Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Collins

[00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are gonna be talking about something that is wildly under-discussed in the news right now, which is that Cuba is about to collapse. And when I say about to collapse, you may think that I am exaggerating. They have literally at this point, 14 to 19 days of oil left. They have had no tanker arrivals since January 9th. The, the tankers that were being sent from Venezuela have been cut off and their last lifeline, which was Mexico, has also been cut off. Why than that? Trump negotiations. So, NAFT is about to, is about to be renegotiated and oh Trump put a lot of pressure on Mexico to cut off. Also, it’s costing Mexico a lot. They spent 3 billion basically in free oil for Venezuela. Over the past just few years I think. Since Why started this person’s administration? Well, Cuba was giving them their slave [00:01:00] doctors for people who don’t know Google. Oh yeah. UBA basically enslaves their, their doctors and was giving them to Mexico as like an exchange. But they did the Venezuela was an also interesting situation ‘cause we’re seeing more and more, venezuela had given Cuba in terms of like loans that Cuba would never pay back, very obviously and stuff like that. $18 billion. And if we look at the elite guard that was killed during the raid, we know that 32 of them, so almost all of the people who died were actually Cubans. So it appeared that Cuba basically controlled like the. The, the, the accusations that Cuba had basically subjugated Venezuela and was just extracting resources from it were accurate. They basically controlled the entire elite guard of the country and most of the major military petitions. Oh. And this is being systemically reversed right now. Mm-hmm. And I note here that another thing you’re not seeing if you’re watching mainstream news right now is that Venezuela has actually made pretty. Big changes. Not only have they stopped sending [00:02:00] money and oil to Cuba but they have started releasing hundreds. I think now we’re at 300, but it shows no signs of slowing down political prisoners. So we are actually seeing change in Venezuela. It’s just Simone Collins: alright, Malcolm Collins: Trump can. Dunk on it too much. Mm-hmm. Or it would look bad for the woman who’s in power now. Right. You know, we have to be very nice about all of our political wins that we’re making in Venezuela and very graceful about it because Yeah. Simone Collins: Yeah. Malcolm Collins: You don’t want too many people asking. Did she cooperate with you guys to get rid of Maduro? Simone Collins: Yeah, like sad. You wanna look a little matchy matchy? That would not be good. Malcolm Collins: Yeah. You know, you don’t wanna look too matchy. Matchy. So she constantly complains. But in terms of what we actually wanna see happen in Venezuela, that’s what we’re seeing right now. Simone Collins: Wow. Malcolm Collins: And I note here that how bad things have gotten in Cuba is, is not a, like this is happening completely out of nowhere scenario. So, Simone Collins: well I have to ask. Do they not have oil reserves? We have oil reserves. By the way, if you’re [00:03:00] wondering if Cuba has oil deposit somewhere, , they do. But, , in 20 12, 3 deep water, more than 300 meters of water exploration wells were drilled by Italian platform Scarborough nine. , And, , none of the three found commercial quality of oil or gas, which jeopardized Cuba’s hopes to find hydrocarbons to boost its economy. So basically they, they technically have some around the island, , but , none of the commercial explorations have ever found a way to reach them in a cash positive manner. Malcolm Collins: Cuba is a little island. Simone? No. Cuba Simone Collins: doesn’t have one. Can have some kind of, I don’t know, tank. This is my out of touch. I I have to ask the out of touch questions that everyone else is asking. ‘cause I’m not the only out of touch person...

Dive into a provocative discussion with Malcolm and Simone Collins as they debunk two major myths: the idea that female-led societies are inherently peaceful, and the romanticized view of bonobos as gentle, utopian apes. Drawing from their book “The Pragmatist’s Guide to Sexuality” and fresh data from studies (including 2024 research on bonobo aggression), they explore how matriarchal structures—both in history and among bonobos—often lead to more violence, coercion, and hierarchy than expected. From evolutionary psychology on women’s submission fantasies to historical queens waging wars, this episode challenges progressive narratives about “natural” societies and argues for building better futures through pragmatism, not nostalgia. Key highlights: * Why bonobo society is a nightmare of sexual coercion and aggression. * Data showing female rulers are more likely to start wars (27% higher in historical Europe). * Evolutionary insights into gender dynamics and power. * A rant on rejecting “hidden utopias” and advancing civilization. If you enjoy data-driven takes on culture, evolution, and society, subscribe for more episodes from Based Camp! Check out our books at https://pragmatistfoundation.com/ and join the conversation.[00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are gonna be going over two persistent myths in society, dissecting them, looking at the actual data to show that no. One female led societies historically are, and actually in modern times because we’re gonna be going into new data, not just the old data that we had in our book, the Pragma Guide to Sexuality are, are more violent than non-female led society. Simone Collins: Oh yeah, sure, of course Malcolm Collins: that makes sense. But also the myth of the peaceful bonobo is where we are going to start because Bonobo society is actually. Horrifying. Simone Collins: I don’t understand why people have this vision of the Gentle Ape. All, all apes and monkeys terrify me more than Pelicans, and there’s nothing scarier than a pelican. Malcolm Collins: So we’re just gonna go over a bunch of data, mostly drawing from a chapter from the Pragmatist Guide to Sexuality about why. You shouldn’t let women run [00:01:00] things. And not just that, but how the progressive movement and the progressive part of the academic movement has this tendency to create these con conflation or confabulation of, unique examples or cherry picked data to try to say that we should go back to some earlier way of doing things or some earlier way is natural. Simone Collins: Ah, the Malcolm Collins: old sapien argument, fix it Dawn. Where they’re like, well, our ancestors were polyamorous. Look at the gentle bonobo. Look at the tribal they are. And I’m like, well. First of all, that’s not true of all tribal groups, and it’s certainly not true of the more successful ones. You just chose one that fit the society that you wanted. You’re like, okay, where’s the most communist, the most matriarchal, the most? Okay. We will say, this is the model for early humans. Yeah. When that’s not actually the predominant evidence that we have, and we can do a separate episode on that. But it’s the same with you know, with with [00:02:00] Bonobos. They go, oh, what, what? There was a period where like some researchers really romanticized Bonobos. And now we know that they basically made a mistake and they created, it is true that Bonobos do have a matriarchal society. It’s just not true that it’s a benevolent, matriarchal society. So let’s go into this. All right. Simone Collins: I wonder. Yeah, and I, I, I’m very curious to, to know when in history women were seen to be. Nice. I, I’m thinking maybe certainly with the Victorian era, this, there was this picture of like, the woman is being the moral anchor of the household, but yeah, I’m, this is gonna be fascinating. Malcolm Collins: Some of our readers may be wondering at this point why we have not...

