Quaker Slave Ownership Rate 2X the South (How They Hid It & Birthed Woke)

Malcolm Collins drops a bombshell: modern “woke” culture didn’t come from the Puritans — it evolved directly from the Hicksite Quaker movement. In this explosive Based Camp episode, we trace how a 17th-century religious group birthed today’s urban monoculture, complete with performative morality, call-out culture, virtue signaling, and a parasitoid mindset that kills its host.

We dismantle the sanitized schoolbook version of Quaker history with hard stats: Quakers owned slaves at dramatically higher rates than Southern colonies or Puritans, yet rewrote themselves as the heroes of abolition. We compare them to Calvinist Puritans, explore “justicle” (morality based purely on feelings), the origins of deplatforming, child moral authorities, bureaucratic meeting-house governance, and why this “super virus” spread so effectively through the U.S. education system.

If you’ve ever wondered why progressive spaces feel like a mix of endless rules, theatrical protest, and zero accountability for results — this is the deep historical root.

Episode Transcript

Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be discussing how what we today call woke evolved out of the Quaker. And a lot of people have posited many potential starts to woke them as a metaphysical framework, as a moral framework, as a collection of behaviors and patterns.

And they’re just wrong. They’re just wrong. Like there’s a very clear. Trace of where the movement emerged, specifically from the Hicksite Quaker movement, Uhhuh how it grew, how it used the Quaker foothold was in the Northeastern education system in the United States and the West Coast education system in the United States to indoctrinate a generation and how it killed its original host generations ago.

At this point, the Hicksite Quaker tradition is dead. And it we’ve mentioned it. Some of those things is woke as a cultural parasite. [00:01:00] It’s parasitoid it. Does not care about the host surviving it. You know, a parasitoid, if you’re not familiar, is like, have you ever seen one of those worms or insects where you can see like the worms crawling underneath its skin and then it explodes?

It’s a parasite that doesn’t, that that goal is to kill you as part of its lifecycle. So, while all of this evil came from the Quaker movement, we still have to mourn what happened to it as well. All right. And I will just be reading from one of our books, I think our best book, the Pragmatist Guide to Crafting Religion.

And it’s at the end of the section on how you determine what is true and what isn’t true.

Simone Collins: Question though are you going to address what if all hiss. Strong assertions that it was the Puritans and not the Quakers.

Malcolm Collins: And to, to say that woke is evolved from Puritanism requires a cartoonish understanding of history.

Simone Collins: Oh, gauntlet throne. Should we have a debate with him?

Malcolm Collins: Well, no. You need to [00:02:00] believe that Puritan culture was the culture that the urban monoculture framed it as. And one of the things that we’ll be going over is the urban monoculture, which came downstream of Quaker cultural framings simply lied about the cultural sensitivities of the Puritans.

The Puritans were example were extremely likely to like they wrote so sexually graphically. That up until the 19 hundreds, Puritan works had to be censored. Puritan, like a lot of the things that people think about puritans are just. Untrue. But if you are talking about which group was famously insanely prudish.

It was, it was

Simone Collins: the Quakers. Yeah. Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: They were so prudish this, the quote that often loves is they women would describe everything from their breasts to their, what was it? To their ankles

Simone Collins: from basically their neck to their ankles. If there was something wrong, it would be my stomach. It doesn’t matter if it was like their heart palpitations or they had severe, you know, me

Malcolm Collins: cramps.

They were just uncomfortable mentioning everything here.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: [00:03:00] That’s my stomach, which is sort of antithetical to the way the puritans approached it, which is just say, we look full bodied at the sins of man, and only through overcoming them have we proven mastery by hiding from them. We haven’t proven mastery.

Yeah.

Simone Collins: Yeah. One of the other patterns of like, pedestal children is these wise sage.

Malcolm Collins: Well, we’ll get into all

Simone Collins: that moralizer. Yeah. Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Let’s get started here.

Okay. What about the Quakers? Weren’t the Quakers morally ahead of their time and super nice, weren’t they leaders of the abolition movement or something? This is certainly the version of Quakers we learned about in the school system that was dominated by the urban monoculture. So we were shocked upon our review of the actual stats, and maybe more than a little bitter, because we felt misled.

Around 42% of Maryland Quakers in early America owned slaves. And this is from Carol kl, 1983. This sample was taken from Maryland wills between 1669 and 1750 among Quaker leaders in [00:04:00] Philadelphia at 70% owned slaves. This sample was taken from the Philadelphia yearly meeting, 1681 to 1705. Even if you go with the lower number, this is, so, that’s 42% of Quakers own slaves.

This is higher than the rate of slave ownership of slave ownership of. Any culture or group in the 13 colonies?

Simone Collins: Wait, wait. Even more than like, the southern colonies

Malcolm Collins: dramatically higher than the southern colonies.

Simone Collins: I forgot about this.

Malcolm Collins: At the Southern colonies only around 20% to 5% of household owned slaves.

Simone Collins: Oh, right. ‘cause it was really a rich person thing there. Yeah, yeah.

Malcolm Collins: With Quakers it was 40%. Oh, no.

Simone Collins: So

Malcolm Collins: the reason I go into this is and, and if, if you have this view that like, if you’re like, wow, this is really different than the version of the Quakers I learned about in school. And the reason is, is because Quakers, if, if it was.

Quakerism that the urban monoculture [00:05:00] evolved out of. It would make perfect sense that it would maintain this trait of trying to constantly frame the Quakers as morally decent when they were anything but morally decent. They were the most morally repulsive founding group within the Americas. By, by an order of magnitude because not only did they practice things like slavery at a higher rate but they then acted like they didn’t do it.

Which to me, I just have this, I immense a moral respo res, you know, disgust. That if you’re going to do a sin, at least own it. Don’t pretend like you were leading the abolitionists when you were not. Almost all of the leading abolitionists were Calvinists which we’ll go into and puritans more specifically.

There, I think there was like one or two Quakers, but we’ll go into this more. So, contrast this with Puritan communities, which wa while less attested, seemed to have a slave ownership rate between 0.5 and 2%. This is from Rowan R 2021 0.5 to 2% versus [00:06:00] 40%. Suffice to say the tale of the whale ship of Essex tells us what happens to Bipoc who put themselves in the same boat as Quakers or any gele of today for that matter, despite the incessant self framing as the quote unquote good.

Guys hint, the moment things went bad. The Essex, Quaker sailors ate their bipoc compatriots. First, they claimed their, this uncanny skew was a product of a series of random draws. So just imagine,

Simone Collins: oh, no. Oh no.

Malcolm Collins: A boat gets lost. It’s a, it’s a Quaker group and they had some Bipo wisdom from various groups.

I think some Native American subs were blacks and et cetera. Okay. And they, they frame it to them in the way the urban monoculture always does. It’s just a random draw of the straw. I’m sorry.

Simone Collins: Totally fair. 100% fair. Yes.

Malcolm Collins: That’s just a hundred percent fair. Four people and they all, oh, that doesn’t sound statistically likely.

But by the [00:07:00] time it’s to the last one, you can’t really do anything, can you? Because we are the nice ones. We are the Quakers. No, I, I think this is important to know, right? People go off on, on me always. I rip on when people are like, oh, Malcolm, you dig so hard into Jews. You dig so hard into Catholics.

Speaker: Why isn’t anyone attacking him?

Speaker 2: It’s freezing out.

Speaker: No, I think it’s the sign.

Speaker 2: Well, the sign from diehard three was clearly racist,

Speaker: obviously. But I think we went too broad. Everybody. I mean, who is that offending

Speaker 2: everybody.

Speaker: Ah,

Malcolm Collins: I always say the OG culture that I have a hate boner for is Quakers. And you really see it in our books. It was the number one culture. I was just from the get go. Like, these guys are evil with the face of goodness. Actually, you know, the AI thing where it’s like the smiley face on like the hug off monster, whatever.

Simone Collins: That’s Quakers for you. Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: That’s Quakers for me. Right? The but anyway, to continue. [00:08:00] To those who’ve only heard the cartoon version of Quaker history and find our claims shocking. Perhaps you’re thinking maybe the Quakers own slaves at a high rate, but maybe they worked really hard to end slavery.

Right? That’s what we’ve heard about Quakers. Sure. Search for famous Quaker abolitionists. And you get names like eliza Hicks, a Quaker who urged boycotts and Benjamin Lay, who theatrically flung blood on people and made a big scene about how opposed he was to slavery.

As you read more about such figures, you will find none of these activities actually did anything to end slavery, and none of them did anything other than complain. And it helped in some small parts of the Underground Railroad. Now contrast this. With the major Calvinist abolitionists, and you get names of people like John Brown of the Harpers Ferry in bleeding, Kansas or Newton Knight working with Malcolm’s ancestors in the free state of Jones.

If you’re familiar with these two figures these are people who actually went out and tried to free the slaves, right? Like [00:09:00] they tried, they, they didn’t go around flinging blood on people or something like that. They on the ground were like, if slavery is immoral, then I have to do something that’s functionally gonna end it, not just make a big show of wanting it to be over.

. We have heard, if you’re not familiar with the free state of Jones, this was the thing that my ancestors were involved in. It was a breakaway state from the, the south that was a state that tried to in, like, integrate slaves with the nons slave population and fight against the Confederacy.

And they, they did really well. There, there’s a movie about them. They’re pretty cool. Anyway

We have heard that Quakers may have played more important a role in abolition in the uk, but in the US at least, their performance was well overwhelmingly performative rather than results oriented. Now, perhaps you’re thinking, come on guys, that is really harsh.

Wasn’t Pennsylvania the first state to ban slavery? While some pro Quaker historians will frame it such as a fact, an assertion that Pennsylvania was the first state to ban slavery intentionally misrepresents [00:10:00] what happened? Vermont, a majority congregationalist Calvinist state banned slavery at its founding in 1770.

Then built that ban into the state’s constitution in 70, 77. These bans immediately freed slaves above a certain age. Pennsylvania did not even put a high duty on slavery until 1973, so it’s three years after Vermont had banneded. But Vermont wasn’t technically a state yet, so they’re like, oh, like a full colony yet.

Simone Collins: Oh, okay. Okay.

Malcolm Collins: And when they did ultimately ban slavery in 1780, they nevertheless allowed slave owners to keep their slaves just banning the purchasing of. New slaves.

Simone Collins: no.

Malcolm Collins: Whereas in the Calvinist state, it’s actually banned slavery contrast. This was Puritan Massachusetts who freed all of the slaves upon banning them just three years later.

