The Auron MacIntyre Show - Mom Is Working for Moloch ｜ Guest： Kevin Dolan ｜ 9⧸14⧸26

00:00:00.000 hey everybody how's it going thanks for joining me this afternoon i've got a great stream with

00:00:12.300 a great guest that i think you're really going to enjoy we've been talking a lot recently about

00:00:17.580 family formation i think unfortunately the stark realities of the lindsey clancy trial

00:00:23.260 have really made everyone think twice about how men and women are ultimately relating to each other

00:00:29.300 in the United States, the importance of family formation, the roles that we all have in those

00:00:35.800 different organizations, the family, the church, the community. We're all thinking more and more

00:00:41.660 about the social fabric that's been torn apart. And once every six months or so, my buddy Kevin

00:00:47.680 Dolan writes an article that just kind of blows the hinges off everything. It's remarkable how

00:00:52.440 consistently he does this. And he just had a fantastic one about social coordination and

00:00:58.240 kind of why we are more or less creating a society through managerial liberalism that has to

00:01:03.780 kind of dissolve families as we understand them. So I thought I'd have Ahmad to talk about today.

00:01:09.560 Kevin, thank you so much for coming on, man. Great to be here, man. Thanks.

00:01:13.740 So your article is titled, Mom is Working for Moloch. And obviously, you are someone who has

00:01:21.300 thought a lot about the fertility rate about family formation uh you've held multiple conferences

00:01:28.980 on the subject of having more children encouraging people to have more children a lot of times when

00:01:35.340 we talk about this issue it's people kind of wish casting saying you know well you know it'd be great

00:01:40.540 if moms could do this or if we had this thing uh kind of just throwing whatever against the wall

00:01:45.920 but having not really thought deeply about the issue not looking at what's actually worked you

00:01:49.760 are not in that position. You're somebody who has thought about this issue a lot, taken active

00:01:53.540 steps to organize conferences to discuss this issue. So this is not something that you're just

00:01:58.280 a tourist on. So I thought it was very interesting in your article because it hit on a number of

00:02:04.640 things I'm actually currently writing about for a book. But you put it in this game theoretic

00:02:09.340 terminology, which I think is extremely helpful for people to kind of understand the frame with

00:02:14.820 which you're approaching this. So there's a lot to go through in this article, but I want to start

00:02:19.920 at the beginning. You point out the fact that basically a lot of what's happening here is the

00:02:27.140 eternal revolution. We know that leftism, and in many ways just modernity in general, seems to work

00:02:34.220 on this kind of principle of an eternal revolution where you constantly are changing everything.

00:02:41.480 this empowers the state to constantly be growing, accruing more and more options to itself. So

00:02:48.360 can you talk a little bit about why the destruction of the family is ultimately

00:02:53.460 fuel for this kind of eternal revolution? Yeah. So you can look at it as the state,

00:03:02.860 sort of the pre-modern state existing to kind of defend us against them, right? There's an inside,

00:03:09.020 there's an outside um and what what has happened basically uh you could argue about when it

00:03:17.260 happened but but basically what what has happened now is that the the the forces of liberal modern

00:03:22.540 the states that are the liberal modern states are so powerful relative to the outside that it's sort

00:03:28.940 of um the the hard line you could say is like 1945 right that's when the the the liberal modern

00:03:37.660 postmodern states own everything they control the whole planet and so it's like well what's their

00:03:41.920 what's their justification if there's no outside to protect us from anymore and basically it's like

00:03:48.040 well now now we got to look inside we got to look for conflicts internally that the state can

00:03:52.500 insinuate itself within find oppression find tyranny uh which basically means you know you

00:03:58.280 think of the state as the the biggest fish and it's looking for smaller fish eating even smaller

00:04:04.780 fish and sort of, uh, taking the side of the weak against the strong interposing itself in all these

00:04:10.420 relationships. And, uh, as long as the state is, uh, interposing itself in hierarchies that strike

00:04:19.280 us as unfair or, um, sort of arbitrary sort of contrived, uh, things like class systems or caste

00:04:28.860 systems. Um, I'm not arguing that those are actually arbitrary or contrived, but that's

00:04:33.840 how they're interpreted, right? Is that, you know, it's sort of pointless and inefficient.