Dive into a mind-blowing deep dive where Malcolm and Simone Collins expose the Jedi Order as the ultimate villains of the Star Wars universe! Forget the heroic myths—this episode breaks down how the Jedi are controlled by a parasitic hive mind (midi-chlorians), enforce child kidnapping and soldier training, uphold a dystopian Republic riddled with corruption and slavery, and lie about the true nature of the Force. Drawing from canon lore like The Clone Wars, prequels, and even the Mortis arc, we argue Palpatine was right, Anakin did nothing wrong, and the Empire might actually be the good guys. Plus, real-world parallels to parasites like toxoplasmosis and cultural brainwashing. Is Star Wars secretly a horror story? Buckle up for facts, rants, and a killer rap outro!Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be talking about how the Jedi order from the Star Wars universe is quite possibly the most evil organization in any sci-fi universe I have ever read. Simone Collins: They are actual scum. They are actual scum. Malcolm Collins: They are. When you, when you actually think about it, you’re like, oh my God. The Star Wars universe under the Republic was a complete dystopia and the empire was needed. Palpatine was right. So, and, and I, I’m not gonna make stretches here. I’m not gonna bend outside the lore. You’re just gonna stage Simone Collins: facts, Malcolm Collins: the lore of mm-hmm. The Star Wars universe. So. Right. Simone Collins: Okay. Malcolm Collins: They have these symbiotic organisms called MIT chloron. Mm-hmm. Now you could say they’re symbiotic, but they’re really [00:01:00] not symbiotic. They’re more parasitic. , Why do I say that? They’re parasitic rather than symbiotic. Well, because when they reach high enough levels in a host, that host loses their ability to breed. IE the Jedi have to be celibate. And it’s made very clear if you have too high a level of this parasitic inflection. If your mitol count is too high, you deal with extreme negative side effects, or at least this is what those infected with the parasite and who follow its will say extreme negative side effects if you attempt to breed. So this. Parasitic organisms that lives in humanoids. They ha has a hive mind that we call the, the light side of the force that they worship. They have to serve the will of it. By the way, it, it lies to them about its true nature provably in the, the, the Star Wars universe. Oh, Simone Collins: does it? They Malcolm Collins: they have [00:02:00] to. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It doesn’t create the force or anything like that. The, the force is, we learned the history of the force and the mortis arc. So it is a. Parasitic hive mind that is lying to them about how it grants them presumably magic like powers. Then they sort the entire society of the universe into a hierarchy based on your level of infection by this parasite. Simone Collins: God, Malcolm Collins: this is, I mean this is just, just any fact. Any Simone Collins: fact, yes. Malcolm Collins: When, when, when they go and they find Anakin. Simone Collins: Oh Malcolm Collins: yeah. Right. They’re like, oh, he has X white chloron count, which means that one day he, he could be one of the most powerful Jedi ever. Mm. Right. I haven’t even gone into the child kidnapping and stuff like that yet, which we will get to. Oh, Simone Collins: child soldiers? Yeah. Mm-hmm. Malcolm Collins: No, no, no. They have literal child soldiers. When Anakin [00:03:00] went in there, and I’ll go, I’ll elaborate on this in more detail, and he killed the young Lings. That was a completely justified thing to do. Within that context, we see those very sane young lings in other shots, and I’m talking about like of the movie, like not even like extended stuff, practicing with light sabers, the single most dangerous weapon in the entire universe. Okay? These are children, Simone Collins: they’re not like...

Dive into the latest Epstein leaks with Malcolm and Simone Collins on Based Camp! We break down the bizarre “pizza” obsession among elites (spoiler: it’s not about food), analyze what’s real vs. conspiracy hype—like torture videos, baby-eating claims, and connections to figures like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Trump, and Prince Andrew. Plus, we explore the fascinating science behind why wealthy men prefer youthful traits (backed by our own research on breast preferences and evolutionary psychology). From elite predator networks to why conservatives are embracing fetishes at Mar-a-Lago, we separate fact from fiction without holding back. Is Pizzagate back? We discuss without getting banned. If you enjoy unfiltered takes on culture, science, and scandals, subscribe for more episodes! Check out our books “The Pragmatist’s Guide to Sexuality” and others at https://pragmatist.guide/ Episode Transcript Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. We are going crazy world with these Epstein leaks. I swear rich people really love pizza. Simone Collins: Such a Malcolm Collins: big Simone Collins: pizza problem. Malcolm Collins: That is my big takeaway. I love it. Even after reading these, Simone, the credulous person, she is immediately is like, do I send so many emails about pizza? Yeah. So she goes to her inbox to see how many times she has mentioned pizza in, how, how many was it? Simone Collins: So in 2025, it, it got a little messed up because we serve pizza at Octavia’s birthday. So not including those, we had 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 emails. No, sorry, eight. Eight. That’s a Malcolm Collins: suspicious number Simone Collins: of emails. Well, no, one was from [00:01:00] Octavian school district, one was from a scientific research paper. One was from an outline from one of our episodes. But it’s like we, we never, we never personally, Malcolm Collins: don’t have any personal emails. Simone Collins: Basically in, in, no, in no email from last year did we at any point. Talk about pizza over email, aside from a, a children’s birthday party invite. And the rest of it was just like quoting other people or people sending us emails. Malcolm Collins: And we have children and aren’t super rich, right? Like we know the demographic. Simone Collins: Oh yeah. No, no, no. Here’s how bad the, the pizza we served in Octavian birthday was cooked in our oven anyway. It wasn’t even like cooked Malcolm Collins: in our oven Simone Collins: Quartered pizza. Malcolm Collins: No. So the, my favorite thing about this particular Epstein League is it the one guy who like wasn’t on board with the naming system and so everyone is like, Hey, how about that pizza and grape juice we had last night? And then there’s this one guy who’s like, [00:02:00] I really like the torture video she sent me. I imagine Epstein, it’s like whenever you’re doing something that’s like shady at work and you have to get everyone together and you’re like, okay, you understand we do not email each other about this. Right? And Simone Collins: then Malcolm Collins: I really like the fraud we’re doing. Simone Collins: I love that. I love the part where we hunted people for sport that Malcolm Collins: love this one, this, this, this one guy who is still somehow, blanked in the, in the emails. Simone Collins: Yeah. Malcolm Collins: But what we’re gonna go over in this episode are two core questions. The first, and I think more interesting question is the science behind all of this which is, we are, for people who don’t know this actually pretty esteemed researchers in the sex space, was Aila even saying that our research is some of the best out there? So, because I, I find it really fascinating and one of the biggest findings that we broke [00:03:00] that other people have, have, have found correlary since our breaking it. Is that the wealthier a man gets, the smaller his breast preference. Which if you’re looking at a societally...

Dive into the fascinating world of “peacocking” with Malcolm and Simone Collins on this episode of Based Camp! From evolutionary biology to modern dating signals, we explore how men and women use costly displays—like flashy cars, makeup, or even leg-lengthening surgery—to attract partners. Discover why choosing a spouse based on looks is a hidden commitment, the history of male fashion from codpieces to high heels, and why both sexes peacock in unique ways today. We break down honest vs. dishonest signaling, why males are becoming more selective in long-term relationships, and real-world examples from seahorses to Genghis Khan. If you’re into red pill insights, cultural trends, or just want to understand the hidden dynamics of attraction, this is a must-watch! Episode Notes * Both men and women who choose spouses based on looks are both telling on themselves and implicitly committing to something without realizing it * Basically, when you’re being choosy about partners, it’s because you implicitly understand (and may be signalling) that you’ll do most of the work and/or take on most of the risk * To understand why this is the case, we need to look to peacocking and WHY animals (plus humans) do it * We also need to understand how peacocking has evolved in the face of modernity and how we may need to disregard certain instincts because they were evolved for an old game and these days, many of the rules are TOTALLY different Why Peacock? Peacocking is required when the target market is selective (it’s obvious and universal—products only need branding and marketing in competitive markets with choices). Female peacocking is necessary only when men get sexually selective. There are three reasons why males get sexually selective: * Males invest heavily in parental care (time, energy, or risk), so they can only mate with a limited number of females. * For example, male seahorses, which carry and nourish the eggs in a brood pouch (a form of male pregnancy), are notably choosy about mates. * Married fathers’ childcare time rose from about 2.6 hours per week in 1965 to about 7.2 hours per week in 2011 and 7.8-8 hours/week in 2020/2021 (with married fathers around 8 hours and college‑educated fathers about 10 hours per week.) * In case comparison is desired: Married mothers’ time went from about 10.6 hours per week in 1965 to roughly 14.3 hours per week in 2011, and around 13.5–14 hours remains a standard estimate in the 2000s. * There is large variation in female quality (for example, in fecundity, size, or health), making some females much more valuable mates than others. * Male seahorses preferentially select larger females, as these tend to produce more or higher-quality eggs, leading to better offspring survival. Males have been observed rejecting smaller or less suitable females by breaking off courtship dances or swimming away, even when the females are receptive. This selectivity stems from the males’ limited brood pouch capacity and the high energy investment in pregnancy, making indiscriminate mating costly * The St. Andrews experience * The marriage-and-then-kids bait-and-switch * In many fish and bird species with biparental care (for example, certain cichlid fishes and shorebirds), males court and mate preferentially with larger or more fecund females and may ignore smaller or otherwise low-quality females. * Will men eventually look for signals of actual COMMITMENT to larger families? * Mating itself is costly (risk of predation, energy loss, disease, increased risk from male-on-male competition), so mating “indiscriminately” reduces a male’s total lifetime reproductive success. * Legal risk * One major form of “predation” in the modern civilized world * Financial risk * A major form of energy loss * Pair bonding? * In monogamous mammals like prairie voles, males form strong pair bonds and show selective affiliation and aggression toward intruding conspecifics, effectively refusing to mate with...

