TIETOJA TÄSTÄ JAKSOSTA
Leftist academics just dropped a wild new paper titled “Toward Individualistic Reproduction: Solving the Fertility Crisis Could Require a Further Marginalization of Men.” In this episode of Based Camp, Simone & Malcolm Collins break it down — from the evolutionary arguments about why men are now “useless” to women in high-equality societies, to the dystopian policy prescriptions: massive welfare transfers to enable single motherhood, robot nannies, artificial wombs, and essentially declaring bankruptcy on pair-bonding and two-parent families.
The Collinses critique the Brave New World vibes, discuss why pair-bonding repair is supposedly impossible, explore real pronatalist alternatives, and go on wide-ranging tangents about immigration & welfare, political violence thresholds, historical gender roles, family business dynamics, and the coming demographic speciation.
A must-watch for anyone concerned about the birth rate collapse, gender dynamics, and the radical policy ideas emerging from academia.
Show Notes
Referring to a research article published in Politics and the Life Sciences from Cambridge University Press, Christian Heiens on X posted: “Checking in on the status of Wokeism, and it turns out Leftist academics are unironically saying that society needs to intentionally “marginalize men” even more to supposedly solve the birth rate. History shows us that what’s normalized in academia becomes publicly mainstream within a generation, and there is no sign the ship is turning or even slowing down.”
Christian continues:
* If academics are going to unironically argue that society has to intentionally beat down men even more in the name of apparently resolving the birth rate crisis then all bets are off and it’s time to start pointing out the obvious as a rebuttal:
* “The way you solve the birth rate crisis is by banning women from most professions they weren’t engaged in before 1965.”
* I don’t see how this is any more radical than what’s already becoming normalized within academia. But you’re unlikely to ever see a paper with this kind of abstract published because it transgresses on one of Progressivism’s most holy pillars.
* “Artificial womb technology, robot nannies and partners help women and men solo parent, AI-driven date matching”
* This entire paper reads like a giant advertisement for Brave New World.
Let’s take a look at this article.
The Article
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 April 2026
The Authors
* Evolutionary Perspectives on Enhancing Quality of Life
* Other articles
* 2 - Female Sexual Attraction Tactics
* Other articles
* 4 - Female Intrasexual Competition
* 16 - Shifts in Partner Attractiveness
* 45 - The Internet Is for Porn
* 31 - Evolutionary Psychology
The Abstract
The cross-national correlation between gender equality and lower fertility is exceptionally strong (r ≈ 0.81). After the 1960s, a unique mating regime spread across parts of the world—with female emancipation, individual mate choice, and effective birth control—followed by a continuing rise in singlehood and declining fertility. Almost all women still want to reproduce, but many struggle to find a good-enough partner. This article argues from an evolutionary perspective that many men’s utility to “free women” has been so diminished that solving the fertility crisis by increasing pair-bonding rates seems unfeasible. A viable means for aiding the survival of low-fertility nations could be to provide women with the economic and social resources necessary for them to conclude that having children alone makes for a better life than remaining childless. Such policies would likely exacerbate male marginalization, but new technologies are on the horizon that could offer men reproductive equality.
The Presented Context
In their framing, ancestral ape‑like promiscuity gave way to a long era of enforced pair‑bonding (via kin and social institutions), but today’s combination of female autonomy and contraception has partially “re‑opened” a promiscuous, highly selective mating pattern, now mediated by modern tools like dating apps.
This, they argue, structurally sidelines many men, reduces pair‑bonding and thus births, and is the core evolutionary–psychological mechanism behind the fertility crisis in rich, gender‑equal countries
On what grounds do they argue that the problem cannot be fixed by amending dating/marriage norms in developed countries? Why do they think pair bonding can’t be repaired?
* They argue that you can’t fix the fertility crisis just by tweaking dating or marriage norms because (a) women’s preferences and incentives have structurally shifted in rich, gender‑equal societies, (b) a large share of men now offer too little “utility” to be chosen as partners, and (c) the emotional and technological environment (contraception, dating apps) pushes mating toward short‑term, non‑reproductive patterns that norms alone can’t reverse.
Recommended Policies
* Make it easy for women to have children without partners
Core policy recommendation
* The authors argue that trying to fix low fertility mainly by boosting pair‑bonding and marriage rates is unlikely to work, because in rich, gender‑equal societies many men no longer provide enough utility to be acceptable long‑term partners for “free women.”
* Instead, they propose that states should provide women with such extensive economic and social support that a woman can rationally judge “having children alone” as a better life than remaining childless, thus raising birth rates through solo motherhood rather than couple‑based reproduction.
* For a start, they recommend that governments run “limited reproductive policy experiments” (pilot programs) to empirically discover what package and level of support actually induces women to have the number of children they report wanting when single.
How that’s supposed to happen:
* Large resource transfers
* They’re deliberately vague
* Presumably, this would be long-term income support or guaranteed living standards for single mothers
* Broader welfare support targeted at enabling individualistic reproduction
* Welfare queens?????
* Strong public childcare
* Strong work-family policies
* General welfare systems that remove dependence on male partners
* The general idea is to make women totally independent of men
* Presumably AI is going to make this possible (according to the authors—who refer to a “post-automation” future
* “Today, such large resource transfers are perhaps politically and fiscally unfeasible, but nations should consider limited reproductive policy experiments to find out what social and economic resources are required to motivate sufficient individualistic reproduction. In our post-automation future, perhaps as early as by 2040 (Kurzweil, Reference Kurzweil2024; Nayebi, Reference Nayebi2025; Rainie & Anderson, Reference Rainie and Anderson2024), insights from these pilot projects could inform national policies with the potential to substantially increase fertility.”
Acknowledged Side Effects
* The authors acknowledge that such policies would “likely exacerbate male marginalization,” since further reducing women’s economic dependence on men lowers the mate value of some groups of men
* BUT!!! they argue the existential risks from demographic collapse justify these measures, and they speculate that technologies like artificial wombs could later give men more symmetrical reproductive options, restoring some form of “reproductive equality” between the sexes.
The Brave New World of it All
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, reproduction is almost the mirror image of what the “individualistic reproduction” paper is proposing: instead of empowering individual women to reproduce on their own terms, the state completely takes over reproduction, engineers people in hatcheries, and severs sex from procreation to maximize social stability and control.
