballot surges. Was this organic voting patterns, or something more suspicious? The Collinses review claims of election irregularities, including the puzzling vote count updates that showed zero votes for Pratt in one batch, Skid Row vote harvesting (with residents allegedly paid in cigarettes and cash), ballot collection practices, and the broader issues of mail-in voting in deep-blue LA. They explore both the mainstream counter-narratives and on-the-ground reports while discussing voter ID, election integrity, and why local races matter. Episode Transcript Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today, we are going to be discussing the latest LA election and the shenanigans that- that may or may not have occurred around that. Shenanigans. A couple of our fans were like, “This is the most blatant cheating I have ever seen in an American election,” and they wanted us to look into it. And I will say that this is an interesting thing for me to look into, because I really don’t know... Like, obviously, if there was election fraud that happened The New York Times, NPR, all the major leftist sources are not going to admit it, because they didn’t want Pratt to win, right? Simone Collins: Well, and what I did hear from my broad leftist news sources was Malcolm Collins: Yeah, Simone Collins: you gotta go, buddy. What I heard from my broad leftist news sources was something along the lines of the Republicans are butt-hurting because Pen- Spencer Pratt didn’t even come close to winning, but he never would because he’s a Republican running in LA, and that seems totally reasonable, so I didn’t think to look further. How can this be a [00:01:00] thing? I, I don’t understand why there could be any weirdness- Malcolm Collins: Yeah, and then the, the secondary thing is obviously, and I, I, you know, I hate to say this about our side, but our side, like if he if, if there was actual election fraud, they would all be saying that regardless. So we don’t actually gain any new information from what they say there. But we don’t gain a lot of new information from our side because obviously no matter what happened, if he legitimately lost at the last second our side would of course come out and say there’s election fraud, right? So that doesn’t exactly give me additional information so what we’re going to do is we are going to review from both sides pieces on this particular alleged fraud. And Simone Collins: then we’re going to- Wait, so the fraud ‘cause you had told me earlier that you thought that the issue was... I mean, it’s inevitable that a Democrat’s gonna win in Los Angeles. Malcolm Collins: No. It’s not so it’s kind of fraud. So there was a, a two-tiered runoff, okay? Okay. This is the gist of it, right? So there’s this runoff system, it’s called, like, a jungle primary where they decide who’s gonna run, and it means- Okay you can have multiple Dems running against each other- Sure ... or a Dem versus a [00:02:00] Republican. Yeah. The leading candidate was this terrible Dem candidate. The, the Black woman, whatever her name is. Anyway she, she was coming in first. Then Pratt was coming in, and then there was a third Democrat that had about half the votes that Pratt had- Okay in terms of sentiment polling, in terms of what they were able to measure, in terms of, like, at the ballots, bold, voter exit polling. And then at the very last moment, all of a sudden this flips. Mm. And all of a sudden- Mm ... Pratt’s getting no more votes- Uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh ... and all the votes are going to the third candidate. This is something that the, the narrative of I have laid it out is the narrative that even the left disagree with. Everyone agrees Pratt was demonstrably in the lead i- in terms of spot number two. And then now was he ever gonna win the full election? I, probably not. But the having him i- be in the final runoff was scaring people, right? So Pratt was demonstrably in [00:03:00] the lead, then all of a sudden this socialist candidate flips it up, right? And- Simone Collins: Doesn’t it have to do more with the fact that mail-in voting was very heavy in the Los Angeles election, that ballots could be posted quite late, and that it could be that this particular third candidate had a really heavy and also late mail-in voting campaign push? Malcolm Collins: Well, that is the only plausible thing, except from at least my reading of this, they didn’t have a heavy and late mail-in voting push. So the explanation that leftists have been using Okay. The explanation that leftists have been using for this is that, okay, yes, she didn’t have a coordinated mail in voting campaign that could explain this, but mail in voters are overwhelmingly Democratic in nature, right? And so if the mail in voters are overwhelmingly Democratic in nature- I don’t even remember