In this no-holds-barred episode, we dive deep into racial and ethnic dating preferences using real data from OkCupid (the infamous 2009–2014 race & attraction studies), multiracial dater research, and more. We cover in-group biases, why some groups show little same-race preference, the surprising “boost” for certain mixes (like white-Asian), why black women face the toughest odds in online dating, and how media/culture shapes (or fails to shape) what people find attractive. We break down hierarchies in desirability, reply rates, gender differences (women tend to be “more racist” in preferences), and why white men often top the charts while certain groups get penalized. Expect spicy takes on everything from passport bros to fetishization, media “go woke go broke,” and even our own subjective rankings (teased for a future paid video). Episode Transcript: Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. As people know, we got really scared after having, you know, videos taken down on this channel and potentially having our YouTube throttled. And so I said, I’m not gonna do anything controversial. Simone Collins: Never Malcolm Collins: again. Never again, never again. But at the same time, an interesting question occurred to me. Simone Collins: Okay. Malcolm Collins: Which was, if you were going to create like a tear list of the attractiveness of different ethnic groups, that was objective, oh Simone Collins: God, Malcolm Collins: what would that look like? So I decided to look into this ‘cause I was like, surely somebody has done this before. And what I was really Simone Collins: according to doesn’t just every. Racial or ethnic or religious group look good to themselves? Like, don’t the Amish find Amish people the most attractive, even if it’s like literally they’re, they’re from very similar heritage. You know, just when, when people look similar to you, don’t you, don’t you find them more attractive? Malcolm Collins: Some groups? That’s true. Not in all groups. Is that true? So [00:01:00] we see that in some studies. Ba basically we’ll go through a number of studies. A number of studies will show that most groups have a preference for their own ethnicity. But in other studies most of the more honest ones. And we’re only gonna cover the OkCupid one briefly, because I assume that all of our audience is familiar with that study. Simone Collins: Oh, I’ll cover it thoroughly. I, I can’t really remember. I went through it when it first came out, but OkCupid stopped publishing their research findings pretty early on because they were too spicy. It was too Malcolm Collins: controversial. Simone Collins: I people got too mad. Justified reality hurts. What Malcolm Collins: you will see in those, if I’m remembering correctly, is blacks do not have an ingroup racial preference and prefer people of other ethnicities. Simone Collins: Oh God, I forgot. Yeah, that was Malcolm Collins: bad. That is not found in pretty much any of the scientific studies except for I think like one or two. Speaker 2: Oh s**t, here we go. It’s on. Race, war. Race, war, race, war, race war’s on everybody. It’s going down. It’s going down. After editing this video, I [00:02:00] was wrong. It has sounded in more of the studies than I remembered, and I should point out here. I do not mean that they had a preference for other racial groups. I mean, they had a preference for the white racial group. Speaker 2: Token Forfeit. Whites win. Whites win. Race, war, everybody whites. Malcolm Collins: And I think the reason Yeah. Simone Collins: But there’s a big problem with publication bias when people Malcolm Collins: find Yeah. I would not publish it if my results came out that way. I’d be like, wait. Oh, Simone Collins: nor would I, yeah. Because we’re not crazy. Malcolm Collins: African Americans are racist against African Americans more than other people are racist against African Americans. Simone Collins: Right. Even...

Malcolm and Simone Collins tear apart Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and the cult of “self-actualization” — a concept that originated with Kurt Goldstein as an organism’s drive for wholeness and potential (think resilience after brain injury, survival, breeding), but Maslow flipped it into a progressive pinnacle achieved only after maxing out hedonistic “lower” needs like endless comfort, validation, sex, and esteem. We explore how this fuels urban monoculture toxicity: identity obsessions, validation addiction, hedonism-maxxing, and extreme cases like adults regressing to child roles for “love without judgment.” We invert the pyramid — true fulfillment comes from suppressing distractions (Catholic mortification, naltrexone hacks, biblical detachment) to focus on civilization-building, pronatalism, sacrifice, and purpose, not self-worship or peak experiences. Riffs include: South Park food pyramid flip, Einstein/Eleanor Roosevelt as flawed “self-actualized” icons (vs. Marie Curie’s two daughters and real achievement), degenerate NPR stories, why celebrities crash despite “needs met,” Buddhism as negative utilitarianism, and why 4+ kids often signals real alignment.[00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I’m excited to talk to you today. We are going to be discussing. The popularization and development of the term self-actualization, as well as the damage it has done to society. Tracing it again, I think it’s a horrible concept that is upstream of a lot of what makes the urban monoculture so toxic. Oh. To a person’s mental framing of reality. Okay. We will provide alternate frameworks, which I think are better. And we will also be exploring the interesting truth behind the current term self-actualization, which is that it actually came from a pretty based concept. Self-actualization is even in the words of the guy who popularized it. A rebranding of the concept of niche’s. Uber, minch, or a progressive audience? Simone Collins: No. Oh my God. The PSYOPs of that. Wait, so was that Maslow of Maslow’s Ma Malcolm Collins: Maslo Maslow was the one who, who popularized it and before him it meant something entirely different. Simone Collins: Wow. [00:01:00] Okay. I’m really, I’m very curious to see what your ultimate take on all this is. Like, is it gonna be a play on that South Park episode of like, we have to invert the pyramid? Are, are we now putting just survival at the, the top of the pyramid? Malcolm Collins: Survival at the top. I actually like that a lot. Speaker: The pyramid doesn’t work. We’ve already tried it. It’s upside down. What, sir? The pyramid is upside down. Turn the pyramid upside down. It can’t be serious. That would put butter and fat at the top of it. Flip the damn food pyramid Malcolm Collins: Yes. We have to invert the pyramid. Let’s do it. Hierarchy of needs. I, I love that the White House actually posted a clip from that Yes. Episode when they changed the food pyramid. And the funny thing is, is everyone was like, I mean, it’s basically right, like the nutritionists were like, I’m not complaining about this. Simone Collins: Yeah. You Malcolm Collins: know? Simone Collins: No, no, no, honestly. ‘cause you know, I, I listened to like all leftist media basically the, the leftist critique of it was not that it was [00:02:00] substantively wrong ‘cause they can’t actually argue against it. It’s, it’s fairly correct as you say. So can you imagine what the leftist critique of it instead had to be? Malcolm Collins: It wasn’t respe a respectable way to announce it. Simone Collins: No, no, no, no. Okay. Well, I mean, okay. Yeah. They were like, well, I can’t believe they steal per two, but Malcolm Collins: they took out sugar. Simone Collins: No, they Malcolm Collins: did take out sugar as, as a ever. They’re Simone Collins: like, I know. Well, because you shouldn’t. There should be no added sugars, period. There’s no point for that. Right. Anyway. No, it was, well, how dare they...

In this eye-opening episode of the Malcolm & Simone Collins podcast, we dive into a Reddit-sourced compilation of studies (verified where possible) that set out to prove discrimination against women... but uncovered the opposite: evidence of bias against men in areas like hiring, domestic violence, child custody, education, sexual victimization, and more.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be going over a number of studies. That reportedly were looking into gender differences in males and females. Oh, and basically found that men have it significantly worse than women and then attempted to cover it up. Simone Collins: What? Malcolm Collins: And we’re going to be, yeah, so on the subreddit, because for people to know the base camp subreddit still, it looks like Reddit, like heavily throttled it at one point to try to block it, but it’s still huge. It’s still bigger than Asma Gold or Joe Rogan. So even with the throttling, we’re doing really well, which I love. And I regularly find great posts in it. And this was from a post in it. Where they list a number of studies and they go through how the studies try to cover things up. And then I use, I sort of try to check this with AI to see like, which of these are accurate representations of this study and where has this post of anywhere taken liberties with the information so that we can be as steelman as we can and to try to get an accurate [00:01:00] vision. Just how much the, the data is being manipulated. And I think this is what people feel like scientists are the, the, the enemy of men say white men, let’s Simone Collins: be, well you mean contemporary scientists because, Malcolm Collins: no, no, these studies go back away. These studies go back to like the eighties. Simone Collins: Okay. That’s alright. I’m thinking of the 1880s, Malcolm. They, they were pretty cool. Malcolm Collins: And I gotta Simone Collins: have a You’re pretty autistic and faab fabulous. So don’t, don’t come from a gentleman scientist. Okay. Malcolm Collins: Okay. Speaker: When is modern science gonna find a cure for a woman’s mouth? Don’t worry. That’s just a fancy doctor. Word for your brain is broken. Unfortunately, there’s no field of medicine that deals with the brain, but I can give you a pamphlet for a cult. Malcolm Collins: For Dr. Simone Collins: Spaceman Malcolm Collins: and you know, this is horrifying. I, another study I learned about that. I actually hadn’t heard about it. I don’t know how, I hadn’t heard about this from the subreddit. Mm-hmm. And I, I double checked to make sure it’s real. It’s a real study. So this [00:02:00] was a 2006 study published in Nature. And it looked at men and women playing an economic game, a version of the prisoner’s dilemma with two actors, one who played fairly and one who cheated unfairly. Participants were then placed in an FMRI scanner and observed the actors receiving painful electric shocks to their hands. Brain scans measured empathetic responses in pain related areas like the anterior insular, anterior cingulate cortex. Mm-hmm. And reward areas like the nucleus humus. Key findings when fair players non cheaters were shocked, both men and women showed activation in empathy related brain areas indicating distress or shared pain. Simone Collins: Okay. Malcolm Collins: However, when unfair players, cheaters were shocked, women still showed empathy related activation distress. But when men. Men reduced the empathy that they showed and showed some activation in their reward centers seeking pleasure from seeing the bad guy punished justice. Simone Collins: Yeah. When Malcolm Collins: we look at something and we’re like, how [00:03:00] can you want to help these scam artists? The, you know, the illegal immigrants, et cetera. Right. And because at first I’m like, well, maybe you could. Picture that they’re not actually just like purely negative actors stealing from like...