In the World State, no one gives birth; all children are produced in centralized hatcheries using processes like Bokanovskification, which mass‑produces near‑identical embryos to match the state’s labor needs.
Natural pregnancy and “motherhood” are taboo and even obscene terms, while contraception and sterilization are universal; sex is encouraged purely for pleasure and social cohesion, not for having children.
Huxley imagines reproduction fully collectivized and tightly controlled by the state, with individuals having essentially no reproductive autonomy.
How this article diverges: the authors of this article, by contrast, imagines the state giving resources to individual women so they can choose to have children alone; reproduction remains individualized and voluntary, even though the motive is still to solve a demographic‑political problem rather than to serve purely personal wishes.
One of the conditioned sayings in the Brave New World society: “everyone belongs to everyone else,”
Episode Transcript
Simone Collins: [00:00:00] so like a couple days ago article titled Toward Individualistic Reproduction: Solving the Fertility Crisis Could Require a Further Marginalization of Men.
Great title. Almost all women still want to reproduce, but many struggle to find good enough partner.
This article argues from an evolutionary perspective that many men’s utility to free women has been so diminished that solving the fertility crisis by increasing pair bonding rates seems unfeasible. In other words, men are useless now. A viable
Malcolm Collins: means. Oh, yes. They made men useless to women.
Simone Collins: Yes. Yeah.
This is what leftists are saying. that today’s combination of female autonomy and contraception has partially reopened a promiscuous, highly selective mating pattern, now mediated by modern tools like dating apps.
But they’re basically like, oh, apes used to have just like a lot of females mating with one man, and now we’re kind of going back to that. Like, and there’s no, there’s no
Malcolm Collins: action fixing
Simone Collins: it.
Malcolm Collins: They actually want to go back to Mike and Simone.
[00:01:00]
Simone Collins: Hello, Malcolm. I’m excited to be speaking with you today because as prominent prenatalist advocates, we’re often asked, where are the leftist pronatalists?
Where are the, you know, trusted academic pronatalists? Where, what’s, what’s going on with them? Surely they exist. What are their policies?
Malcolm Collins: What are their policies? Are they-
Simone Collins: Well, one, one set just published their policies and they’re kind of unhinged and dystopian, so I’m delighted and I want to share them with you.
Malcolm Collins: Well, generally, I like unhinged and dystopian, you know, a lot of
Simone Collins: people- Me too. ...
Malcolm Collins: say I’m unhinged dystopian, so- Yeah.
Simone Collins: No, this is what we, it’s what we’d like to see. Uh so, yeah, I, I think both of us are gonna come off maybe a little bit more in favor of this and you, you might expect, but there are th- some things about it that I think are just horrible.
So, yeah, we’ll, we’ll critique it, but let me first just give you, you know, the full, the full breakdown. Mm-hmm. But referring to a research article published in politics and life sciences from Cambridge University Press, Christian Heinz on [00:02:00] X posted checking in on the status of wokism, and it turns out leftist academics are unironically saying that society needs to intentionally quote unquote marginalized men even more to supposedly solve the birth rate.
History shows us that’s what’s normalized in academia becomes publicly mainstream within a generation, and there’s no sign the ship is turning over or even slowing down-
Malcolm Collins: Well, I, I think there is a sign that that ship is in the process of sinking right
Simone Collins: now. Yeah, we would beg to differ with Christian on that.
Oh. But he, he continues, “If academics are going to unironically argue that society has to intentionally beat down men even more in the name of apparently resolving the birth rate crisis, then all bets are off and it’s time to start pointing out the obvious as a rebuttal. The way you solve the birth rate crisis is by banning women from most professions they weren’t engaged in before 1965.
I don’t see how this is any more radical than what’s already being normalized within academia, but you’re unlikely to ever see [00:03:00] a paper with this kind, with this kind of abstract published because it transgresses one of progressivism’s most holy pillars.” Now, I mean, I disagree with that because women have been engaged in all sorts of professions before 1965 that
I, I, I guess like maybe that’s, maybe that’s the point.That’s actually, that could be a really interesting thing to, to explore, but I don’t think that’s the solution. Anyway, they continue
Malcolm Collins: artificial- I think a lot of guys are unaware of how employed many women were before that period. The only period where women were not widely employed was like the 1920s to the 1950s.
And before that, they held most jobs that they hold today and they didn’t hold ... So they didn’t hold like the heavy manual labor stuff or like the war stuff-
Simone Collins: Yeah, they did. They were out working in the fields. I mean, maybe they weren’t working in mind.
Malcolm Collins: No, no, no, no. Not the same type of manual labor that you see being overwhelmingly male today.
Simone Collins: Yes, yes.
Malcolm Collins: And, and so you’re not really chan- what, what, what ... I mean, I think what they really mean is to [00:04:00] artificially attempt to create ... Like this, this is one of these things that I just need to ex- ... Sorry, this gets me so much because a right wing point, and I’m right wing, and it is such an uninformed right wing point that I think it makes us all look stupid.
So, women, like the idea of men leaving the household to go to a job that’s like a, a, a wage job didn’t really get popular until the 1900s. Really in like the 1910s is when it began to reach a mass audience.
Simone Collins: It’s a post-industrial revolution thing.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And before the ... And, and it stopped being male dominated in the 1970s.
That’s when women really began to enter the job market in mass. So you, you, you only had this really operational for about half a century, and it was only really ever successful in like the upper middle class in the United States. Which, I mean, obviously influenced Hollywood of that era and so created the press in like the, the perception modern audiences in, in this case you are the [00:05:00] modern audience that this was ever a widespread role of women.
Women actually worked i- in the household industry if you go to pre-wage labor economies and at levels that were, ... I, like I, I’d say ubiquitous, right? You know? Well,
Simone Collins: Christian’s rebuttal might be exactly my point. I’m just saying pre 1965 jobs, so ...
Malcolm Collins: Well, those jobs were often closer to what today we would call management that I think these people realize.
So an example would be if the family was a butcher, like we, we’ve talked about before the man would butcher the meat and the woman would run the finances and the procuring of food and the woman was the manager. It’s
Simone Collins: true. Yeah, she’d manage the books, she’d manage the sales, she’d manage
Malcolm Collins: the- Or if she was an upper class woman, she would quote unquote-
Simone Collins: Manage the household.