what I was saying. Simone Collins: So I had asked you it, [00:04:00] my, what I had heard was, oh, the Republicans are butt hurting about Spencer Pratt being in a minority lead for a little bit and then losing a bunch of ground all of a sudden seemingly. But what they’re missing is that Republicans are heavy with in-person voting, Democrats are heavy with mail-in voting, and in Los Angeles and in California in general I think even postmarked- Ooh maybe even possibly up to the day of the election you can still submit mail-in ballots, and that what is happening is that possibly this third candidate or Democrats in general were just doing their last minute thing and sending in their mail-in ballots- Yes ... Malcolm Collins: and that’s what was Simone Collins: happening. Malcolm Collins: So we will explore this theory, but there’s- Okay a problem with it. Simone Collins: Okay. Malcolm Collins: The problem goes that in this last minute push that happened all of a sudden for this Democratic candidate, the votes should have, right, like if it had been like a normal election, should have continued to go disproportionately to the Democrat who looked like they were going to win the first place, right? The voting [00:05:00] shouldn’t have shifted between Democratic candidates late in the process like this. That doesn’t make mathematical or narrative sense. So we’re going to get it- Because, yeah, it could just be that a bunch of Dem votes came in at the last minute, right? But then those votes would presumably proportionally still be for the person who won top ticket first, and then for the person who ended up beating out Pratt second, not almost all exclusively for the person who edged out Pratt. So we’re gonna look into both of these explanations because there are, you know, plausibles and then it’s like, okay, yeah, but what’s really happening here? Simone Collins: Yeah. Like, my, my standing plausible theory is that whatever that third candidate that got a surge after, you know, the, the, then overtook Spencer Pratt was just one who heavily focused on last minute mail-in ballot- Malcolm Collins: Yeah voting. So we’re gonna see if that’s true, and we’re also going to go into what the leftist counter-narrative is. So I’m gonna start with the leftist counter-narrative, okay? The leftist counter-narrative goes like this. And [00:06:00] I’ll be reading from a piece, How a Misreading of Data Fueled False Claims About LA Mayoral Vote Count. Okay? Late on election night, an update of vote counts in Los Angeles mayor’s election appeared on electoral results pages of various media outlets, including the Los Angeles Times. It showed leading Democrats Mayor Karen Bass and Council Member Neda Rahman receiving tens of thousands of new votes, and leading Republican former reality TV star Pen- Spencer Pratt from receiving no new votes. So basically, on the screen, there was this big, like, huge number of votes to these two Democrats, and then literally zero votes for Spencer Pratt. Some voter, observers of the vote tally immediately took the screenshots with some shouting fraud. I mean, that looks a lot like fraud. Others ran statistical analysis that showed it would be impossible for a candidate such as Pratt running second in the race to receive zero votes in such a large batch of bal- ballots. In fact, the update that showed zero Pratt votes was [00:07:00] followed one minute later by another update that showed tens of thousands of votes for Pratt and none for Bass or Rahman. There was no batch of votes that included zero votes for any candidate, and LA County’s own data shows that plainly. But the claim’s fit was the broader false narrative being pushed relentlessly by Trump and other Republicans in recent days that California Democrats were cheating. Voter data pushed out by the Associated Press came as two separate updates one minute apart, with Bass and Rahman’s votes in the first and Pratt’s in the second. The AP vote count receives updates as provided by election officials and adds them to our vote count. What happened in this case is that there was some log in an automated update, such as that one candidate’s votes were added in an update, and the other candidates were followed about a minute later, the Associated Press told The Times. Specifically, an elec- electronic update from the Los Angeles County website pulled in votes from only one cro- group of candidates, including Karen Bass and N- Rahman. [00:08:00] Exactly one minute later, the electra- the electronic update picked up votes from another group of candidates, including Spencer Pratt. Taken together, the updates included the 21,000 votes for Pratt, the 12,000, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Okay. Does that sound plausible to you? Simon

    42 min
4.4
out of 5
155 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