The Immorality of Weakness: Nietzschean vs. Collinsian Philosophy

In this thought-provoking episode, we dive deep into the often misunderstood philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche, exploring his ideas on the immorality of weakness, the concept of the Ubermensch, and how they relate to modern issues like woke culture and tribal morality. We differentiate our views from Nietzsche's, discuss the relevance of his ideas in today's world, and address the broader implications for cultural and societal development. Join us as we unravel complex philosophical concepts and their impact on contemporary thought.

[00:00:00]

Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Today we are going to be talking. About the immorality of weakness, and I would note here that we are not going to be talking about this from the perspective of niche, but we will be talking a lot about Frederick Nietzsche throughout, especially at the end of this episode to differentiate our views on why weakness should be scorned versus Nietzsche's views on weakness leading fundamentally to immorality.

Because they're actually distinct, but not as distinct as I thought when I went into this subject. And I would say that me studying Nietzsche, very sad. It's just a bunch of instances of me being like, I don't want to be basic, but he actually makes a lot of good points. Very prescient about woke people, but we'll get to that in a second.

Okay. Well, that people will use the sympathy of others to try to exert power over them and that people will manipulate others by acting sympathetic to them [00:01:00] to keep them in a permanently infantilized state that glorifies themselves i. e. the person doing the infantilization. But before we get to all of that, where this was highlighted for me.

Was two things. One is a recent evolution in my understanding of our wider world perspective, which has become a lot more clear to me and sort of how I view clan based structures and how I view morality at the wider societal level than at the individual level, but also a clip that we ran in a recent episode that's a famous scene from Trigon or I don't know if it's a famous scene, but it's a scene that always hit me hard as a kid.

Because in it, there are two characters arguing and the character who is the villain says you have to kill the one character is trying to save a butterfly, the good guy. And then the villain says, well, you just need to kill the spider then basically.

Simone Collins: Because it's a butterfly caught in a web for those.

Because [00:02:00]

Malcolm Collins: if you free the butterfly. Then the spider will eventually starve. You can't, you're not doing a good thing by freeing the butterfly. You're just consigning the spider to a slow death. And the good guy character says no, there's always a way.

Speaker 6: That was the easiest way to stop him. I didn't want to kill the spider unless the spider caught the butterfly, it would die of starvation . You can't save both,

Speaker 5: it's not right to make that choice so easily. . BUt

Speaker 6: I'm not wrong about this, Rem. Wanting to save both is just a naive contradiction. And what would you have rather had us do, just think about it? In the meantime, while we do that, the spider eats the butterfly

Speaker 7: I wanted to save both of them, you idiot!

Malcolm Collins: And the entire Trigun series is based around this philosophy of No matter how bad things are, there is always a way to save the bad guy.

There is always a way to make things right. When in reality, by [00:03:00] attempting to save the bad guy, you often cause much more harm in the longterm. You are masturbating your own sense of justice. Like you being a good person, usually because you don't have to deal with the risk that that bad guy poses to society.

The famous example here, of course, I'm thinking of is the woman who had a person murder her mother. And everyone was like, this is a really bad dude. She petitioned to get them released from prison early, hired them, and then they murdered her when she fired them for stealing from her. Which is to say that a lot of people, when they take this benevolent and magnanimous looking position, they're doing it just to heighten their own sense of I'm a good person without really thinking about the other harm that this person is going to cause, which is what often happens.

If you look at statistics and I'll add some in post here, The vast majority, for example, of thefts are caused by a very, very small majority of thieves who just do it over and over and over again, right? It's the same as just about any crime, right? Very small number of people actually do it, which I think

Simone Collins: Also, [00:04:00] just to be fair, explains the behavior of people who want to give people the benefit of the doubt because the vast majority of humans deserve the benefit of the doubt.

It's a very, very small percentage that really just needs to be distrusted and removed from mainstream society.

Malcolm Collins: The, the, the problem here is I think that we as a society have been conditioned to not believe this by media.

And I'm going to call this the Thai hot Maru problem.

Speaker 2: What's on your mind, Lieutenant? The Kobayashi Maru, sir.

Lieutenant, yOu are looking at the only Starfleet cadet who ever beat the no win scenario.

Speaker: How?

Speaker 2: I reprogrammed the simulation so it was possible to rescue the ship. What? He cheated. I changed the conditions of the test.

I don't believe in the no win scenario.

Malcolm Collins: Now, for people who don't know what the Tai Hot Maru is, the Tai Hot Maru is a famous test from the Star Trek universe that [00:05:00] you are supposed to be unable to pass.

And it's supposed to show what do you do in an unwinnable scenario. And yet our society and media constantly says, when the hero is given an unwinnable scenario, save this person or this person. Save your love or like this group of citizens. The answer is always supposed to be, there is a way to save both.

Simone Collins: And

Malcolm Collins: that is not true. Fundamentally,

Simone Collins: right?

Malcolm Collins: There is not always a way to solve those. And it creates a really toxic mindset around morality for a lot of people because they believe that any decision that leads to harm for some group of people is fundamentally an immoral decision, regardless of the necessity or longterm good of that decision.

And so here, what I wanted to dig into was your response to the try again video because I think it's accurate and it encapsulates our view of morality that [00:06:00] we will go into and why this view of morality leads downstream to some very perplexing beliefs that we have, for example, a lot of people can be like, wait you guys think that there's differences between cultural groups.

So if you think that there's differences between cultural like groups Then why don't you think that like the europeans are the good guys and like, the the jews and like the the blacks are the bad guys when it seems that you actually have a great deal of derision for northern europeans and even more derision for anti semites And yet you hold very pretty neutral views to groups like the hispanics.

And Really really confuses And it's like, well, there's actually a logically consistent reason for all of these beliefs, but you just assume that the reason is that we're capitulating to the urban monoculture without realizing that the position that we're taking is actually even harder to hold than the just generic, you know, Sort of racist person position.

Yeah we don't have some big community that's going to back us up for it Yeah More based [00:07:00] than this other position because it is more unique and out there But simone go through what your thoughts were to the the spider in the web

Simone Collins: Yeah, I mean, I think that there's an obvious correct answer for the spider in the web Which is you leave them alone.

And if the butterfly is You know A strong and resilient butterfly. It will get out of the web. If it is a smart and resourceful and healthy spider, it will eat the butterfly. And you don't want to release the butterfly as if it's a weak butterfly and it continues to reproduce and produce other hapless butterflies, it will hurt all butterfly kind ditto with the spider.

So you just kind of have to let them Duke it out and you shouldn't be intervening. And nature will run its course, which. I guess makes us bad people, but it's very consistent with our Calvinist inspired views, right? Of like, it is not our job to intervene. You are saved or you're not saved. You are fit or you're not, you're going to matter or you're [00:08:00] not, you're going to change history or you're not.

And that is not within our control. We have free will 100%, but we've been dealt the cards. We've been dealt. Does that make sense?

Malcolm Collins: Yes. And I would say that While you can talk about this at the level of the spider and the butterfly, where this matters more when we're making cultural decisions about the cultural groups we admire, and that we look to, and we tell our kids, these are good cultural groups, these are cultural groups you should model yourselves after, these are cultural groups you can learn from.

Are the cultural groups, That are thriving and in an upwards trajectory So i'll note here when I say in an upwards trajectory the unique amount of derision we have towards things like european cultural groups or Americans who are born into positions of relative privilege, but haven't been able to secure a family is downstream of the belief that they should have had access to all sorts of advantages, and yet they are still failing.

Why are they failing despite their [00:09:00] historic position of strengths? That must mean that their culture is uniquely ill fitted to our time and place. Essentially, and people get very surprised, they're like, but I thought you guys care about diversity. And this is where you need to understand the way we relate to diversity.