Malcolm Collins: Manage the household. That meant the finding-
Simone Collins: Hiring, hiring, recruiting, finances.
Malcolm Collins: [00:06:00] Recruiting-
Simone Collins: Yeah. ...
Malcolm Collins: all the staff. The man may do business outside of the household, but it was often a lot less of the critical kind of business. There’s
Simone Collins: often like, how do we invest our money,
Malcolm Collins: More like entrepreneurship.
Yes. You, you would think of it today, which, which I think is not an inappropriate way for a family to structure themselves. It’s very much I, I could say- Maybe that
Simone Collins: was Christian’s point. We, we don’t know.
Malcolm Collins: The, the woman does the safe job and the man does the riskier, high return job. Yeah. Which is, I mean, that’s the way Hunter gatherers work.
The woman gathered the f- like the berries that was, you know, low risk, low return, but kept everyone fed, and the men would go high risk, high return, like meat gathering where you could get gored, you know? But
Simone Collins: is it- I thought you meant get gored, like pick up gourds. You meant get gored like stabbed by a rhinoceros horn.
Malcolm Collins: Yes, yes. No, no, no, no. But I’m, I’m, I’m pointing this out because it’s important that we not fall, fall for like this weird trad cargo cult and we actually try to, you know, structure something that could work.
Simone Collins: Because that’s likely what Christian was thinking, like, [00:07:00] oh, women should just be secretaries and teachers.
Whereas we’re like, yeah, sure, women could be managers and like finance-
Malcolm Collins: No, women actually, no, I disagree with you. In a modern context, women make awful managers. Women make other women-
Simone Collins: Oh, within a household context, they’re, they’re really good managers.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. They, when, when a woman is serving with her husband in a managerial context, but she is technically supportant to them in a social context the dynamics work very well.
Mm-hmm. That’s the way you and I basically operate, right?
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.
Malcolm Collins: I mean, you, I wake up, I look at my calendar and I do what Simone has put on my calendar. You know, she manages my daily schedule. She manages our finances. And, and, and just, you know, like women managing finances is actually very common cross-culturally.
There’s a famous case in Japan where they, like, significantly impacted the economy.
Simone Collins: Oh, God. Yeah. This, I read about a long time ago.
There was this period in Japanese history where, yeah, like stay-at-home mothers got really into investing and really good at it. It was like [00:08:00] early Wall Street bets, Japanese Housewife Edition. I will have to look up more on that if you want me to. I don’t remember off the top of my head exactly how it worked, but they got really, really good at it.
If you want to learn more about this, this is called the Miss Want to No Bay Phenomenon, , and at their height, they moved billions of dollars a day.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: But they were like housewives. So, but they, they also became very respected for what they did because they got really good at it.
Malcolm Collins: No, but, but my point being is that it, it’s actually you know, the, the, the types of roles that women did historically now that you have like larger multi-person companies, they’re not quite as good at or as efficient at as they were historically the, the bureaucracy has expanded.
Simone Collins: Well, I mean, what you’re describing to me also sounds like a, a, a different manifestation of the argument people constantly make around raising kids, which is that a genetically related family member is going to just do a much better job raising kids than someone who’s not like some paid daycare manager.
Yeah. Meaning it’s, it’s kind of sick that we’re, we’re trying [00:09:00] to force or obligate people to instead just, you know, have some paid person raise their kids when they could just, they could do it. And, and this is maybe a little bit similar. Like you’re gonna get worse results when you’re working for someone who’s not your kin.
You don’t care as much. You’re just not invested in it. And the economy would be a lot better off if people worked more directly on their own families things.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah.
Simone Collins: I think family businesses are a thing for a reason. But anyway, massive, massive tangent. Christian continues quoting from the article, “Artificial womb technology, robot nannies and partners help women and men solo parent, AI driven date matching.”
This reads, this entire paper reads like a giant advertisement for Brave New World. So let’s look at the paper that he was referencing in this article because he’s just referencing this recently posted, April 24th so like a couple days ago article titled Toward Individualistic Reproduction: Solving the Fertility Crisis Could Require a Further Marginalization of Men.
Great [00:10:00] title. It was written by three people, Mads Larson, Leaf Edward Aut- Autinson Kiner and Marianne Fisher. And I think it’s kind of telling when you look at their previous research the, the TLDR, i- if I look at the other papers they’ve published is these people have looked at datings and evolutionary psychology, broadly speaking, and they’re like, “Yeah, man there’s no solving the dating crisis that’s leading to demographic collapse, so let’s just build the dystopia to solve that problem.”
It’s great. Some, some titles. So Mads Larson most recently published Evolutionary Perspectives on Enhancing Quality of Life. Leaf Edward Audenson Kiner posted or sorry, his recent articles are Breakup Likelihood Following Hypothetical Sexual or Emotional Infidelity: Perceived Threat to Blame and Forgiveness, and also Female Sexual Attraction Tactics.
So he’s looking very academically and granularly [00:11:00] at sexual dynamics in the modern world. Marianne Fisher, her recent publications are Mate Poaching by men and female intersexual competition and shifts in partner attractiveness, and the internet is for porn and evolutionary psychology. So these people aren’t like writing out of nowhere, okay?
Like-
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah. They’re kind of- They’re not getting completely unaware of current dating market problems.
Simone Collins: Yeah, like they, they understand, I think, fairly intimately and from a perfect- But they’re
Malcolm Collins: like the evil team. Like they, they’re, they’re like, they’re like-
Simone Collins: Are they evil or are they being practical and they’re leftist?
And we’re seeing what a pragmatic based leftist would pr- prescribe based on that finding, which is why this is so fun and interesting.
Malcolm Collins: I’m worried I don’t like these words together.
Simone Collins: I will read to you the abstract. “The cross-national correlation between gender equality and lower fertility is exceptionally strong are equals approximately 0.81.
After the 1960s, a unique meeting [00:12:00] regime spread across parts of the world with female emancipation, individual mate choice and effective birth control, followed by a continuing rise in singlehood and declining fertility. Almost all women still want to reproduce, but many struggle to find good enough partner.