00:04:39.340 You're sort of leaving, leaving smart people, leaving talent on the table when you sort of

00:04:44.940 maintain these, these artificial hierarchies. And so the state has said, no, we're not going to do

00:04:50.360 that. We're going to break that down. We're going to, you know, you're not, you're not allowed to

00:04:52.980 have the old boys club. You're not allowed to exclude people from this and that. And so basically

00:04:58.240 what has happened is having torn down all of those uh sort of arbitrary constructed hierarchies

00:05:05.280 it's like what's left well what's left is sort of the biological substrate of hierarchy which is

00:05:10.680 the roles of men and women and parents and children and and the most natural uh the most

00:05:19.940 natural hierarchies that exist that's all that's left and so the state basically is like well now

00:05:24.600 I got to eat this. This is what there is left to eat. And, and you see like with Lindsay Clancy,

00:05:29.980 it's like all of the legal explicit distinctions between men and women have either been eradicated

00:05:39.580 or reversed in terms of like preference or, or, or a financial or legal subordination,

00:05:45.180 all that's gone. Uh, but feminism still has to exist. There's all kinds of money in, 1.00

00:05:51.900 in feminism sort of uh institutionally activists and lawyers and and fundraisers and so uh you know

00:05:59.860 you sort of all of these movements whether it's the the the gay rights movement or or or blm or

00:06:07.620 feminism it's like all of these movements can either sort of declare victory and abolish

00:06:14.460 themselves which they're not going to do or they can find uh they can find goals and aims that are

00:06:23.460 fundamentally like irreconcilable unattainable so they can have this eternal revolution so that it

00:06:29.360 can go on forever and that's what you see in all of these different uh sort of left-wing

00:06:35.020 movements is is that they've sort of had to go to war with god almost they've had to go to war

00:06:40.160 with like fundamental reality uh because that's that's all that's left that's the only enemy they

00:06:46.120 can still they can still claim to be the underdog against so when we have this scenario uh where

00:06:54.860 obviously uh as you say like basically we reach the end of history and therefore uh the state

00:07:00.260 can only turn on basically its own uh you know its own charges uh to to kind of legitimate its

00:07:06.000 power uh when you have this scenario where we constantly have to be trying to destroy 0.60

00:07:11.820 everything about hierarchy and the natural order uh obviously uh feminism gay rights all of these

00:07:19.520 things are are kind of tendrils of this revolution that uh you know work their way into every aspect

00:07:25.260 of our lives uh but the the question i guess for a lot of people then is okay wouldn't you want

00:07:34.640 your society even if you understand that you're gaining more power by kind of wedging all of these

00:07:40.760 things apart by getting between men and women getting between parents and child you know

00:07:46.120 ultimately don't you understand as an apparatus that you're kind of eating you know the seed corn

00:07:51.620 that you're you're tearing up the roots like wouldn't the leaders wouldn't the people who

00:07:55.480 ultimately manage the regime who are trying to accrue the power when they realize they're

00:07:59.440 they're kind of killing the golden goose as they attempt to you know take that last bit of power

00:08:04.340 Or doesn't it occur to them that there is ultimately a limit

00:08:07.340 and they will kind of disassemble their own thing as they're doing this?

00:08:11.260 Well, if there were a guy who was like, or a gal,

00:08:15.160 who was the boss of managerial liberalism, 0.82

00:08:18.080 then number one, it wouldn't be managerial liberalism.

00:08:21.040 But also they would, yeah, they would have an incentive

00:08:25.220 to like keep the whole structure alive.

00:08:28.300 But that's not what we have.

00:08:29.160 We have all these different competing interest groups

00:08:33.380 and and fiefs and you know you you uh uh curtis yarvin's favorite example is is like virology

00:08:42.500 and how uh in the domain of virology the way you win is by making virology super important

00:08:51.540 and making it really salient and drawing a lot of a lot of funding to the field of virology

00:08:56.900 and if you fail to do that or refuse to do that then you will sort of you won't get published and

00:09:01.300 And you won't get media attention and all these things.

00:09:03.720 And so the people who rise to the top are people who are willing to do that.