So, If we care about cultural diversity, we see every individual culture as a hypothesis about how people might live and thrive and get through the current challenges, both technological and social, that our species is facing, and if every culture is a hypothesis, a culture that is failing to thrive.

under these conditions is fundamentally an incorrect hypothesis. I do not care about incorrect hypotheses thriving. I care about the greatest diversity of correct hypotheses thriving. Because the greater diversity of correct hypotheses we have, the less of a monoculture we will have, and the more resistance we will have to unknown threats.

We humanity the species will have [00:10:00] two threats that may occur in the future. So

Simone Collins: in other words, we're looking at cultures and cultural technology that produces human flourishing and if it fails to do that then we don't see The point in trying to intervene and save it because in the end it is producing suffering it is producing harm It is producing death and it's causing damage and it's holding humanity back

Malcolm Collins: Well, yes, and this happens at two levels and there's two reasons to have this derision one is for yourself And for your own culture and family So if I looked with admiration, for example, we were doing the episode on on modern German culture recently that we were pointing out is really, really failing right now, if I looked with admiration at the culture in Germany right now, and I told my kids, Oh, you should admire that.

You should follow that. They would end up weaker because that culture is failing. I need to teach them to see that culture with a degree of disgust. And if they can [00:11:00] do that, then they are less likely to follow a culture that isn't thriving or pick up bad ideas. But if they see a group that is doing well, a high fertility, economically thriving cultural group it, they should look at that group and be like, Oh, for whatever reason in our current cultural context, this group is doing really well.

What can I steal from them? It reminds me of the Klan people, as I've mentioned, who go into the backwoods, which can help people understand pluralism as a cultural value system, which is to say that when the backwoods cultural group, the greater Appalachian group in America, when they immigrated into this country and they encountered the Native Americans they butchered lots of Native Americans, when contrasted with the Puritans or the Quakers or the other cultural groups in the region.

But they also didn't dehumanize the native americans They married into native american families at very very high rates. They adopted tons of native american cultural technologies They basically saw the native americans as just a another group in this inter clan [00:12:00] competition You know if you have the hatzfields and the mccoys the native americans are just another Group that we should try to take their stuff and learn what they're doing.

That's working and learn what they're doing. That's not working No, I'm not saying that that should work, that that's like a good way to do things, or that's the way things should work in a modern context, and I'll discuss why this is, is, is uniquely bad in a second, but I'm saying that it epitomizes this view of diversity, which is to say That when you see another group not doing well, you're like, okay, i'm gonna take their stuff But like like I will outcompete them but when you see a another group that is doing well in some way you're like, okay, what can I learn from them?

Everyone is equally human to you and everyone is part of this game to you Whereas to groups like the quakers the native americans weren't really human. They were like The child or something that needed to be protected and kept in a zoo, but like there was obviously nothing to learn from them There was obviously nothing no reason to respect them or marry into their families or etc, right?

[00:13:00] And this is also a very interesting thing, which is why people who have this pluralistic cultural competition mindset End up being much more, from stronger cultures because they believe they have to be a strong culture. It is a position of internal cultural weakness that leads to an individual shying away from this world perspective, because it means that.

When you look at other groups, you think if they could intermingle with my group or if we were competing within a fair equal environment, I would be outcompeted when you are certain that you will outcompete others. You always want equality. Strong groups always fight for equality while groups that have an internal weakness.

A fear of being out competed, they will always compete for isolation.

Simone Collins: And either you will think, if you're in one of these groups that you're really confident about, that your group will just take over all the other groups and make the world better, or that in the end, only the strong groups will remain and the world will be better.

But either, either [00:14:00] perspective. Has an adherent believing that the world will be better off, especially if the weaker groups are allowed to run their course and stop existing.

Malcolm Collins: Yes. And an interesting thing about this philosophy, and this is where actually something that Nietzsche talks about aligns with something that we believe, which is he argues that being sympathetic to someone who is suffering, or I don't believe he uses the word sympathy.

What's the word he uses here?, showing pity to somebody who is suffering is fundamentally to infantilize them and to prevent them from rising up. But this doesn't mean never help people who are suffering. Help them with magnanimity. And when you help another culture with magnanimity, You are helping them with the intention of creating a group that competes against your own and through that competition makes you sharper.

I like that. And I, I

Simone Collins: think the point isn't to say into the garbage, like, can these guys go or like, maybe it would be better if we just accelerate [00:15:00] their demise. No, it's, it's give them tools to maybe have them change because as they are now, isn't clearly sustainable. And. Help them, give them an out, maybe offer them the chance to join your group.

Malcolm Collins: It's important to note that one of these tools needs to be derision and looking down on them. Because if you accept another group for their failure, as the progressives do, handing out Yeah, yeah. That evangelizes them and it insults them. It doesn't just insult them. It traps them because it puts them at a local optimum where it is better for them to continue with their state of non contribution over exploring what potential other pathways might be available to them.

Simone Collins: And another avenue, or I guess arena or part of our lives in which we see this is that classic issue with teachers. Where is a student sometimes it'd be really annoying if a teacher was really critical of [00:16:00] you or would like put a lot of time into showing you what an idiot you are with your work or how much you could improve your form on something like in martial arts or in a sport.

And you would complain to a parent and say, like, well, why are they being so mean? Like, can't I just. And your parent would explain to you that teacher actually cares about you. Like they don't give a s**t about anyone else in the class. They're just letting everyone else skate by and basically be mediocre, but they're investing in you because you have potential.

And I think that's the same kind of dynamic here. Are you going to. Just let them slide by and feel bad for the fact that they're mediocre and bad and not encourage them to improve? Or are you going to recognize the potential they have to flourish and invest in it?

Malcolm Collins: Well, and I think that this can be seen in the way that we approach things like philanthropy.

You can look at the Collins Institute, which is a institution that is designed to teach people and be free. And as an education source that we built for our own kids education primarily, but we made it free to anyone else who wants to use it to put all of human knowledge at their fingertips. And that.

[00:17:00] This is fundamentally opposed to many of the progressive solutions to things like poverty, which is to say, Oh, well, we'll give them money. Oh, well, we'll give them houses. Oh, well, we'll give them this and this and this which is a form of enablement. But it also makes the progressive dominated areas worse because they end up attracting more of these economically unproductive individuals.

And so people can look like when a progressive looks at what we're offering, they're like, well, yeah, but the homeless people may not want. To use your education system. They may not want to attempt to educate themselves. And it's like, well, That's a problem then, isn't it? And then they're like, well, what if they have, what if they have like severe mental illnesses and stuff like that, what if they've got all of these other, you know, problems?

And it's like, well, this is the thing. I believe that everyone is capable of economically contributing in this country, unlike you progressive. I think that when you lower the amount of restrictions that people have on them, there is always a way to make a living. I believe that [00:18:00] everyone has some utility to society, which is fundamentally different than the view that you are espousing, which is that these individuals must be permanently infantilized.

And I believe that there is a class that is born with that level of mental disability, but I think it's a much smaller class than is functionally left disabled by the way progressives handle things like homelessness. for this.

Simone Collins: That and improvement requires tough love. Improvement requires being critical. It's something also that shows up at a lot in your, in my relationship, right? People think, oh, can you believe that they would criticize each other or encourage each other to be better for me to be like, Hey, Malcolm, you could do this better, or you'd be like, Simone, like this was a great meal, but it needs more of this or that.

And by the way, you're totally right. That race needed way more salt or like MSG. It just needed to kick. But like the fact that we do that it's because we care and it's because we love each other and it's because we respect each other and we live in a culture now that sees [00:19:00] criticism as an act of violence, rather than an act of care.