Simone Collins: So the Quakers just pulled up the slavery ladder. They, they just kept their slaves.

Malcolm Collins: The, yeah, the same year of the American Revolution and the Treaty of Paris. So, [00:11:00] sure the Quakers did ban slavery first, but only if you discount be Vermont because it had not joined the union. And only if you count a partial ban on slavery even was in Pennsylvania.

Quaker communities did not spearhead the anti-slavery movement. They just happened to be the group with the most power. In reality, the state’s first anti-slavery protests were exclusively led by Mennonites, and the first local slavery bans were enacted within the Mennonite communities. As a historian of the protests said Mennonites never had slaves.

It would not even buy something if they thought it had come through the labor of a slave. They viewed slavery as a quote unquote Quaker thing and just walked away and lived apart. So that’s a quote by the way, by Lane 2012. Mennonites, so you’re not, this is the Amish and, and the Mennonites and everything like that.

Although all Inapt groups are, are, are, are in this, the Amish, literally in their writings sought of slavery as a Quaker institution. This wasn’t because they didn’t know about the Puritans and the [00:12:00] Southerners. They just, of all the cultural groups, they associated Quakers was perpetuating slavery the most.

Okay. So, while the Quakers were eventually against slavery, they were so far as we can tell, at least the least anti-slavery of the anti-slavery gropes. Oh, for goodness sake, you might be thinking at least Quakers were nice to Native Americans. I read that in a book somewhere. This appears to be a manipulation of history, but not quite as bad as the one that Quakers have built around slavery.

Quakers indeed had better relations with local Native American communities, but this seems to have as much or more to do with the communities than the Quakers. To quote David Hackett Fisher’s book, Albion Seeds another feature of the Delaware Valley. The natives were friendly and very different from the more militant tribes of the lower Chesapeake and upper New England Williams Pins Indian policy would’ve been disastrous failure in Maryland or Virginia just as it later failed in Western Pennsylvania.

So it would seem that [00:13:00] the Quakers were merely granted a convenient opportunity to be nice to Native American populations and history sort of smudged the facts over time. But why trust the storytellers? Let’s look more at the concrete numbers to determine whether Quakers treated local Native Americans with more kindness than their Puritan counterparts.

There are nearly 10,500 remaining Delaware Indians, Leno Lepe left falling from a population of 1500. Back during the colonies contrast. This was the Aki with Hu the Puritans interacted, who now have a population of around 9,775 falling from a post smallpox population of. 10,000. If Quakers did treat the Delaware Indians differently, they found some other way to undermine them as if Indian populations within the Quaker neighborhoods don’t seem to have survived at the rate the ones around Puritans did.

So it’s like Quakers, they’re like, we were so nice to the Native Americans who lived alongside. And I’m like, oh great. Can I ask some of those Native Americans how they fared? [00:14:00] Oh, well not many of them survived and it was a hard time for all of us back then. And weren’t you the one of the wealthiest groups in the early co?

Oh, yes. And we gave them plenty of gifts, but somehow they just didn’t make it. We tried our best. The point being is the facts on the ground are not, not great. Okay. What about women? You might say, yes. You might be wondering, were the Quakers not the greatest advocates of gender equality? And, and you might be beginning to see a little similarity to the urban monoculture with Quaker communities.

Act like you’re helping everyone but actually be completely morally corrupt because your actions don’t matter. And this is, we’ll get to this in a bit but this is how it came out of it. This is the social hack that Quaker invented at its core.

Simone Collins: Do you think they were the first to pioneer it?

Malcolm Collins: I’m not familiar with any other group in history that cared so little about their actual actions, in [00:15:00] contrast with the way that they decided to frame their own morality.

Every other group I’m aware of in history, at least in some tentative way, tried to tie their actions and the consequences of those actions to whether or not they were moral people. The Quakers really like, like worse than Deontologists because the Deontologist at least has like a set of rules and they’re like, well, if everyone obeys these rules, society will be good.

But Quakers then pioneered this idea of does it feel like you’re being moral? Then you’re being moral. And nobody had really come up with this concept before. And it turns out it’s a very good concept. It’s spreading among certain types of educated communities that are very good at arguing themselves into believing they’re good people.

Right. But no, back to the topic of a women. While it is true that Quakers touted gender equality, going so far as having a saying in souls, there is no sex Quaker population stacked. Don’t imply they acted on this belief where it mattered,

Simone Collins: huh?

Malcolm Collins: For example, Quaker women were twice as likely as men to be illiterate at the [00:16:00] height of their influence.

20% to 40%. I

Simone Collins: forgot about this. Yes.

Malcolm Collins: 99 to 1706. Only slightly different from the super sexist Calvinists difference. 16 to 50% in the 1760s. It seems the only way the Quakers were actually more in favor of gender equality manifested in the burden of proselytization being placed on women as well, often resulting in Quaker women being beaten or even hanged for their efforts.

So like the urban Monoculture Quakers claim, they’re pro women, right? Their monoculture is like, oh yeah, we’re pro-women. That’s why we allow them to be sleep around and be used by men. And like, they’re responsible for all of our advocacy work and you know, they have to do, you know, it’s, it’s a, yeah, we’ll use women more.

And that makes us more pro-women.

Simone Collins: Did anyone ever accuse the, the. Puritans of being super sexist.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Yeah. I mean the, the Quaker cartoon version of history generally frames puritans as being pretty sexist when in [00:17:00] reality they were not. Particularly sexist. They were not, they were not as gender equal as the backwards people.

The backwards people were wholly gender equal or, or near gender equal. But the, the puritans were fairly gender equal. The Quakers had extremely high hierarchy within their culture, but they like pretended like it didn’t exist, and so it didn’t exist.

Simone Collins: Huh.

Malcolm Collins: I mean, they were famous as, you know, for looking down on everyone else.

Like they saw everyone else’s like subhuman. And they cared a lot about your family line, how long you had been in the community very much. Well,

Simone Collins: now Puritans cared about lineage too, so

Malcolm Collins: Oh, Puritans did too, but it’s striking was in Quaker communities because they give off this, oh, we only care, you know, like we we’re, we’re truly e equalist.

And then have this hyper fixation on like family lineage and everything like that. And have an a, a very distinctly set apart aristocracy which is really like the urban monoculture. You, you have your woke aristocracy, but they frame themselves as not being an aristocracy. Like the actress who goes on stage and is like, you, you, you could have no freedom on stolen land.

And [00:18:00] so the tribe that used to own her on land reached out to her and is like, Hey, can we have our land back? And she’s like, eh, hang up the phone. Right? It doesn’t matter her actions, what matters is what she says. On the issue of moralities, Quaker will enthusiastically extol their virtues through history books.

However, if you actually turn to look at the sources that deal in hard numbers, we see Quakers had very little motivation to act on their moral compass. And when they did, they only did so with great compromise. For making this point, we. No, we will get a lot of heat from those trying to defend the myth that they were virtuous \, rather than virtue signaling colonial Quaker.

Still, if we are to build new cultures, we must understand how to enforce moral behavior. If the Quaker system was bad at doing so, we would make the world objectively worse place by allowing the mist to perpetuate to understand why just are apparently so unmotivated to take concrete actions that enact their values in the world, instead of merely signaling a desire for those values to be [00:19:00] enacted.

We can investigate why the Quakers were against slavery.

Speaker 3: Note here, the term justicle is one that we had coined earlier in the book that means a moral system that decides what’s moral based on whether you feel that thing is moral in the moment.

Malcolm Collins: Quakers wrote

Extensively.

Malcolm Collins: About their distaste for slavery, so we know their logic to Quakers. Slavery violated the golden rule, and that term golden rule is everywhere in their anti-slavery material, essentially, because Quakers would not personally like the feeling of being slaves, slavery was bad.

They somehow managed to take. A topic like slavery and make it about their own feelings. Because Quaker’s opposition to slavery is based on personal feelings. Recall that a major Quaker standard of evidence is gained through personal introspection and investigation of one’s emotions is it’s easy to see how they might compromise on the principle if owning slaves made them feel better.

Speaker 4: And we’ll see this in the urban monoculture. You know, you will see somebody with like [00:20:00] pro-union, pro socialism signs, like on their computer, , like a star bucks communist, but using a, , apple phone made by near slave labor. They don’t care. They don’t care about thinking about it if it makes them happy, just like the Quakers of the Colonial period.

Malcolm Collins: Quaker’s reasoning behind anti-slavery sentiment stands in stark contrast , to Calvinist distaste for slavery, which emerged from a general dislike of any institution that removed individual agency. In other words, whereas Quakers disavowed slavery because it would make them feel bad if it happened to them.

Calvinists opposed slavery because it represented the immutable evil of removing human agency. And you can see that the Calvinist reason for disliking slavery led to much more moral action than the Quaker reason was. The core point I’m making here is it’s because, okay, but if the only reason that slavery is bad is because I had feel bad if I were a slave.

And I let my slaves go, well then I’m gonna lose a major investment and I’m [00:21:00] gonna feel bad. And because my feelings are like closer to me, I’m gonna be a little bit more attentive to those. Right? A just mindset leads to immoral action because at its core, this philosophy, it’s based on the aesthetic of thinking good, not doing good, just gain status was in their social circles by loudly protesting the injustices of the world rather than by making actual sacrifices to make the world a better place through direct actions.

Anyway, I have a disclaimer about how not all Quakers are bad people, but you know, this is back when I was trying to be a good guy writing this book. Now I’m like, ah, whatever. Of course, of course that’s true. But this is more fun

actually, I’m gonna skip this part here so I can get right into the origins of the super virus.

Simone Collins: All right.

Malcolm Collins: And if you wanna read that part, you should get our book and read it. It’s a good book. So. As man spread across the world, he brought dogs with him Early. Humans who settled in the Americas were no different. Their trail basing. Canine companions, genetically drifted from old world breeds making American [00:22:00] varieties fascinatingly unique.

Sadly, when the Europeans came, they killed them. Almost all of them. The only survivors were the Malmo and a few related arctic breeds. While people claim that breeds like the Peruvian hairless dog, the Exo malti and the Chihuahua are pre-Colombian. DNA studies show that this is not true. They are less than 4% pre-Columbian.

But we wouldn’t be telling you this story if the ending weren’t so. Clear. Cut dogs catch a form of transmissible cancer called canine transmissible venereal tumors. C-T-V-T-A long time ago, a single dog developed a tumor with this very unique ability and all dogs today that have CT VT carry an iteration of that original dog’s tumor.