00:09:07.520 And the best way to make virology really, really sort of politically relevant and salient and get a lot of money thrown at it is to engineer a plague.

00:09:17.040 And so it's that phenomenon, if you can think of that as like a symbol or a metaphor, it's all of these little fiefs trying to make their things salient and relevant.

00:09:29.540 and uh and and yeah there's the thing is not a person it can't see in that sense and i i sort of

00:09:39.580 um there's a lot of like uh there's a lot of like dooming on on these topics uh and and people

00:09:47.920 saying like was kind of hopeless it's sort of uh this headless monster that we can't defeat

00:09:52.500 but one of the things that's uh really important to understand about this monster is that it can't

00:09:59.380 see basic things like that like the fact that it's it's it's uh sort of headed for a cliff and

00:10:05.760 there's no breaks um and it also can't like it can't assess threats the way a person can and so

00:10:12.720 you can build all kinds of capacity that that system can't read as threatening um and so it's

00:10:18.400 less about like you know um it's less about how powerful that system is and it's more about like

00:10:24.320 Where are the vulnerabilities where like what doors are left unguarded?

00:10:29.420 So, yeah, that's that's why it's it it doesn't see those things because it can't see those things.

00:10:35.760 All right, so let's get to the core problem itself.

00:10:38.420 The article is largely about fertility rates, family formation, like why this isn't happening as somebody who has looked at this extensively, held conferences on it, written on it.

00:10:50.560 I think you kind of come to the early conclusion, the article that the reason that we have low

00:10:57.860 fertility is obvious and absolutely no one will talk about it. So Kevin Dolan, what is the obvious

00:11:05.100 and incredibly offensive answer to why we have low birth rates? Well, yeah, so I introduced it

00:11:09.920 kind of as a troll. The strongest correlation between fertility and any other sort of social

00:11:17.440 science variable is uh educating and employing women like and and and what i sort of uh talk

00:11:25.340 about in the article is i think there are a lot of people on the right who sort of view that problem 0.54

00:11:31.620 unseriously because they have this sort of like why i oughta like we oughta put these broads in

00:11:37.480 their place and like and and what they're sort of failing to recognize is it's not like we have 1.00

00:11:43.820 this fertility problem because women are like getting too many PhDs or the, or there are too 1.00

00:11:48.420 many female C-suite executives. It's like this correlation exists at the level of like being 1.00

00:11:54.900 taught to read and escaping subsistence agriculture. And like, you know, uh, not,

00:12:00.560 not sort of losing your teeth at, at 30. Like it's, it's the only countries that have escaped

00:12:07.880 this uh this sterilizing trend are uh places where none of us want to live places where

00:12:17.940 and and and there's no there's no conceivable serious plan to like replicate those circumstances

00:12:24.600 uh it was sort of like um it's sort of like the way the way they uh they way they got on

00:12:30.980 Mitt Romney's case for talking about self-deportation uh that we just we just make life

00:12:36.100 harder for these people until they all leave um it's like you can't make their lives harder than

00:12:45.600 they are in like cameroon you can't make their lives like without without destroying the country

00:12:51.700 without making your life like it is in cameroon and or like it would be so so uh basically it's

00:12:59.580 it's this sort of thought terminator for a lot of people uh as soon as they sort of

00:13:04.720 there's tons of people talking about fertility who like just won't see this can't see this don't 0.95

00:13:10.240 want to talk about it period and so they come up with all kinds of like stupid like polishing the 0.98

00:13:16.100 brass on the titanic type solutions for this problem uh but then there's another set who like 0.98

00:13:21.120 they sort of um either either it's it's it's tends to be either leftists or like you know

00:13:25.940 pretty right-wing guys where they say well the thing is it's it's it's women's education

00:13:31.620 and which generally means like either uh shut up stop talking about this or it means like

00:13:40.080 i don't know like it just it just sort of becomes this vague like we're at some point we're gonna

00:13:46.520 turn into the taliban uh and like yeah yeah you know keep women at home and and make sure that

00:13:52.880 they never walk outside and interact with a book but like realistically these are not you know this

00:13:58.500 is not anything that's coming right like that that tends to be the the terminating on the right now

00:14:02.980 you do talk about some of the attempts that nations have tried right like there's direct