And I think it's that contextualization that needs to change. a complete rebrand now and a complete overhaul because we have to return to an age in which giving someone criticism, giving someone room for improvement is an act of, and it's seen as an act of care and love. We can, we can get there. And I think people are ready for that, but I think it's going to take a lot of work because we've been so indoctrinated, even from your and my childhood of thinking.

That critical feedback is violence technically speaking. Yeah. And

Malcolm Collins: So people will hear this philosophy and they'll think oh well This means you think this the strong should lord over the weak that the strong should Push around the week when instead we're saying the exact opposite.

Anybody who knows us knows that we have a very high opinion of ourselves and our family culture, which I think all culture should. You don't have pride in who you are. Then why are you existing? Why are you doing any of this? Why are you passing on your [00:20:00] culture to the next generation? We have an incredibly Yeah.

A high degree of pride in who we are, and yet we focus our efforts on trying to help other cultures and communities that are struggling right now and making it through something like demographic collapse, even cultures that are very different from our own. And we want that because we want our kids to have a diverse group of competitors.

To further hone themselves if humanity becomes homogenous humanity has fundamentally failed because we are no longer Intergenerationally improving we are just a blob The same thing forever

Speaker 12: So cast off your fears of age and blight. In putrescence find your true delight. For in my real all I cherish, so let my blessings upon you grow. Embrace the Let Bloom inaction.[00:21:00]

Join

my God.

Malcolm Collins: because we are no longer Intergenerationally improving we are just a blob The same thing forever and I think that this leads to conflict between us like some people are like, why are you so antagonistic? To cultures that attempt to enforce their values on other cultures so for example Cultures that try to enforce oh anti gay marriage.

All society shouldn't have gay marriage. And I'm like, no, the cultures that are against gay marriage can do better. They should do better, but you can't enforce this on other people. Like Sharia law is bad. Right. And they're like, no, I think that my culture needs to be enforced on everyone. And then people who have this perspective you often see a high overlap with this and things like antisemitism and stuff like that.

And I think that there's this influencer class who I'll move away from naming them specifically, but who. Have an overlapping fan base with our own who [00:22:00] have a confluence of these sorts of perspectives, and people are surprised by the amount of intense derision we have towards these individuals. And I think that they think that this derision that we have towards these individuals is.

A capitulation to the urban monoculture instead of literally for the exact same reason we have derision for the urban monoculture. And perhaps even in greater measure, because when I look at the type of person who might be saved, who might be able to build a strong culture themselves, who might be able to build some sort of level of intergenerational thrivingness.

These types of individuals are drawn to right leaning philosophies like ours, but they can also be lured by the siren calls of these other philosophers, which where the aesthetics of the right leaning community and people can be like, what, what do you mean? Like, like, like, be specific here. And I'm like, well, I see no different from your standard anti Semite than I see your average BLM protester.

These are both individuals who are from one cultural group, whether it's like a black [00:23:00] cultural group or whether it's from. A white supremacist cultural group who sees another culture out competing them. Whether it's academically or in the number of famous people they have, or in the number of politicians they have, or in the number because Jews do very well in those categories or in their economic success.

And they basically get angry and flip over the board like a child and are like, you must be cheating instead of being willing to see any flaw in themselves. And these individuals are worthy of the highest level of score, much higher than just a culture that's failing because they're not just a culture that's failing their culture that is incapable of improving itself because it is incapable of seeing its own laws or when other people are out competing it, which means that when I'm, you know, interacting with my kid and I want to ensure really, really, really stay away from values like this or people like this.

That's what we're looking at. And The highest degree of toxicity in this comes from when we look at how to better our culture, and I think that these two cultural groups [00:24:00] can really be seen here how they differ. Both groups might believe the goal is cultural supremacy cultural supremacy through individual competition, which is a little different, but we, when we're improving our culture, or I guess I should say, both of these groups see their goal as cultural improvement.

But when we're looking at cultural improvement, we are looking at other cultures and trying to see how they're doing well or hypothesized ways we can do our own culture better while looking to our culture's history to see what parts of it worked in the past. Well, and I improve their future. They're looking to purify their culture by going back to some sort of cargo cult aesthetic of an imagined past greatness, which existed for almost no culture on Earth.

Simone Collins: Yes, and we need to see a return to. Friendly rivalry and a good form, which I, I don't know, reading J. M. Barrie's Peter Pan introduced me to the concept of good form in a way that I just really loved because it, it gave me a peek into [00:25:00] how people used to view healthy rivalry in the past, which is, and then maybe I'm totally romanticizing this and misremembering it.

But the idea is that you would compete with someone and you would compete along, I guess, certain rules of like basically being a good sport or a bad sport. And it, a rival was seen as a good thing that you wanted in your life. It was, it was like a knife enjoys seeing something can sharpen itself on it and it knows that it needs it.

And right now when people see groups that are in competition or even opposition that hold different values, they see them as a threat that has to be eliminated. They see them as a thing that they should take out in using any means available, including very bad form. Whereas in the past, I really love this concept of seeing opponents in life, seeing rivals as a source of improving your own fitness.

And when you lost, you would lose in good [00:26:00] humor, understanding that you've learned something from it and that you will become stronger through the act of losing, figuring out what you did wrong. And then getting excited about having another round with this. opposing entity or person and hopefully winning next time.

But you can't get there if you don't engage. And if you don't take everything with good humor, good sportsmanship and good form.

Malcolm Collins: Exactly. Well, and, and, you know, this is where I get so high in my derision of these groups is They haven't the capacity to improve anymore because of that because they see a group beating them as a group Victimizing them.

They are unable to believe because of this usually a lionization of a fictional historic past greatness That their culture could lose in a fair competition. And so they'll say well then the competition wasn't fair [00:27:00] And this matters to us because as soon as people realize that cultures are actually different and groups are actually different, they then want to say, well, mine's good.

But if you say yours is good, not because of you, not because of your individual efforts to improve that culture, but because historically it has some. claim to supremacy, it will inevitably fail and is also uniquely tempting and dangerous to individuals who are close to the path of, I think, cultural actualization, which is, again, why we constantly deride these groups so much.

Speaker 4: And here I really want to highlight something that is often missed by people, but Nazis really were just the we was kangs for white germanic people. , if people aren't familiar with the we was kings meme, it is this joke around some people in modern black culture that will try to take credit for all of these historic moments or characters in history [00:28:00] saying, oh, ancient Greeks, that was all black people or, oh, you know, uh, the first battery or the first, you know, they, they think Wakanda is real basically.

Speaker 20: The original rulers of England and Britain

Speaker 21: were black. That's King George of England, a light skinned black man. You clearly see the Vikings as black men.

Speaker 22: Do you see that with your glasses? These are black men. Jesus is a black man.

Speaker 23: Beethoven. Black. Mozart. Black. Henry VIII. Black. William Shakespeare. Shakespeare.

Speaker 22: Undoubtedly

black.

Speaker 8: We was kings and s**t, that's the truth we spit M is con, Alexander too Black as f**k, yeah, they knew what's true Caesar, Napoleon, all them cats Black power, homie, we created that We started China, Japan, and Rome, India, too, man, we claimed every throne.

Built the Great Wall, Taj Mahal, no cap. Babylon's gardens, yeah, we did all that. We brought democracy, math, [00:29:00] and science. Set the standards, made the world reliant. We was kings, and that's no lie.

Yasuke, the greatest samurai ever known. His legend grew, as black as our own.

Malcolm Collins: Aristotle, Socrates, yeah, they was black. Plato too, that's a straight up fact.

, and we laugh at them and are like, oh, that's so silly, but that's exactly. Who both the Nazis were in a historic context, but also a lot of the modern neo Nazi movement falls into this category in that, you know, the Nazis would say, oh, well, Buddha, he was actually Aryan. He wasn't Indian, of course.

