Debating Fairness in Sports and Immigration Policies

In this in-depth video, Malcolm and Simone Collins present a comprehensive overview of the "New Right" political movement, its origins, and its key policy positions. As Simone runs for office in Pennsylvania, the couple outlines their vision for a pragmatic, family-oriented, and anti-bureaucratic approach to governance. They discuss a wide range of topics including fiscal policy, social issues, immigration, foreign policy, and environmentalism, offering a fresh perspective on conservative values in the modern era.

Key topics covered:

* The emergence of the New Right and its differences from traditional conservatism

* Pragmatic, evidence-based fiscal policies

* Cultural sovereignty and family rights

* Immigration reform focusing on high-skilled workers

* America First foreign policy with strategic interventions

* Environmental conservation balanced with economic needs

* Critique of progressive policies and bureaucratic bloat

* The importance of meritocracy and fighting discrimination

Whether you're a political enthusiast, a concerned citizen, or simply curious about emerging conservative ideologies, this video provides valuable insights into the evolving landscape of American politics.

Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] I think this new political alliance of the tech entrepreneurs with the Americans who are just tired of being around Makes a lot of sense when it comes to stuff like this.

Okay. Let's build new systems. Let's build better systems. We don't need to do things the way they've always been done

Simone Collins: what progressivism is now is, is like a bureaucratic virus. And because these , organizations are so large. They were taken over by this virus, which, which presents itself as progressive. And so they turned left.

Malcolm Collins: And when you talk about the inefficiencies that this has gotten, I think a lot of people don't realize how big this is.

You know, you look at something like the case of putting the suicide netting on the golden gate bridge, which ended up costing. About a third the cost even in cash adjusted dollars of the original construction of the bridge itself.

. When, when we talk about the collapse of our school system, we see as we pour more money into the school system, it's just increasing the size of the bureaucracy.

I'm going to be putting some graphs on screen here so you can see this.

Simone Collins: Well, student outcomes are not improving. [00:01:00] And

Malcolm Collins: their mental health is going haywire with a recent

CDC study showing one in four school aged girls had a plan to kill themselves on any given year, not over the course of their entire adolescence.

And it reported one in ten attempts to unalive oneselves from students. every single year. This stuff needs massive and immediate reform. So let's go in to our actual policy positions

would you like to know more?

Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I am excited to be here with you. You are running for office in Pennsylvania right now. And this episode is meant to collate many of our Evolving political beliefs into one video that we can use as an ad for this campaign cycle, but also for our regular watchers to catch up or have a one place to see everything that they can share with other people and our political beliefs Well, they kind [00:02:00] of matter because something that's been coming up more and more in other videos we've been doing is this concept of the new right, a new political faction forming within the right.

And at first I thought that our views were just sort of a weird form of right wing beliefs. Then I put in the names of other figures that are associated with this new right, like Elon and Peter Thiel and Chamath and Vivek and David Sacks and Marc Andreessen. And JD Vance, the recently appointed VP for Trump.

And I asked , what are the unifying political beliefs between these people? And it basically spit out. Our political belief system to a T. And then I was like, well, then what I'd really like to do with this video is one explain , in short, we've done longer videos that go into a lot more detail on this, how the new right emerged, then also give a political philosophy, not just like a list of.

These are the things we believe, [00:03:00] but a larger philosophy around why we believe these things.

Simone Collins: I like it.

Malcolm Collins: And so people know you can be like, well, the Simone's running or Malcolm's running. It doesn't really matter. We do everything together. We run all our companies together. We believe in gender equality.

Just not the way feminists talk about it.

Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, and honestly, as, as you can see, Malcolm is, is the talker, the way we work, Malcolm. Malcolm is the outbound high risk high reward faces the public, you know, strategy guy and I'm execution. So that's why you're going to see him talk more. I mean, I think I get s**t done.

Malcolm Collins: It's sort of a a communist approach to putting together a family. You could say from each, according to their ability to each, according to their needs.

Simone Collins: All of our chickens are named after communists.

Malcolm Collins: Yes, because that's what always happens to communists at the end of the day is the, the. But what I mean in the family context, a, a communist family structure is to say [00:04:00] that we split tasks based on our ability and our needs while understanding that men and women are on average different and therefore Some tasks are going to be easier for a woman or dispositionally more favorable for a woman and some tasks are going to be easier for a man.

Simone Collins: Well, also logistically, like, for example, it's a lot easier to get elected as a woman than it is as a man. So who do we run? This one!

Malcolm Collins: Exactly! In this world of DEI! So let's start with How the new right emerged. And this will be a summary of some stuff we've gone over in other videos, but broadly speaking in the nineties there was a force that we call GOP Inc.

This is what the Republican party was. It was an alliance of two broad factions, one theocratic faction that was interested in legislating morality, i. e. enforcing people to conform to their view of what was moral through legislation like. You know, banning gay marriage, for example and then an alliance of them [00:05:00] and big business, as well as blue bloods, because big business and blue bloods are usually the same group.

Over time, big business moved to the left, as did intergenerational wealth and the theocrats stopped being able to get anything done. At that point in history, Trump came along. Trump inspired an entirely new base that the Republicans hadn't classically appealed to, which was disenfranchised Americans.

Americans who felt they were getting the raw deal and wanted to tear down parts of the system and try to build something new that kind of worked. Hence, drain the swamp. Hence, Drain the Swamp, but the new right hadn't really emerged yet with Trump because when Trump took this position, the types of people, like I mentioned before, like Elon and Shemmass and Vivek and David Sachs you know, they were still, and even us you know, we were still and actually even Trump's current running mate, we're still in trouble.

J. D. Vance, yeah,

Simone Collins: J. D. Vance was quite the never Trumper.

Malcolm Collins: Yes, but as time went on, the left move [00:06:00] further and further left. They begin to sort of divide our society into an ethnic caste system that believed some humans were more deserving of human dignity than other humans. For example, was the CDC partially distributing COVID vaccines based on a person's ethnicity instead of based on their need, which is just horrifying to us.

And recently they have moved

Jews to the bottom of this hierarchy. In our mind, making them a little different from Nazis,

Recently a response to one of our videos. Somebody was a bit surprised by this point they were like, oh no, it's only these Zionists. And then I put it out. Well, you know, you look at the surveys, it's 85 to 95% of users Zionists.. It doesn't require much knowledge of Jewish history to know why many Jews would think that for the Jewish people to be safe, they need to have at least one state where they are the majority of the population. But. Outside of that.

The urban monoculture, which the Progressive's push. Is based on the belief system that all economic differences between cultural and ethnic groups [00:07:00] is due entirely to discrimination. Therefore, if there is a group like the Jews that is disproportionately economically successful, yet claims to be the historic victims of discrimination. They must be lying because that is impossible within The urban monocultural perspective.

Malcolm Collins: but they have also overreached and gone against the science in many areas. For example, the gender transition of youth which we will get to when we talk about our social policies.

But this began to push the tech elite. So historically in the nineties, big business was conservative. Entrepreneurial tech elite was progressive. But that has flipped. Now the big business. Went to the other side, the tech elites came to, to our side and it was because as JD Vance, I think very eloquently showed, they actually have a lot in common with America's disenfranchised groups.