In this explosive episode, we break down what may be the biggest geopolitical story of the decade: a failed military coup attempt against Xi Jinping in January 2026. Top PLA leaders (including key Central Military Commission figures) were purged after an alleged raid on Xi’s hotel residence in Beijing led to a firefight and mass arrests. Xi has gutted the military leadership, leaving only loyalists in place. We discuss: * The timeline of purges, assassination attempts, tunnel explosions, and the leaked coup plot * Why Xi’s consolidation of power is accelerating China’s path to collapse (demographics, food/energy insecurity, real estate bubble) * The scary logic: Why attacking Taiwan (or elsewhere) might now make “sense” for Xi personally, even if it’s suicidal for China * Parallels to autocracies throughout history and why centralized power always ends this way * Why the West (and AI progress) might secretly benefit from chaos in China * Bonus riffs on US domestic distractions (Minneapolis/ICE protests), organ harvesting rumors, and why nobody seems to care about real global inflection points This is NOT mainstream coverage — it’s the raw, unfiltered analysis you won’t hear elsewhere. If you’re tired of slop-stream media ignoring the real threats, this is for you. Sources & further watching: Lei’s Real Talk (summarized transcripts used), Winston & Laowai’s old China motorcycle vlogs for real cultural insights (sort videos by oldest). Episode Transcript: Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I am excited to be here with you today and I mean, I’m actually excited ‘cause. There is world changing news, like, like way bigger news than the Maduro situation. Way bigger news than anything that’s happened maybe in like the last half decade, Simone Collins: but you probably haven’t heard about it. Malcolm Collins: Not that many people are covering it, and I don’t understand why. So, Simone Collins: because we’re so obsessed with this little city in the United States called Minneapolis. Malcolm Collins: I, so for clarification, there was essentially a military coup just happened in China. Simone Collins: In China, like China, Malcolm Collins: China, like a ma, the second major power, Simone Collins: Indianapolis or China, Malcolm Collins: the heads of the military. And, and so far of the, the CMC, the committee that. Makes up the military. And I’ll put a picture on screen here. Every single [00:01:00] member of it now, this is, this is the entire top of the Chinese government. Simone Collins: Oh. We’ve gone to all of them. I, I, Malcolm Collins: every member, but she and the secret police head, like the guy who’s in charge of Okay. No, Simone Collins: that’s why I saw, yeah. There was one Malcolm Collins: left. Is arrested or killed at this point. And the two last one of these guys who hadn’t been, had a group of military members go and try to abduct g from where he lives, which is a hotel. And there was a firefight and a bunch of people died and they locked down parts of Beijing. Imagine. Simone Collins: I bet they just didn’t have the LRADs. If only they had our LRADs Malcolm Collins: in Washington. The head of our military attempted to abduct Trump, and the next day what we were talking about was some dumb piece of nonsense who got shot by law enforcement because he physically attacked them while carrying a gun. Right? Like that’s Speaker: an officer approaches your [00:02:00] car, be polite. Speaker 2: Is there a Speaker: problem, officer? And stay in your car with your hands on the wheel. What the f**k do want motherfucker? Unless you wanna ask this, Malcolm Collins: right? You know that, that, that video people watching, they’re like, well, they had already gotten the gun. Out of his hands before he had it when he attacked them. Right? Like, well, what do you mean? I understand? Yes, you shouldn’t shoot him after you get the gun outta his hand. But that’s a heightened situation, okay? These are still...

India’s population bomb is fizzling out faster than most people realize. Over 5,000 government schools now sit completely empty (zero students!), with numbers surging 24% in just two years — mostly in states like Telangana and West Bengal. We’re diving deep into India’s collapsing fertility rates (many regions already sub-1.5 or lower), why certain ethnic/religious groups are disappearing faster than others, and what this means for India’s future demographics. We compare this to Japan and South Korea’s school closures due to depopulation, bust the myth that “India will outbreed everyone,” and discuss why Indian immigrants in the US maintain stable fertility (~1.6, similar to whites) while resisting aspects of modern urban culture. Topics include: * In-group hiring preferences & H-1B controversies * Cultural isolation that protects against fertility collapse * Nuanced pros/cons of Indian communities in America (safety, values, economic contribution vs. potential downsides) * Nick Fuentes’ recent anti-Indian rhetoric — is it fair, or controlled opposition? * Gender dynamics, arranged marriages, and why some Indian cultural traits help resist “urban monoculture” This is a raw, unfiltered conversation on natalism, migration, ethnicity, and the future of populations. If you’re interested in demographics, pronatalism, or immigration realism — hit play.[00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are gonna be talking about the disappearance of Indians, the, the Indian Ethnic Group of India. I will start with a interesting article here, over 5,000 government schools in India. Sit empty with zero students, 70% in the states of Al and West Bongo. Is this another Simone Collins: Somali fraud problem or what? Malcolm Collins: This, this from the natal subreddit? No. So these are, these are in India. Their schools are sitting empty because of low birth rates, not fraud. Simone Collins: Okay. Malcolm Collins: No, no, not fraud. Just abandoned. Wow. Like that very sad documentary about Korean schools where they had one student left and they were keeping the school open and they were like, it was really creepy because they would like do tours of the school. You know how Koreans are like very obsessed with, but there was Simone Collins: this one kid sweeping up a classroom that only teacher, no, no. Malcolm Collins: The teachers, the staff were like, they kept everything spotless for, for one kid, like all of the classrooms and everything. It’s [00:01:00] like when Simone Collins: Albert King concert Albert died and Queen Victoria like insisted on having his. Breakfast made each morning and all these things set out for him. Like his clothes laid out. ‘cause she, yeah, no, it’s, it’s really Malcolm Collins: weird the way, but it’s a grieving Simone Collins: thing. This is not a function thing, it’s a grieving thing. Malcolm Collins: There’s the Japanese town that ended up replacing all the kids with, with straw dummies. Simone Collins: No, just to make the, what, like one kid in the town feel less lonely. Totally not creeped out. No. Now there’s Malcolm Collins: straw dummies playing on the swings and on Simone Collins: the slide. What if it was just a great troll though? What if they actually really hated kids and they’re like, I, I will terrify idea for you. This Malcolm Collins: kid with some Miyazaki stuff right here. No, this kid’s gonna walk around and, and think their entire generation is turned into straw. Simone Collins: Oh my gosh though again, amazing troll. Like, you know, you’re the grocery store owner, kid starts acting up. Listen kid. You wanna know what happened to the last kid who messed around in my grocery store? Straw man. Malcolm Collins: It literally to me [00:02:00] feels like a Stephen King book or something. You’re kid, kid, you move to this town, everyone else is, all the other children are straw and all the adults act like it’s totally normal....