Or you'll get, not even exaggerating here, I have seen this in our own comment section when we're talking about, oh the ancient Greeks did stuff, it wasn't the ancient Celts, it wasn't the ancient northern Europeans, it wasn't the ancient Germans, and they're like, oh don't you know?

Just like in the Kangs. Stereotype. Don't you know that, , like Socrates and Alexander and all that, they were actually northern European guys? And all of the ancient Greeks, they actually used to be northern Europeans? And it's like, oh my god, you sound exactly like a Kang's [00:30:00] guy.

Aristotle, Socrates, yeah, they was black. Plato too, that's a straight up fact.

Speaker 4: And they would talk about how great, like, German and Aryan civilization was.

When anyone who studied Roman history knows that they were, Of the barbarians, one of the most barbaric, , along with my own ancestors in, in, in Britain. You know, these people were basically animals when the Romans were building all of their great stuff, when the ancient Greeks were building all of their great stuff.

, and so I view both movements and individuals with equal derision. In the same breath here if the progressive movement's goal is to force everyone into the urban monoculture, you have a number of options.

ideological arguments against that, like the clan based argument that we're presenting here. But in addition to these ideological arguments, there is athetic conservatives. So in the same way that, you know, some progressives like to dress up like furries and furries [00:31:00] broadly are a progressive movement, , in the conservative movement, we have these people who like to LARP in sort of this cargo cult of the 1950s trad family that they, you know, got from Hollywood.

Uh, not taking into account that if they saw something come out of Hollywood today, they'd be like, Well, that's obvious propaganda and not real. And I'd be like, yeah, and what was happening in the 1950s was Hollywood propaganda heavily influenced by the Legion of Decency, , and it's okay to have them in the movement. Like we, we have many of the same goals, but them attempting to impose this LRP that they're playing on other people hurts us in election cycles.

And is the conservative version and should be treated, I think, with equal derision to when progressives do this, , of, you know, the trans community trying to legally force people to use their pronouns. If, if they can gain status within their own little local hierarchies for playing that LARP, fine. , if they can gain status by signaling that they want to impose that LARP on other people, fine.

But they need to learn that when they're hurting us in election cycles for [00:32:00] something that is obviously, it's no sort of. philosophical backbone to it other than an aesthetic. , that's where we need to draw the line and there needs to be some degree of pushback.

Malcolm Collins: But now I want to go into Nietzsche, because a lot of people will hear this and see rhyming parts. Have you ever studied Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy?

Simone Collins: Nietzsche? No. What do you

Malcolm Collins: know about it, broadly, before I go into it?

Simone Collins: What do I know about his philosophy? There's the ubermunch. There's a fairly blackpilled approach to humanity.

And society, and there is a deeply unhappy man who people have misframed as an incel, just because he like never married, but it's not like he was actually an incel who was generally fairly unhealthy and didn't have very great relationships in his life, but had really great ideas and left behind that legacy that has since mostly resonated with young people.

How, how accurate am I [00:33:00] agreeing with him a lot? No, no, we would totally end up agreeing with him a lot because we take a

Malcolm Collins: very Okay, well, here I'll ask you a different question. What do you think his view on the ubermensch was? What is your vague understanding of the ubermensch?

Simone Collins: If I were to frame it in our terms or state it in our terms, it would be that some people really matter and the rest of people just don't know.

That's not it. Okay. What is it?

Malcolm Collins: He believes the ubermensch is someone who creates their own values and meaning in life, rather than accepting pre existing moral frameworks.

Oh

Simone Collins: wow, so we totally like that, because that's basically what the pragmatist's guide to life is all about, is decide for yourself what you believe and why.

Malcolm Collins: So this individual affirms life completely, saying yes to all aspects of existence, Including both joy and suffering. He believes that this individual has to has overcome and have self mastery.

A fundamental aspect of the Übermensch is the ability to overcome oneself continually. This involves mastering one's own instincts, passions, and even one's quote unquote evil tendencies. The Übermensch strives for constant self improvement and self overcoming. This worldliness he positions the Übermensch as a counterpoint [00:34:00] to otherworldly religious ideals.

The Übermensch is focused on giving meaning to life on Earth rather than seeking fulfillment in a spiritual or afterlife realm. Creative power, the Übermensch is described as a quote unquote poet of life. Someone who creates and destroys in the process of self realization. This creative power extends to the formation of new values and the ability to shape one's own identity, independence, and responsibility.

An Übermensch takes full responsibility for their life and choices, not relying on external authority or scapegoats. They are capable of standing alone and embracing the freedom and responsibility that comes with self determination. Embracing life's challenges, rather than seeking comfort or easy solutions, the Übermensch welcomes challenges, conflicts, and adversity as opportunities for growth and self realization.

So the Übermensch

Simone Collins: is

Malcolm Collins: just a reasonable, logical person who takes ownership of what they believe? Wait, hold on, hold on. I'm not, I'm getting to the end here. Transcendence of common morality. The ubermensch goes belong conventional morality, recognizing its socially constructed nature. However, this does not mean being amoral, but rather creating [00:35:00] a personal ethical framework based on life affirming values.

In essence, Nietzsche's Übermensch represents the highest potential of human beings. Someone who has overcome societal constraints, created their own values, and fully embraced the challenges and joys of earthly existence.

It's important to note that Nietzsche saw this as an ideal to strive towards, not necessarily a concrete reality or call for a superior race. So, continue. Your thoughts. So

Simone Collins: this sounds like someone who just owns their own morality and lives life. According to it, in accordance with their, the values that they have decided independently for themselves without being told what to do by society matter.

And that there's nothing exceptional about this kind of person, aside from the fact that it is fairly exceptional for someone to be a part of society. We didn't think he existed yet. Wasn't he one of those people? No. So what you know, because he doesn't seem to be the kind of person who went by society values

Malcolm Collins: were were influenced by the values of society and that other people's values were influenced by the values of [00:36:00] society and that these were not truly independently crafted values.

Simone Collins: Okay,

Malcolm Collins: well, he's probably being a little hard on himself, but I don't know, Simone. I'd ask you this other than us. How many people do you know who created their own values all like we go through in the pragmatist guide to life? How many have actually followed through with that?

Simone Collins: I think I mean, someone, obviously, because we spoke with him recently give me a moment here.

Monarchist. Curtis Jarvin. Yeah. I think that

Malcolm Collins: What

Simone Collins: is his name again? Ernest

Malcolm Collins: Yarvin. Sorry. Hold on, hold on. I'll add it. So this morning, Simone and I were doing what we call a list of live players.

These are people we need to follow up with and know. So, our list because basically they're acting. This is

Simone Collins: cribbing from Sam Oberge's concept of live players, which is someone who I don't know. Is thinking independently and likely to change the trajectory of, of change. Humanity because they're not going to act in [00:37:00] the way that any other optimal thinker would when placed in some kind of wind up toy position.

Malcolm Collins: But the point I'm making, Simone, is that we made this list this morning. So this is like a list of basically Uber mentions, you could say. Yeah. So on that

Simone Collins: list are people like Ayla, like Curtis Yarvin. These people definitely are thinking How long

Malcolm Collins: is the list? It's like maybe 12 people. It's like maybe 12 people.

The list is, and I want to make absolutely clear here, not limited to the live players in our social networks. It's not live players we think we can build a connection with. Yes,

Simone Collins: some of these people are people we've never had a conversation with. They don't know who we

Malcolm Collins: are.

Every live player on Earth is today. that we could identify. Simone, with the internet, how many more people do you think we know than Nietzsche knew within his lifetime?

Simone Collins: Okay, touche.

Malcolm Collins: He knew people who were maybe writing books within [00:38:00] his lifetime, and then, like, people in his surrounding town. The number of people that we see, we are looking at Cities of like millions and millions of people and not like one city, but multiple cities.