00:14:08.480 bribery by the government there's you know tax incentives uh you know built-in uh you know things

00:14:14.520 uh for for child care all of that uh but you're you're pretty dour on that what why don't these

00:14:20.160 managerial solutions solve this problem what seems to be the issue there we know why we can't go back

00:14:26.980 to afghanistan but why can't we just pay women more to have kids well number one the math just

00:14:33.760 doesn't pencil out like like the the the sacrifice that you're asking of people to uh have these kids

00:14:41.320 is enormous and uh the kind of person who would have a kid for a thousand bucks is like not

00:14:50.080 necessarily the person that you want raising kids like it's like those incentives are not good

00:14:54.300 incentives. Um, but also, uh, and this is, this is sort of like where I try to get to with the,

00:15:01.020 with the women's education and employment thing. The reason that, uh, women's education and 1.00

00:15:07.240 employment is, is correlated with, uh, declining fertility is not that like the moment a woman

00:15:15.120 learns to read, she goes like, anything's better than having kids. Like I I'd rather do literally 0.71

00:15:23.760 anything. And you could use, number one, if you just have contact with women, period, you know, 0.99

00:15:29.680 that's not true. If you look at history, it's obviously not true. But what it does correlate

00:15:34.380 with in terms of being employed, being educated, it's a proxy for being integrated into sort of

00:15:43.320 the global marketplace, right? It's, you know, you get your smartphone and it's not necessarily,

00:15:49.120 it's not the smartphone itself. It's being connected to this infinite marketplace where

00:15:55.080 there are zero costs for defection, where nobody has any leverage. And so you can't interact in

00:16:01.120 this, uh, this illegible relational social domain that women in particular are, uh, sort of deeply 0.99

00:16:11.200 adaptive to. Um, and so what that means is, uh, we think about family life, family life involves

00:16:19.600 enormous amounts of, uh, placing a bet on another person. Like, you know, you, you, you sort of have

00:16:28.320 to, a woman has to marry a guy, uh, before he's really come into his own before he's like, you 0.97

00:16:36.740 know become who he's going to become and she's got to stick with him through that like sort of

00:16:42.960 difficult uh period where they're broke and then uh you know her sort of looks will fade and she 0.86

00:16:53.100 will get older and he will stay sort of reproductively viable for a couple decades after

00:16:58.020 that and he's got to stick with her sort of in acknowledgement of the fact that she stuck with him

00:17:03.880 and there's this big coordination problem this big uh and we used to solve that with reputation

00:17:09.620 we used to solve that with like you know you don't get a girl in trouble you don't run out

00:17:13.540 on people and you know and and and uh most of the most of all of your economic and social activity

00:17:19.980 took place with other people who you had always known and were always going to know like your

00:17:25.720 your social universe was in a sense closed uh which meant that reputation mattered and there

00:17:32.400 were costs for defection real like costs and one of the things i talk about is like your your uh

00:17:38.560 your mother put all this work into you and there wasn't like it wasn't like the sheriff would come

00:17:46.000 sometimes but like usually it's not like the sheriff would come or she'd sue you for your

00:17:50.660 you know because you're supposed to take care of your mom when she's older right

00:17:53.600 instead it was just like culturally expected and everyone around you would uh

00:18:00.160 call you a dirt bag if you didn't take care of your mom, right? And we sort of now regard those

00:18:08.900 reputational illegible things as sort of toothless, but they were not toothless in any other period of

00:18:15.820 history. They were extremely concrete and they had real consequences. And so it's the evaporation

00:18:22.060 of that relational bond, which is, again, it's what managerial liberalism is just designed to

00:18:27.580 eat, to chew up and deconstruct, both in terms of the relationship between parent and child and

00:18:34.520 the relationship, the lateral relationship between men and women and families. My conclusion basically

00:18:41.440 in the piece is that there's no, like human beings won't raise families unless they can do it in this

00:18:48.800 deeply high trust relational contextual frame. And if you try to make them do it as a transaction,

00:18:56.360 they will just not do it.

00:18:58.220 They, you know, it's pandas at the zoo.

00:18:59.840 They just won't breed.