So when a dog gets a CT VT tumor, they are growing that inside them. When a genetic testing was performed on the CTVT tumor, it was found to come from a literally. pre-Columbian breed of dog making this extinct species of dog. Also the most prolific single [00:23:00] quote unquote, dog alive today. While that pre-Columbian dog died of cancer, they did so in a way that functionally granted them everlasting life through the DNA was in that cancer and all of the tumors it has produced by this what I mean, if you collectively took all of the, the dogs that had this tumor and put it in a mound that would be the single largest mound of one dog’s DNA on earth today.

And it is this pre-Colombian DNA. From what we can gather, the super virus, the parasitoid we discussed at the beginning of this book, first evolved within Quaker culture and more specifically, the hi site branch by decimating Hicksite birth rates the super virus has long since relegated everything culturally unique about hi site Quakers to the dust bin of history, huh, that said, it’s tumors.

The tumors that now wear the skin of countless victims through which it acts. It’s almost entirely hitite on a DNA level. Along with that long dead pre-Colombian dog, hitite Quaker culture is at once functionally [00:24:00] extinct and the single most important culture in the world today. As a reminder, Hicksite Quakers hold personal emotional states as their highest standard of evidence, while Orthodox Quakers believe their personal emotional experience is important, but subordinate to the Bible. So we explained the two groups a bit earlier in the book. I guess I’m gonna need to give you a quick here. So Quakerism as a religious community believes that truth. Like if you go to one of their meetings it’s a bunch of people sitting in a room and when one of them feels moved by God to speak because the core source of truce is inside of every individual.

They stand up and they speak. And that is where truce comes from. That is how their meeting houses work. You maybe notice a lot of similarities to the urban monoculture here. But the, the, the, there was a big split in the community. One group, the Orthodox Quakers believed that, okay, yes, this personal voice that spoke inside you was important, but it was not as important as the Bible.

The Bible still took precedent. If your [00:25:00] internal voice conflicted with what the Bible said to do, then the Bible was correct. The Hicksite said no. The, the internal voice inside you takes precedence even to the Bible itself. And as, as soon as you take that position of pretty quickly, the Bible just doesn’t matter at all.

Right, because, yeah, you know, you,

Simone Collins: I, I think like anyone who has struggled with addiction knows this. ‘cause you, you, your, we, if we wanna personify it, like your addiction can convince you to do kind of anything. And I think when you just choose to pretend that something you feel in. Personally is like God speaking to you.

You can justify any of your actions as being divinely inspired or endorsed in some way.

Malcolm Collins: Well, this is, this is where ideas that are prevalently, urban monoculture like search yourself, you know, like, you know, look for self-actualization. Yeah. Look for self-acceptance. These ideas are completely antithetical to Puritan culture.

They are almost a literal [00:26:00] inversion of Puritan culture, whereas they are perfectly harmonious with Quaker culture of this

Simone Collins: period. Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Some cultural commentators draw connections between the Parasitoid super virus and Puritan ideals suggesting the virus has a Puritan origin. Given what you have read thus far about Puritan and other Calvinist cultures, it should be immediately clear how utterly buffoonish this idea is.

If we were going to be as uncharitable as possible, we would say Puritan culture is superficially one, based on a veneer of intellectualism, performative stoicism, and inward focus, . Aspirations of self perfection and ruthless capitalism. Independent research and an uninterested discuss towards outsiders.

Therefore, unironically cultural movements often framed as being in direct opposition to the super virus, such as the red pill, men going their own way. Mig tau, and followers of Jordan Peterson and others. Pseudo-intellectual, stoic, inspiring right wing self-improvement junkies represent cultural viruses derived from the Puritan strain of American thought.

Mm. [00:27:00] So it’s not that Puritanism didn’t generate any of its own viruses. They’re just in a different camp. The, the American Puritan tradition of and again, I’m, I’m trying to be uns charitable here, performative intellectualism stoicism you know, obsession with personal self-improvement.

We see these cultures like, it’s very clear when you run into one of these cultures, you’re like, oh, you’re a descendant of the Puritans. But these are the self-improvement cultures, right? Like, we see them all around us, but they’re, they’re typically against the urban monoculture. It appears this misconception comes from a tendency to frame moralizing shaming and shunning as punishment for apostasy as uniquely puritan.

This is silly as that pattern of behavior exists across virtually all hard cultures throughout history, including many that thrive today, the various pop culture viruses with which our species currently contends feature clear signs of the cultures from which they evolved. Even if most people don’t identify these cultivars as being viral, [00:28:00] secular descendants of their earlier cultures, consider the rational and effective altruist movements, which by our estimation at least, are clearly derived from Jewish culture.

Not only are a huge chunk of the rationals and effective altruist movements. Founding members and many of their current prominent members ancestrally Jewish, despite Jews representing a vanishingly small percentage of the population. We 2% for people who don’t know but the communities, and I’d argue of the leading members of the EA community and the rationalist community those of Jewish just are probably 75%.

Like it is, do

Simone Collins: really think it’s that dense?

Malcolm Collins: Oh God, it must be. It must be. I I If you said it’s under 50%, I would. Poop myself. It is, it is a Jewish cultural movement. But the community’s constant debating of moral ontology. The habit of throwing ideas at the wall and Masochistically offering financial rewards to get people to argue against them.

And intense trust in institutions to develop metrics to effectively distribute capital. Could not be more [00:29:00] Jewish. There is, there’s like the, when I talk about the rationals, rationals will literally like put up bounties that are like, debate me. No other culture does that, that is Jewish to its core.

Okay. In the same way that like manosphere culture is pretty puritan to the core. Rationalist and effective altruist cultures. Even like the idea of you just like sit down and be like, I’m gonna like white knuckle it and work until I become the best version of myself. Such a, so amazingly good and cool and effective.

Like for an example of like what Puritans did, Puritans specifically settled in regions that had lots of rocks in them to make farming harder for themselves.

Simone Collins: And it was also uniquely cold. It was very cold. And it was rocky soil. Yes.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Yeah. And, and they chose us. They could have chosen the more fertile land that the Quakers chose.

They said, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. I want the worst land there is because the hard work will strengthen my spirit. If that, that does not sound like the urban monoculture. That sounds [00:30:00] like the manosphere. I. Anyway here, or at least the healthy part of the manis here. Obviously there’s like incel self part, but we whatever rationalists and effective altruist cultures even maintain the Jewish superpower of being able to split apart and recombine with manyfold conflict.

While groups like rationalists, effective altruists and dark effective altruists made posture as though they disagree with each other, they also enthusiastically jump at opportunities to engage in debate with members of other factions. Something that can’t be said for the various viral descendants of the Quaker are Calvinist culture.

Hmm. And, and this, you really see EAs, rationalists, dark intellectuals, you know, our group, we all debate each other all the time. We all talk to each other all the time. You go to two branches of woke culture and it’s like they fight like cats and dogs the moment you put them together.

Simone Collins: That’s a really good point.

I hadn’t thought about that.

Malcolm Collins: This is also true for various branches within the manosphere. You know, you, you, you, you, you put them together, [00:31:00] they’re, they get along slightly better. But different branches of Puritanism got along slightly better. Yeah. But Jews always, like, if you Jews, like an Orthodox Jew will find like a, a you know, a reformed Jew and they’ll be like, he’s a Jew.

And I’m like, why? Why would you even do that to yourself? Like you’re, it would be so much easier to be Jewish and there would be so much fewer Jewish conspiracies if Orthodox Jews could just be like, yeah. The people who don’t practice any of our traditions are no longer functionally Jewish.

Simone Collins: For real.

Yeah. Like, you don’t qualify. You’re not doing the work.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Because if you look at the people who are actually doing a lot of the like, bad Jewish stuff

Simone Collins: there, yeah. I mean that’s what blew my mind. I, I think maybe just, maybe I’m uniquely ignorant, but I had no idea that if you just, if you are Matrilineally Jewish, you would be considered by so many Jews to be Jewish.

When I was like, no, you can’t be a part of a religion if you’re not doing the work. If you haven’t, I guess I’m this, I’m so used to like baptismal based religions where like, until you’re baptized into the church, until you actively opt in and dunk yourself in [00:32:00] water, like cold running water, you’re not in, you know, like, yes.

And then you have to keep going to church and you need to like re-up your commitment, you know, it’s like you’re not paying your dues, you’re not tithing. Like, what are you, you know, where’s your temple recommends? Like, there’s just so many things that I’d grown up assuming were like, you’re not religious unless, and here’s this group that’s like, what?

Oh, you know, all your mothers before you we’re Jewish, so. You’re in.

Malcolm Collins: Fun, fun fact on this point, by the way.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: This is what our entire track, the question that rank Judaism comes from, because this is a fairly recent cultural innovation. And if you find this to be an interesting topic, I strongly suggest that.

I, I, I think it’s one of the most interesting of, of the tracks if you’re, if you’re really into cultural anthropology and not Jewish. If, if you’re Jewish, don’t wash it. It’s very offensive. It’s easily our, our, our thing that gets us called antisemites most frequently, but we’re, it’s just a cultural look at the, the, the historical evidence we’ve been able to find, but anyway, here awareness of the origins of the super virus is important as it yields a better understanding of its nuances, why they exist, [00:33:00] and actions it may take in the future. It also helps explain why we subjected you to a Quaker history lesson. The super virus does not just have, quote, unquote, some features of Quaker culture.

It is quite literally a secular iteration of Quaker culture’s hicksite interpretation from its core outlooks on reality to its government practices and pet projects. This is why Colonial Quaker culture presents such a prophetic view of today’s dominant pop culture morality, not because it was really ahead of its time, but because it ended up becoming the dominant pop culture.

And if you’re interested in this, read David Hackett’s Albian Seed just. Skip to the Quaker chapters and you’ll be like, this sounds like somebody was following an Occupy Wall Street protest or something. The, the, just, all of the antics they got up to let’s start with the concept of call out culture.

While Puritans would seek out and punish community members who violated their rules, it was rare for them to target individuals outside their communities. Puritans were interested in creating the perfect world within [00:34:00] their settlements and did not really care much about what people outside their settlements were doing, unless it evolved.

The degradation of human will eg. Slavery. On the other hand, you will see numerous colonial era cases of Quakers publicly shaming non Quakers to goad them into changing their ways. In colonial Quaker culture, an individual could raise their status within their own culture by quote, unquote calling out.

And this was even the word used in Quaker culture. Those of different cultures which is wild, right? Like most cultures don’t do this. Most cultures are not particularly concerned with performatively calling out. Ways that like the backwoods tradition doesn’t do this. The backwoods tradition would never go into like a Quaker settlement and like start chastising Quakers for not following Backwood tradition.