In this episode, we dive into the viral Australian academic advice (from Deakin University researchers) that parents should ask babies for “consent” before changing their diapers. It sounds absurd on the surface—and we roast it hard—but we also steelman their perspective before tearing it apart. We explore how this philosophy ties into extreme gentle parenting trends (no timeouts without consent? No punishments?), the misuse of “consent” as the sole argument against adult-minor relationships (spoiler: it’s not about consent; it’s about developmental stages and guardianship), and why removing natural threats/fears from kids’ lives might fuel modern anxiety epidemics. From ritualized diaper changes that feel suspiciously fetish-adjacent, to using clinical terms like “vulva/penis/anus” on infants vs. fun family euphemisms like “doty” and “flippy,” we share our unfiltered parenting stories—including epic blowouts, bribery for potty training, and why our kids aren’t anxious wrecks despite (or because of) our pragmatic, authoritative style. We also touch on Krampus, ancestral fear exposure, nursing home STDs, and why suburb-raised girls invent existential threats. Plus: a chaotic domestic tangent about poop smells, manga villains, and who’s making dinner. If you’re tired of overthinking parenting and want a raw, evidence-based take on why kids actually need guardians (not mini-adults), this one’s for you. Episode Transcript: Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Today we are going to be talking about children and consent and infants and consent uhoh. And we are going to be using it went viral a while ago, this story where a leftist university specifically it was the Deacon University in Australia suggested that you ask your baby consent before changing their diapers. And Simone is just sharing a story about changing Texas diapers. So, you know, on, on topic here. But it’s, it comes off as ridiculous at face value. But I want to look at it from their eyes, not like the other people covering. I wanna see how they argue for it, why they think it’s important, right. And then I want to go from there to look at other instances in which parents and parental advocates have been advocating for. Extreme consent searching from children before, like punishment and everything like that. And we saw this like in my Stephen Mullany debate where you know, like asking Simone Collins: for consent for timeout, Malcolm Collins: well they don’t, don’t do timeouts ‘cause a kid [00:01:00] wouldn’t consent to it. Right. You know, you know, it’s only gentle parenting. Only nice parenting. And so I wanna go into this philosophy in its extremes, but I’m also gonna be arguing that a a lot of people have misunderstood. And I think where the concept of consent creeped into children’s, the literature and the concept of children needing consent, is that for whatever reason, the urban monoculture decided to use a lack of consent to argue why, you know, we do not have sex with minors. And I actually think that that’s. Completely stupid. Like that is not why you don’t have sex with a minor consent. And I, I, I mean, I’ve argued this with animals where I point out that, you know, the reason we don’t have sex with animals isn’t that the animal can’t consent because we Simone Collins: eat Malcolm Collins: animals and we like raise them in a state of constant torture if you’re talking about veal or farm chicken or something like that. Oh, goodness. And, and people protest that, but you know, they’re, they’re, they’re at the same time, they’re like, oh, consent, consent, consent, you know, is why we don’t [00:02:00] do it. It’s a disease risk with, with animals. Simone Collins: Yeah. Yeah. Malcolm Collins: There, that’s why a lot of cultures convergently evolved that particular belief. But with children, I, I point out here that, okay, like you’ve got like a 15-year-old or something like that, right? Like, okay, a, a 15-year-old in terms of their cognition...

In this eye-opening conversation, Simone Collins and Malcolm Collins declare 2025 the year climate activism collapsed—and they’re not mincing words. From Greta Thunberg’s pivot to Palestine solidarity, Bill Gates’ major memo shift (”Three Tough Truths About Climate”), Matthew Yglesias rethinking his past positions, and even progressive New York walking back aggressive climate mandates... the movement that once dominated headlines is fading fast. We dive deep into why: overhyped apocalyptic predictions that never materialized, market forces solving “crises” like peak oil, historical moral panics (Satanic Panic, video games, comics), and the bigger question—what panics are actually justified? Simone shares her personal journey from hardcore climate activist (saving sea turtles, Earth Day Network, custom environmental major) to realizing many doomsday claims were overblown. We contrast climate with real existential issues like demographic collapse (aka “TISM”), water shortages in major cities, and AI disruption—plus why some panics (ozone hole, Y2K, leaded gas) were worth the freakout and actually got solved. If you’ve ever donated to climate causes, worried about the apocalypse, or wondered why the vibe shifted from “save the planet” to class conflict & human dignity... this episode is for you. We also riff on everything from Kylie Jenner housekeepers to hag-maxing Karens channeling maternal energy into Earth-worship, why young men stopped caring when the hot activists aged, and how the prenatal movement avoids the same pitfalls as old climate hysteria. Timestamps below ↓Subscribe for more unfiltered takes on culture, demographics, tech, and civilization’s real threats.#ClimateChange #2025 #DemographicCollapse #PronatalismSimone Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, Malcolm. I’m excited to be speaking with you today because 2025 was the year that climate activism died. And I don’t think enough people are talking about it, but major activists and donors and even states are dropping climate change like it’s hot. So we’re, we’re talking about Matthew Glacia, Greta Thunberg, bill Gates, and even the state of New York, which is insane what even New York lost climate change. I’ll, I’ll go into it. It, it’s, I’m like, okay. I mean, it’s clear we’re, it’s over. It’s over. We, we we’re not trying to make fetch happen anymore. Speaker: You only fight these causes cause caring cells All you activists can go yourselves That was so inspiring! What a wonderful message! Simone Collins: And in general that the sentiment has shifted. From saving animals and the earth to class conflict and human dignity. And this is ex exemplified by Fels, like Kylie Jenner being criticized for watching her animal cruelty-free makeup on her housekeepers. No one cares that it’s animal [00:01:00] cruelty free. They’re like, how dare you? Yeah, I love, I love that you a Malcolm Collins: housekeeper. She, she got it all cheap or whatever. The, the, this office that was able to do animal testing really cheap, and then they found out it was just because they were doing it on interns. Simone Collins: There’s, I think there’s that, I heard about that separately, but this, this was this was a, I think a more prominent kerfuffle, but I just think it’s really funny because she, she pays her housekeeper. The housekeeper obviously consented to it. But I think just mere, I think it’s exemplified because what, what really people are freaking out about is basically in any way using a paid employee, I guess, you know, for anything. And, and to not do it. Malcolm Collins: It’s a fascinating phenomenon, how hard, how fast and how completely the climate movement was abandoned. Yeah. Speaker: Alright, that does it! I f ed it! Malcolm Collins: We will be teaching our children about the climate movement as a historic movement. Simone Collins: Yeah. And speaking [00:02:00] of, of historical movement, I think this, this is a there’s a wider question that this development, the...

In this raw, unfiltered episode of Based Camp, Malcolm & Simone Collins tackle a politically explosive question: Why have Muslim-majority forces historically struggled to conquer and durably hold new territory from non-Muslim groups in modern times? Malcolm walks through centuries of examples—from the rapid early Islamic expansions to Ottoman Janissaries (often Christian-origin elites), the Yom Kippur War debacle, Cyprus 1974, East Timor, Azerbaijan-Armenia clashes, and more—arguing that success often depended on non-Muslim leadership, extreme minority rule, or unified caliphates that quickly fractured. They explore deeper patterns: * Coups & hierarchy: Why Muslim militaries tend toward rigid command (fear of coups) vs. decentralized Protestant/Jewish models * Idolatry & status-signaling: Protestant anti-idolatry aversion to luxury vs. opulent signaling in some Muslim/Persian/Catholic cultures * Delegation success: Early Islamic Golden Age thrived on minority rule + competent outsiders (Jews, Christians); later majority rule often shifted to abuse * Birth rates, delegation, and modern “solutions” (hire outsiders? Ban excess luxury?) Heavy on pattern-noticing, historical exceptions, biological/cultural analogies (invasive species, extremophiles), and zero sacred cows. Expect spicy takes on religion, coups, multiculturalism, and why Protestants/Jews rarely stage military coups. Perfect for fans of contrarian history, cross-cultural analysis, pronatalism, and unapologetic anthropology. [00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today with a day when I had one of those very thoughts where a thought enters my mind and I begin pulling on it and I’m like. Oh no, this can only end in bad places. Oh no. Simone Collins (2): Oh, not again, Malcolm Collins: laughing. When we were doing a recording and I said in the recording something like, well, you know, Muslim majority armies almost never are able to conquer new territory. And then it sort of got in my head I was like, but wait, isn’t that how Islam primarily expanded in the early days? And then Yeah. They thought they were like a Simone Collins (2): successful warlike group or something. That’s kinda the impression an outsider gets that doesn’t know anything. Malcolm Collins: And then I got in, well, yeah, I, I also can talk about them as like an invasive species almost in the same way that the Vikings were, they, they were an extremophile group that developed really extreme individual practices. And when they were put on the scene around groups that didn’t have defenses against them, they were quickly conquered. Mm-hmm. And you, you often see this with extreme offa groups like the, the [00:01:00] Arab Nomads or the Vikings. Okay. You just need a force to unify them. Yeah. But I then had this second thought, which is okay. So Malcolm, can you think of any time recently that a Muslim force? No. No. They’re, they’re pretty good as is any sort of highly dispersed group at protecting their territory. Okay. So, so once they have Simone Collins (2): it, they keep it. Malcolm Collins: Yeah. We saw this in places like Afghanistan, for example. Okay. But conquering new land, I got in my head I was like, okay, surely I can think of instances in which a Muslim majority group conquered and durably kept the land of a non-Muslim majority group for let’s say over a generation. Right? Simone Collins (2): Yeah. Give, given the reputation that we think they have. That would make sense. Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And so then I just started going through in my head, like the Ottomans, no. Like they were terrible in World War I like, like practically a joke [00:02:00] player. The, the Yo Kippur War. The Yo Kippur war was hilarious, and we’ll go into it as more of an example of this wider phenomenon, but like Israel little, at that time, Israel was not like the major arms producer it is today. It didn’t have technology. There were this fledgling...