00:19:01.440 And so in one sense,

00:19:04.060 that's a problem for all these institutions

00:19:05.800 because like, you know,

00:19:06.720 we've got social security

00:19:07.980 and we've got all these,

00:19:08.880 we've got all these expectations

00:19:11.100 that define the value of your checking count

00:19:14.100 and the dollars and your stock market portfolio

00:19:17.140 and your real estate portfolio.

00:19:19.260 All these things are determined

00:19:20.640 by expectations of steady economic growth,

00:19:23.440 which you can't have if the population collapses.

00:19:26.360 And so the case I'm making is like, you know, that's why they care about it. That's why like, or they should care about it. That's why you get all these think pieces about it from sort of liberal publications. And so trying to wrestle with this. But the reason we should care about it is like, oh, we've created, we've created a world that humans don't want to raise families in. Like, that's just a fundamental, like a spiritual indictment of the world that we live in. We got to fix that.

00:19:52.540 right um so go ahead oh sorry go ahead uh well i was gonna say um let's talk a little bit about

00:19:59.980 how this transition took place because i think that's what catches a lot of people off guard

00:20:05.060 when they're having this discussion uh you know we we're constantly hearing from you know older

00:20:09.780 generations well just you know go out and meet a woman at the bar you know you know shake shake

00:20:14.700 the boss's hand uh you know look him straight in the eye he'll offer you his daughter as you know

00:20:19.440 and a dowry you know like this we get that kind of advice right and so you have this moment where

00:20:24.960 it's hard for them that they look at the money in people's bank accounts or they the economic

00:20:29.760 activity and they say look you know you have more money or you know you have more luxury than

00:20:34.720 previous generations it should be easy it should be fine to you know make this happen and one of

00:20:40.580 the things that you talk about uh in the piece is that integration into the global marketplace

00:20:46.740 that I think is so important because the other way to say this when I'm stealing terms from

00:20:54.020 crazy Marxists is you're deterritorializing, right? You're moving things out of the realm

00:21:00.220 of the sacred, out of the realm of social capital and tradition and hierarchy and bonds,

00:21:06.620 and you're moving it into the marketplace. And so what we've done is we have commodified

00:21:11.280 every aspect of this familial relationship that used to be the building block of society. Instead

00:21:18.240 of a woman taking care of her children, you hire someone to take care of the children. Instead of 1.00

00:21:22.660 a woman taking care of the home, you hire someone to clean the home and organize things. Instead of 1.00

00:21:28.060 having parents educate their children, we pay a teacher to educate your children. Every interaction,

00:21:35.760 whether it's taking care of your parents or, you know, being responsible for a woman you

00:21:41.700 impregnated. These are all now functions of the court, economic functions. They can all be

00:21:47.120 quantified, placed into dollars, packaged and resold. And this creates a serious problem for

00:21:53.880 what you call the Moloch trap. So can you talk a little bit about that kind of liquefying the,

00:21:59.480 you know, the kind of social capital that once existed in this familiar relationship,

00:22:04.020 turning it into globalization and how that creates a coordination problem yeah so johan

00:22:09.040 kurtz wrote a really really good piece on this i don't know if you've had him on the show you

00:22:12.220 should i did yeah yeah that piece was phenomenal yeah awesome yeah so uh it it's a phenomenon that

00:22:18.380 i i've started calling dark poverty it's like dark matter or uh it's it's this invisible poverty

00:22:24.040 uh because yeah like all of the the sensor apparatus of liberalism says you know gdp's

00:22:31.280 up and household incomes up and houses are bigger and all this stuff you think about um

00:22:36.960 spotify ads manager makes it easy to create your first audio ad in minutes for free sign up today

00:22:44.300 launch a campaign and start reaching your audience uh the best example i could think of is like uh

00:22:52.280 i grew up in north texas and like every house had a pool and um you can see from like satellite

00:22:59.920 images. It's just lines of pools. And, and, and most of these pools are like barely ever used.