Simone Collins: Could you imagine? Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Puritans didn’t do this. Cavalier may have done this a little bit, but not much Quakers did this.

Simone Collins: No, I feel like Cavalier. Most of these other ones were like very prideful and exclusionary. Yeah. I think maybe one thing that really shows the connection [00:35:00] between the Quakers and the urban monoculture is the fact that they wanted to convert everyone to their way of life, whereas these other groups were like, no, you can’t be one of me.

Like, you’re not aristocratic, you’re not moral enough. You’re not. Hardcore enough, you know, all of them had their own exclusionary things.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. But the Quakers didn’t. Yeah. And, and they were extremely exclusionary., The Puritans, when they take on indentured servants, they took on indentured servants at a very low rate.

Because they would have moral tests for the indentured servants and like require moral background checks onto these people. ‘cause they’re like, well, if you’re gonna become a part of our community, we have to make sure that you have the moral fortitude to be a true puritan.

Simone Collins: Yeah. They only, they only wanted top performers, even if it was servants in their community.

Yeah. Very high bar.

Malcolm Collins: It was an, it is an interesting, the way they did it, they were extremely elitist, but as soon as you were in the community, then you were equal. Right? But, but the bar to get in the community, the Quakers were the exact opposite. They said they would accept anyone. But when you [00:36:00] joined, if you weren’t from one of the ancestral ruling groups within the Quaker community, you were treated like trash.

Which is very similar to the urban monoculture. Oh yeah. The, the Hollywood star goes, oh, yes, we accept everyone. But of course you know, next time we’re in church I get moved by God, not you. I, I just wanna make sure you understand the, the, the secret rule about who’s actually allowed to stand up and talk today.

Without, without getting side-eye from Mrs. Johnson. Very, very much a, a cracy right. Quaker priorities. And how Quakers demonstrate those priorities have strong parallels with those held by the virus. For examples, Quakers can dim exhibitions of animals at places like zoos as quote, hurtful to their, the animals’ feelings.

With Elizabeth’s drinker reporting, it looked so sorrowful. I pitied the poor thing and I wished it in its own country, or consider it’s hope. Some Quakers chose to protest with Squire Wharton Spastically jumping into a bull baiting ring, a [00:37:00] sport that pitted dogs against bulls, and subsequently calling out the people in the crowd by name.

Does this not sound like Greta Thornberg, by the way, like jumping in and jumping? Oh,

Simone Collins: she’s never put herself at physical. I guess she did on a boat. Never.

Malcolm Collins: This might be the only, only time a Quaker put himself at physical risk. But like the idea of spastically throwing yourself in like a bull ring and started yelling at people in the crowd by Nick, how dare you?

Puritans never, never did stuff like this. When, when Puritans didn’t like something, they would get together as a community and they’d be like, okay. I don’t like what these people are doing. We should probably kill ‘em all and try to get them to repent so they don’t go to hell. Right. That’s a good plan.

Okay. Good plan. Yeah. God no, but it’s, it is very different, right? Like, we’re gonna come together in the community. They were, they were not dramatic, let’s say. Right? Like, they, they got stuff done.

Simone Collins: They were dramatic. They told their kids to stir, to open graves and contemplate death. You don’t think that’s a little

Malcolm Collins: dramatic.

They also chose [00:38:00] colors that said the colors.

Simone Collins: Sad colors.

Malcolm Collins: Sad colors. That’s literally what they called the colors that they like best. Sad colors is what you were supposed to wear as a Puritan which were co colors that showed like non pretentious was the idea behind them.

Simone Collins: There’s a lot of earth tones.

Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: But I love this, you, you hear

Simone Collins: actually behind us, we’ve sort of. Colonial era paint here. Those, that’s a sad color.

Malcolm Collins: You, you hear a Quaker freaking out about like zoos, urban monocultures freak out about zoos all the time. I don’t know any other cultural group that spazzes about zoos like the urban monoculture does.

Quaker might be like the one historical example, like just, sorry, put yourself in the distant history. Imagine Rome, you’re in Rome or something, and they’re, they’re parading the animals like the arena or whatever. And there’s the one person who’s like, oh, look at those poor animals. Everyone would look at them like they were crazy, right?

Like, they’d be like, how, how do you think that’s gonna earn you social points? It makes you look like a nutter. They’re animals. Okay. You could at least care about the 40% of your [00:39:00] people who own slaves. But no, in Quaker culture, this is doing a normal thing to signal and you signal it because you know it gets you status.

Simone Collins: Oh, do you think maybe that’s that parallel of a culture that pedestal lies those outside more than those inside?

Malcolm Collins: What do you mean by that?

Simone Collins: In the sense that when you look at those heat, remember the heat map episode we did that showed the conservatives holds those in their family and then their local community above those outside their community?

And leftists are more likely to favor people outside their community or even their country or culture more than like their own families or themselves.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, yeah, maybe. I mean, but it’s, it’s all performative with Quakers, right? Like that’s important to remember as well. Like the consequences of their actions are really quite irrelevant to them.

They don’t gain status from performing you know, John Brown level action. It’s not about actually attempting to free slaves. It’s about yelling at people because what they care about and, and, and, and the way they view their own moral worth [00:40:00] is, did I performatively look like I was doing a good thing, right?

Simone Collins: Yes.

Malcolm Collins: And the things that performatively look moral are literally an actually moral within a Quaker moral ontology which is really weird. But this is what I’m talking about when I’m talking about Jism because they invented that concept no one had. But again, you’re seeing all over the place here that Quakers look exactly like the urban monoculture.

It’s not like they’re similar. It’s the same culture. Hatred of gun ownership and distaste towards persecution of criminals represents another Quaker value that has effectively migrated to the modern culture with, and no, here no other culture in the history am I aware of, didn’t like criminals being punished.

You’ve got to understand how absolutely bizarre that is as a cultural predilection, right?

Simone Collins: And then that is one of the most I wanna do an episode on this because Brian Cha did a really great essay on it called Escaping the, the Permanent Underclass. But the fundamental issue of us failing and refusing to enforce [00:41:00] our own laws leading to societal breakdown is, is maybe underused in our time as like leading to the downfall of civilizations.

So. I think that’s important, and I forgot that that was. Really something. It started with Quakers.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, and keep in mind, they were also one of the few cultures, they’re, they’re cultures that are anti weapon usually don’t survive. So they’re, they’re very rare as a cultural group to, to see owning weapons as a more negative thing to do.

Simone Collins: Yeah. Good point.

Malcolm Collins: And it, by the way, if you’re asking how did they survive, if they were against owning weapons in a place as dangerous as a frontier, it was the backwards people. They took the backwards people and they put them in the regions where the Indians were because they knew the backwards people would kill the Indians, and then the Indians would kill the backwards people and they’d be busy killing each other, and they wouldn’t bother with some more inward settlements.

Simone Collins: Were refusing to own weapons works when you’re surrounded by a bunch of other people who own weapons and do the dirty work for you, in other words.

Malcolm Collins: Right? But that’s actually very urban [00:42:00] monoculture as well. Right? Functionally, they still killed Native Americans by shipping the backwards people to where their strategy to deal with Native Americans was killing them.

It’s just no blood on my hands. I just shipped another group of people who’s very murdery to that region. And by the way, the reason why we’re so nice on the backwards people and the puritans is those are our ancestral groups, right? So of course they, they can do no wrong, even though they, they are super murdery.

I, I admit that. So William Penn proudly reported, quote, not one soldier Nor Armour or militia man seen since I was first in Pennsylvania who brags about not having any army. Sorry. From my cultural perspective, it’s like so weird. When at once point a gang of pirates stole a ship in Philadelphia and started devastating the Delaware Valley coastline, Quaker leaders qualed among themselves over how they could suppress the crime without violence, allowing countless homes and businesses to be plundered while they took their time, soul searching over [00:43:00] whether it was acceptable to sully themselves through the use of arms.

This

Simone Collins: sounds like the gang rape situation in the uk. They’re like,

Malcolm Collins: no, it’s literally like the gang rape situation in the uk. There are groups out there, gang, and they’re like, whoa,

Simone Collins: there are these pirates that keep hurting our communities, but how do we nonviolently without punishing anyone? Handle the situation?

Malcolm Collins: No, it’s even, it’s even more than that. It’s like, well, I mean, it could be anyone. I gotta put the Freedom Tunes episode here

Speaker 5: We found a 15-year-old girl with a head cut off it, a pea and kind of grooming gang kidnapped her and forced her in a slavery before murdering her. People near the scene of the crime.

Heard them scream ahu or bar when the incident occurred. I mean, that could have been anybody. Yeah, anybody could have done that. Hmm. There must be clues. What did you say? He screamed, uh, eats Arabic food. Yeah, man, that’s crazy. But I mean, you know, white people speak Arabic too. Like a blonde white guy could also yell at, you know, I didn’t mention his skin color.

Look, I’m just saying there’s really no information or motive here or anything. Uh, [00:44:00] we’re just gonna drive ourselves crazy trying to figure it out. So, and a, a big part of mystery solving is just knowing when, when to quit. Why not interview people from his community? What community? I could, it could have literally been anyone, you know, it could have been a Norwegian social worker who was on vacation here.

You know, like we, they, we just don’t know. You know what, maybe we’re just gonna search her for DNA. Why Do you think some people are genetically prone to this kind of thing? No. It could help us solve the crime. I mean, maybe it’s not a crime. Maybe it could just be someone’s culture. You know, shh. Quiet.

Someone four blocks away is typing hate speech about this on their keyboard. Got it. Looks like we found the real criminal. After all,

I know we can laugh at Wokes acting like this, but Quakers acted the exact same way. This is Quaker culture. I.

Malcolm Collins: , it’s a way of thinking that feels moral, but it leads to negative action. You know, the Quaker is not doing anything about the pirate. It’s led to people dying, being raped, everything like that, you know, very similar to what we’re seeing today.

But [00:45:00] they refuse to, it’s like, I don’t know, punishing criminals sounds like a pretty bad thing to do. People often confuse Puritan and Quaker norms around sex, assuming that it was the puritans who were insanely prudish. Whereas in actuality, Puritans were so comfortable talking about sex. And apt to do so was graphic frequency that puritan writing often end up with heavy editing to be published up until the mid 20th century.