In this episode, Simone & Malcolm Collins dive deep into the escalating conspiracy theories from Candace Owens’ world—especially after Charlie Kirk’s assassination. From Charlie being a time traveler who attended a secret “X-Men school” for gifted kids, to Brigitte Macron (and Michelle Obama) secretly being men, Harvard as a Mossad base, Frankist cults running the world, the Bolshevik Revolution, 9/11, JFK, fake moon landings, dinosaurs being “fake and gay,” and the infamous Egyptian planes surveillance plot... we break it all down. Is this audience capture on steroids? AI-induced psychosis? Genuine belief amplified by massive Patreon money ($200k+/month)? Or just the most entertaining grift in conservative media right now? We plausibility-check where things aren’t totally insane (spy recruitment on campuses is real!), laugh at the absurdity, and explore why her follower count exploded in 2025. You can find Simone’s Reality Fabricator scenario in which you experience a world as Candace Owens where all her conspiracy theories are real here: https://rfab.ai/share/adventure/youre-candace-owens-and-all-your-conspiracy-theori Simone outlined this episode, so the notes (and some text screenshots) follow and the transcript can be found after. :)The Candice bot: https://rfab.ai/share/adventure/youre-candace-owens-and-all-your-conspiracy-theori RFab is finally mostly stable: https://rfab.ai/ Our Substack: https://basedcamppodcast.substack.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/SimoneAndMalcolmCollins Discord: https://discord.com/invite/EGFRjwwS92 The School: https://parrhesia.io/student-signup App to talk with kids: https://wizling.ai/ Episode Notes Candace Owens has gone so off the reservation that we’ve got to talk about it. The latest from Candace Owens is that she claims he’s a time traveler based on joking, flirty texts he sent her. Writes Cinema Shogun on X: Candace Owens is now saying that Charlie Kirk was marked since a child because he had special powers. She thinks he could possibly see into the future. And claims he went to a secret school for kids with gifted abilities like the X-Men. That’s where we’re at folks. * He posts a clip of her talking about this followed by the X-men intro—love it I had not realized how far it had gotten. And yet Candace Owens has a huge following: * 7.5M followers on X * For scale: * Brett Cooper—also part of the Daily Wire cinematic universe—has 538.8K * Ben Shapiro has 8M * Asmongold has 1.2M * Elon Musk has 2342.5M * Donald Trump has 109.3M * Hasan Piker has 1.6M * Greta Thunberg has 5.1M * 5.74M subscribers on YouTube * Ben Shapiro has 7.13M * Brett Cooper (who split off from Daily Wire __ after Candace Owens) has 1.68M * Asmongold has 4.31M * Hasan Piker has 1.77M * 11.8K members on Patreon * Her membership starts at $20/month, so minimally she’ making 20*11,860= $237,200/month. * Minimal tiers allows people to: “Submit questions and comments to have answered/discussed in the final segment of “A Shot In the Dark”. This will be the only pool of questions selected from.” So I decided to explore: * What exactly Candace Owens is claiming * Whether her apparent psychosis is AI psychosis, audience-driven psychosis, good ol’ fashioned psychosis, or a mix * What role her audience plays: Are they egging her on for entertainment, intentionally worsening her psychosis? Do they believe what she’s saying? Candace Owens’ Claims The Antisemetic Theories I think these may be the most important, as I think they lead to a surge in support (as antisemitism is on the rise and her expression of it is uniquely entertaining) * Owens has alleged that Jews founded Israel as part of a “cult” linked to the Frankist sect, involved in crimes against Christians during Passover. * She has claimed Jews orchestrated the Bolshevik Revolution to exterminate Christians, that Harvard University serves as a Mossad base, that Israel was behind the 9/11 attacks, and that the Holocaust is...

In this episode, Malcolm & Simone Collins explore the bizarre, contradictory, and extremely influential philosophy of Julius Evola — the Italian thinker often called the “super-fascist” who criticized the Nazis for being too materialistic and not racist/spiritual enough. We cover: * Spiritual racism & soul hierarchies (yes, really) * Why he hated Nazis, democracy, modernity, Christianity, and Jews * Magical idealism, riding the tiger, Kali Yuga & return to a primordial golden age * Tantric sex metaphysics, non-ejaculatory rituals, graveyard meditation, and “metaphysics of sex” * The strange influence on Bronze Age Pervert / BAP, new right vitalism, and even some Nick Fuentes-adjacent ideas * Why we consider spiritual/mystical “vitalism” one of the most dangerous and self-defeating paths a person can take[00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are gonna be talking about the philosophical ideas of a man who hated the Nazis because he thought they were too woke and weren’t nearly racist enough for his standards. This is a man called Julius Ola. So, so actually he, he calls himself a super fascist. He, he he didn’t actually hate the, he, he criticized him over that, but he thought that what they were doing broadly aligned with his ideology, which was a very interesting world perspective. And I, I wanted to talk about it because I was looking at and trying to understand where some of the new Vitalistic philosophies got their world framing from. For example, the philosophy of BAP or Bronze h pervert, who, who by the way, has explicitly said to his followers, don’t read this guy directly. It’s all philosophical. Who what is it? Like mystical hoodoo? But he’ll occasionally read things that this guy has, has, has written as like a, a sort of [00:01:00] vibing. And when you, when you see this guy’s idea, you’ll be like, oh, I can see where the framework presented by a Bronze Age pervert, or by a man’s world or something like that, may have come in part from this guy’s ideology. He was around during the period of World War ii, so you understand he was in Italy. He’s an Italian. I know, I know. Terrible. Is he still alive? He was alive until the 1970s. Okay. But he’s not, he’s Simone Collins: not an actively publishing substack author. He, he’s an an actual philosopher who wrote stuff in, born Malcolm Collins: in the 18 hundreds. Yes. Pre-internet. Okay. Simone Collins: Okay. Malcolm Collins: Okay. Okay. Gotcha, gotcha. So, like, philosopher, philosopher, guy. And his ideas. If, if you strip out the, the racism and everything like that of his ideas, ‘cause that’s, there’s a lot of racism. It, it was interesting, he believed that different ethnic groups had different qualities. Like there was like a hierarchy of soul quality between ethnic [00:02:00] groups, but that you could work so that you, your goal was to always improve your soul quality. Right? Like, like how we believe a person’s life’s goal is. Simone Collins: So he wasn’t an HBD dude, he was a like soul. Like metaphysically. Different groups were different. Malcolm Collins: Yeah. That’s why he didn’t like the Nazis, because he said they, so that was his big disagreement with him. He was like, well, you know, they’re, they’re being too like materialistic. Oh my God. Simone Collins: Like, don’t look at the genetics. You have to, you have to look at their auras. I’m so what he thought, Malcolm Collins: he thought that you could like, work out your soul enough. He’s like a soul Jim. What, Simone Collins: on what grounds was he evaluating their souls? We, Malcolm Collins: we will talk about it, but he thought that you could work it out enough that you could get your soul into like another ethnic group of souls. So like, you, you could have an Aryan soul even if you weren’t Aryan and if you were Aryan, but like, you were too materialistic. That’s kind of Hindu, right? Simone Collins: [00:03:00] I mean, like,...