This article argues from an evolutionary perspective that many men’s utility to free women has been so diminished that solving the fertility crisis by increasing pair bonding rates seems unfeasible. In other words, men are useless now. A viable
Malcolm Collins: means. Oh, yes. They made men useless to women.
Simone Collins: Yes. Yeah.
This is what leftists are saying. Anyway, a viable means for aiding the survival of low fertility nations could be to provide women with the economic and social resources necessary for them to conclude that having children alone makes for a better life than remaining childless.
Malcolm Collins: Oh my God, this is so dystopian.
They want women ... Oh my God. It’s someone taking too much delight in this.
Simone Collins: This is delight. Come on, this is so funny.
Malcolm Collins: And what they’re going to do is they’re going to tax the [00:13:00] men to pay for this, these men that they supposedly don’t need because if- Kind of. If the money’s not coming from the women, then who’s it coming from, right?
Well- They’re literally turning men into slaves of the state to support these women who are the, the partners married to the state.
Simone Collins: A little bit, a little bit. Such policies would likely exacerbate male marginalization, but new technologies are on the horizon. They could offer men reproductive equality.
So they also, in that last sentence, do acknowledge, we are throwing men under the bus, but maybe they’ll be okay when AI takes over. So the, the, the, the context which they present for all of this makes sense given their credentials and history as academics focused on evolutionary psychology and, and, and dating dynamics and, and their framing ancestral ape-like promiscuity gave way to a long era of enforced peer bonding via kin and social institutions, but they point out, which is real, that today’s combination of female autonomy and contraception has [00:14:00] partially reopened a promiscuous, highly selective mating pattern, now mediated by modern tools like dating apps.
But they’re basically like, oh, apes used to have just like a lot of females mating with one man, and now we’re kind of going back to that. Like, and there’s no, there’s no
Malcolm Collins: action fixing
Simone Collins: it.
Malcolm Collins: They actually want to go back to Mike and Simone.
Simone Collins: Yeah. So they, they argue that this structurally sidelines many men and reduces pair bonding and thus births and that that’s the core evolutionary psychological mechanism behind the fertility crisis in rich gender equal countries.
And so I, you know, if you’re wondering on what grounds they argue the problem can’t be fixed by amending or dating and marriage norms in developed countries, which is kind of what we’re trying to encourage at least among some subcultures that we hope will survive and why they think pair bonding can’t be repaired, they argue that you can’t fix the fertility crisis just by tweaking dating or marriage norms because A, women’s preferences and incentives have structurally shifted [00:15:00] in rich gender equal co- countries and societies, and B, a large share of men now offer too little utility to be chosen as partners.
And at C emotional and technological environment, the, the contraception basically in dating apps pushes men toward dating short term and, and having non-reproductive matches and norms can’t reverse it per their argument. And keep in mind, these are academic researchers who have looked at partner selection, who have looked at behavior around dating.
They’re not necessarily wrong.
Malcolm Collins: No, everything they’re saying is true if you completely sociopathically hate men.
Simone Collins: Well, and they do. So- They do.
Malcolm Collins: It’s fine.
Simone Collins: You know, no, no one, no one contractually has to love men, so I guess they’ve chosen not to. So what do they recommend? They want to make it easy for women to have children without partners.
And their core policy recommendation is, is to, to have states provide women with such extensive economic and social support that a woman can rationally judge [00:16:00] having children alone as better than remaining childless. So they, they basically are like, “Let’s make welfare queens.”
And then that will, that will raise the birth rate. And for a start, they want governments to run quote limited reproductive policy experiments, end quote. So basically pilot programs to empirically discover what package and level of support actually induces women to have the number of children they report wanting when single.
So I guess the idea is to do some sort of Sam Altman style, like the, the OpenAI style UBI experiment, but just with like support for women having kids at, and at the beginning they would theoretically ask women, “Hey, how many kids do you want? “ And then offer them varying levels of support in order to have those kids and then just sort of see what’s enough to actually get that completed fertility that, that matches their desire.
And they, they-
Malcolm Collins: Because there’s no, there’s no problem with kids who grow up in one [00:17:00] parent household.
Simone Collins: No, what? No, I, what are you talking about? I’ve not heard of such a thing. But you see, when, when the state is daddy, who cares? Everything’s fine.
Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, I think that this sort of like just not caring about reality is really how we got in the, the situation we are with the immigration situation and stuff like that.
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Which is people just being like you see that like I saw some recent stats that horrified me it was something like well over 50% of Hispanic immigrants are on welfare, right? Like-
Simone Collins: No. ... you cannot be- Really? That Hispanic immigrants?
Speaker 12: So these stats , I’m sharing with you here, I was extremely skeptical of them at first, so I decided to go double check that they’re real. , And, , this is real. It’s February 2026 from the Center of Immigration Studies, , titled Welfare Use by Immigrants and the US Born in 2024. The report analyzes US Census Bureau’s 2024 Survey of Income and Program Participation SIPP, which measures participants in major means tested welfare programs.
, So this is, this is from US [00:18:00] government databases, all right? So what we see is the first generation of Hispanic immigrants, 70% of them are on welfare. In the second generation, it’s 54% of them are on welfare. And in the third generation, it’s 53% of them are still on welfare. So more than half of third generation Hispanic immigrants are still on welfare.
If you contrast this with, , white immigrants, in the first generation, at 33%, in the second generation at 31%, and the third generation at 32%. , So fairly steady there. If you look at Asian immigrants, it’s 38%, 29%, 37%. , The interesting one is really Blacks because Blacks go up the longer they’re in the United States.
It’s 52%, 48%, 56% for the third generation.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. You cannot take a majority population into your country that is on welfare, right?
Like-
Simone Collins: No.
Malcolm Collins: That, that- Well,
Simone Collins: you said it once and you’ll say it again. You cannot both have poorest borders and general social programs. You gotta choose one.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And, and people just [00:19:00] ignore this because they act like these populations are the same as the Native population and they’re not necessarily the same as the Native population.
Yeah. And you ... This gets me to like a secondary point that I’m getting really pissed about on the right and- Oh. ... I wanna clock someone for this. Uh-oh. So after this recent guy who tried to assassinate Trump-
Simone Collins: Oh. ...
Malcolm Collins: everyone on the right is like, “Well, I would never, ever push for any form of political violence, but the left does.”