So if you take people like the people of rural Appalachia who have this pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality, [00:08:00] Who have this belief in a meritocracy and grittiness and entrepreneurialism. These are all things that were always valued by the entrepreneur class. In addition to that, the entrepreneur class has been very heavily shaped by libertarian philosophy since the crypto boom.

And in addition to that they are very distrustful of large bureaucracies and believe that A lot of the way the government has handled things recently, like the COVID response and it's well, and election cycles has become corrupt and bureaucratic and needs to be reformed.

Simone Collins: Yeah. I would just add that it, it seems that As we have shifted to an age of greater bureaucratic bloat and, and general organizational ossification in general, and just keep in mind the cost of doing anything now in business and government is so much higher because now there are all these layers of management, all these layers of regulation, which add costs, which add personnel, which had departments.

I think that also somehow has to do with The large organizations, you know, the big [00:09:00] dot coms of what used to be a much more scrappy era becoming progressive is that they're starting to align more with sort of progressive bureaucratic government interests. And I feel like. A lot of what people see as progressivism actually isn't that anymore.

It's not really what what people think of when they think of like progressive social policies. It really has to do more with large sprawling bureaucracies and a sort of cancerous growth. I don't know how else to put it. Well, I mean, that's what DEI is. It, it, it, like a cancerous It's not about actual diversity and equality.

It's about an organizational growth that has, has, has Increased in size like a large scale for

Malcolm Collins: replicating idea that prevents the organization's normal immune system from attacking it by saying it's doing something very important, i. e. protecting diversity and inclusion, but it is not. I mean, you can look at recent leaks from things like Disney.

Where we, they had an instance of a half black person not getting the job because they didn't quote [00:10:00] unquote, look black enough. Or the recent leaks from the FAA are not leaks, but like now we know that this is what happened where they built tests that were designed to get more minorities in.

And the way the test did that was by asking questions like, what was your least favorite subject in school and giving you points for saying science or saying, do you take commands from authority? Well, and giving you points for saying, no, you didn't.

So actual black people were not hired for this. If they didn't fit. Stereotypes, it was really black people. Yeah, it

Simone Collins: was, it was only people in a specific association who actually kind of got the answers leaked to them, which is even more corrupt. So I think the really interesting thing about this though, is that it's not that the large companies of before that used to be conservative somehow just became progressive culturally over time.

It's more that what progressivism is now is, is like a bureaucratic virus. And because these organisms, organizations are so [00:11:00] large. They were taken over by this virus, which, which presents itself as progressive. And so they turned left.

Malcolm Collins: And when you talk about the inefficiencies that this has gotten, I think a lot of people don't realize how big this is.

You know, you look at something like the case of putting the suicide netting on the golden gate bridge, which ended up costing. About a third the cost and taking about three times the, , the time even in cash adjusted dollars of the original construction of the bridge itself.

Simone Collins: It's telling, I mean, it's also telling about the mental health of our society. The huge amounts have to be spent just to stop people from hurling themselves off the Golden Gate Bridge

Malcolm Collins: at this time. When, when we talk about the collapse of our school system, we see as we pour more money into the school system, it's just increasing the size of the bureaucracy.

I'm going to be putting some graphs on screen here so you can see this.

Simone Collins: Well, student outcomes are not improving. And

Malcolm Collins: their mental health is going haywire with a recent

CDC study showing one in four school aged girls had a plan to kill themselves on any given [00:12:00] year, not over the course of their entire adolescence.

And it reported one in ten attempts to unalive oneselves from students. every single year. That was horrifying. This stuff needs massive and immediate reform. So let's go in to our actual policy positions and policy positions you sort of see across this group. So in terms of our fiscal policy we have a policy position that historically you and I republicanism, but it seems to just align broadly with the new right or the techno Conservatives, as we are sometimes called and it is what I , broadly would describe as pragmatic evidence based fiscal policy with a heavy distrust of bureaucracies.

Simone Collins: I think I have to emphasize here that evidence based. Policy of any sort is actually incredibly radical as a political concept. So, now come sent me to Cambridge to study technology policy. I literally have a master's degree in it. And the entire [00:13:00] punchline of the entire degree was. Wouldn't it be cool if politicians made evidence based policy decisions?

Oh, ha ha, that will never happen. Let's interview a whole bunch of politicians who tried to make it happen and they got laughed out of office and basically the incentives aren't in place to motivate it. But now there's this faction that's really pushing for it. So one, it seems like a no brainer, but two, this is revolutionary and also really exciting from a political development perspective.

Malcolm Collins: Yes. So what, what does this mean? This means a fiscal policy that is largely Anti bureaucracy, but not just anti government bureaucracy. We are also antagonistic towards large corporate bureaucracies, especially corporate bureaucracies that control the mediums of communication. So if they have natural monopolies in a space like, say, YouTube, or in a space like, say, Twitter, or in a space like, say, Facebook, it does make sense for the government to intervene like that as our founders knew.

That is why when our founders were [00:14:00] building our government, they nationalized the Postal system. Why did they do that? Why? When the phone lines were building out was heavy, heavy, heavy regulation put on them. Because if a company can buy the air between my wife and I and control what the other person is hearing or control most media in the country or something like that, that creates Huge negative incentives in huge incentives for foul play.

And so it makes sense to regulate that. But while we do believe that bureaucracy is bad, this does not mean that we are always against government intervention, as we have just pointed out is trust busting. For example you look at JD Vance and he was for raising the minimum wage. He just was sincere.

He didn't pretend like it wouldn't cause people to lose their jobs. He didn't pretend like it wouldn't put companies out of business. He just considered those in his calculations. Or you can look at policies that we push, like we would push a policy that says that companies should not be able to demand somebody work from the office.

Unless they can prove there is an efficiency gain from [00:15:00] that, that demand. You know, you shouldn't otherwise they should

Simone Collins: be permitted to work remotely, Malcolm saying, because that makes it easier, for example, for parents to be parents.

Malcolm Collins: Exactly. Or if you're talking about things like maternity leave I believe that if a company cannot create a safe environment for a mother to bring her child into the office, they need to pay for her to be with that kid at home.

And if it's not an office environment or an environment where the child can be safe, like a construction site or something like that, that means we need to allow the mother to stay home because, and if you're wondering why would you say something like this, there often are not other solutions for very young children, other than to be with the mother for the first, if you have not dealt with a baby under like 3 months old, it is very, very hard to find care solutions for them.

And it also means that we are open to economic experimentation when we say evidence based. So something like UBI is something that we would be open to, universal basic income.

But we would be open to doing it on a test [00:16:00] basis where it could be used to lower other bureaucracies. So this also applies to how we relate to things like Cash handouts to people who are struggling financially. We are pro cutting back all of the complicated bureaucratic mess and promoting simple cash handouts if, if those can pass along with a cutback of all of the other things.

Because we should be getting money directly into the hands of the citizens and not in the hands of bureaucrats, which, as you saw from that school problem, this is why more money isn't helping with school outcomes, because it's all going to the bureaucrats.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: With AI, we can really fight that now.

Simone Collins: Yeah, basically so many government systems, you know, were developed at a time when We mostly dealt with paper filing systems and snail mail.