We are looking at like the smartest of the smart people in our society who get together to hold private events where, you know, we are picked for those events because like successful people think, Oh, you guys are uniquely smart. And then we are, we are, we are leveraging those networks. To find every other live player we can find, and there's just not that many.

Like, when you went to Hereticon, which is like, some of the wealthiest people in the world, they go out and they find all of the greatest, most heretical thinkers of our time, and the most common complaint among the live players there was, it's just not that heretical here.

Simone Collins: Yeah, there's a lot of like, we want more spicy conversations, but part of that and part of the discussion when people were saying that was, have we just become desensitized at this point?

Malcolm Collins: No, no. So my point is, Simone, if you look at, if you [00:39:00] assume that the rate of live players within Nisha's lifetime is the same as the rate of live players within our lifetime, and ubermensch means live player, is it really that weird that he wouldn't have met anyone that fit that qualification in his life?

Yeah.

Simone Collins: Okay, you, you make a strong point and I'm probably I'm, I'm conflating his existence with the existence of that sort of Vienna cafe, culture, turn of the century, social club of people who are all very influential intellectuals. But he wasn't in that. But he wasn't in that and so that's, that's my problem of just kind of mushing history all together and being like, I don't know, all smart dead people kind of hung out with each other.

Like we're going to

Malcolm Collins: have live players throughout history, but Nietzsche was not in one of those communities. In fact, his work was not recognized until after he died. So he'd have no reason to think that he was uniquely brilliant or anything like that.

Simone Collins: Yeah. Okay. Then totally understood. And thank you for giving me that [00:40:00] explanation.

And it's interesting that this concept comes up again in Samuel Berger's work and comes up again in what we're at least in what we're calling people to become in the pragmatist guide to life. I didn't realize we were essentially asking people to become Yeah, the pragmatist guide to

Malcolm Collins: becoming an ubermensch.

That is what the book basically is.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Microphone (Wireless Microphone Rx)-4: I really want to emphasize here how rare people are, who create their own value system, even though Simone was like, but even that the basic that expected of everyone. We have been environments that are supposed to be the places where the best and the brightest of our society. Colette, you know, I have a Stanford MBA.

She had the graduate degree from Cambridge.

Whatever you think of higher institution utility, it is true that it can open some doors with you for you indefinitely. , of the people who are going into higher education. , Stanford business school is probably the hardest program to get into. And Cambridge is one of the most classically prestigious. Graduate programs to get into. And neither did I [00:41:00] meet a single person? I would put in this Uber man category and I frequently, like one of my go-to conversations is okay. What are you? What do you want from your life?

Like what has value? What's good. And So few people had anything other than like an aesthetic explanation for that. Like, I want this athletic outcome, or I want this set of things that I was taught to expect from life. Instead of having some like underbrush line. Logical explanation or you get pretty, um, you know, childish life philosophies, like, oh, things that make me feel good are good.

And I should maximize feeling good among the population. , which is, you know, what you normally get from w just, hasn't put a lot of thought into life, I guess. And so, yeah. I was, I think that, , I would commend to people that if you're out there and if you're young and you're like, okay, when am I going to finally meet the.

Intellectually active people. , I might give up on that or not give up on that, but understand that you're going to meet them by doing the types of things that you, as an intellectually active person would decide to do. So [00:42:00] like, If I was at the prenatal it's convention, which is coming up soon, by the way, you can check it out.

And the code word to get a discount is Collins. , you're probably going to meet a lot of people like that. There. Just because if you were looking at the world's problems today and you're not concerned about what other people think of you. You're probably going to be like, oh, fertility rates. That's an issue. , I should probably be working on that in some way. , or, you know, Some stuff around AI. You might see them in, in, in higher numbers.

, so it like was the cafes of oldest. Simone was talking about. It is the places where the best and the brightest coalesced to talk about the problems of the time and not be accrediting institutions where you're going to find life players.

Simone Collins: But I'm glad that we, I mean, I don't know, I kind of have insistently tried not to read Nietzsche because I don't want to be one of those people who is constantly influenced by, I personally, and this is another thing about our more backwoods influenced culture.

Is that we, we look down upon people who speak in the terms of other [00:43:00] philosophers and constantly refer to them. Oh, I hate it. As soon as somebody starts quoting philosophers to me, I'm like, oh, so you're an

Malcolm Collins: idiot.

Simone Collins: Yeah, like just state things in simple terms and, and stop trying to front and show me how well read you are.

This really bothers me. Well, and

Malcolm Collins: I think that Nietzsche does a good job of this. He's also very against, like, cruelty of the strong to the weak. People think he does anything, he's like, no, he'd view that as a form of weakness. You know, that's like the adult who plays children in tennis to dunk on them.

Simone Collins: Oh, well, and I can probably dig up this study and find it for you if you ask me for it before you run this. But I can share with you the study that showed that people in like a technical academic field who are lower in status tended to use more jargon than people who are higher in status, because it's a way for, if you actually are low status to try to puff yourself up.

If you're of high status, all you want to do is explain things in dumbed down terms that people can understand. So honestly, the more dumbed down your terminology is, the higher status you are. And you know, someone who's really amazing at that. Is Elon Musk. [00:44:00] When he explains things, he uses extremely simple terms, he doesn't make references, he speaks in words that everyone can understand, including children, and I think that's great.

Oh, I

Malcolm Collins: absolutely agree. You know who else is good at that is Trump. Never, never you know, uses these, like, obscure references or anything like that. Like, he's interested in getting his point across. Now, let's talk about Nietzsche's view of weakness, because a lot of people are going to see it as correlatory to our view of weakness when they are distinct, but I'm going to say that his view of weakness is not stupid.

So a lot of people would say that he argues that weakness leads to immorality. So he calls this the, the slave morality. Okay. So, oh no. Is

Simone Collins: this his term for sheel or something? Is this just

Malcolm Collins: maybe a little bit. Okay. So he, there's this thing called slave morality in which the weak are unable to assert themselves psychologically or socially.

They are developed.

Simone Collins: So this is his word for lemmings or sheel [00:45:00] or, or, or n pc. It's a bit

Malcolm Collins: different. It's a bit different than that.

Simone Collins: Oh, okay.

Malcolm Collins: They develop resentment towards the strong. They create a moral system that redefines weakness as virtuous. Traits like humility, meekness, and obedience become quote unquote good.

Strengths, pride, and self assertion become quote unquote evil. So essentially what he believes is that when individuals are weak, they redefine the rules of the game to make weakness strengths and to look down upon and see with contempt the things that some individuals have, which give them strengths over of weak individuals.

So if I'm a weak individual and I see somebody who has achieved things, I can't because of their willpower or because of their cunning, I will redefine willpower or cunning as evil.

Simone Collins: That's so interesting because I thought that this behavior was a very modern phenomenon. I thought. Quite frankly, that [00:46:00] those disempowered enough to see themselves in these weak positions have only just recently been given the platform and ability to shape culture.

What he's implying with this definition, if you have it right, is that the weak, for a very long time, have had cultural influence and the ability to reshape narratives and have been trying to do this since at least his. Lifetime, which is surprising.

Malcolm Collins: Yes, actually he saw the beginning of this influence coming from a christian morality oh, yeah, which I mean

Simone Collins: of course like ever since the the new testament ever since jesus This was the thing, you know, the meek shall inherit the earth, right?

But

Malcolm Collins: yes, and I think this is an over You know, extrapolation of that line within Christianity. I do not believe that this is I think if you look at something like turn the other cheek and that stuff that is not weakness.

Simone Collins: It's about being tough and it's about being oriented around your values. Rather than your

Malcolm Collins: values over other people's [00:47:00] values.