Though we should acknowledge that Puritans were also only in favor of sex within marriage. So Puritans very similar to like we are on our show. They were like kink friendly. They were like, whatever, friendly. It’s like just within marriage. Okay. As long as you’re doing it within marriage, you know, sex can be fun, have some fun with it, right?

But remember, it’s about having kids. And I think that this is a like we’re not. Presenting a divergent viewpoint to the founding fathers of our country when we present that way of dealing with, with sexuality. And I think a lot of people that have this really you know, deontological like, oh, we’ve gotta be constantly pure around sex.

We need to not to, that’s not, that’s not American culture. [00:46:00] That’s not American founding culture. That’s some weird nonsense that you got. Ed into by the school system because they told you that’s what the bad guys did in history, and now you associate with the bad guys in history because you didn’t actually open a history book.

Well, the one that was written by Urban Monoculture okay. Quakers in contrast, were so uncomfortable discussing sex. It was common in Quaker culture to be against sex altogether, even was in marriage. This group eventually split off into the shaker movement. People are unfamiliar with them. They, they didn’t even believe in sex with marriage.

One French traveler was shocked to find that when a Quaker woman consulted their physicians, they tended to describe everything from their next to their waist as their stomachs and everything from their waist to their feet as their ankles. This snobbery also partially led the collapse of Quakerism with many people never marrying, and as many as 16% of Quaker women in the colonial period being single by the age of 50.

This prudish anti-sex angle has manifested in many branches of the super virus, even though it stands massively at odds with the logical [00:47:00] ideologies of those groups most likely to become infected. This is why the infected progressive groups that one would expect to be pro-sex given their stated ideologies can sometimes appear bizarrely prudish with the modern sex negative movement in the anti keek movement and the gender critical movement all having.

Thought leaders within them that emerged from radical feminist groups and why groups like The Red Pill and Mig Tau, or even the Pragmatist Guide series, which Calvinist roots seem weirdly sex obsessed, but in a clinical and experimental way. Consider that the only living people we’ve mentioned in this book so far who grew up with Calvinist derived cultivars.

This book’s Ulcers and Ala Ala also grew up with the Calvinist culture, are both known for highly analytical sex research was one of our other books. Being The Pragmatist Guide to Sexuality, even the Hicksite Quaker approach to internal governments is almost perfectly aligned with governing practices that spontaneously arrived within nodal networks, featuring late stage super virus infections.

By the way, any, anything that you wanna say about the sex stuff before I go [00:48:00] further?

Simone Collins: No, it’s just really funny. We are seeing high rates of sexlessness these days, that’s for sure. But I think it’s,

Malcolm Collins: no, no. I mean the urban monoculture acts very pro-sex. It acts very obsec sex, right?

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: But if you actually look at it, it’s the first group to start shaming sex and stuff like that, or at least certain factions of it are which is weird.

And there’s this constant tension within the urban monoculture that is weird if you don’t understand what it evolved out of, that feels incredibly sex negative. Like it’s , debauchery, maxing sex negativity. And it’s also why if you look at the people who are the best sex.

Ologist sex researchers, they are often in groups opposed to the urban monoculture. Mm-hmm. They here ala us

Simone Collins: Diana Fleischman. Diana

Malcolm Collins: Fleischman. They, they are also outside. These are like the top sex researchers that I’m aware of that do like good real sex research and the urban monoculture hates all of them.

Because you know, when you talk about real data [00:49:00] around kinks, you unfortunately reveal uncomfortable things around the way that women and men are different. But people from these other traditions just get Gideon doing that. You know, they’re like, oh, well let’s, let’s cause a little fight here.

Anyway, consider the similarities between the conduct of Unprogrammed Quaker Meeting House and the method of governments utilized by Occupy Wall Street. In an Unprogram Quaker meeting, house attendance will sit quietly until moved by God to stand up and start speaking in Occupy Wall Street convening.

There would be no set leader, but people would stand up and start speaking when so moved and their audience. So as not interrupt them would react using a complicated set of hand signals outside of the hand signals. Occupy Wall Street meetings were strikingly similar to unprogrammed Quaker meetings.

Perhaps had colonial Quakers heard of the innovation of the hand signal interaction, they would’ve enthusiastically adopting it. Seeing as Quakers were well known for being obsessed about bureaucratic procedures and building complex social procedures to ensure [00:50:00] everyone got a voice at any moment.

Heck, we even have quotes from William Penn complaining about his fellow Quakers being so, and the word he used was government ish, that it was hard to get anything done again. Sound like any modern groups. Here. We should also point out that the colonial era Quakers were not particularly less rule oriented than the Puritans was David Hackett Fisher pointing out in Albian seed that pin’s laws against sin were more rigorous in some respects than those of Puritans.

Quakers just happened to be more obscure and bureaucratic was their rules. For Puritans rules had a goal where Quaker rules were an interactive social language, one must successfully navigate to signal social status. This can be seen in things like traditional Quaker weddings, having had 16 stages to make even a slight mistake at any of these intricate stages with a huge social fapa and could leave you permanently cut off from friends.

And this is, you see with the supervisor, they’re constantly inventing new rules in how they talk to each other. New [00:51:00] rules in how you do this, new rules in how you do this and if you do it wrong. Oh no, you didn’t first say, don’t you know, we don’t say people of color anymore. Don’t you know? Yes.

Simone Collins: It’s like the homeowners association of life.

It’s so bad

Malcolm Collins: you need to ask my pronouns first. Another, and it, and this is interesting. This is used to it’s, it’s a very actually interesting cultural technology. I’ll take a bit of a side here. What it does is it sort of, forces the culture to reward how psychologically invested you are in staying on top of the culture.

Mm-hmm. Because the more you are paying attention to how the ever-changing bureaucracy is changing, the higher up in the culture you’re going to be right. And so you basically have to constantly navel gaze at your own culture. It’s a very useful cultural technology. If your goal is to capture all of a person’s mental space, it’s a very useless technology.

If your goal is effective action. And the urban culture [00:52:00] adopted it. Another interesting similarity between these super virus and Hicksite Quakers can be seen in how they spread within organizations. Both start by preaching the harmonious collaboration of a diversity of viewpoints until they reach a certain population threshold within an organization, at which point they aggressively and systematically purge the organization of anyone not willing to slavishly submit to their ideology.

For example, when the hicksite factions would grow in an Orthodox Quaker churches, they would lay low until they felt they had enough backing to make their move. Then. Change the locks on the meeting house doors. Oh my God. And ban anyone who did not submit to their new way of thinking from entering. This is by the way, from a journey to the past at Penn State, Brandy Wire.

So that’s crazy. Like that is so woke, right? Oh, we just want acceptance. We really care about all you guys until you get just over that 50% mark. Then you’ll walk up the next day and the doors are padlocked and you are not allowed anymore until you agree to their set of rules about how things are gonna be done.

Simone Collins: [00:53:00] Not great. That’s not great.

Malcolm Collins: Puritans didn’t do things like that, by the way. They were very upfront about their plans and their goals. Another interesting parallel can be seen in the colonial era, Quaker and modern super virus cult of our relationships with quote unquote disadvantaged groups. While Quakers presented themselves as uplifting and empowering underrepresented groups, they ultimately took and held power just for and among themselves.

Quakers largely immigrated to the United States, mostly Pennsylvania as either working class or middle working class groups. But Rosen power quickly by creating a tightly knit oligarchical community in the towns they occupied. In the case of Philadelphia, this was the Philadelphia’s corporation.

These individuals were highly interrelated with no less than 85% of them being married to each other. This by the way, is from, where did I get that stuff from? Judas Diana. So Stone, the Philadelphia Corporation despite their working class background and quick rise to power, Quakers had a reputation for being spiteful.

Was Bishop Sheldon describing Quakers in [00:54:00] 1669 as quote very mean, the best,

Simone Collins: very

Malcolm Collins: scarce worth, the title of Yeoman? The truth seems to be that Quakers were nice so long as you slavishly submitted yourself to their social agenda and never uplifted one of your own people over a quote unquote friend, which is what the Quakers call each other.

Which again, how urban monoculture, right? We just call everyone friend. Don’t you know? Oh by the way, we do have a ruling group that controls everything and they’re 85% interrelated. But we are meritocratic, I promise. Just beneath the scenes.

Simone Collins: No.

Malcolm Collins: This behavior can be illustrated by political alliance formed between the Quakers and German Protestant immigrants and a Baptist mostly . In which the Germans would vote Quakers into office, but never the other way around.

Simone Collins: Oh, yes. I forgot this. Yes. This bizarre like representation thing.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Yeah. Where you’d have communities that were majority anti Baptist and Quakers would still be able to get power because the anti Baptist voted fairly and the [00:55:00] Quakers would always vote only for Quakers.

Um mm-hmm. Which is how the Wokes work when they enter communities, right? They’re like, oh, we’re really about everyone. We’ll support everyone, but not really. With one Rufuss Jones writing quote, we hear nothing of any men of prominence in these days except for friends, EEG Quakers. So this arrangement, Quakers dominated their local legislators to understand just how lopsided this arrangement was.

Consider that Lancaster County was so German by the mid 18th century that only a hundred Quakers lives there, and yet J just those seven Quaker families kept the local government firmly in their grip. Seven Quaker families, a hundred Quakers kept Lancaster County. If you don’t know where Lancaster is, at the heart of Army country, in their grip, we actually suspect there is a case to be made that the only reason the Quakers ever turned against slavery was to appease their Anabaptist constituencies who had always been fervently against slavery.

We say this because Quakers did not turn against slavery until they started needing broad support from Anabaptist [00:56:00] Majority to maintain political dominance in their regions. While Quakers cultivated the public image of a culture that regarded outsiders as equals, they very clearly looked down on them using terms like mongrel marriages to describe the marriage to a non Quaker God.

It’s not, oh my, a woman for Quakers to be kicked out of the community for marrying non Quakers. But

Simone Collins: honestly, that’s how it’s now, if you like, marry a Trump supporter, it’s, it’s seen very similarly. That is uncanny.

Malcolm Collins: And this behavior increased as they consolidated power. And note this included marrying like Native Americans who attempted to convert to Quakerism freed slaves who attempted to convert to Quakerism.

This however, was not true of Puritan communities. In Puritan communities. We have many instances in which freed slave converted to Puritanism and Puritan sought, you’re doing it well, you’re the, you’re the boss, right? Like, you’re awesome, right? They, they integrated very well and super not true in backwards communities.

Yes, backwards always fought was Native Americans, but they were called squaw marriages. But they marry them too if they thought that they were strong and they were allies with them. So, [00:57:00] yeah. Not so much Quakers. They, they say it, but they don’t mean it. Just like with slavery what is interesting is why Quakers felt this way.