Oh, excuse me. And now we live in an age where you can do things so much more efficiently. The really funny thing is, you know, we, we've done a [00:17:00] lot of work in other countries, Malcolm worked in South Korea. We, we have goodness gracious girl. Both we, we run a company In Peru, in addition to the United States, it's funny that in some countries like Peru, which you think of like, you know, their systems cannot be anywhere close to us, you know, sophisticated as the governmental systems in the United States, actually, in many ways, they're way more advanced because they were able to just leapfrog ahead.

You know, they were, they were developing certain systems when tech was way better than when we developed those same systems. So if we just kind of let go of what we started with and Built something a little fresher. It's amazing how much money could be saved, how much time could be saved. So like literally people like, Oh, you can't have improved government services without paying more in taxes.

Totally not true. If you just redesigned some systems, started fresh, you could both lower taxes And get better results, which is, you know, amazing, but also frustrating because no one's doing

Malcolm Collins: it yet. I should point out how easy this can be. So you look at like, when we talk about these [00:18:00] inefficiencies, consider that like recently I was trying to do some business filings on an online platform.

It would not let me submit them on the weekend. What is an online platform? Why did they need to accompany? Business hours. This is because of bureaucracy. Or you consider in it, you know, when she's saying things are so much smoother in Peru, you probably are underestimating how much smoother they are.

You know how I pay my taxes in Peru. I get a catalog that tells me everything that was done was my taxes. The last time I paid with a pie chart and pictures of local improvements. And then it has a little slide that says, my credit card and they're automatically deducted from my bank account. Yeah,

Simone Collins: we're, we're on auto pay.

We don't have to worry about it. Yeah. Whereas in our, in our district in in Pennsylvania we receive a snail mail letter and then have to go to the super janky online system. And we, I think there's a Yahoo address literally for our tax collector if we have questions. Because I literally paid our property taxes today [00:19:00] again.

And I was like, Oh my God. Wow. Okay. Okay.

Malcolm Collins: All right. Well, let's continue here. So the, then, then people are like, okay, I can see how that makes sense. Like, it's actually like, wait, wait. So you just want to be prepped. Like, you're not about like pointlessly defending big organizations that don't have any reason to defend them.

You're, you're not about endless expansion of bureaucracy. You just Want to do what helps the most people that seems that there's got to be a catch there somewhere, right? Because it's just not the way politics has been played historically But I think this new political alliance of the tech entrepreneurs with the Americans who are just tired of being around Makes a lot of sense when it comes to stuff like this.

Okay. Let's build new systems. Let's build better systems. We don't need to do things the way they've always been done because I don't need to worry about big multinationals losing their government contracts.

But let's keep going here. So our [00:20:00] social beliefs,

Simone Collins: yeah, , our overarching philosophy is cultural sovereignty, which is that the government should not be coercing people into living a certain way.

You know, you shouldn't, you shouldn't force families to say, okay, you have to raise your kids in this culture. For example in, in New York, there's been talk of, you know, shutting down various forms of private schooling in some states. It's very difficult to be a homeschooling parent or there's a lot of regulation around it.

So, yeah. And of course, in, in all states, there's a varying report support for school vouchers allowing people to send their kids to private schools and or homeschool their kids with some additional support. So really where we stand is, you know, kids should be able to be educated by their families as those families see fit without any control.

We certainly never want to see ourselves getting to a place where families are in Germany, for example, where you literally cannot. Homeschool your children? And I don't know what would, what would you wanna add to that, Malcolm?

Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, the, the framing, the framing that I would [00:21:00] use is we see society right now as being an existential battle between two groups.

If you look back at what progressives we're trying to promote in like the nineties and the eighties, they may have been wrongheaded in some areas, but broadly they wanted more equality. That is no longer what they are pushing for. They are now pushing for what we call the urban monoculture. That's core value proposition is in the moment reduction of pain.

This is where you get things like trigger warnings. Small emotional pains should be avoided at all costs. But it's also where you get really strange decisions that would seem to make no sense at the if you're, if you're looking for something like equality, like why do Fentanyl handouts on the streets that's obviously going to make it harder for people from less advantaged backgrounds to get off drugs and easier for people who are from advantaged backgrounds to get off drugs because they have their family support or why would you like California has removed Certain types of testing in school, you [00:22:00] know, the the rich kids are still going to be able to go to sat prep and everything Like that they're still going to be taking these tests and they're going to be using that to get ahead These things increase inequality or why would you have something like the haze movement the healthy at every size movement?

That you see on university campuses these days and things like fat studies departments that's trying to say We should not tell people it is unhealthy to be fat because that causes, in the moment, emotional pain. We need to fight this. And the urban monoculture is the cultural group that exists across all large urban centers, pretty much everywhere you go the world, whether it is in France or New York or Philadelphia. This cultural group allows people to join it while ostensibly still being members of their birth culture. However, they are not allowed to continue to hold their birth cultures value sets. So if you don't understand what I mean when I say that

if I go across progressive groups, if I ask a progressive Muslim, or a progressive Catholic, or a progressive Jew you know, [00:23:00] what their views are on sexuality, what their views are on human gender roles, what their views are on a husband and wife's roles, what their views are on parental punishment techniques, what their views are on what happens to you You know, after you die, what their views are on the cosmology as a universe, what their views are on our relation to the environment.

I'm gonna get broadly the same answers. They are allowed to keep a few holidays here and there, but broadly speaking, when a person enters the urban monoculture, they have to let go of any genuine cultural differentiation. When I ask. Conservatives of these various religious factions. Those same questions.

I am going to get wildly different answers and we like that. And we like that. What the conservative party has become is an alliance of diverse cultural segments that are trying to protect their Children from the urban monoculture. And here you might be like, Oh, what do you mean? Protect your Children?

Well, the problem is, is that before the 90s, progressives and conservatives had about [00:24:00] the same number of kids. When progressives got consumed by the urban monoculture, which was a genuine cultural shift from promoting equality to mostly trying to fight in the moment, emotional pain what ended up happening was their fertility rate, Absolutely crashed.

And now they can only continue to exist as a culturally relevant faction by converting children from high fertility cultural groups or importing children from high fertility cultural groups. That means that the iterations of progressive culture that more aggressively target people in the age deconvert from their birth culture between 15 and 23.

End up out competing the other iterations and progressive culture begins to do this more and more and more in crazier and crazier ways, specifically through control of the education system and through attempts to control children's entertainment.

The point I am making here. They don't believe that this is some sort of conspiracy masterminded by a shadowy cabal. It's [00:25:00] just that the iterations. Of this incredibly low fertility, urban monoculture that disproportionately targeted youth ended up converting more members than other factions of it.

And thus began to represent more and more of it. It's simple cultural evolution.

Malcolm Collins: This is terrifying to this diverse alliance of conservative families, and I see our primary policy goal in regards to like social agendas is to.

Protect diverse and high fertility families, children's from deconversion, giving the children an opportunity to decide to deconvert when they want to, when they leave the financial support of their parents. But before then, I believe that the rules of the culture are best made by a family. And then people will be like, well, what if it's something, you know, clearly abusive.