It's about not listening, not responding, not If somebody is attacking you, you do not need to be baited into that. Yes. And I'd also say the same with the meekness. This is about social inversion. It is not about weakness. Jesus didn't say the weak will inherit the earth. Yes, it's the meek. Well, I'll look up the definition of the word as Jesus meant it in the context because I think it's likely not.

Oh yeah, what the original word was. Yeah,

Simone Collins: everything's lost in translation.

Speaker 13: Oh, it's the meek! Blessed are the meek!

Oh, that's nice, isn't it? I'm glad they're getting something, because they had hell of a time

Malcolm Collins: Are you. In kidding me. Okay. So I go up to look. What does the word that is translated into English? As meek

where Jesus says blessed are the meek for, they will inherit the earth. I was like, okay. Cool. Well, what does it mean? It means having self control the term is most frequently used to describe a horse that is tamed that what. , it means you [00:48:00] are a being of great strings, but you act with gentleness humility and self-control of course, no one would want us to know what is being said.

There are blessed are those with self-control for, they will inherit the earth. The one thing we're not allowed to have.

Would note that, , when I had mentioned this before in videos that were actually filmed after this video and edited after this video. So I'm adding this sort of in post. , somebody was like, oh, well, if you look at this argument, Meek actually is better translated as gentle. However, if you actually look at the instances in the argument that this person is providing, it's very clearly self-control fits better than the word gentle.

So I'll give you some examples here. This is from the Nixonian. , ethics from Aristotle where he's using this word and we can try putting in the word self-control and we can try then putting in the word gentle. , and you'll see that self-control just fits better. It's pretty clear that this word meant self-control. All right now we praise a [00:49:00] man who feels anger on the right grounds and against the right persons and also in the right manner. And at the right moment for the right length of time, he may then be called. Self-controlled. If we take having self-control to be a praise where the quality. For those with self-control really denote a calm, temper, not led by emotion, but only by becoming angry in such a manner for such causes and for such links of time.

As principal may ordain. Although the quality is through rather to air on the site of defect since the man with self-control is not prompted to seek redress for injuries, but rather inclined to forgive them. Now. Let's put gentle in here and you'll see that gentle just makes so much less sense. Now we praise the man who feels anger on the right grounds and against the right person and also in the right manner at the right moment.

And for the right length of time, he may then be called gentle tempered. If we take gentleness to be a praise where really quality for gentle really denotes [00:50:00] a calm, temper, not led by emotion. Is that what gentle decline?

It indicates a calm, temper, not led by emotion, but only becoming angry, , for such cases, um, that have like, , we're principal may ordain.

No, that's not what a gentle person would do. A person who is self-control would only become angry when their principal would tell them to become angry and not in reaction to things. A person was self-control would be a person who is able to restrain their temper. , and, I should note what's really cool here is we have Aristotle here basically in long form defining what this word actually meant, which is so, so cool that we get that. , but it, it means more than just a generic self-control it means very specifically the ability to control the emotions that you are expressing to other people. Or experiencing yourself, , in the face of, , something that might anger someone or something that might otherwise cause distress to an individual.

So it's very specifically self control over your emotional [00:51:00] state or at least the emotional state that you're expressing to other individuals. And it makes perfect sense to me that people with self-control and self-discipline would inherit the earth. Oh yeah, of course.

Speaker 10: How blessed are the sorrowful! They shall find consolation! How blessed are those of gentle spirit! They shall have the earth for their possession! How blessed are those who hunger and thirst to see right prevail!

Speaker 11: What waS that? I was too busy talking to Big Nose. I think it was blessed are the cheese makers. What's so special about the cheese makers?

Speaker 14: Well, obviously, it's not meant to be taken literally. It refers to any manufacturers of dairy products.

Speaker 11: You hear that? Blessed are the Greek. The Greek? Well, apparently, he's going to inherit the Earth. Did anyone catch his name?

Speaker 13: Oh, it's the meek! Blessed are the meek!

Oh, that's nice, isn't it? I'm glad they're getting something, because they had hell of a time.

Malcolm Collins: People used parts of Christian theology as early as Anisha's time and weaponized them. However, I would disagree with Anisha in the way that this So in Nietzsche's mind, [00:52:00] specific individuals see other individuals becoming strong or successful and then to psychologically protect themselves, they say, Oh, the things that make them strong and successful are the things that are bad about them.

I actually don't think it plays out that way. I think it happens at the level of cultural systems, as I've mentioned before. I. E. You will have one cultural system as we've noted in the United States that originally, for example, said, Oh, if something creates disgust within you, then it is immoral, whether that is, you know, a diseased person or two men kissing or you know, the poor.

Right? And then that began to create a lot of. Negative externalities and then another cultural group was like, oh, we shouldn't be looking at things that way clearly This leads to you know This is the mother theresa thing, you know hug the lepers even if they create an evolved sense of disgust in you because you know in an evolutionary context if you hug people that leprosy you get leprosy and die, right?

Like there's a biological reason to not hug somebody who looks horrifyingly sick she was like [00:53:00] you need to overcome that you need to learn to love them and this appears on its surface You To be a superior moral ideology. And I agree that it is in so far as it differentiates between the intrinsic disgust reaction, but even to Nisha, that intrinsic disgust reaction is something you need to learn to master with the mistake that this cultural group makes is it begins to elevate the disgust reaction.

It begins to say the things that create disgust are the things that are good at a cultural level. And I think you see this in a lot of modern art. I think, yeah. And the uglification

Simone Collins: of so many things.

Malcolm Collins: Yes, where they will take video game characters and they'll say if this character is arousing to look at or beautiful to look at, then it must be evil and we must subvert it.

Whereas we need to create Yeah, or

Simone Collins: we they will literally use attractive people as like, That's how you know they're

Malcolm Collins: fascists. Absolutely. And he thinks more broadly that what a lot of people consider virtue or morality [00:54:00] is just a system for affirming weakness. And he focused a lot on this concept of being life denying.

Or life affirming as a value system, which again I guess I'd say rhymes a lot with a lot of like manosphere philosophies or even our philosophy if you look at our video of life levels of I think it might be the video on the age of vitality or vitalism, vitalist based systems, now here i'll note that you might now say

well, if all of this is the case, then how does Nietzsche define good? Right, like, if he's saying that weakness causes people to act in negative ways, how is he, like, measuring these individual actions as negative? And I'll read a basic explanation of how he defines what's good and what's bad, and this might surprise you as well, Simone.

So, he, Niche defines quote unquote good primarily in terms of what promotes human flourishing and the realization of human greatness, particularly for those ki [00:55:00] He considers quote unquote higher types or quote unquote noble. He rejects traditional moralities, universal prescriptions, in favor of a more individualistic and life affirming approach.

Power in strings, Nietzsche associates goodness with everything that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power and power itself, life affirmation. He values actions and attitudes that affirm life, embrace struggle, and promote vitality rather than those that deny or diminish life. Human excellence.

Nietzsche prioritizes the cultivation of exceptional individuals and their unique virtues over universal moral norms. Creativity and self overcoming. He emphasizes the importance of creating new values and constantly striving to surpass oneself. Metrics for evaluation. Life promotion. Nietzsche asks whether moral decisions are quote unquote life promoting, life preserving, species preserving, you.

Perhaps even species cultivating. Now you can see how much this aligns with a lot of our philosophy. [00:56:00] Flourishing of higher types. He judges moral systems by their capacity to facilitate the development of exceptional individuals. Perspectivism. Nietzsche advocates for recognizing the validity of different moral perspectives.

was in their cultural context, rather than adhering to universal standards. So again, pluralism. Nietzsche argued for pluralism. It's

Simone Collins: just so unexpectedly pronatalist, optimistic, and vitalistic, when I'm used to being presented, Nietzsche, as this very Depressing, dark, black pilled guy. This

Malcolm Collins: is weird. Well, and I think that what we're seeing here is why, like, and then finally here, overcoming resentment.