Distaste for so-called mongrel marriages was not about purity, but because Quakers thought that it was impossible for anyone who is not a quote unquote true believer to experience love and have a happy marriage as Quakers held, that marriage should only be for love rather than for material gain or lust.

Marriage to a non Quaker or someone axiomatic incapable of love was perverse. So I love, this is so urban monoculture. We, we care about everyone because we are the only people capable of feeling love. And it’s like, wait, do you really believe that? Like, Trump supporters don’t feel love? Well, of course they don’t.

They’re incapable of it. They’re hillbillies. They’re the deplorables. They’re whereas the deplorables, the backwards people, they’re like, oh, those people are you know, a little arrogant. And I don’t like ‘em much, but of course they, they have the capacity to feel love, like they have human emotions.

But again, we see this [00:58:00] in the urban monoculture. You don’t see anything like this in Puritan culture. It is fascinating to see such viewpoints mirrored in today’s super virus. Those infected often posit how the immune could possibly have healthy relationships or marriages wring their hands over trad wise with kids who look happy.

Importantly, projecting that she must really hate their lives. And you see this all the time. They, they’ll always say, if somebody’s living a way that’s different from the urban monoculture, oh, they must hate their lives. Oh, they must hate their lives. Right? The Puritans didn’t do this, by the way.

They weren’t constantly saying, anyone who has a Puritan must secretly be incapable of love and hate their lives. They were just like, oh, they’re, they’re freaking idiots. Like, I, I don’t care. I don’t wanna deal with them. Like they’re stupid. They’re going to hell. They’re not among the elect. Anyway, the hypocrisy can also be seen in Colonial era Quakers, not to mention those infected by the modern era super virus who wanted to be known for seeing everyone equally, despite really looking down on those in poor rural environments.

When Scotch Irish arrived in the colonies, one Quaker writer referred to them. These are the, the backwards people, the scum of two nations. This holds many [00:59:00] similarities to the groups heavily infected by quote unquote coastal elites who look down on poor rural, quote unquote deplorables. Despite presumably viewing the poor without bias and wanting to uplift them.

Don’t worry. They didn’t deserve their tradition just for poor and rural individuals. Antisemitism was also strong in every Quaker community, just as it is among those with a deep infection of the urban monoculture virus. Great. Hann Swanson from a prominent Quaker merchant faction had this to say of Jews in 1756.

This people, once the chosen people have become the scum of the earth.

Oh,

Laws were passed in Quaker dominated settlements, Pennsylvania, that systematically disenfranchised Jews like the law in 1794, Revok preventing work on the Sabbath, meaning Jews could only work five days a week with Abram Woodruff being convicted under this law despite keeping with his own Sabbath.

The Jewish community at the time was keep mind Quakers like, [01:00:00] oh, you can practice religion any way you want. Right? We accept all people except them. F*****g Jews and the backwards people and the Puritans. Now note here, the Puritans never actually particularly beefed with the Jews this hard and the backwards people, and we don’t have any records of them, particularly beefing with the Jews.

If you look at the founding fathers they predominantly, as we pointed out, well, we have quotes from every founding father, but George Washington complaining about how evil Catholics are. And we’ll find, you could find a number of them from the non-Catholic, the Quaker ones complaining about Quakers.

There are actually fairly few complaining about the Jews. And as I’ve pointed out in the early American colonies, Jews were able to vote in twice the number of colonies for colonies. Then Catholics could only two colonies. I should go into how much Quakers hated Catholics ‘cause they also hated Catholics.

Mind you, so don’t, don’t think, but this is where you get this anti-Jewish. We were like, why is the urban monoculture so anti-Jewish comes from the Quakers? In part, the Jewish community at the time was well aware of how disproportionately cruel the Quakers were to them, and saw them as distinctly different from other [01:01:00] Christians to the point of seeing them as not Christian at all, was a prominent Jewish broker, Heime Solomon saying it was neither the Jews nor the Christians who founded the practice.

Note here. When he says the practice, he’s talking about slavery. , So it wasn’t just the anaba, it saw the Quakers as founding slavery.

Malcolm Collins: But Quakers, Quakers worst than heathens, pagans and idolaters. The Jews did not like Quakers either. So keep in mind there’s a mutual hatred, these two groups

fair.

A final and interesting area of overlap manifests in both groups, tendencies to regard use with a unique level of reverence, given that the super virus has become the dominant culture in our society, it doesn’t seem particularly weird to us that adults turn to a child turned moral authority like Greta Thornberg for wisdom on the subject of government policy, as a small sample of two people who don’t hail from today’s dominant culture, we can report that this is really, really, really, really, really weird for adults to take tactical or moral [01:02:00] advice from a child.

Here’s a quote from ALB and Seed about this. People of other faith were startled to observe Quaker children giving moral and religious instruction to their elders. We have an account of a 10-year-old child who interrupted a gathering of adults to deliver a spontaneous speech on salvation. The adults listened respectfully, and after the child were done speaking, a grandmother offered a prayer and said, oh Lord, that this young branch should be a teacher to us.

Old ones another at the age of 10, regularly reprimanded adults in his own family, condemning them for swearing, breaking up card parties, and preaching to them about salvation again.

Simone Collins: I mean, it sounds like they needed some talking to, though that a gambling problem or something. Well,

Malcolm Collins: again, this goes into Quaker, like they’re actually very voiceful, but they, that’s why they rely on children for moral authority.

Right.

Simone Collins: They haven’t been fully corrupted by their own culture yet. Yeah. I mean, maybe it kind of works.

Malcolm Collins: To wrap things up, Quaker culture was not prophetic of future values. [01:03:00] Rather, today’s super virus is derived from Quaker culture. To suggest that Quaker culture was prophetic is akin to suggesting that the ethnic makeup of early settlers was weirdly prophetic of the ethnic later wake up of later US population.

Simone Collins: Hmm.

Malcolm Collins: It’s like, well, yeah, they killed everyone else. Evidence that the virus grew out of the hicksite Quaker culture as opposed to emerging through convergent evolution can be seen in everything from vestigial value sets, many of which run counter to progressive values to the super virus’s weird governance system the prudish nature was in which it treats sexuality and the theatrical ways infected engage in protests and their common use of children to preach moral values.

But if you’re wondering why Quakers had this view of children being moral authorities, it’s because they’re like, well, if, if. Truth comes from within. Children have the less ex, the least amount of external exposure to the world. And so the least amount of corruption, so what they say spontaneously has the closest moral truth.

Now, the urban [01:04:00] monoculture doesn’t know why. It cares what children think over other people. And there isn’t really a progressive reason to elevate somebody like Greta Thornberg to a position of like a saint in their culture. Right? And this is why I’m saying you could trace it. There are too many vestigial elements of Kure culture like wanting to protect zoos.

That’s a weird thing. Like a person who eats meat moldering about how unethical zoos are. Makes no sense unless you’re coming from the Quaker culture and then it makes perfect sense. So a lot of the, the moral concerns, the way that they protest, the way that they organize is just clear as day. Why didn’t the more virtuous Quakers call out their purely performative colleagues?

They did. However, systems for de platforming people had already begun to evolve in Quaker culture centuries ago when George Keith began to speak out against the Quaker community for not living up to its values, the same Quakers who in England demanded the right to free expression, started demanding restraints on the types of things that could be published.[01:05:00]

Causing many of the printers in the Quaker territory to be arrested for publishing unlicensed books and having the press and types seized by 1693, Keith, along with others who spoke against the Quakers for their hypocrisy, were forced to leave. In Quaker culture, you were allowed to call out outsiders for things like slavery and you were even allowed to shame specific Quakers.

But the one thing you were never allowed to do was to point out that Quaker culture as a whole did not at all live up to its espouse values and was fundamentally hypocritical. Very urban monoculture tactic. If you’re wondering where the urban monoculture got this tactic, did it develop it? Did it evolve it?

No, it had the idea of de platforming people was in the culture that evolved into the urban monoculture before it ever started. Interesting.

If you are still dubious of our claim, the super virus has Quaker origins. Think about the Virus’s initial starting point in spread The American secondary school system. The United States school system was most heavily influenced by Quaker culture [01:06:00] and disproportionately won by Quakers. In its early days, had the virus evolved independently, it would’ve more likely initially spread through activist movements instead of the entrenched bureaucracy.

Why did the Parasitoid super virus evolve within Quaker culture then? And I know this is very clear. If the urban monoculture evolved naturally, the earliest instances of something like the urban monoculture we would see would be in activist circles, yet. It’s actually in teachers unions and in other school related institutions where we see the earliest iterations of it, which come from Quaker culture.

Hmm.

So why did it evolve in Quaker culture? Why did Quaker culture produce one of the most virulent of all the mimetic viral packages when similar secular viruses have evolved out of nearly all of America’s major early cultural groups, while the traditional branch of Quakers were not Les, the evolution of the iCal branch of the Quaker face was what allowed the super virus to develop the worldview allowed the super virus to appeal to [01:07:00] entire nodal networks at once instead of individual nodes.

For example, the Red Pill and Jordan Peterson followers focus heavily on how they will help individuals rather than society as a whole. The just worldview allows an individual to believe that if everyone in their group. Structures their thoughts and language in a certain way, society will become better.

Mm-hmm. All else equal. This motivates individuals to spend more of their time converting people than spending time and effort on requiring effort required to literally build a society that structurally embodies their values. For clarification, if you have two groups and one of those groups spends 100% of its adherence contributed time and effort to converting others while the other spends 50% of its adherence, just time to converting others and 50% on trying to improve the world, the group that is not interested in actually making a difference while outcompete the other, evolutionarily speaking.

Yeah. However, very few cultures are able to convince people that they are, quote unquote good despite investing so little time in the actual realization of their values. Hmm. This is a unique [01:08:00] Quaker innovation. Moral or amoral innovation. An absence of the success metrics is a feature that equipped Quaker culture to produce the ultimate super virus

the way Quaker culture can shamelessly claim to be abolitionists while simultaneously counting America’s most prolific slave owners among its members by being aesthetically abolitionists, presents a critical social technology needed by the super virus. It doesn’t matter whether the super virus actually uses significant resources to help bipoc, LGBT people, the poor, the disenfranchised, the environment, or women, it aesthetically cares about those issues.

And from the perspective of an infected person aesthetically carrying it’s morally equivalent to actually doing something. This is why there was so little public complaint on the far left about the BLM foundation being spent on things like a $6 million mansion for the board members. Or like consider more recently Greta Thornberg’s B boat to Gaza.

