I read the profile of Malcolm and Simone Collins and realized there’s a particularly eugenicist streak in Anglo-American life. Most “vibrant tropical people” just don’t approach family formation in such a cold and calculating manner.
Also, never trust a couple that names give their daughter the name Titan Invictus.
From the article: “As she says this, her five-month-old daughter Titan Invictus – the couple refuse to give girls feminine names, citing research suggesting they will be taken less seriously – is strapped to her chest, occasionally burbling, while Malcolm has charge of their two sons Torsten, two, and Octavian, three.”
That Malcolm and Simone Collins posed for those pictures shows a significant lack of self awareness. They look like they would be rejected as too over the top if you were satirizing secular progressives. They condemn both the actual Nazis of Germany and the imagined ones of their minds today, but then turn around and play god with their own offspring by choosing the embryo they did because others "had higher estimated risks of traits such as obesity, migraines and anxiety." If they bring some awareness to this issue and help offer financial support to struggling parents, good, but they are really creepy.
In what sense would they be considered right wing? Part of their agreement when having kids was that Simone could keep her career and that Malcolm would take over primary childcare after six months. They trash large families that have traditional gender roles. They are actively promoting and pursuing having babies be genetically engineered and consider serving the alphabet soup community a top priority of their non profit. Doesn't sound real right wing to me.
Found this book they wrote that probably offers a glimpse into their worldview. Sounds like an assertion of the "noble lie" of traditional religion's social value, combined with a description of how to "neurohack" yourself into believing your own custom religion.
They're weird, very Silicon Valley, likely autistic. She worked for Thiel and might share a lot of his worldview. I'd say they're on the right insofar as they're too weird and heterodox to be on the left, which despises pronatalist white people to the very marrow of its bones. But they're far from traditionalists (and again, so is Thiel), even if they have more respect for tradition than the contemporary left does.
Yes, the only way the Collins are on the right is if you consider "on the right" to be anything that even slightly challenges or breaks with progressives. I think you would have to be at least on the autism spectrum to include, "if you have ever thought about inventing a religion or starting a cult, this book is for you" as a reason to buy your book. My take on them is they are progressives who wouldn't buy into every left wing fad and understand a low percentage of people having children is suicidal for civilization.
Point taken, but depending on your definition of "vibrant tropical", IIRC the man who had the most confirmed children was an Arab sultan who was intentionally aiming for that title and was highly systematic about how he made use of his harem.
What I'll say is the idea of approaching family formation in a calculating manner is surely a very masculine way of thinking. My guess would be that Simone Collins has an exceptionally masculine mind, good chance she's autistic or at least autist-adjacent (the name Titan Invictus offers another clue).
Even Scripture reads, "Blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them. He will not be put to shame when he confronts his enemies at [or in] the gate." Surely this is a passage that resonates more with men than women. The normal way to convince women is to say, "Babies sure are cute. There is nothing like a baby. Here, hold this cooing baby."
I’m talking about America today and not about an Arab sultan in times past. Seems to me that only secular WASPy type Americans would be the ones who would promote a pronatalism that’s fueled by embryo freezing and IVF.
Pronatalism is best pursued naturally in a culture that truly supports life-long marriage and family formation as essential building blocks for social flourishing.
Yeah, I just don't know about the "WASPy" part, unless you intend that term very broadly. Bryan Caplan wrote a high IQ secular pronatal book, but by my standards he's only a *little* weird, these people are a *lot* weird. Still, I could easily imagine a weirder version of Bryan Caplan saying similar things to them. There are probably more Ashkenazi than WASP sensibilities in the way Silicon Valley "rationalists" speak and think.
I haven't met him in real life. I don't think it should be controversial to say that the way he carries himself in the world of ideas is unconventional and quirky. But I'm also not really interested in debating whether Caplan or anyone else in the world is a little weird or not at all weird.
I'm not asking for a debate, I'm just trying to get a better understanding of how weird we seem to the outside world. George Mason econ is already pretty heterodox among economists and Caplan is one of the weirder ones in an already weird subculture. So to hear someone say he's only a little weird makes me wonder how many levels of weird the speaker is on (and how weird is the person they consider weird by comparison).
I read the profile of Malcolm and Simone Collins and realized there’s a particularly eugenicist streak in Anglo-American life. Most “vibrant tropical people” just don’t approach family formation in such a cold and calculating manner.
Also, never trust a couple that names give their daughter the name Titan Invictus.