And then it's like, where do you draw the line? Like, what about Jewish circumcision? Right. For example, this is key to their religion and yet many other cultural [00:26:00] groups would say that this is child genital mutilation And therefore it should be made illegal in our country

And if you were inclined to believe that government overreach, in terms of parenting practices, isn't that much of a problem. Keep in mind that one in three children in America Has the child protective services case

opened on them.

Malcolm Collins: at the end of the day I think the people who are best able to make decisions about whether a child should be have to undergo some sort of the cultural sacrifice or unusual cultural behavior Technique or parenting technique or tradition are people who have undergone that themselves.

I am okay with, for example, Jews who themselves were circumcised, deciding to after a lifetime of living with that, make that decision for their own kids.

Simone Collins: Yeah, and I think so. So when it comes to like adult issue legislation I think that the bigger policy is. leave this up to people. For example, we are not against gay [00:27:00] marriage.

We are not against you know, sort of legislating how adults live their lives.

Malcolm Collins: Well, and I'd also point out that Trump has really moved in this direction as well. So, you know, if you look at, for example, a lot of people are like, Oh, you really just mean like Christians and stuff like that. But no, you know, you look, Who was, was doing the prayers at, at the RNC just the other day?

That was Hamit Dhillon. That was a Sikh prayer. And people have been like, well, some Republicans got mad that she did a Sikh prayer. Like they were talking about how Nick Fuentes was fuming about it. When was the last time Nick Fuentes was at anything relevant? I don't know, of course he would have to.

I mean, he's, it's his brand, what? Progressives try to choose obscure racists to argue that the conservative party has a racist base. Yet here I will put on screen a poll done by FiveThirtyEight, a mainstream polling organization, showing that until Obama was elected, President, more Democrats than Republicans said they would not vote a black person president.

And you can see by these various graphs I'm putting on screen here that look at different types of racism, [00:28:00] that there really isn't a disproportionately racist Republican base. And there never has been at least not since the seventies or so. And what does this mean? This means that you have been manipulated by a media into believing that far fringe extremists make up any relevant portion of the party.

Simone Collins: Well, and you, I mean, I think anyone can understand why this would happen. You know, we live in an age where outrage drives clicks, where algorithms are driven by whatever gets the most engagement, not whatever is the most reasonable or correct or smart, but by what makes people either really angry or laugh a ton, and of course that means you're going to get crazy extreme views elevated from all sides.

Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah, but it's important to note that the crazy extreme views on the right are not being implemented into policy at the crazy, not at all. No views on the left are being implemented into policy and are being taught to children.

Nick. Winters. Isn't teaching your [00:29:00] children. He's not in public schools. He's not even allowed on YouTube. Who is teaching your children who is being paid by the government? To teach your children. What is real? What is make believe? What is socially normative? What is wrong? What is right?

This has been my first year in preschool with a class of my own teaching alongside another queer neurodivergent educator and we have been rocking R2's class.

But our teaching team is shifting, and a new person is being onboarded. Someone with many years of experience. So today at the lunch table, when the topic of gender and genitals came up, one of our students plainly looked up and said, Well, I'm a girl today.

But I know that Teacher Co isn't. No, they're Enby. And the look on the incoming teacher's face was priceless. She was shocked in a good way. [00:30:00] And she just looked around at the two of us and said, This class is incredible, and I am so impressed.

Let me say it again for those in the back row, CRT is not being taught below law school.

Those of you that are against it are being misled. by the media about what CRT and where and when it is taught. My governor has put into place some ridiculous legislation that many governors across the country have put into place, such as

 Can't teach critical race theory, so, teachers, in the past,

we've been activists. After this show of last year, we really need to stand up and do what's right for our kids right now. So, this is a call to action, teachers. We've got to stand up and fight for our kids, because this is b******t. Do your students call you by your first name or Mr. or Miss? Great question!

This is actually a classic [00:31:00] question. Here's your answer. Currently my students just call me Desmond or Desi, first name. However, I have been at schools that go by last name. Those schools I go by Teacher Fambrini. I am gender fluid, so I don't go by Mr. or Miss. I go by Teacher because I am a teacher. So Desmond, Desi, or Teacher Fambrini.

I'm starting to get a little emotional looking at the new masks I got for a couple reasons. I've had American flags put up in every classroom.

We're going to have to say the Pledge of Allegiance and I'm not going to be able to talk about basically any of the things that I have on these masks. Hey y'all, let me introduce you to our non binary alpaca. The kids voted on a gender neutral name. Alex was there to help me during the really quiet moments when nobody would talk during virtual learning.

Yes, they were so quiet! But then I also took it as an opportunity to teach my students about how to respect people's pronouns. Did Alex ever get misgendered? Yes. But then it opened up some teachable moments about what to do when that would happen. For [00:32:00] example, Hey, Mr. Vuong, did he just wake up from his nap?

Oh, do you mean did they wake up from their nap? Yeah, they just did. I would apologize quickly, make the correction, and move on. I started off modeling how to correct somebody, and then afterwards my students would correct each other whenever somebody would misgender Alex here. Representation in the classroom matters.

My kids were 5th graders, and they still got a kick out of Alex. Oh yes, and here's Alex's friend, Lincoln the Llama, who goes by pronouns he him. At first, my students thought that he had very feminine features, so they thought that he was a girl. And this is why we should never assume somebody's gender just based on what they look like.

Alright Lincoln, say something. Hello. My students were really surprised how low his voice sounded. Don't assume.

Malcolm Collins: The crazy extreme views on the right are not what your children are being exposed to in elementary school, in middle school.

Why do

Simone Collins: you think that is? By the way?

Malcolm Collins: Why do I think that is? Because they don't actually represent a large pool of people. The crazy extreme views on the left actually represent a large portion of the left's base. I mean, here I'm like showing statistics that show this is true, but let's, let's get into Trump's actual positions because I think a lot of people have been lying [00:33:00] to about what Trump's positions are.

So, a lot of people are like, well, you know, Trump is, against gay marriage, right? But you can look at, or here, I'll read a tweet by Richard Hanania about what happened at the RNC. Trump personally dictated the new RNC language on abortion and gay marriage. His team put the delegates in a room, took their phones.

Trump said, you're going to pass this and you're going to do it quickly. Night of nights for social conservatives. Mr. Trump made clear to his team, and now this is written from the perspective of Of somebody who was there. Mr. Trump made clear to his team that he wanted the 2024 platform to be his and his alone.

He wanted it to be much shorter and simpler. And in some cases, vaguer, he was especially focused on language about abortion, which he recognized was a potentially potent issue against him in a general election. He wanted nothing in the platform that would give Democrats an opening to attack him, and he made it clear.

To aides, that he was perfectly fine with bucking social conservatives, for whom he had delivered a tremendous victory by reshaping the Supreme Court with a conservative [00:34:00] supermajority. Trump also stressed that he did not want to define marriage as between one man and one woman. This is coming from Trump!

And in his official platform position, instead, the document contains a vague statement open to interpretation, quote, Republicans will promote a culture that values the sanctity of marriage, end quote. So why is Trump making these moves on things like abortion and on things like gay marriage? Because it is what he, he is siding with this new right faction.