He values moral systems that avoid the resentment and reactive attitudes he associates with slave morality. By rejecting traditional morality's universal claims, Focus on altruism niche aims to create a space that is more nuanced individualistic and life affirming in its approach to ethics That promotes human greatness and cultural [00:57:00] flourishing So you can see from this a lot of this aligns with our value system Not all of it and we're going to get into just a second why not all of it does but When you hear this, I bet you're thinking this is not the niche.

I was told existed Why wasn't I told that this is what niche was actually about?

Simone Collins: Nietzsche

Malcolm Collins: whatever I don't care what his real name is. It's not a real language. There's English and then there's everything else. I don't want to sell you my words by drinking sewer water, okay? And again, this is what we're talking about when we're talking about cultural competition.

Having a degree of humor in your cultural pride, humor in your patriotism, can be great in terms of causing other people to lean into their cultural pride and patriotism. Yes, yes, yes. But I think that the urban monoculture fundamentally hid from people what this philosophy was because they knew It would seem so.

He basically called out wokeism before wokeism came to exist.

Simone Collins: Yeah, and this is pretty [00:58:00] mind blowing for me. Thank you for calling me on this.

Malcolm Collins: Well, I mean, I think that the Yeah, he's like, oh, yeah, so in the future this group of people is going to use sympathy as a weapon They're going to use it to they're going to begin to have contempt for everyone who's successful everyone who's thriving They're going to try to spread this morality.

They're going to try to diminish these people's capacity for exceptionalism he could be seen as very like it's interesting if you if you go over what niche thought It is very I'd say predictive and almost prophetic of woke culture and the evils of woke culture and how woke culture acts and hurts people.

The evils of the culture that creates basically roaming populations of homeless people who just get shipped between cities as soon as any city receives sanity. And then another city is like, Oh, we'll be the good guys now. And it is fundamentally evil. And it is something that fundamentally we must fight against, but fortunately, [00:59:00] it is also self extinguishing.

The slave morality that Nietzsche talks about, I think, spiraled out of control within recent ages, and is now the dominant cultural group in our society. Not in the way it was during the Christian period but in an even more true way, where in the Christian period, I think people were twisting scripture to get slave morality, where now I think slave morality is being worshipped in and of itself.

Any thoughts before I go into how we differentiate from Nietzsche, Simone?

Simone Collins: No, I mean, you just basically summed it up, but that's still fascinating.

Malcolm Collins: As to how we differentiate from Nietzsche which I think is very interesting. From our perspective, which could be seen as very in line with CJ, We deride, like Nazis, for the same reason we deride the BLM movement. Which is to say Nazis say, we are not thriving, we didn't win the war, because of this other cultural group that's making more money than us, it's Doing better academically than us.

It's in higher paid professions than us, the [01:00:00] Jews. A lot of people think they didn't like the Jews because they thought the Jews were like dirty or something. They, they use that in some of their advertisements, but that wasn't the same way wokes will call like white people disgusting. Most of the stuff on the Jews that the Nazi complained, complained that they out earned Germans, that they were taking money from Germans, that they had quote unquote privilege over Germans.

If you translated it to modern words, there's a reason you're not being told this, but that was fundamentally the way the ideology worked. And that was why I deride that ideology so much in, but for the same reason that was like BLM where they're like, oh, black culture isn't doing well because white culture, white culture is cheating.

White culture is victimizing us. And I'm like, it's not. And they're like, no, look at all these systemic. And I'm like, well, there's everything was taken from us when we were slaves. And I was like, well, everything was taken from the Japanese much more recently. When they were put in the, concentration camps and they bounced back pretty well.

I have a lot of Jewish friends,

Simone Collins: internment camps, but yeah,

Malcolm Collins: whatever. A lot of friends of mine, families went through the Holocaust and they lost everything. And the Nazis took everything from them and they moved to the U S and now they're all in

Simone Collins: Michigan.

Malcolm Collins: Explain that, you know, [01:01:00] it's cultural differences when you can accept.

that you need to learn from other cultures, you can improve quickly when you believe in a past. And this is, I think, a danger for black culture right now that it's facing is the Wakandanization of ancient Africanism. Which is to say that they can just go back to some ancient way of being African and they'll be able to outcompete everyone instead of needing to come.

Wakanda's not. Ancient? It's super high tech. That's what makes it so cool. No, but it is based on the belief, which has become quite common within some black communities, that they used to be this super powerful advanced civilization, and that by going back to that, they can achieve greatness again. And I look at the We Was Kings movements the same way.

That I look at modern anti Semites or Nazis more broadly. It is a glorification of a past that never happened.

Simone Collins: Right, because our, our key philosophy is, is you don't go back. You push forward, taking what was best. Well, no,

Malcolm Collins: our, our biggest key [01:02:00] philosophy is the biggest deception you could ever have as a deception against yourself.

A belief that you are strong where you are weak. That you are succeeding where you are failing. But, how are we different from Nietzsche? The core failure of Nietzsche's philosophy, this isn't that big a failure, but it is a core differentiation we have.

Is he saw individuals as being made up of like sort of competing urges or components? That fought against each other and while I think this exists to an extent I think that the core unit of identity when we're looking at society is not the individual but it's the intergenerational family unit And then the clan and then the individual if i'm sort of ranking the importance of these individual things when i'm looking at the individual above the individual Is me in this exact moment of time, or me as I exist as a combination of my genetics and the memeplexes which are living on top of those genetics.

But me as an individual is just not [01:03:00] particularly important. And I think a lot of our philosophy could be seen as, now I'd never read Nietzsche before so I didn't know that any of these were Ideas that rhymed with his ideas of taking some ideas that rhyme with his ideas and applying them at the cultural level Instead of applying them at the individual level.

I

Simone Collins: mean What didn't you say that there are some competing urges within every human with at least every human who tries to rise above their base? humanity Like there's the part of you that just wants to eat and be lazy and lie back and not work because we're designed to conserve energy and, and maximize intake of calories and reproduce, but then there's also our prefrontal cortex and this ability to rise above and reason and engage with logic and think about things bigger than just our basic urges.

I think that's a fundamental internal struggle that anyone who even sees themselves as part of a larger chain has to overcome every single day. Don't you?

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, [01:04:00] I agree with that. I mean, we, we often talk about as a four footed beast, which is caged with you have your human side and your animal side and they're both in a cage and you need to feed your animal side just enough meat to keep it from getting strong or it will attack and kill you.

It will dominate you, but if you feed it nothing, it goes rabbit and attacks you. Or you end up spending all your time mollifying it and petting it and being like it's okay, buddy I know, you know, we haven't seen porn in a year, but You don't need to freak out when you see an attractive woman

Speaker 15: Colonel,

Speaker 17: these men have taken a supreme vow of

Speaker 15: celibacy. Like their fathers and their fathers before them. I haven't seen a woman in decades.

Speaker 17: Miss Huddleston.

You say your war is over. Oh, my. Wherever you go, it will. You take the pain with you.

I know you were hurt when that woman left. But you're just using that to hide from who you really are.

Malcolm Collins: . But Yeah, I think that that we see that. But I take that not from [01:05:00] Nietzsche. I take that from Wynwood Reed, where he talks about these concepts. And I think that also our concept of civilization, which is to say civilization or a civilized individual is someone who's better able to suppress these pre evolved needs and ideas for and and humanity more broadly, where you argued to me and I have adopted this view is that the human is the part of ourselves that we choose instead of the part of ourselves that we are born with.

And that people who are more human are the people who are better able to suppress their pre born instincts, their animal side. Would you agree with that?

Simone Collins: Sorry. I'm trying to find like moments when I could talk when she's not winching. I have a call in six minutes just as a note.