From the article: “As she says this, her five-month-old daughter Titan Invictus – the couple refuse to give girls feminine names, citing research suggesting they will be taken less seriously – is strapped to her chest, occasionally burbling, while Malcolm has charge of their two sons Torsten, two, and Octavian, three.”
They expect that name to be taken more seriously?
That Malcolm and Simone Collins posed for those pictures shows a significant lack of self awareness. They look like they would be rejected as too over the top if you were satirizing secular progressives. They condemn both the actual Nazis of Germany and the imagined ones of their minds today, but then turn around and play god with their own offspring by choosing the embryo they did because others "had higher estimated risks of traits such as obesity, migraines and anxiety." If they bring some awareness to this issue and help offer financial support to struggling parents, good, but they are really creepy.
I don't know them from Adam but it's very likely they are actually right wingers.
In what sense would they be considered right wing? Part of their agreement when having kids was that Simone could keep her career and that Malcolm would take over primary childcare after six months. They trash large families that have traditional gender roles. They are actively promoting and pursuing having babies be genetically engineered and consider serving the alphabet soup community a top priority of their non profit. Doesn't sound real right wing to me.
Palladium is definitely a right wing site.
Found this book they wrote that probably offers a glimpse into their worldview. Sounds like an assertion of the "noble lie" of traditional religion's social value, combined with a description of how to "neurohack" yourself into believing your own custom religion.
https://www.amazon.com/Pragmatists-Guide-Crafting-Religion-Demographic/dp/B0BSJ5SXK2
They're weird, very Silicon Valley, likely autistic. She worked for Thiel and might share a lot of his worldview. I'd say they're on the right insofar as they're too weird and heterodox to be on the left, which despises pronatalist white people to the very marrow of its bones. But they're far from traditionalists (and again, so is Thiel), even if they have more respect for tradition than the contemporary left does.
Yes, the only way the Collins are on the right is if you consider "on the right" to be anything that even slightly challenges or breaks with progressives. I think you would have to be at least on the autism spectrum to include, "if you have ever thought about inventing a religion or starting a cult, this book is for you" as a reason to buy your book. My take on them is they are progressives who wouldn't buy into every left wing fad and understand a low percentage of people having children is suicidal for civilization.
Point taken, but depending on your definition of "vibrant tropical", IIRC the man who had the most confirmed children was an Arab sultan who was intentionally aiming for that title and was highly systematic about how he made use of his harem.
What I'll say is the idea of approaching family formation in a calculating manner is surely a very masculine way of thinking. My guess would be that Simone Collins has an exceptionally masculine mind, good chance she's autistic or at least autist-adjacent (the name Titan Invictus offers another clue).
Even Scripture reads, "Blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them. He will not be put to shame when he confronts his enemies at [or in] the gate." Surely this is a passage that resonates more with men than women. The normal way to convince women is to say, "Babies sure are cute. There is nothing like a baby. Here, hold this cooing baby."
I’m talking about America today and not about an Arab sultan in times past. Seems to me that only secular WASPy type Americans would be the ones who would promote a pronatalism that’s fueled by embryo freezing and IVF.
Pronatalism is best pursued naturally in a culture that truly supports life-long marriage and family formation as essential building blocks for social flourishing.
Yeah, I just don't know about the "WASPy" part, unless you intend that term very broadly. Bryan Caplan wrote a high IQ secular pronatal book, but by my standards he's only a *little* weird, these people are a *lot* weird. Still, I could easily imagine a weirder version of Bryan Caplan saying similar things to them. There are probably more Ashkenazi than WASP sensibilities in the way Silicon Valley "rationalists" speak and think.
I don't disagree with your last sentence.
I was one of Caplan's PhD students; could you further explain your standards for weirdness?
I haven't met him in real life. I don't think it should be controversial to say that the way he carries himself in the world of ideas is unconventional and quirky. But I'm also not really interested in debating whether Caplan or anyone else in the world is a little weird or not at all weird.
I'm not asking for a debate, I'm just trying to get a better understanding of how weird we seem to the outside world. George Mason econ is already pretty heterodox among economists and Caplan is one of the weirder ones in an already weird subculture. So to hear someone say he's only a little weird makes me wonder how many levels of weird the speaker is on (and how weird is the person they consider weird by comparison).
Bryan Caplan does NOT promote embryo screening and IVF. The Collins couple are “reprotech” boosters.
Caplan simply encourages people to have larger families and most people have children naturally.
You missed your most high profile media mention! Me, obviously:
https://gaty.substack.com/p/if-modern-school-is-a-prison-its
Thanks. I will add to next week's list.