And the new right faction is building a set of, because if you look at the, the paleo conservatives. There are some areas where the new right and the paleo conservatives crash. And so it makes sense for them to have compromise in some places. Generally the new right is fairly pro gay rights. So they're just against what is, is a cult that's essentially grown within parts of the trans movement.

That targets, you know, kids as young as three and that is completely uncalled for. And we will talk about that in a second, but in regards to [00:35:00] adults deciding to get married, if they want to, I don't really see how that affects anyone else. And I don't see why we as a government should have any hand in that at all.

But if we are going to make marriage a legal institution, we should not be deciding who should and who should not be able to get married.

One of the primary causes that led to the American revolution was the British government making it illegal for Presbyterian ministers, to marry people and sending out Anglican ministers to do it in said to decide who can get married and what those ceremonies should be.

Some religions in the United States believe that gay people can get married. We need to allow those individuals to get married under those religions. Or we are doing what the British did. We are legislating what religions are true in what religions aren't true. And I don't think any Republican wants Government bureaucrats to have power, to determine how we should be interpreting our Bibles.

Malcolm Collins: and so you, and then I point out, [00:36:00] so why else is he doing this? It's also because it's what most Republicans want. And I think a lot of people, especially young Republicans, if you look at where the party is going, so, if you look at, Gallup polling for 2021, Showed that 55 percent of Republicans overall supported same sex marriage in 20, and in 2015, about 63 percent of Republicans under 30 supported protecting LGBT individuals from discrimination.

From Pew, nearly half of Republicans younger than 30 say that abortion should be legal in any age group. Or most cases, 47%. So the stance that we generally take on abortion is we should be stricter on it than we currently are. I do not think that a baby that has a nervous system and it appears they can feel should be getting aborted.

I think that that is killing a human being. However, I think before the nervous system really starts developing, I am not that antagonistic to abortion. So what week cutoff would you have on this about?

Simone Collins: Well, I hope pretty much 15 weeks is a reasonable place to be.

And that's where I think most people [00:37:00] stand on this. Yeah. Pennsylvania as a state is past that.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah.

Simone Collins: Admittedly, I'd be super fine with more restrictions. In Pennsylvania, but not all the way to nothing, only, you know, to 15, basically.

Malcolm Collins: So here I need to talk a little bit about trans stuff, because this is an area where we are going to piss off a lot of progressives, but it is something that we need to begin to admit as a society.

A cult uses the fact that That trans people, that we were not supposed to attack them, and that's fine. I, I believe that there are, you know, I think if you believe that there are gender differences between male and female brains, it only makes sense that sometimes a person might be born with a brain that is somehow more like the opposite gender than like their own gender.

But, and, and that those people would need to be protected from discrimination. I understand that, and I'm okay with that. What I am not okay with is that whenever you say, Okay, here is a group, and we need to do everything [00:38:00] we can to protect them, then certain malevolent strains, often self replicating memes, will begin to grow within those communities.

And people will begin to use those communities identification to overreach. You will get, like we had in Pennsylvania, what was likely just a cis guy

In a middle school, but who just learned that he could identify as a woman and Prevent himself from having to face punishment for his actions to victimize young women He had created a hit list.

This list was brought to the teachers of his school by a young woman The teachers ignored it and later that very same day He savagely beat one of these girls until she had to go to a hospital and I think that we need to stop just saying You believe anyone especially when you're dealing with children.

it's genuinely really good grooming advice. On April 4th, 2023, Postcard reveals he's in contact with four minors. Age 9 to 13. I've so far sent it to four minors between the ages of 9 and 13. I hope it [00:39:00] encourages them to transition. When the Anka Zone animation became a meme, they got excited over its virality among kids. Mana Drain and Orion also fantasized about getting kids on hormones orion was the manager , coercing him every step of the way. This is apparent by how he talked about him to others. Has he started hormones yet? Yes, but not effectively. I guess that's what you'd expect just telling a r to buy hormones. They bought estrogen, but no anti androgen. It would have been more fun if he started hormone blockers at like 12.

Haha, isn't that true for everyone? Don't worry, I'll make him into a good girl

Don't blow up our spot, bro. All t slurs are like that. You can trust me around your kid. It'd be transphobic not to. Me with daycare tots. To Orion, and many of his associates, their identity was little more than a political shield.

It clearly worked, given he publicly fantasized about assaulting women in bathrooms. Me when transphobic little girls ask me what I'm doing in the women's restroom when I'm obviously a woman. the two fantasized about assaulting J. K. Rowling's grandchildren. Not letting teaslers get with your kids is transphobic. Someone should Harry Potter woman's [00:40:00] grandkids. Orion then goes on to call them turf meats.

Malcolm Collins: And this is where new studies,

like in 2024, development of gender non contentedness during adolescent and early adulthood was a study that came out that looked at 11 year olds who identified as the opposite gender. But, who did not receive gender affirming care. It turns out over 9 in 10 of them, by the time they were 20, 23, completely identified as their birth gender but it turns out they were just gay or autistic.

So that means that when you are applying these kind of treatments, Two 11 year olds the type of chemical castration that comes from puberty blockers that we now know is not safe long term that you can't just turn off puberty midway through and then start it up at a later developmental phase and have that have no cognitive effects, no physical effects.

I mean, I think it should have been pretty obvious from the beginning that that wasn't true, that we are sacrificing nine Gay or autistic children for every one trans child, we might be healthy and we shouldn't be doing that.

And when I say sacrifice, I'm using that [00:41:00] term, literally when you consider the fact that. When a child is diagnosed with being transgender and then given gender affirming care, the suicide rate in that population is around 40% to 50%, whether or not they are transgender.

This is particularly agregious as we are likely not even helping the individuals That have real gender dysmorphia. We are transitioning when you consider the fact that there are other treatments for gender dysmorphia that do not have this incredibly high suicide rate associated with them. Such as certain anti-psychotics. But the mimetic virus that is the modern progressive movement. Won't let us talk about this. The moment a child goes into gender affirming care. You are flipping a coin with their lives.

Malcolm Collins: The CAS report, like what we have seen in the UK where we have seen other developed world countries begin to move in this direction.

\ , this was a unbiased government survey for people who aren't familiar with it, that looked into all of this and basically said, We should be rolling it back. And [00:42:00] even even as I'll add this in post about what was found at that one clinic,

What is most disturbing is that after a year on blockers, a significant increase was found in the first item.

Quote, I deliberately try to hurt or kill self, end quote. This is in the youth survey questionnaire. So it was increasing. Puberty blockers increased even by Travis stocks own, as pro trans as you can get. They just didn't want to publish this increases. Do

but that they knew that this was causing more harm they found internal memos that showed that statistically the gender reforming care was increasing children's risk of unaliving themselves but they didn't publicly release this information because it didn't go with the cult's agenda.

Is the holy guide to living pure, this will help explain. First, Laughter. Her name's Lorraine, too? We're all Lorraine, and you will be Todd. A [00:43:00] name chosen especially for you oh. You're not

An oppressed minority. you're a cult!

Excuse me, are y'all with the cult? We're not a cult. We're an organization that promotes love and Yeah, this is it

Malcolm Collins: And this is really scary to me that this was allowed to happen and that it's likely happening in the United States as well. So again, Cultural sovereignty means that the way I would approach culture, gender affirming care more broadly, as I guess I wouldn't ban it outright. I would say that if the parents consent to it, then it's okay for children.