Malcolm Collins: Great. Well then we use our time wisely today. And I really appreciate you Simone. I it's so Cool to be potentially contributing to the philosophical canon of human civilization But be able to do so Was not living a shitty life like Nietzsche.

Nietzsche did

Simone Collins: The amount of luxury that we enjoy [01:06:00] is humbling every single day. I mean, I'm just Humble the weave hot water. It is amazing running water running water and hot water. Holy crap And drink drink a potable water that we can just drink the water that we get in our faucets There are so many things that blow my mind every single day.

And yeah that we get to it also that The average person in a developed country now who has access to an internet connection and a phone can engage with the world's leading philosophers. I mean, this used to be something where only the wealthiest and the most connected would have the shot at going to some university where some major philosopher was pontificating in some large venue and you wouldn't really necessarily get to know them or have a lot of exposure to their ideas.

And now people can just. Go on YouTube and listen to it or like follow this person on sub stack. And it's, I love that we live in this age and I love how democratized these great ideas are. And to your point, now I'm coming away from this conversation, very grateful for the fact that while Nietzsche lived at a time where he thought [01:07:00] that Ubermunch, the Ubermunch was like a theoretical figure, that now pretty much everyone has the tools to become an Ubermunch.

And that there are a decent number of these people and that they are significantly changing the trajectory of humanity at a time where we would argue, this is one of those. inflection points in the entire history of humankind and intelligence in general that is really crucial and some, some decisions made by a small handful of people who choose to participate in the game.

And this is not about who has the most money or the most IQ or the highest IQ that is. It is about those who choose to show up and play this game. They're going to change the course of human history.

Malcolm Collins: Interesting thing is to tell Nietzsche that we would eventually enter a time of such opulence of, of, of, of such abundance that because pleasure was so everywhere for people [01:08:00] that the only humans who are able to survive, the only humans who are able to make it through this crucible.

Are the ones who tended towards the ubermensch

Simone Collins: that is

Malcolm Collins: fundamentally what our philosophy of the garden of the lotus eaters is

Simone Collins: to

Malcolm Collins: say that only those who can master their own values and masters themselves are going to exist in the future. We are, we are at a civilizational bottleneck where only the ubermensch survive.

Simone Collins: Yeah, it's exciting. It's exciting. It's scary, but it gives me a lot of hope. And I love the fact that so many people have a shot at really mattering now and it doesn't come down to where you went to school or who, you know, or how wealthy you are, whatever like that, that wasn't the past. And I mean, I think Nietzsche did come from a position of having enough money in his family and having enough family to support, to, to a certain extent to be someone who had these ideas.

Now, this is something that's a lot more democratized. So that's cool. Thank you. This [01:09:00] is a really interesting conversation. I didn't think it would be because we've talked about this so much and we're like, I don't know, this seems like a straightforward situation, but there's,

Malcolm Collins: There is. And I was surprised because I had always sort of looked down on each day's work as being like try hard.

I sort of thought of it as like, well, maybe it's because so

Simone Collins: many try hard people started talking about it and then you start to associate it. With that, and I think here's the problem. Here's what may have completely broken his reputation is that a bunch of like incel bread pillar types started quoting his work way too much, not way too much, but like a lot.

And then all of those that the urban monoculture enemies of those people then basically started blackballing Nietzsche as a historical figure because he was this, this superhero to a particular class of human that they saw as subhuman and hateable and, and anything that they liked and respected had to be bad.

The

Malcolm Collins: concept aesthetically aligns with some Nazi ideals when people hear it because they [01:10:00] don't know what it means. They don't know what it means. People who choose not to. Well yeah, it's a, it's

Simone Collins: a German word and it implies some level of superiority. It must be evil.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, and he was around during the Nazis, and I've heard that some of his books were edited by somebody who had Nazi sympathies after he died, because he sort of became famous after he died.

Was

Simone Collins: he, was he pre Nazi? I don't know the exact timeline. My understanding

Malcolm Collins: is he was sort of when the Nazis were rising, and his, like, sister or cousin or something edited a lot of his works to include some, like, anti Semitic ideals. When I think that, you know, realistically, if you're applying his ideals, they'd be incredibly pro Jewish, because Yeah.

Which is but I, but I think that if, if you look at our ideals, I guess I'd say that our ideals are significantly closer to the ideals of somebody like Nietzsche than they are to your classic modern, you know, Anti Semite are racist or anything like that, but they don't align completely with them.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah.

Simone Collins: Well, which is fair because we live with a lot of additional information. And what am I having

Malcolm Collins: for dinner tonight before your call, by the way?

Simone Collins: So I'm kind of experimenting a [01:11:00] little bit with something from the freezer. And if it doesn't work out, I'm going to have backup. What are you

Malcolm Collins: experimenting with spit it

Simone Collins: out.

Your, your karai spiced chicken. I'm going to try baking and air frying different versions of it. Okay. Maybe with an egg wash to, to, to see if we can revive it. Because you don't want to deep fry it anymore. You're concerned about the carcinogenic elements of the oil. So I'm going to try two different elements of baking it simultaneously tonight.

And if neither of them ends up working out, then you're going to have grilled cheese sandwiches. Where's the

Malcolm Collins: Karai spiced

Simone Collins: chicken? It was in the deep freezer and we need to use it or get rid of it. So, Oh, is it like deep

Malcolm Collins: frying?

Simone Collins: Yeah, you had pre prepared this for deep frying. You had created karaites. How would you deep fry it in a pan?

I don't want to deal with all the oil.

Malcolm Collins: Okay, well, we'll see how it works.

Simone Collins: Yeah. And if this doesn't work and you still think that it's worth reviving, there's a lot more of it. There's a ton of it because you made a will deep fry it then because I like the deep fried karaites. Okay, then yeah, then next time I will, I will [01:12:00] fill a large pan with it.

All right, do your call. You're late. Thanks. Bye.

Malcolm Collins: I really appreciate that, Simone. You did a great job.

Simone Collins: I hit order on Amazon. I am skilled.

Malcolm Collins: You acted with efficiency and urgency, which is what was required of you for this particular emergency, Simone. Make sure you're centered.

Simone Collins: No. Just no. What? There. Ah. No, not quite. Ah.

There you go. Thank you.

Malcolm Collins: These things matter. , we're trying to think of how we can

start this. Well, you

Simone Collins: mentioned the Star Trek clip. You have the clip from that anime. What is Star Trek? Oh, the Star Trek. Yes. I mean, there's so many, like there, this is one of those, I think it keeps recurring in memes. As a trolley problem and in media and in shows, because it's 1 of these problems that we're [01:13:00] fully aware of.

And we just don't like it. But also social mores, like tribal based. Intuitive evolutionary traits that we have like that intuition toward fairness means that we can't override logic without feeling an extreme pull like it's deeply unfair that this exists and we're evolved to not accept the reality.

But at the same time, we logically know that that is the reality. And I think that that tension makes this something that people keep bringing up and highlighting without ever, of course, coming to a clear conclusion. Unlike us, of course, we just know exactly what the heck that

Malcolm Collins: is. Okay. So I'll get started so we can jump right into it.

Go for it.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Speaker 18: It's Daddy the Bone Collector! Ahhh! You're [01:14:00] not going to hit me! BAM! BAM!

Hey! I got it! I'm gonna escape!

No! Toasty! Octavio's got me and he's gonna eat me! Oh, that looks like it hurt a lot, buddy. Are you okay? Are you okay?

Did you see what happened? What happened? Oh, his knee, uh, he hit my knee with his, uh, chin. Oh [01:15:00] God. And he hit his tongue, I think. Awww. Toast, do you want a hug? Hey, move. Of course it got hurt. Torsten, come here and get a hug, buddy.

Speaker 19: Come here, buddy. Come here.

Come here, my love. I got you.