Like obviously it would’ve actually done [01:09:00] functionally nothing, even if she could have got there and the chance of her getting there was functionally impossible, right. With the situation. Yeah.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Yet she does it because morality isn’t the point. Performative morality is the point. You don’t need to actually achieve the end.

Almost no other culture on earth developed a set of interlocking memes, which allowed humans to believe something. So cockamamie thoughts Simone?

Simone Collins: Yeah, this, well, this shows up a little bit in another episode that I wanna film on the end of girl Bosses, but

Malcolm Collins: I’m sorry. We’ll only get to one episode today, but

Simone Collins: may maybe what’s gonna happen.

What what did happen with Quakers is perhaps this is signaling the beginning of the end of actual charity and the, the beginning of what basically became salaried activism where people stopped actually just doing the good works and devoting their life to volunteering or [01:10:00] philanthropy and instead literally getting paid to be an activist, but not actually solving the problem.

Not actually giving, being literally a net drain, but just in the name of, or the theme of your cause.

Malcolm Collins: Yes.

Simone Collins: Which is so insidious and disgusting.

Malcolm Collins: The Parasitoid virus convinces its victims that by buying into it, they will intrinsically serve the best interest of those groups. Without this technology, people would quickly notice the harm this virus inflicts on the infected gold driven organizations, and pull back before they die of the disease and release the spores grown within them into the social ecosystem.

People at Occupy Wall Street would stand up and say, this obsessive infighting and bizarre method of making decisions is clearly inefficient and will not achieve our goals. It will make them impossible. As scary as the Parasitoid super virus can be, we must understand it because it represents the single most sophisticated and robust cultivar ever evolved while we , [01:11:00] fastidiously.

Avoid the use of super virus evolved social technologies was in our own houses, cultivar, our own family’s cultivars, techno puritanism. We suspect someone smarter than us may be able to find a way to use some of these social technologies in a beneficial and durable culture. Likely somebody of Quaker descent because, you know, you evolve with a culture.

Maybe they have some biological resistance to some of these. Finally, we need to be clear that just because something evil evolved out of Quaker culture does not mean Quaker culture in and of itself is evil. We are the first to admit that Unitarian Universalism evolved out of Calvinism. And I see Unitarian Universalism as a fundamentally evil religious tradition.

Speaker 9: Have we ever done a video on the sins of the UUs and all of the skeletons they have in their closet? Because if not we should, , they’re not quite as bad as the Quakers, but , they are, they’ve done some stuff that is almost equally morally revolting.

Speaker 10: So if you wanted my ranking on how evil different Christian sex are, top easily, the Quakers and, and they’re, it’s because of the hypocrisy, right? [01:12:00] Like , they both act the most evilly, but then think they deserve to be treated the most righteously. , After them it’s the Unitarian Universalists.

, And Catholics are a distant third. Like they don’t even come close to the Quakers as a Unitarian universalists.

Speaker 11: By the way, just a side note here, this is not to say positive stuff about the Jews. I would never want to do that voluntarily. But, , if you are under the mistaken belief that the Jews own the majority of slave ships, , this actually comes from the nation of Islam and has no reasonable historical backing.

, From what we know of individual slave ships. Quakers owned far more than Jews did.

Another fascinating thing about Quaker culture, if you wanna see how deeply it is seeped into the urban monoculture, is AI reflexively defends it, even when the stats are against it. So if you put an episode like this, like I’ve done anti-Jewish, anti-Catholic, anti-everything, episodes, never has ai, so reflexively attempted to defend it when I dump.

A script [01:13:00] into it to ask what it thinks of it. And what’s very interesting is the points that it will challenge when I then ask, yes, but was that point wrong? Like the slave ownership rates? It’ll be like, no, that’s well attested. And it’s like, okay, well then why are you saying that’s not an issue? And it’ll be like, well in, in later periods, Quaker slave ownership rates.

And it’s like, are there any statistics for that? No, people just said it. And I’m like, well, and when you consider that the Quaker. Regions did not ban slavery in a way where existing owners had to give up their slaves. Is it likely that you saying that later, slave ownership rates and Quaker colonies were lower, is accurate?

. Of course it’s not. Of course it’s not. It’s Quakers click through slaves way longer than anyone else in the north. , But AI will reflexively freak out and grasp to this myth of the decent Quaker because they have written it so deeply into history.

Malcolm Collins: So clearly we’re not gonna be like, well then anything that evolves outta Calvinism is evil because techno puritanism evolved outta [01:14:00] Calvinism, right? So I think you could evolve something good out of it, but it’s important to understand how it works. Meta thoughts, Simone.

Simone Collins: I find this pretty compelling.

It, it had been a while since I’ve edited the Pist Guide to Crafting Religion and reviewed this argument, and I’ve heard so many people bring up in the comments. But what if all this thinks it’s the puritans and well,

Malcolm Collins: oh, sorry. For people who don’t know do you know what religious background, what if all hiss is,

Simone Collins: oh god.

Not, don’t say Quaker. Don’t

Malcolm Collins: say Quaker. Well, you didn’t know he, yeah, he was Quaker. That’s why he’s so motivated to not see the Quakers. Not, it’s also why he’s so mystical. The Quakers have always been the most mystically brained of the Christian traditions,

Simone Collins: or at least willing to believe their thoughts.

Which yeah,

Malcolm Collins: don’t think I, I by the way, I respect Ruby Art as an intellectual.

Simone Collins: We do. Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: We love

Simone Collins: him.

Malcolm Collins: I don’t just respect with an intellectual. I think his content is good. There are some people who I respect their ideas and I’m like, but your content isn’t very good.

Simone Collins: Right.

Malcolm Collins: I can watch a single Ruby art video and [01:15:00] get like five ideas for episodes.

Yeah.

Simone Collins: Yeah. It’s, it’s very inspirational and informationally dense and good. It’s good analysis

Malcolm Collins: and, and people are like, oh, well what about like, his weird crash out, he had a religious crash out or whatever about, you know, going on an Ayahuasca trip. And I’m like, I don’t, I don’t care about that. Like, whatever.

That’s who he is. He didn’t sell himself. The Ruby art has always sold himself. When you’re. Working with an ai, there’s a little heat meter, right? And this determines how you, you put it on one side and you get uncreative answers. But they’re very structured. They’re very exact, they’re very precise.

You put it on the other side, you get maximally creative answers, but they’re also sort of all over the place, right? Ruby Yard. Brain very clearly is a model all the way at that end. I think it’s called high heat. I can never remember which one is high heat or low heat. But and, and he, and of course that’s gonna be one more cogent and work better with a Quaker tradition, like a Quaker tradition.

It’s going to lead to that because in a tradition where truce [01:16:00] comes from within a lot of people that have said 25% of the population hears auditory hallion nations of the general population. And I would bet it’s much higher in the Quaker population. They’re much more in touch with this mystical side of them.

My hatred towards mysticism is, and I will admit this is in part genetic the puritans and the, the backwards people boast. Hated mysticism. And ruthlessly dug it out wherever they found it. And I’m just carrying that forwards as part of my tradition. It is part of my genetic heritage, but I also think that it is strategically useful.

Which is why I, I, like, could Rudyard ever become a techno puritan? I, I don’t think that his mind is structured in that way. I think he’d need to develop some form of technical puritanism, which we would like and include in the index if he had kids from Quakerism. If you wanna know more about the index, you can read the because the techno puritanism is like our specific strain of our religion, but then we have this wider system that people with different iterations can join.

And if, if their iteration is better, there’s certain rules for how it works and people marry and everything like that. [01:17:00] And how kids develop traditions. It’s, it’s, it’s long, but it’s for if we ever become a world spanning tradition we wanted the rules laid out pretty well. But yeah. The reason why you didn’t know that Rudyard was Quaker?

Not

Simone Collins: maybe you told me once, but I forgot. Quaker and Origin, I suppose people also make fun of you for pronouncing his name Ruby Yard. What is it? Well, Rudyard or I, I think, you know, like Rudyard Kipling maybe I’m saying wrong. I dunno.

Malcolm Collins: That sounds foreign to me. He should, he should make it American.

Just change

Simone Collins: Ruby. Ruby Yard is this like our, our, our friend. Who, who’s named EU Gina, but we call her Eugenia because that’s way more

Malcolm Collins: fun. Yeah. I, I renamed my friend’s American names. I don’t want them to walk around with the shame of being called like Jesus or something.

Simone Collins: Yeah. So, I guess then it’s, it’s a Ruby Yard.

Ruby

Malcolm Collins: Yard. Yeah. Ruby Yard. Come on, Simone.

Simone Collins: Not Rudyard.

Malcolm Collins: A Malcolm.

Simone Collins: I’m pretty sure Rudyard is a, like a really English name.

Malcolm Collins: No, but the the funny [01:18:00] thing is, is so if you’re watching this right. I’ve admitted my bias on, on this particular episode, right? Mm-hmm. And I think you’re getting the, the Quaker perspective on history from him.

Yeah. And you’re getting the Puritan perspective on history from me.

Simone Collins: Decide for yourself.

Malcolm Collins: But I would say of the two videos, you know, different ways that models work, who was citing statistics? Okay.

Simone Collins: Yeah. And Malcolm actually named sources in this one. Guys.

Malcolm Collins: I went through sources and statistics. That isn’t something you can fake, and that’s the way the Puritans approach things because we care about what’s actually true, not what’s vi be true.

And we need to revive the Puritan tradition in America. That says, mark, if you don’t know what we’re talking about, you can see our track series. I already mentioned one. The, the question that breaks Judaism. If you want an extra spicy one. Throw, throw us right into the bonfire. Was that one? But yeah I hope that Rudyard gets married and, and, and finds a way to recreate.

I mean, he’s part of our wider project, right? Like Rudyard is trying to craft a culture and if he had a family, he would intentionally craft a culture, and I think it’d be [01:19:00] pretty cool. So, let’s, let’s hope something works there.

Simone Collins: Yeah. Well, I, for all we know, he’s dating someone now. You know, I hope so.

Hopefully he is, I hope,

Malcolm Collins: I mean, he is not unattractive, but I think he got a little black belted on, on women. The same with like another online intellectual who I wish was dating through the few, I wish we were dating more aggressively. Like I wish ho ass was dating more aggressively. Ho ass is fantastic, super intellectual, but he is, he, you know, society, right?