But both parents need to consent to it. You can't, because a lot of divorced parents will use this as a way to get custody of a kid. Which is, you know, if you can convince a kid of this, then you can. Easily take them away from the other parent. And it's very easy to convince somebody, you know, as you've always told me, Simone, thank God, nobody figured out they could come to me because Simone is autistic.

When she was young and tell, tell her well, it turns out that there's a way that you can feel comfortable with your body. And [00:44:00] then that you could enter a group of people and they would all constantly affirm anything you wanted to believe about yourself. That would have been very difficult for you to resist.

You've often said, and I'm like even me, I think that would have been difficult to resist. I understand why it's alluring during puberty, these, these groups. And so if a family wants to do it, I am okay with them doing it. But I think if somebody has, you know, comes from a Christian background or for a Muslim background, no school should not be.

beginning to implement, and this is what we're seeing, this type of care without parents knowledge, which is current policy in Pennsylvania. And that is horrifying to me. So, that's probably one of the, the, the spicier things, but it is something that's, that's commonly believed without this group.

Simone Collins: I mean, yeah, I'm just the, this is something that comes up a lot that we're also not really in favor of having natal male sports, sportsmen, sportswomen on female teams. It's just not fair from a competitive standpoint.

You know, so that is something. It's so

Malcolm Collins: ghastly when people are [00:45:00] like, it is fair. Like, can't you see, like, look at this study or something. It's like, I can look at the pictures. This is obviously not fair.

not only that, I was in the GSA growing up and I remember Somebody being kicked out for being transphobic, for even suggesting that a trans person may one day want to do this.

They said that that was a transphobic thing to say. It was considered in the same category of suggestion as somebody being like, well, if you're trying to protect gay rights now, how long until you're trying to argue that people should be able to marry minors? And you'd be like, that's a homophobic thing to suggest.

The idea even was in the GSA when I was younger, that we would have trans people competing on female sports teams was considered homophobic and transphobic.

Simone Collins: Yeah. So, you know, that's just a step too far. And We're, we're along those lines too.

Malcolm Collins: Yep. Now I'm going to go to immigration cause that's a hot button issue these days.

What do we think on immigration?

Simone Collins: I

Malcolm Collins: do not believe that you can have a country that [00:46:00] offers a social safety net that is open to immigrants and have porous borders for low skilled immigrants because then you have a huge negative incentive for them to come in, but I am not anti immigration broadly, I believe we need.

To get much stricter on low skill immigration, and we need to be more permissive on high skill immigration. If somebody gets a degree, and Trump has said that this is a policy that he holds, actually, if somebody gets a degree in the U. S., he wants them to be able to immigrate to the U. S. I'm not as loose as Trump is.

I think if somebody gets a degree from a top, maybe 50 college in the U. S., Or gets an advanced degree in the U. S. of a STEM degree. And I think that this should only apply to STEM degrees, not to arts degrees. They should be given automatic entrance into the United States. Because it makes, it was insane to me, like at Stanford, I, I did my MBA at Stanford and I had classmates who wanted to stay in the U.

S. They would have been huge economic contribution. And

Simone Collins: struggled to, yeah, and, and still had to leave. Yeah. And we lost all that talent after investing in that talent. Immigration [00:47:00] policy also plays a really key role as populations start to decline in developed countries. So in the future, we're going to need obviously people to staff our economies. Yes. And so a lot of what is going to prop up nations as we start to see fewer And fewer kids being had by those living in them already is immigration, but it's not just about warm bodies, taking up jobs and taking care of old people and working in restaurants and whatnot.

It's also about your tax base. Basically if we do not have people paying in to pension funds and keeping up cities and maintaining our social services, we start to fall apart. So the nature of immigration also really matters from this perspective. To Malcolm's point, if we bring in just low paid, low skilled workers, we're not going to be receiving money into a tax base that will maintain our economies, it will maintain our social services and our governments.

So what really. Focus on is bringing in people who will continue to hold up our tax bases, our governments, [00:48:00] and our cities. And that has to be higher skilled, higher paid people.

Malcolm Collins: To word this another way, one of the major problems that we're facing right now throughout the developed world and now in the developing world, because Latin America fell below every population rate all the way back in 2019, even by the UN's own statistics is rapidly falling fertility rates.

That means fewer people, and that has a massive economic impact. However. You don't fix this problem by increasing the number of people on welfare. That makes the problem worse. Yeah, it basically accelerates the

Simone Collins: problem. Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: But all of those people are taking money from the government. Instead of adding money to the government, you have made this problem worse.

And so that means in our immigration policy, we have to be acutely aware of this. And now people are afraid of how, how this might change our culture. To take in people from other countries. That's really not a problem when you're dealing with high skilled, high earning immigrants, high earning immigrants, almost always culturally assimilate within one generation.

The reason why low [00:49:00] skill, low income immigrants are able to not integrate with a population is because they are often not engaging with the mainstream economy, which allows them to culturally isolate themselves within the population. Which allows these cultural ghettos to form,

Simone Collins: And

Malcolm Collins: that is not good for a country.

It's not good for them. And it's often not good for the country that they left.

So, Oh, a final point I would make with an immigration is I think we need to be more open to using immigration aggressively against our geopolitical rivals. When China. Turned its back on Hong Kong. I think the US should have been willing to take any Hong Kong individual with over X amount of income or X amount of savings.

I think when Russia became a geopolitical enemy of ours and there were people , fleeing the draft, we should have made it very easy for high skilled immigrants to immigrate into the US because then we create a stronger pole that. Severely damage at these countries economies. Hong Kong doesn't have value because the land of Hong Kong Hong Kong has value because of [00:50:00] all of the competent people in Hong Kong If we can take those people, especially the people who are drawn by the promises of america That helps us a lot and those people will assimilate very quickly if they are high earners Finally, I believe that we should create an alternate path to immigration that allows people to immigrate more easily if they're willing to pay higher taxes So a unique tax bracket that allows for very fast immigration.

However, as a counter to that, I also think that if somebody has immigrated, if they go on welfare or social services for more than a specific time level, they should be deported. I do not think that if you immigrate to our country, you should be able to use social safety nets that this country pays into because that creates very negative incentive systems.

All right, next one, foreign policy. What are our beliefs on foreign policy? Generally I have really liked Trump's foreign policy, which is to say that. Historically, people have [00:51:00] either been, you know, hawks or doves, broadly speaking, you know, do we get engaged? Do we act as the world police? Do we try to, we don't take that position at all.

Our goal is America is America's interest first.

However, America's interest first means that we need to pay attention to what's going on internationally, what's going on with our trade partners, what's going on in regions that we rely on for selling to, you know, a, a person can be like, Oh, I don't, I don't care that there's a person randomly murdering people on the streets outside my house, but if your house makes its money by selling to those people who are being murdered, well, then that matters.

Okay. So I think that we should intervene. In foreign affairs, but in very constrained ways, but also much more aggressively than we have historically. So what did that look like? That looks like what Trump would do. Somebody would cross a line, he'd draw a red line, somebody would cross it, he'd send a few missiles into their country.