And I’m like, “Look, it’s one thing to say that in our current political climate, it doesn’t make sense to push for political violence.” Mm-hmm. But suppose some, for example, immigrant population with value systems entirely different from yours, took over your government and enforced those value systems on your women and children, right?
Like, you don’t even resist then. Like there is no level of the government is with you [00:20:00] where you don’t, and you’re like, “Well, I can resist with my vote.” And it’s like, yeah, but what if
Speaker 13: They plan to rig the system to make it impossible for you to win going forwards. I mean, consider that even right now, we’re seeing the Voting Rights Act being knocked down, an act that for most of our lives had given around 30 congressional seats to people solely based on racial interests, right? That is completely unamerican and this sort of stuff can be enacted again.
I
Malcolm Collins: Like this idea that there is no amount, you know, okay, so now the government decides that
I mean, and some countries are basically already at this point . You don’t fight then, right?
Speaker 6: The trouble with Scotland is that it’s full of Scotts. Grant them prima nocte. First night, when any common girl inhabiting their lands is married, our
Malcolm Collins: immigrants
Speaker 6: shall have sexual rights to her on the night of her wedding. If we can’t get them out, we’ll breed them [00:21:00] out. That should fetch just the kind of lords we want to Scotland.
Taxes or no taxes, eh?
Malcolm Collins: Like, I, I mean, if you look at the grape situation that’s going on in the UK right now, they are not far from that, right? There was a recent case where l- underage girl was being dragged away from a park and there was video of it and she was- Oh my God.
screaming that they were gonna grape her and the government has banned the distribution of this because they said it would cause social unrest.
Speaker 5: the asylum seekers, John Jahanzeb, and Israel Niezel, steered the 15-year-old victim away from her friend group in Lemington Spa in Warwickshire, and brutally her in a park.
According to the BBC, more disturbing evidence was also played in court, including cell phone footage recovered by police and recorded by the victim, which showed her screaming for help and Jehanzeb covering her mouth to muffle the shrieks. The son reported that more clips captured by the teen showed her crying and begging not to be brought into the park. LBC reported that the video clips were so [00:22:00] disturbing that it would cause disorder if the general public were exposed to it.
Malcolm Collins: Ah.
But they, they also recently just, if it makes you feel any better did arrest a V-tuber for having a model that she drew that could be interpreted as underage.
No, it was a- What? ... closed model and a model that she drew herself and it didn’t look particularly not safe for work to me, but,
Simone Collins: Gosh. ...
Malcolm Collins: you know, this is the difference in, And
Simone Collins: it was an adult V-tuber. It’s not like it was a child.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, of course. What, what else would it be? No. I mean, there, there’s a point where it’s like, h- how much do you need to be getting cut by your government before this makes sense, right?
And we live in a world where that could happen to us, like within our lifetimes removing a tool for resolving things off the table simply because it makes you look like a good guy right now in this particular political fight where the left is ...
Speaker 14: And I want to be extremely clear here. I am [00:23:00] not saying we are anywhere close to that point yet as a society. I am just saying pretending like that point doesn’t exist is in long-term detrimental to any value set you claim to espouse. Like when I look at my ancestors and, , the South became a slave state and seceded from the North and they created the breakoff state of the free state of Jones, would, you not have done that?
Would you not have seen, oh, now I live in a society dedicated to slavery. It’s worth me resisting that , or when the Nazis took power, would you not have resisted that? Would you have just gone along with that because now that’s the law? Or when the communists took power in the Soviet Union and started sending people to gulags, you would have just said, “Okay, well, I guess this is the law now.”
Like, this is what gets me. There could always come a point where resisting makes sense. What is evil is not resisting, but the leftist framing of completely normal, mainstream political opinions that any [00:24:00] reasonable person might have. As extremist political opinions. It is not deciding that if things ever actually became extreme, like we were under a communist or Nazi or Confederate state, that it wouldn’t make sense to resist in any means possible.
So to be clear here, I am not calling for political violence. I am just saying that if Nazis ever actually took control of one of our countries, that’s something I would work to resist.
And it’s particularly rich that Nux keeps going over this whole thou shall not kill thing that he’s so into. When you consider that his ancestors, the Jews did not successfully resist the Nazi state and my ancestors had to go in and bear the moral costs of killing the people that did that to his ancestors.
I would like to think that, , they have learned from that. And their actions recently seem to suggest they have. But
The evil thing is not resisting actual Nazis, it’s framing normal political ideology [00:25:00] as Nazism to justify reactions, , against normal political figures and normal civilians.
I
Malcolm Collins: and, and the real problem here, and we might do ... I mean, we’ve done videos on this in the past, which is why I’m not retreading it, is that the left is framing normal right wing positions as Nazi, and then they’re giving people the psychological license to kill anyone they have deemed a Nazi, but they have defined that 50% of Americans are Nazis, and this is happening and people are being radicalized not by far leftists, but by mainstream news outlets by CSN, CNN and MSNBC.
Sorry, I had to go on a rant there. But,
Simone Collins: Well, let’s explore how these academics would propose this welfare queen pronatalist initiative to happen. So the, the big thing is, is just large resource transfers, though they are very deliberately vague in the article, which I think is a very common progressive, hand wavy way of like, “Oh, let’s just, you know, have infinite [00:26:00] immigration and let’s just have, you know, let, let, let’s not incarcerate people for committing crimes.”
And like, well, okay, well, how are we gonna deal with like the fallout from that? And they’re like I, I, you know, what do you wanna do? You wanna, you wanna put them in jail? You wanna send them back?” You know, it’s, you don’t exactly explain what
Malcolm Collins: we felt about- But have you seen the, the video recently of like random mobs in the UK beating up people who are in pubs?
Simone Collins: No. Wait, what? Yeah, it’s for drinking alcohol.
Speaker 9: Frustratingly, this video has been scrubbed from YouTube, which means if I post it, this video’s likely gonna be taken down. So you have to, , go to one of a few news websites to see it. Here in the UK Express, you can see UK riots, gangs waving Palestinian flags, beat lone pub goer in more chaos in Britain streets, , or in the sun, , violent attack, shocking footage shows gang waving Palestinian flags storming pub before knocking man to the floor and kicking him in the head.