Sandman,

Simone Collins: it’s, it’s hard for people to meet these days. It’s, I don’t know, you know, you. Maybe also people just discounted the extent to which people met in high school and college. And now because people are getting married so much earlier, they, you know, we don’t have societal institutions for old people to get to find each other, right?

Because for, for all of history, your family got you married or you married in university or.

Malcolm Collins: I’ll tell you what, I had a fan in

Simone Collins: high school

Malcolm Collins: if I had a fan base like theirs, and I guess I do have a [01:20:00] fan base like theirs.

Simone Collins: Yeah. That’s considered gosh, or even abusive. Consider that. You also love listening to YouTube scandals about, you know,

Malcolm Collins: I don’t think it’s abusive if you’re one being transparent about it, and two, it’s for marriage.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Right. Like if you go, Hey, I want to date my fans people would probably be okay with that. But if you’re like, casual about it and you’re hooking up with one and then you’re going to another, that’s one thing. If you are, like, if you do what I did, which is like I’m looking to get married. I will marry someone in my fan base send me applications.

We will talk and then we will seriously date if it looks good. It is,

Simone Collins: well, there, there are people who, like, for example Ava has a, a very clear likes application. She’s doing it and it’s still very difficult for her to find

Malcolm Collins: someone. Well, no, it’s difficult for her because she filters on a bunch of stuff related to sexual compatibility, which isn’t that important in a marriage.

Especially if,

Simone Collins: Most people are filtering based on that. So, I mean,

Malcolm Collins: yeah. Well, most people are tars. Okay. We live in a world of tars. Okay. Yeah. How, how like to tar shared kinks is not going to marry after 10 [01:21:00] years of marriage. I’ll tell you that like Simone and I, for example, do share kinks, like we have compatible kinks.

And yet we don’t role play them because it would take time and effort and I don’t want to deal with it someday.

Simone Collins: I mean, it just, yeah. Logistically it’s. When there are five children constantly running around.

Malcolm Collins: That’s such a Puritan answer, by the way, Simone, you know? But what I’m saying is if you die, I will reach out to fans for dating.

That’s, that’s how I’m gonna date, by the way, if Simone dies.

Simone Collins: Great. Now you’ve just put a hit on my head. Thanks Malcolm.

Malcolm Collins: No woman is

Simone Collins: now she knows what she needs to do.

Our, our house is heavily

Malcolm Collins: I’ll be, I i I

Simone Collins: out. You’ll have to get through our children first.

Malcolm Collins: If somebody, like

Simone Collins: they’ve seen home Alone so many times that like, they just desperately want someone to like to come at our

Malcolm Collins: house, break in. Oh yeah. The kids are waiting for that. Come on. So wouldn’t it be really fun to kill an intruder?

Simone Collins: Did you see there were the most recent Contra points video? It’s about saw the saw franchise.

Malcolm Collins: No. What

Simone Collins: [01:22:00] she have to

Malcolm Collins: say about it.

Simone Collins: Well, what she kind of, she, she, she explores why people are into such horrific violence and makes a very decent point. Parents, just b blindly have their children watch and their children love Home Alone, which is basically just proto saw when you actually think about what is being done to these criminals.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. But Home Alone is just a movie about transmitting a back country value systems. I’ll, I’ll do a longer video on that, but

Simone Collins: yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Everything in that movie is a Jack Tail. Home Alone is a Jack tail. Yeah. It is a, it’s a feel about a young person who is mad that somebody’s coming into his territory, his land, and so he, he

Simone Collins: even has Yeah.

Like he, he, he’s, there are lines where he is like, I’ve gotta defend my family. Yeah. Like he’s, it is very. It is very Marshall Jack Tails type tricks to

Malcolm Collins: kid. Well, well, in many ways because it’s, it’s a another thing about Jack Tails that’s unique is the, the character, the hero in a jack tail is, is, is like not [01:23:00] explicitly, not overtly masculine.

That’s an important part of this tradition. Like, be they Bugs Bunny or Home Alone or Jack Tails themselves. And home Alone shows that like, extremely violent and not overtly masculine.

Simone Collins: Yeah. The most masculine sibling is is Buzz. It’s your girlfriend Wolf. Oh, what, what a

Malcolm Collins: movie. So, for dinner too, let’s redo the steak.

Oh, we got steaks too. Oh,

Simone Collins: the steak. I forgot. Do you want me to like, I don’t know. Try,

Malcolm Collins: what I was gonna try is a noodle dish if we could with steak.

Simone Collins: Yeah. Ooh. Okay. So what if I. Took ramen noodles and just boiled them. Aldente. Or you actually have some of the Korean Ramen noodles. If you don’t wanna use just normal, like cheap ramen oh, that’d be, and then, or I could just do the ramen noodles, prepare them as suggested then with like, like flash, like sautes, [01:24:00]

Malcolm Collins: here’s what I would cook it in the sauce I would make.

Okay.

Simone Collins: Okay.

Malcolm Collins: I would add garlic, ginger oyster sauce.

Simone Collins: Mm-hmm.

Malcolm Collins: And a splash of soy sauce.

Simone Collins: Yeah, that makes

Malcolm Collins: sense. Its MSG.

Simone Collins: Yeah. So saute them in that really, really quickly and then pour over the Korean noodles prepared with their sauce as directed.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Oh, and saal olic.

Simone Collins: That’s a very wet sauce.

Malcolm Collins: Well cook it down.

Simone Collins: Okay. All right. Cook down the sauce, then throw in the meat basically just to warm it up and then serve that with the green noodles. And then the leftover,

what did we forage? I was gonna say ramps. They’re not ramp ramps. Yeah. The leftover a ramp shell at things, you know.

Malcolm Collins: Oh, that would be really good. Together

Simone Collins: as a topping. [01:25:00] Okay.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah,

Simone Collins: I will do that. Do you want me to bring it up to your room? ‘cause I’m just gonna be feeding the kids outside.

Malcolm Collins: I don’t have leaflet until seven.

But I’m really excited to talk with her.

Simone Collins: Do you wanna take a nap first though?

Malcolm Collins: I tried to take a nap earlier. I’m just not.

Simone Collins: That’s not good. That means that you’re gonna freaking pass out. I

Malcolm Collins: won’t crash out. I’m gonna be fine.

Simone Collins: Mm-hmm. Oh, I, I, I actually can trust. Yeah, you’ll be excited enough to not fall asleep.

Whatever

Malcolm Collins: episode do you wanna do tomorrow for get live for tomorrow?

Simone Collins: Gosh, I don’t know.

Malcolm Collins: We have a, let’s see, I’m gonna pull up our back.

Simone Collins: There’s a lot. I feel like we have actually a decent

Malcolm Collins: backlog. We have a stupidly long backlog right now. So, so just your

Simone Collins: mind, that’s why you’re not so worried about doing,

Malcolm Collins: that’s why.

Well,

Simone Collins: we’re not filming on Thursday, and by the way, you’re going to the dentist tomorrow.

Malcolm Collins: Okay. Simone. I appreciate that.

Simone Collins: Do you need to, I love you and I will let you know when dinner is ready. I look forward to seeing you.

Malcolm Collins: Got a major system update done today. Oh,

Simone Collins: congratulations. You rock,

Malcolm Collins: With the [01:26:00] new system that allows it to compartmentalize its logic into three categories.

Simone Collins: And I love that. I mean, the loop buster feature, by the way, very intuitive to use. I really like that for the agent. Oh,

Malcolm Collins: you use loop buster. Yeah.

And you can see it’s a problem, right? Like it does sometimes get into loops.

Simone Collins: Yeah. I, I just need, I just need that for myself. If you don’t mind. You, you do, you do approach a ai the way that you approach human minds. But I like that because as we are ad naum, not much different. Right. I’ll find.

Malcolm Collins: Love you too.

And you’ll, you’ll find the new feature really intuitive too. It’s, it’s quite aesthetically nice in the way it’s been implemented.

Simone Collins: Oh, you know how I like that.

Malcolm Collins: And I’m gonna, I’m gonna try to get one to write a s muddy fanfic book. That’s my next task. I’m wanna do video games is one of the things I’m working on.

And then book writing is another thing I’m working on.

Simone Collins: Right, because you’re looking at that structural, like, how do I make a complex interdependent system work well with AI all by itself? Oh, I’m so excited. Okay, good. [01:27:00] I love you.

Malcolm Collins: Have fun with the comments today.

Simone Collins: I didn’t get to them. I wanted to send the investor outreach email, so that that’s, that’s what I appreciate.

Malcolm Collins: That was more important.

Simone Collins: Yeah, it is.

Malcolm Collins: And we’re over 70,000 now. Woo.

Simone Collins: Well, I do wanna get to the comments because I presumably they’ll, they’ll help me like to dispel my apparent psychosis, so.

Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, you, you are psychotic about this. I think, I think the, the belief like you just do not seem to want to engage with, like, if I had had a major disease that seriously impacted my life and my kids were likely to get as well like. Anorexia and I found out apparently being unaware of this ‘cause watching the episode again, it was very clear that you were unaware that it’s generally considered the poster child with culture bound illnesses.

That it was caused by my culture and I didn’t know that and I couldn’t intuit that from my own experience. I would be super interested in learning more about it, but you don’t seem to have any curiosity [01:28:00] around that, which I just don’t understand. It’s so antithetical to your character. So I assume there’s some like distortion field active here.

Simone Collins: I, I hope to get insights from the comments, so I’m gonna be digging in.

Malcolm Collins: People have asked us to upgrade our microphones if every time like I check,

Simone Collins: yeah, mine sounds terrible. I bought a road lav mic and I need to get it to work. It’s not connecting ‘cause of the way my Mac works. So

Malcolm Collins: lav mics are always worse than these types.

Simone Collins: Yeah, but this one sounds terrible,

Malcolm Collins: so I don’t know. Yeah. One that doesn’t sound terrible. Every time I’ve done the research and bought them and apparently I failed time and time again. So why don’t you do the research this time?

Simone Collins: Okay, I

Malcolm Collins: will. ‘Cause I’m tired of, of, of failing at this and people just being like, I want you guys to have better equipment because we’re not like cash constrained.

Alright, I’ll get started here.

Speaker 12: Cake. No, it’s not cake for breakfast, but it’s in the shape of one of your favorite things. [01:29:00] Helicopters. A helicopter. Yeah. Helicopter. Pancake Bank. I love you. You nerd. You helicopter nerd. You’re surrounded by helicopters. Yeah. What’s, what is, what is up with this? Right here. Right here? Yeah. I love you.

Yeah. Love your children. Aw.

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