Be like, if you escalate, I escalate. And a lot of people historically thought that this would [00:52:00] lead to a continuing cycle of escalation on each side. But when you make the lines that you're drawing very clear, i. e., you do this, I do this. If you do this to counter this, then I'm doing this. It doesn't lead to cycles of escalation.

I call this the BOP strategy. Um, And by that, what I mean is you need to lightly but immediately punish wrong actions by foreign actors and not be afraid to do that and not be afraid of escalation. And I think that we have been too cowardly to do that for a long time. And that has led to the spill out of larger conflicts that might not have happened.

Had they thought that this sort of retaliation could happen. For example, , there's the famous meeting with Trump and Putin. And many people were like, why didn't Putin invade Ukraine? And Trump said, well, there was a meeting where he told Putin, if you do that, all these beautiful minarets you see out here, they'll all be gone.

Simone Collins: Allegedly it [00:53:00] was all those golden turrets.

Malcolm Collins: Imagine if you just selectively sent missiles to blow up every one of the turrets in Moscow. That would be a, culturally, a pretty big slap in the face. But it's not the type of slap in the face that could be used to justify a nuclear escalation. And that's the type of thing that prevents people from escalating conflicts.

And it's the type of crazy nonsense that people are never sure if Trump is really going to do. And that's what allowed him to have such a peaceful term as president.

Simone Collins: What I like about what appears to be the new rights foreign policy is that it's very pragmatic and it's, it's America first.

What benefits American citizens and what do American citizens need. So from that perspective, it's less ideological, it's more pragmatic and it's not a blanket policy. For example, JD Vance though he's very for a swift end to conflict in Ukraine [00:54:00] he's not as bullish on major support in Ukraine, whereas he is pretty bullish on support for protecting Taiwan because he.

Is the strategic importance of Taiwan vis a vis the United States as being a much more salient issue than sort of Ukraine versus the United States.

Malcolm Collins: And I should point out a larger point on his position on Ukraine, which I'm actually coming around to. He's like, what are we really fighting over at this point?

We're fighting over small amounts of land. We have already shown Russia. We've already shown China through our support of the Ukraine, that we're willing to make this type of conflict costly to them. So now it's, do we wait 10 years so that Ukraine can maybe take back its land and spend hundreds of thousands more lives and spend billions more dollars, or do we end this now and say, look, it's mostly out in the rocks.

Wash at this point. We don't need to worry about further rescue Russian escalation because people are like, oh, it'll attack Europe next. No, it won't. They've expended their entire generation of soldiers. And [00:55:00] they have a fertility rate of like 1. 3. They, they cannot replace those soldiers with their current fertility rate.

They are about halving their population every generation at this point. point. Russia has detoosed itself. At this point, is it really worth the cost in human lives? Yeah, it's bad. We shouldn't allow bad actors to get what they want, but is it really worth hundreds of thousands of young lives?

I don't think so. Not at this point. Now what do we think on environmentalism?

Simone Collins: Yeah so, again, I think J. D. Vance shows exactly the kind of clear minded insight that I love with, with regard to environmentalism. Energy, the environment. He is, for example, in favor of, we'll say clean natural gas pipelines.

You know, he's like, yes, put a pipeline through a forest. I don't care. Let's focus on minimizing damage. Yes, but we're not going to run against it. But [00:56:00] he's also very in favor of nuclear, which is 1 of the most practical clean energy sources available in our time that we really should be focusing on.

And energy is a major. Environmental plus national security issue right now. Especially with the rise of AI. So, I think that that's really the best approach to take. I think the fact that sustainability and the environment has become a highly politically polarized issue is a travesty that we may be emerging from slowly.

Malcolm Collins: I'd say that, that the, you know, when we talk about bull moose republicanism, it's not just the trust busting. It's also the way that Teddy Roosevelt creating our national park system. I believe that for. Many traditional American cultures having healthy wilderness is core to their cultural traditions, hunting, fishing, hiking.

We need to protect our land and our streams. That means keeping the water clean. Clean rivers. That means [00:57:00] keeping healthy woodlands and preventing development on them.

Simone Collins: Yeah, it's not. And it's also not even as though like traditional stereotypical old conservatives hated nature to your point, right? The classic hunting, fishing, nature loving.

This is not a politicized issue. So even the fact that because we're talking about right and left and we're saying, well, we have to have stances on the environment. It's kind of funny because really. All humans and all nations and everyone who cares about their nation should be caring about sustainable management of the land of their country.

What you're saying

Malcolm Collins: is correct, but the left fundamentally doesn't care about that, and we need to talk about what leftist environmentalism has become. Deontological environment, performative

Simone Collins: environmentalism. Well,

Malcolm Collins: more than that, anything that affects the environment is therefore an intrinsic negative.

You talk about something like an oil pipeline. It really doesn't have putting an oil pipeline through a national park really doesn't have that much effect. It is, it is a single strip of land for [00:58:00] vast efficiency gains, because what's the oil doing if you're not building the pipeline, it's going on trucks and it's going on tankers and those emit.

fossil fuels. It is all performative. That's why they hate nuclear power, even though we know that when it is well maintained, it is largely safe outside of natural disasters. So yes, pay attention to not putting it where natural disasters are. But if you're talking about what actually is green fuel, you're looking at things like nuclear.

But it also means that a lot of less just environmentalism is also, I'd almost say like downstream of bizarre conspiracy theories. It's like, Oh, well you need to do this and you need to do this and you need to do this. And it's, it's these huge webs of everything like that. And you need to save this one little species that blah, blah, blah.

I'm like, no, screw it. Build a dam. Damn. That's hydropower. That's useful, right? Yeah. Build the dam. I'd say Yeah, save the tree. Like that forest, save that forest, okay? But don't tell people they can't build a pipeline through it, okay? [00:59:00] Somebody's dumping chemicals in the streams, yeah, stop them from dumping chemicals in the streams.

But a ban on plastic bags or straws, that's getting ridiculous, okay? Especially when it was the left that put masks on everyone, which is now something like a third of all waste in the ocean. It is insane how bad this has gotten. It, it is all performative and in a way that causes much more environmental damage in the long run instead of just being sane about this and saying, let's protect our environment as a cultural asset in the same way that Teddy Roosevelt did.

So, to sum up this, like, because a lot of these can feel like feel like independent, maybe unrelated policy issues. And I'd say that pretty much the entirety of the new right is downstream of four core philosophies. One, anti [01:00:00] bureaucratic, all large bureaucracies lead to inefficiencies, which leads to evil and suffering.

We need to reform our bureaucracies too. Family sovereignty. The family should be able to make its own cultural choices, choices about how it educates its children and choices about how it relates to his children. Did you know that 37 percent of kids have had CPS called on them in America?

That is a huge waste of tax dollars and a sign of just public overreach. We should be allowed to have our kids walk to school without having CPS called on us and our kids taken away. There was a mother in the U S who was sent to jail because she, Allowed her 14 year old to babysit her eight year old.

That is insane. The government should not be making decisions around what's safe for our kids that are not safe. Three, pragmatic. That's how we approach the economy. That's how we approach foreign policy. That is how we approach everything. Be pragmatic. Pragmatic. Don't follow larger ideologies like just small government, just [01:01:00] large government, just always intervene, just always not intervene.