, If you want video I was able to find, , of what it’s like to live in the UK these days, here we go.
Speaker 10: A machete on display in broad [00:27:00] daylight. This was a daytime brawl. You
Speaker 11: got a pro
Speaker 10: bar. Barbers fighting over territory. Two on street beatings. This is kebab shop turf wars.
Speaker 11: And he said, “We’re going to kill you and we will burn down your house.”
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, because it’s around- That
Simone Collins: sounds like we should do an episode on that. What, what the, the ... Yeah, the, the, the, the downfall of alcohol, not only are sails down, but you’re getting beaten up for drinking? That’s insane. Wow. And a British tradition. I mean, if there’s anyone who’s allowed to daydrink, it’s Brits.
Malcolm Collins: It’s the land
Simone Collins: of breakfast of beer.
Malcolm Collins: Oh
Simone Collins: my God, that’s yeah-
Malcolm Collins: I, I don’t know if you’ve seen some of the recent tweets from JK Rawling.
Simone Collins: No.
Malcolm Collins: But they’re pretty freaking insane. Now she’s gotten on the whole, like, Islamist or the problem thing.
Simone Collins: Oh, God bless. Okay.
Malcolm Collins: You know, so somebody, basically this one British PM was talking about [00:28:00] how, you know, violence is, you know, never the answer.
And she’s like, “Well, thi- is this Katie something? It better not be Katie something because I saw a video of her shouting globalize the infatata.” Oh, gosh.
Simone Collins: And-
Malcolm Collins: And, and Katie then comes back with this globalized impatata and she goes, “I don’t think you know what that means.” And it’s like, of course she’s like, “It means the struggle.”
In the same way mind comps just means mind struggle, right? Like it’s a totally arbitrary word, but it’s just German for my struggle, come on. And JK Rowling writes back, “Your show is called Useful Idiots. I don’t think you know what that means.”
Simone Collins: Oh my God. JK
Malcolm Collins: Rawling is cooking. I love her.
Simone Collins: We might need to do a full episode on that.
So save it. But-
Malcolm Collins: Elon and JK Rowling on one team, that’s, that’s what we needed from
Simone Collins: childhood,
Malcolm Collins: right?
Simone Collins: Yeah. It’s delightful. But yeah, basically, I think they, they want some sort of long-term income support for women who choose to become single mothers or [00:29:00] guaranteed living standards for single mothers.
They also want broader welfare support targeted at enabling individualistic reproduction. And this is in contrast to what many states have proposed in terms of prenatalist policies where they really wanna focus on family formation and giving benefits to people who are married, who are raising kids in two parent households.
So this is a, a distinct diversion from that. And as Malcolm highlighted earlier, there is abundant research on the, the, the idea of being raised by two people. You can read the book, The Two Parent Privilege which I’m almost finished with. It’s, it’s a pretty good summary of the research, if you don’t believe me.
But they want strong public childcare, they want strong work family policies, and they want general welfare systems that remove dependence on male partners because they’re useless and they’re not worth marrying. And the general idea is just to make women. Wait, wait, don’t want assistance
Malcolm Collins: going to two parent couples
Simone Collins: anymore.
No. No, no, no. There’s no mention of that. Yeah, no. It, this is a ... The, the [00:30:00] very premise of this is we declare bankruptcy on long-term committed partnerships and on men.
Malcolm Collins: Remember, I, I had the episode where I was like, “Humanity’s gonna speciate, guys.” Like-
Simone Collins: No, this is, this is feeding into that hypothesis. This is, we’re adding that, you know, one tally to the side of the scoreboard for speciation, for sure.
Malcolm Collins: And I, and I’m gonna be honest, like, I, because the person who keeps getting me with this stuff is nuts, because nuts is always like, “Oh, well, we on the right would never think violence is okay.” Meanwhile, you know, me, if I lived in Britain right now
Speaker: Go ahead.
Speaker 2: Mom, it looks like Bitlock got hold of those home office documents via freedom of information requests.
Speaker: Nine freedom of information requests.
Speaker 3: He accused the government of covering up the true stats and undocumented migrants. Whitlock’s 4chan account, mom. , Deactivated last month. Because?
Speaker 4: History books say the last land invasion of England was 1066. In actual fact, the last land invasion of England was yesterday morning at 9:45 on a boat. Carrying 40 [00:31:00] undocumented male migrants landed in Dungeoness Kent.
Speaker 5: , an Afghan national was arrested after stabbing three people in Midhurst Gardens in Uksbridge in West London.
One victim 49-year-old Wayne Broadhurst was walking his dog down the street during the horrific attack. The suspect, illegally entered the UK and was granted asylum , according to the BBC.
Speaker 4: That land invasion’s an act of war, right? In war, civilians are allowed to we’re supposed to
Malcolm Collins: anyway, continue.
Simone Collins: And presumably, admittedly that they do the same thing that we kind of do with, with prenatalism, which is like, maybe AI is gonna make all this possible that the authors refer to a post automation future. Here, here’s a quote from their article. “Today, such large resource transfers are perhaps politically and fiscally unfeasible, but nations should consider limited reproductive policy experiments to find out what social and economic resources are required to motivate sufficient individualistic reproduction.
In our post-automation future, perhaps as early [00:32:00] as by 2040 Kurzweil referenced Koorsweil 2024 you gotta, you gotta throw in your singulatarian references they give some more references. “Insights from these pilot projects could inform national policies with the potential to substantially increase fertility, and then of course they acknowledge the side effect of men being totally screwed over.
They, they say that- Side effects, but
Malcolm Collins: whatever, whatever, that’s probably.
Simone Collins: Well, yeah, they would likely exacerbate male marginalization. So they also admit it’s already happening since further reducing women’s economic dependence It’s on men lowers the male value of some groups of men. But, but don’t worry.
They argue the existential risks from demographical apps justify these measures as they speculate that technologies like artificial wombs could later give men more symmetrical reproductive options, restoring some form of reproductive equality between the sexes. So I think it’s very appropriate that I got the tip for this episode from not Altus Hexley on X who sends us some of our best material.[00:33:00]
You rock. And he, his name is very appropriate because the, the thing they’re describing here is uncannily like Eldes Huxley’s Brave New World where reproduction is, is, is this very individualistic reproduction. Except instead of en- empowering individual women to reproduce on their own terms, the state is completely responsible for re- reproduction.