In this eye-opening episode, we dive deep into one of the most bizarre political phenomena of our time: How did Western leftists (and especially progressive women) once celebrate the 1979 Iranian Revolution… only for the regime they helped bring to power to later execute tens of thousands of them? We show the iconic photo of two leftist women holding up Khomeini’s picture — one was executed 10 years later, the other fled to Sweden after escaping execution. And shockingly — many modern leftists (Hassan Piker, Jackson Hinkle, PinkNews-aligned voices, etc.) are STILL defending or downplaying the current Iranian regime during the massive 2025–2026 protests while simultaneously claiming America is worse. But we don’t just dunk — we try to seriously understand the psychology: audience capture, sexual/ethnic progressive hierarchies, anti-Western civilizational loathing, the “screaming girl exponential effect” (South Park style), and why atrocities against protesters (machine-gunning crowds, false-flag kill-zones, body-bag photos) simply don’t register for many on the far left. Then comes the uncomfortable mirror: A significant faction on the dissident right (Groyper/Fuentes-adjacent) enthusiastically cheers for a vision of government that is structurally almost identical to the current Iranian theocracy — just swap “Supreme Leader + Council of Experts” for “Catholic autocracy / monarchy / inquisition / 12th century governance” and remove democracy entirely. We go through direct quotes and show why cheering for this vision is functionally the same mistake the 1979 leftist women made. Episode Transcript:Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. People are wondering why we haven’t done the Iran one yet, and I wanted to wait until we had a really interesting and mentally engaging take that we could do on this. Yeah. And we are gonna be focused on two core areas today. We are going to be focused on how modern western leftists help bring in this regime. And moderate secular leftists brought this regime into power even was in Iran. And. Why they’re fighting against it falling apart. But then we’re also going to, no, if you’re, if you’re surprised by that, here is an image of two leftist girls. You can see they look like hippies celebrating in 1979 right in holding up his picture, you know, the the current leader and the ayatollah. And it said he later had 30,000 leftists executed. And these two specific girls in this pictured the girl in front, Maria Rafi, was executed by Islamist 10 years [00:01:00] later. And the girl at the back, Sahara Mohammed, escaped from Mar Grand and took asylum in Sweden four years after the revolution. Simone Collins: Oh my gosh. Malcolm Collins: And this is, didn’t work Speaker 3: out for them. Malcolm Collins: This is one of the types of things on our new subreddit that’s like huge now. That we need mods for. So do reach out if you’re interested in that. Because we are now the largest conservative Reddit on Reddit, bigger than Joe Rogan, bigger than Asma Gold definitely bigger than any of the mainstream conservative ones. But I think if you look at the comments on the Reddit and stuff like that, people were laughing at this. They were laughing at this and saying stuff like, it’s a shame that she had to escape the regime that she brought into power. And I would actually like to hold a mirror to many people on right, right now, which is being as stupid as these two girls were putting a regime into power that told them exactly what it planned to do to people like them exactly the way it wanted to operate. The other thing that we’re gonna go into a lot, which I find to be a very interesting topic to discuss is all of the [00:02:00] modern leftists, you know, whether it’s Asan or anyone else, and we’ll go over who they are, what their platforms is, like pink news and stuff like that. Mm-hmm. Who are standing the regime right now saying the regime really isn’t...

Why Women Are Obsessed with Gay Hockey Romance (Heated Rivalry Phenomenon Explained) YouTube Description (optimized for SEO + engagement): Straight women are going absolutely feral over Heated Rivalry — the steamy gay hockey romance series that nobody saw coming. From TikTok edits to viral thirst posts, this Canadian show (now on HBO) has become a global obsession, even trending in places where it’s banned. In this episode, Simone & Malcolm Collins dive deep into why women can’t get enough of male-on-male romance — from Yuri on Ice to Boys’ Love manga, slash fiction since the 1970s, and the surprising evolutionary & psychological reasons behind it. We cover: * The “women can’t love” red-pill theory (Simone’s most based take ever) * Why go woke go broke has one massive exception * The difference between real gay relationships and the fantasy versions women crave * Power dynamics, objectification, escape from gender politics, and much more Is this just harmless escapism… or proof of something deeper about female desire?Simone Collins: [00:00:00] Maybe the red pillars are right. Maybe women love, well, maybe women are incapable of love. And also women know it too, and that’s why they like to watch men love each other, because they love to observe these strange creatures who are capable of love. Oh my God. That is the most Malcolm Collins: based Simone. Simone that’s going at the front of the video. I That is. That is, I had never considered this before. Right. Right. And I think you might be right. Simone Collins: go woke, go broke has one massive exception and it’s when , the wokeness is for a leering, non woke audience that just wants to thirst over when you are objectifying Malcolm Collins: the person. Simone Collins: Yeah. When you we, yes. When, when you are objectifying. Would you like to know more? Simone Collins: Hello Malcolm. I’m excited to be speaking with you today because gay men on ice are trending and before Malcolm Collins: Gary, Gary, Gary on ice, that anime, we, we watched like two episodes of it or something about gay men on ice. Simone Collins: It’s, yeah, but they’re figure skaters. And today we’re talking about hockey [00:01:00] skaters because literally what, before 6:00 AM this morning alone, I heard about the show heated rivalry, which features steamy sex scenes between two hockey rivals. Four times two were from like YouTubers and then. Two or from friends. Malcolm Collins: Why was everybody talking about this seems like a normal thing in media these days. Why is, why are people talking about this? Simone Collins: No, no. This is different. This is different. And okay. Also, one of our, one of our patrons encouraged me to do an episode on this because it’s trending that much. And they’re like, what is going on? So they wrote, why do straight women love to Lust after Gay Men? Because that’s the thing people are talking about. They’re not talking about the show per se. They’re talking about the women posting TikTok reactions to it and edits of it. And like, this is women fangirling over it. So this person wrote, there seems to be current cultural fascination with these gay hockey players. And the video I shared by Brett Cooper delves into the current craze ‘cause she did this whole thing on it. This has always baffled me because the obvious. [00:02:00] Incompatibility, but this is long-winded cultural stereotype. It doesn’t seem to be a new cultural phenomenon, but I don’t know how timeless it is either because it’s definitely intercultural. I’m also personally interested in this topic, given that a lot of girls growing up told me things like, I wish you were gay, or You have to be gay. I even had a group of four female friends, I had make a plan to try to convince their parents I was gay so we could all go together to a vacation house. Though nothing happened. My condolences by the way, I’m just wondering and would love Malcolm’s input on the subject. So we need your analysis,...