Know what you're trying to optimize for, which is the best interest of the American people, and then look for the most pragmatic way to optimize for that. And four, be willing to make large changes. The existing system cannot keep operating as it's operating. When Trump said drain the swamp, what he fundamentally meant is we need to replace large portions of our current government bureaucracy or remove them because they are not working.

And this is a national security issue at this point. Today, we Microsoft went down all around the planet because they were interfacing with a anti virus software, a computer protection software that was made by a company that was overly focused on DEI. Just a few weeks ago, we had one of the biggest secret services Failures in American history.

What is secret service been primarily focused on for the past half decade? D. E. [01:02:00] I. So much so that they now have a woman running the secret service. And you could say, what do you think that a woman can't run the secret service? And I'm just saying, realistically, was there a man who was more qualified for that role?

Almost certainly, because there's just more men in the military, and they've been in these positions for longer. So it seems to me almost impossible that she was the most qualified person for this position. And downstream of that, it led to incredibly deleterious mess ups that could have been avoided.

And when you're talking about stuff like the FAA, That controls our planes in the sky, employing people specifically because they don't like science and don't take orders well, this is going to lead to an American Chernobyl. We need to take this seriously, and I believe a new branch of government needs to be created that specific role, and obviously we wouldn't be doing this at the state level, but I would recommend that the new right begin to [01:03:00] advocate to this, that specific role.

Is churning through government organizations and cutting out these DEI cancers that are promoting bigotry and not meritocracy. What we need to be rewarding is meritocratic success. I remember I told this to a reporter once and they looked at me like I had lost my mind. Say you, you, you're not pro favoring black candidates over white candidates. That's literally what they said. And I go, I'm sorry, I old school racist, oh God, what did that racist say? That we should judge people by their character and not according to their skin color?

Who was that guy's name? Martin Luther King. Famous racist. I agree with him. And I think that we need to go back to what fighting racism used to mean. Which was fighting unfair discrimination. Not the insane bigotry it has led to.

Do you have [01:04:00] any final thoughts, Simone?

Simone Collins: Evidence based policy.

Malcolm Collins: Evidence based policy. If it produces And be willing to let institutions fail. This is, this is one of the things where like the existing guy you were writing against when he's like, well, if you did, if you allowed money to follow the students, then all the parents would pull their kids out of school.

They take them into homeschool programs and our existing public schools would fail. And it's like, Hmm. Well, I look at all the money that's going to the bureaucrats. Now, I look at the results that we're seeing as we pour more and more money in and I'm thinking maybe we shouldn't view that As the end case, if it would cause a school system to fail, then we need to develop new systems.

Simone Collins: It wouldn't. But here's the thing is it wouldn't cause the school system to fail. It would force the school system to reorient itself around student outcomes. The only way that you can reform the existing school system is by making it accountable. To parents and students, which right now it isn't right now.

It's accountable to teachers unions. And I love, I

Malcolm Collins: love when [01:05:00] Democrats are like, well, but schools form important sub functions, like getting food to food, scarce families. And it's like, why on earth is the school system doing that? Why on earth is the only meal that kid is happening when he's at the school system?

These two programs need to be disintermediated anyway. That's insane. If that's why you're putting kids in an environment where by the CDC's own statistics, 1 in 4 girls has created a plan to kill themselves every year. 1 in 10 kids is trying to unalive themselves every year. Yeah that, that's a critical level and we need to be okay with seriously reconstructing some institutions when they aren't working for us anymore.

And, and this goes across, you know, I, I, one of the things that was, that was said by A, a, a black voter recently that really got me is they go, we are being economically lynched by the Democrats. And that's the way I think a lot of Americans feel these days. Do you have any final thoughts?[01:06:00]

Simone Collins: But I'm very hopeful about the future. The fact that I used to think that both sides really just didn't have any decent solutions for our major problems. And now I feel like the new right, as you've defined it, and as we've found that we really resonate with. Really could be forging a new path forward that a lot of people can get behind.

So, yeah, well, things get kind of dire and yes, you're describing some really unpleasant scenarios that we've ended up in. I think that our future is bright and I'm excited for it.

Malcolm Collins: I, I do think so as well, but the thing that has scared me recently is. As the new right has formed into a political faction where I almost agree with every one of their major points, Democrats are evolving into a political faction that I think begins to embody more and more what I see as true human evil.

A group that orders humans on an ethnic based caste system with Jews at the bottom. We've seen this before [01:07:00] and I don't want to see what it could lead to.

Simone Collins: I feel like what we're seeing now though is, is more than ever a disengagement from it. And a distaste, a distaste for the straw man of the right among people who are on the left, but that's just due to a lack of understanding of the right, and more importantly, the new right.

And if anything, I'm seeing more and more people starting to either secretly or even publicly detract from how far the left has gone. While you say and argue that the extreme views. described by the left are being implemented in policy, and I agree with you that they have been. I think that most people secretly and behind closed doors aren't comfortable with it.

And more and more people are beginning to walk away because it's gone too far.

Malcolm Collins: Well, let's hope that happens before a plane crashes and children die.

Simone Collins: Yes.

Malcolm Collins: Okay.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Or we implement DEI [01:08:00] policies at a local nuclear plant and it ends up, you know, this, this stuff is going to get dangerous if we are not aggressive in ripping it out.

Simone Collins: It has already gotten dangerous. We're already seeing. Breakdowns that are causing people to, well, I mean,

Malcolm Collins: look at Boeing's famous, very aggressive DI problem programs before all of the planes started falling out of the sky. Like this is no messing around anymore. This is your family's safety. This is your children's safety.

Anyway. Love you.

Simone Collins: Love you too. Gorgeous. Like our, our lifestyle, our like our whole thing. You know, our, you tell him you're running, he can vote . He's, he's outside our district. They're based in a, another district sadly didn't wanna vote there, but likes, likes a religion. Hey, it's nice of us. A random stranger can visit our house and be like, you know what?

I'm having what these guys

Malcolm Collins: are having. [01:09:00] Most people are like that when they meet us. I, I know almost nobody who like has met us and not liked us. Which has been an interesting, like recurring experience where somebody thinks that they hate us based on like preconceived notions or something. And then they meet us for an interview and they plan to do a hit piece.

And they're like,

Simone Collins: Oh, I

Malcolm Collins: can't bring myself to do this. Like, Oh, right. Like Mary Harrington, for example, she thought you

Simone Collins: know, or we tell them to write a hit piece and they're like, well,

Malcolm Collins: I don't want her. That was what the guardian piece was. She didn't want to read it. Well, but their editors are like, screw that, like, no,

As final note here, any of you who are in or around Pennsylvania's Montco region and are interested in helping with campaign stuff. , please reach out and we can connect you with the various teams in the area.

Oh, yeah. And I guess people should like, and subscribe.

That'd be cool.

We're going to get a lot of downvotes on this one, because it's going to be appearing as an ad to a lot of random people who aren't already following us. Uh, so that's not going to be a lot of fun to deal [01:10:00] with.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit basedcamppodcast.substack.com