It engineers people and hatcheries and several sex from procreation to maximalize social stability and control. So basically in, since you haven’t read it in Brave New World, in the world state, no one gives birth. All children are produced in centralized hatcheries using processes like they, they call it Bocanos visification and they mass produce m- almost identical embryos to match the state’s labor needs.
And they’re like in these tiers of like alphas and betas and et cetera. Natural pregnancy and motherhood.
Malcolm Collins: I, I would go more, ... I mean, I’m not against this idea for like our family or [00:34:00] cultural group.
Simone Collins: Yeah. ...
Malcolm Collins: but I certainly wouldn’t go the direction they’re going, which is like cutting out men and creating these weird poly giant, you know, like-
Simone Collins: Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: The
Simone Collins: Brave New World approach is, is kind of equal and it, I mean, that’s like a solution that kind of works for everyone. And in Brave New World, everyone’s also conditioned from birth to be really, really happy with how they are.
Malcolm Collins: Which I think is a good thing to do, right? Yeah. Like why make somebody unhappy with their station in life?
I know that like people are like, “Oh, it’s so dystopian.” I love, you said you read it for the first time and you’re like, “Oh, how utopia.” I was
Simone Collins: like, “This is awesome.”
Malcolm Collins: I, I mean, the way that I would do it is I, I think the, the way that Kl- like Korinsky does it, the, the, or the, the, the, the son of Korinsky who set up the the Klan system in the Battletech universe is a fairly close to the way I would structure things if I could just structure them anyway which is to have a system where you bio, you, you, you clone from like the most successful people within your culture.
Oh. And that determines how much of, of their DNA is, is within the [00:35:00] individual and these individuals within sort of pools do competitions that they’re not all expected to survive to secure the fittest from within a batch.
Speaker: U five are the final vestiges of your brood that some deem might one day be of value to the clan. I am not one of them. To me, U five are the excrement of a failed, semi aborted batch from my blood house, far from the pinnacle of humanity demanded by the Klan’s geneticist that spawned you.
I am a gracious host, so I will give you the opportunity to show me what those strix on Lund home taught you. Show me what you know of being a real true Bo met warrior and prove yourselves worthy of [00:36:00] the name and heritage you carry with you.
Malcolm Collins: And then those individuals end on taking on roles within society that, that are meaningful.
And then you can still have like freeborn people, like that’s within Klan society- mm-hmm. ... but they just don’t often get the most prestigious jobs and stuff like that because they’re not as genetically fit as the- Ah. ... people who have to go through this in- incredibly rigorous process. And the people who go through the rigorous process believe they have a duty to the wider clan and society and everything like that.
So-
Simone Collins: Oh,
Malcolm Collins: interesting. ... like arbitrarily cruel to the freeborns, although they do view them with prejudice.
Simone Collins: Yeah. The, the, the people who reproduce naturally and die naturally in Brave New World have to live on like basically wildlife preserves and they’re seen as disgusting and horrific and you, it’s even frowned upon to be even moderately monogamous in the, the, the world state of Brave New World.
They, they have this saying, they have all [00:37:00] these sayings because it, they’re all about conditioning. Everyone belongs to everyone else. And if you start seeing someone like a particular person too, like too much, people are like, “Hey, man, you need to start like sleeping around a little more.” And like some, some women, because there is no reproduction, I think at one point one of the female characters is like feeling a little bit off and her friend is like, “Oh, like you should just have a, like a fake pregnancy.”
Like you, you, they even have women like go through simulated pregnancies, I think is like a form of treatment. It, it’s weird. I, I, I like that system- Yeah,
Malcolm Collins: that sounds very dis- that’s, that’s not the future I would go for with the,
Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah.
Malcolm Collins: But I, I think the future that I would want would be particularly brutalistic compared to what some people think is appropriate.
Simone Collins: Well, but look, I mean, what, what I, what I really appreciate about this is that we’ve been waiting for publications from academics and left-leaning people on what they think we should do about the problem. And [00:38:00] this, this is out there. It’s, it’s not what I would expect. You know, I always thought it would be more of the, the socialist approach of just give, give everyone a ton of money, but here they’re like, they’re really leaning in, I think, to a lot of progressive values, which is like, “Oh, we can not only give people a lot of money, but also just destroy all men.”
They, they, they don’t even talk about like how to address the social unrest that would result from that but-
Malcolm Collins: Because they don’t think that they need to just, you know, a new excuse to kill men, right? Like-
Simone Collins: Yeah, maybe just also introduce like a maid, but for men like Canada’s euthanasia
Malcolm Collins: system. I, I mean, that’s what Canada’s made is.
You know it disproportionately kills white people, right? At least.
Simone Collins: But not men, right?
Malcolm Collins: I don’t know if it’s ... I mean, I know women are more mopey, so you’re
Simone Collins: right, you know. Yeah. I, I imagine if, if, if we were to look it up, that there would be more women who utilize the services of made than men. We
Malcolm Collins: actually, we can look it up right now.
Simone Collins: Okay. With the power of AI. [00:39:00] Are you looking it up using RFABs,
Malcolm Collins: slightly more men. Well,
Simone Collins: they get it done. Men, get it done.
It’s just how it always has to be.
Malcolm Collins: But I just don’t understand this, this like lie down and take it approach. You know, if you’re gonna unalive yourself anyway the, I, I am really getting quite perturbed that the right seems to not see that the left is willing to use any tactic against us.
Mm. And we keep being like, “Well, we’re gonna do things in the moral way.” And it’s like, well, I mean, maybe that’s why we keep losing ground.
Simone Collins: Yeah. I, I don’t know. But-
Malcolm Collins: But
Simone Collins: I’m delighted by this bold stance. And I’ll have to
Malcolm Collins: point out for the people who are like, “Well, we need to do things in the moral way.”
If, if- What
Simone Collins: is the moral way? I, I don’t like that. Especially because- They need
Malcolm Collins: to, they need to somehow convince enough of the electorate to give them political control, then they need to enact the policies that need to be enacted without the women freaking out and voting against them again, [00:40:00] which even with ICE, which has barely done anything in terms of immigration in the United States has already like a mass triggered white women, right, to be like, “Oh, he’s an, you know, a fascist.”