In this episode, we dive deep into the stunning US military operation "Absolute Resolve" that captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on January 3, 2026. We analyze the viral testimony from a Maduro loyalist security guard (shared by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt), which describes overwhelming US tech: sudden radar blackout, massive drone swarms that retaliate only against shooters, a tiny team of ~20 elite soldiers dropped from just 8 helicopters, and a mysterious "intense sound wave" weapon causing nosebleeds, vomiting, and immobilization.We break down what's plausible (confirmed US capabilities like LRAD acoustic devices, microwave systems, jamming of Russian/Chinese radar like S-300 & JY-27), what's experimental, and why this feels like "Space Marines" vs. conventional forces. We also compare it to Israeli spycraft (e.g., pager ops), discuss future multipolar world dynamics (US vs. Israel as dominant powers?), and explore emerging warfare trends like autonomous drone swarms.This is scary, impressive, and potentially game-changing. What do you think — real next-level tech or exaggeration?Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are gonna be doing an analysis of the US raid on Venezuela, what US’ military capabilities are, because we’ve done some on Israel’s military capabilities, which are, it may be maybe less impressive. We’ll talk about the two in comparison in a second. And what the future of war is going to be like from this and the piece I’m gonna read, it’s scary. It’s scary. The, the first thing that you’re going to think when you hear this, and the first thing I saw when I heard this piece is, this is fake. This, this cannot be real. Where’s your source? Right? Simone Collins: So, oh, no, I immediately thought of the w was it Cuban? Embassy. Russian Embassy. Yeah. That was later Malcolm Collins: proven fake. Oh, Simone Collins: yeah, it was, but I Malcolm Collins: still, okay. But th this is when I heard this, I thought, or at least I’m skeptical, like I’m not gonna present this on the show unless I dug into it. So I did a lot. Of digging on this. Mm-hmm. To try to find where it came from to try to find, if it’s a credible source, to try to find if it’s plausible with what we [00:01:00] know, a raid within this location might be. Here’s what we do know and why I do think it’s plausible. Yeah. For two reasons. One is the secretary Carolyn Levitt. This is Press Secretary tweeted this. Right. So if the White House Press Secretary is tweeting an account of what happened during the raid, and it is completely fictional and out of line, was she knows what happened during that raid. Yeah. At the very least, right? Like the people who approve this, that had to go to somebody for approval. You don’t tweet about what happened during a raid. It a. May have, and this is what’s really interesting because after digging, digging, digging, the version of this that went viral is the version she shared. Okay. Oh, I eventually found the original leak. Simone Collins: Oh, the person, the guard one of Maduro’s guards actually reporting his experience Malcolm Collins: actually recording this. Yeah. So it turns out this is plausible. It is likely real, and parts of it are left [00:02:00] out in the version that the White House tweeted that went viral in right-wing circles. And as such, my, my read of why did parts of it gets left out is though they’re the military capabilities they don’t want you to know about. Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. Malcolm Collins: The biggest part of it that was left out that I found really interesting is the guy notes that the drone swarm that was all of a sudden around them, out of nowhere. Yeah. That whenever anyone tried to shoot at it, it would shoot them, but otherwise it left people alone. And well, I didn’t read Simone Collins: about that. Ooh, wow. Okay. Yeah. Well, Malcolm Collins: because that’s only in the Spanish....

The UK government funded a chilling “anti-radicalization” video game called Pathways that’s being pushed into schools across the country.In this Based Camp episode, Malcolm & Simone Collins play through the game and reveal how it psychologically punishes curiosity, punishes looking things up, punishes even moderate/middle-ground choices, and funnels every player toward “reeducation” counseling services run by the very company that made the game. From demonizing basic questions about immigration, to warning kids they can go to prison for watching the “wrong” video online, to turning a hot goth girl (Amelia) into the face of evil right-wing radicalism — this is one of the most dystopian pieces of state-sponsored propaganda we’ve ever seen. Is this the future of “preventing extremism”? Or is it straight-up psychological conditioning + chilling effect rolled into one creepy edutainment package? Watch us break down every major choice path, the psychology behind it, and why even “just looking it up” gets you marked as radicalized. [00:00:00] Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. So. If you guys are on the internet and you’re like me, you’ve probably heard or seen videos talking about this video game that was made by the UK government designed to brainwash kids or augment kids political beliefs. Specifically, or, or, or from the perspective of the government. Counter extreme beliefs. And I sort of blew it off when I first saw it. I thought it would be like dust born or something like that. Or one of the other. What Simone Collins: is Dust born? I don’t know that, Malcolm Collins: Dust Born was a game that somebody that USAID was funding gave a bunch of money to, that was just horrible. The main character was just this horrible black, racist person. And they were. Pregnant and it was weird. But it was, it was more sort of funny to go through. Right? Yeah. Because they tried to compete in the mainstream gaming market and just nobody bought it, so it’s kind of irrelevant. Right. Okay. The problem with this one is, is they’re learning and they’re adapting. And with this game. And I, and I had [00:01:00] seen it and I didn’t think anything of it. I was like, it cannot be that bad. I watched it and it’s, and then after I watched it, like, ‘cause I watched Adam go play through some of it. I’ll play some of those clips like really cut down for you guys. I then played through every choice myself. Simone Collins: So anyone can access the game. How did you find the game? Yeah. Malcolm Collins: And I realized it’s way more insidious than you would think. Just Google it. It’s, it’s called pathways. Really? Wow. Okay. It’s way more insidious than you would think about the way it structures things, the way it handles psychology, what it punishes players for. And, also the way it gets to people. So unlike other games where it’s like, we’re just gonna put this out there and anyone can play it. This game is something that is given to educators in the, the whole district in the uk and they’re actively encouraged to like put it on school computers, have kids play it, you know, as part of classroom exercises. And it. A really interesting thing about it that you may not get if you’re just watching the video, is the group that made it. The main other thing they do is like counseling for kids who [00:02:00] they, who are becoming radicalized. And a lot of the game is pushing you towards saying you need counseling, Simone Collins: right? Because the, the game centers around you plays Charlie and. They’re all Charlie. Charlie inevitably ends up going through reeducation. And so this is basically an advertisement for them? Yes. It’s like, some, some semaglutide production company. Making a health video game in which in the end you just end up taking semaglutide. No, it’s a Malcolm Collins: similar glide company going to the government, which is already paying for the semaglutide and then saying, Hey, can you...

In this raw, unfiltered episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into the January 2026 ICE shooting death of Renee Nicole Good — a 37-year-old white lesbian poet, mother of three, and full-time activist killed in Minneapolis during an immigration enforcement operation. Why hasn’t this incident sparked the same massive outrage or martyr status as George Floyd’s death (despite happening blocks away)? We break down the video evidence, the protester’s actions (including laughing, attempting to drive away, and prior harassment of ICE agents), the role of extreme privilege, and why parts of the left seem uncomfortable rallying around a white woman’s death — even when she was queer. We also discuss: * The normalization of antagonizing law enforcement * Broken systems, immigration fraud (especially Somali migrant networks), and why “this could happen to anyone” is dangerously misleading * Personal family tragedy (children losing a parent) * Parallels to other cases, cultural bubbles, and long-term societal consequences Plus bonus tangents on everything from vampire conspiracies to future human colonization and why we’re team “family values vampires.” If you’re tired of surface-level takes, this is the meta-analysis you need. Love you, Simone. 🔥 Watch the full bodycam/protester footage breakdowns in context — and drop your thoughts below: Was this avoidable? Is the reaction (or lack thereof) revealing something deeper about modern activism?Speaker: [00:00:00] When an officer approaches your car, be polite. Speaker 2: Is there a Speaker: problem, officer? And stay in your car with your hands on the wheel. What the f**k do want motherfucker? Unless you wanna ask this, Speaker 4: That’s fine. Us citizen. You wanna come at us? You wanna come at us? Speaker: Unless you wanna ask this, Would you like to know more? Malcolm Collins: Hello Simone. I am, well, I guess it’s a, it’s a somber occasion to be here with you today. ‘cause today we’re gonna be discussing somebody who died and the public reaction to it. And I think what a lot of people are missing, ‘cause I wanna focus more on the meta commentary. The ice shooting death? Yeah. Because I think it’s, it’s really interesting in a number of perspectives. One of, I think the biggest is that she has not turned into, like, when it first happened, there was this [00:01:00] feeling that, oh, this is gonna turn into a death that a lot of people rally around, like the bbl m death, like the trouble. Well, and people Simone Collins: were pointing out even the, the geographic proximity, the physical proximity of her death to the death of George Floyd. Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And yet it has not turned into that. It, it, it very much has not turned into that. So I wanna talk about why that hasn’t happened, and I’m gonna start on that question because I think it’s, it’s a very, very fascinating, and I think a large part of it comes down to a video that you shared with me, right, where they are interviewing a white woman who is at a protest about this woman’s death. And she says. She feels uncomfortable being there and she’s not sure it is ethical for her to be there. And the reason why she is not sure it is ethical for her to be there is because they are protesting the death of a white woman. And she feels that that is a fundamentally wrong thing to do. Speaker 8: So, I mean, I’m just walking around kind of just day side. ‘cause I, I [00:02:00] got, I was like, I don’t know if it’s the right thing to do. It feels kind of wrong being here in some way. I don’t know why. Uhhuh And why, why do you think? Yeah, I don’t know. Um, I don’t know like where that stems from. Um, like I don’t, I mean, part of it is being like a white woman that I’m privileged and I have a lot of privilege. Mm-hmm. Um. So I feel like white tears are not always something that’s helpful or necessary. Yeah. Um, when black and brown people have been experiencing this Yeah. For a long time. Um,...