Yeah. Because, you know, if we were actually going to resolve the problems that we have in countries like the UK and the US it’s going to look so much worse because these communities are going to fight back against being deported, right? Like, especially in a place like the UK, like imagine if ICE was doing raids in the UK right now- Yeah.
you would have an actual war in the streets of some major cities, right? Like, that is the situation that’s been created and these people are upset that they, they don’t want the bad optics of that sort of stuff. It’s like, come on. Like, do you understand how gruesome what’s going to need to be done is if we are going to have a chance of stabilizing for example, most of Europe at this point?
Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. Yeah. I have nothing more [00:41:00] to add aside from ... I hope more leftists come out with their deranged takes. I want the Hassan Piker take on prenatalism. I want the, I want, I want everyone’s nonsense because this is great. They’re, they’re finally coming out. It was inevitable because demographical apps is an increasingly trending issue and I, I really hope that more of the sort of expressed progressive values are played out in proposed prenatalist policy because this is very amusing and delightful.
It is.
Malcolm Collins: It’s unhinged. And I, I, I, like, our side needs to, like, realize who we’re fighting against. Like, they want you eradicated. They want your way of
Simone Collins: working. But, like, actually, yeah, and they just, they just, they, they openly admit it. This, this, with this will marginalize men
Malcolm Collins: of repercussion, right? They just write this down.
Like, of course, we’re going to eradicate you what you thouh- But
Simone Collins: I mean, they’re useless, so it’s okay. It’s so, On the
Malcolm Collins: plus side, at the very least, among technologically [00:42:00] productive populations, these people are an incredibly low fertility group, so they’re not going to exist in the future.
Simone Collins: Well, and clearly as is evidenced to buy their very low rates of relationship formation it’s
Conservatives are marrying. Conservatives are having kids. It’s it’s kind of a demographic inevitability. But I love you. I’m glad we got married and I’m glad we have five kids. So screw you guys.
Malcolm Collins: Yes. Screw you guys. We’re going for a six this year, so we’ll let you guys know how that’s gonna go.
Simone Collins: Fingers crossed, yeah.
Malcolm Collins: Fingers crossed. But Texas still alive, and that was a touch and go.
Simone Collins: It was. I’m glad he’s okay. All right. Love you. Bye.
Malcolm Collins: Love you too. Bye.
Simone Collins: But it was a, it’s really cool. I enjoyed trying it out. It, it’s nice just to have the sources more prominently put. I, I like, I’ve always liked Perplexity because it includes citations.
Malcolm Collins: So she’s talking about the new feature on RFAB which [00:43:00] is a super, it’s meant to remove AI hallucinations. So what it does is it runs multiple models that can search the internet starting with Grock and you can choose which model it runs and how many checks it does.
Yeah. And it reviews the answer and then edits the answer based on with, with like checks. So you can be like, “This many model runs said this was definitely true.” And it also adds facts if another model forgot a fact. So you can get a, a really expanded and really well thought through list while knowing what’s likely a hallucination and what’s not.
Simone Collins: Yeah. It’s, it’s quite convenient. Especially if you’re trying to do research that you’re using for work or school and you’re like, “I really can’t afford this to be hallucinated right now.” Because even on perplexity where I feel like it’s better sourced and more transparently sourced, there have been times where when I click through on the sourced links, the source isn’t very good or it’s [00:44:00] harder to see, or they’re just referencing some weird like Roundup article somewhere.
So I like this. Yeah. I mean, I, I will give you more feedback later when I can try it out more since you like what? Made it yesterday and now I’m trying it today. So it’s all very new.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. No, things move fast. And what else? We’re also adding I’ll see when I get this done. It’s, it’s, it’s not done yet because it’s a bit more complicated.
But 3D image generation from 2D images that we’re going to then work to map to meshes to make computer models.
Simone Collins: Oh.
Malcolm Collins: So you’ll be able to create full VTuber models with AI is, is the hope.
Simone Collins: Okay. Okay. I get it. That’s, that’s super cool.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, I know. And we’ll also be the first site that does this at least to the degree that we’re looking at doing it, so.
Simone Collins: I love that. Well, power to the people, let’s do it.
Malcolm Collins: Power to the people. I am excited to be working on things. Yeah, we got, we got turned down really quickly from an accelerator. We made it really far aways before and I’m so [00:45:00] confused because we have like paying users and everything now and we’re growing pretty quick, but-
Simone Collins: Well, and they had broadly, when we made it to a final round interview, the first time we applied, been like, “Hey, yeah, just get back to us when you do A, B and C.”
And we did A, B and C and now they’re like dead in the water with us. So do they know something we don’t? That’s what we want to find out.
Malcolm Collins: My big concern is it could be the not safe for work stuff.
Simone Collins: Oh, that, yeah, could just be dead in the water kind of thing.
Malcolm Collins: But that’s what most people use, so, you know.
Simone Collins: Not digging that away.
Malcolm Collins: It gives the internet what it wants. I’m not stupid here.
Simone Collins: Yes, we give the people what they want and what they want is pervy and that’s okay. That’s okay. We support it. All right. I’m gonna get into it and I’m excited for this one.
Malcolm Collins: Okay.
Simone Collins: Cool. All right.
Speaker 16: Yesterday he was like, “I can’t take off my shoes.”
Simone Collins: And I’m like, “Oh, okay.” And I like pull them off and then rocks just fly everywhere when I take off [00:46:00] his shoe because he’s taken to putting rocks in his shoes. So ex- excuse me. There was explosion in there at 1983 in the night. Oh.
I didn’t expect to see that. Excuse me. Okay. Octavia, I thought you said that missiles hit the tracks. Oh yes, missiles. Missles hit the tracks and there was a giant exposing the West expression in the world. And the firefighters, they all came over and helped fast
Octavian Collins: And then they helped a lot of persons. No, no. 400 people are pronounced dead at the hospital. But 10 for five and two- 10
Malcolm Collins: survived.
Octavian Collins: 400 producers. And two more somehow for five at the hospital and which were added to the 10 and two people.
, This helicopter right here, Austin, this medical helicopter also [00:47:00] came over from America to Majersey to fix it.
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