00:23:06.940 And, uh, you know, why is that the case? Is it because we're just so, uh, uh, wealthy that we

00:23:13.780 just prefer to have our own pools? Like, no, it's because all of the common spaces are completely

00:23:17.600 unlivable. We've, we've, we've made it so that, uh, you, you can only own, you can only control

00:23:25.160 property that you as an individual control. You can't collectively own property

00:23:30.340 the way that you could have in the pre-1964 regime. You funnel everything into the domain

00:23:43.420 that you can actually protect and gate. You get these big homes with all the amenities packed

00:23:47.480 inside, and it's incredibly overpriced. You have to compete for... There's a great book,

00:23:55.160 two, two income trap by Elizabeth Warren of all people, which, where she talks about, uh,

00:24:00.660 the competition for positional goods. So, uh, you know, you can, you can make more cars,

00:24:07.260 you can make, you know, better food, et cetera. You can't make more of the best school in town

00:24:13.180 school district. Right. Uh, and so people will engage in this extreme, like zero sum competition

00:24:21.140 for these positional goods in order to escape things that used to be unthinkable.

00:24:28.100 So the idea that your kid would be the victim of a violent crime at school

00:24:35.600 was just not on most people's radar 50 years ago, 100 years ago.

00:24:40.840 And now it's like, no, I have to pay a $250,000, $350,000 premium on my home value in order to escape that very real possibility in a lot of these cities.

00:24:56.160 And so it's like you have to pay for that.

00:25:00.200 You have to pay – so much of like the – you see these women on these dating apps who are like, yeah, a man should spend $500 on our first date.

00:25:08.520 and uh you know that's kind of an extreme example and like you know there are of course women who 1.00

00:25:16.420 are more reasonable than that but like what is causing that phenomenon what's causing that 1.00

00:25:20.860 phenomenon is that in the absence of any kind of reputational capital in the absence of any kind of

00:25:27.340 binding common culture. It's, uh, you know, I have hundreds of thousands of, uh, swipes to do,

00:25:38.280 and there has to be some kind of a gate. And so we're just going to turn it into like a cash

00:25:42.320 transaction, a commodity, which, you know, is kind of an indistinguishable from prostitution,

00:25:46.520 but like it's, that's, that's what everything is like. Everything is commodified in that way.

00:25:51.340 And so people can sort of on paper have more material goods, but it's at the cost of burning all of this illegible social, you know, like if you grew up in the, in the sixties and you know, you were in like a two bedroom house and there were like four kids in the house.

00:26:12.120 well yeah you'd bunk up and it was a little tight but like the kids had the run of the whole

00:26:16.780 neighborhood and like that was that was their space and it was completely safe and it was

00:26:22.440 completely functional and and so yeah you just come home and sleep and that's not a big deal

00:26:28.080 now it's like well you got a bigger house but like you're stuck in the house and that's uh

00:26:33.460 you know they've done like those studies where it's like yeah his his his grandpa would walk

00:26:39.340 10 miles to the river and his dad would you know walk to the corner grocery store and he

00:26:44.920 you know cps might get called if he's alone by himself in the yard like it's everything is

00:26:51.360 becoming more confined and constrained and i think there's a very real analogy to like breeding and

00:26:55.600 captivity like people just won't do it can you specifically explain the moloch trap uh definition

00:27:03.000 because i think that game theory really helps people understand what the issue is here otherwise

00:27:08.220 they have such a hard like you know we've talked about the social capital i actually had johan on

00:27:13.100 to discuss that exact article and of course you touched on it very much there and it's important

00:27:17.500 but specifically your your point about social coordination and why it fails when we're in this

00:27:23.720 mode i think is critical for people to kind of get over the threshold and understand the issue

00:27:27.920 yeah so um scott alexander writes a great blog slate star codex and he's got an essay called

00:27:34.160 meditations on moloch and uh it's from that alan ginsburg poem talks about moloch and it's it's uh

00:27:40.720 moloch is this personification of uh coordination problems so it's it's the idea that we all

00:27:49.520 are in a situation where our individual interest is served by doing something that's bad for the whole

00:27:56.320 and if there's no one to coordinate us then we're all going to do what makes sense for us and we're

00:28:00.320 we're going to burn the whole system down basically uh so an example of that that he gives is like

00:28:06.180 uh you know there's there's uh polluting a lake or something and you know it's it's in everybody's

00:28:14.360 interest to pollute the lake they get you know x percent of more productivity if they pollute the

00:28:18.540 lake but eventually the lake gets so polluted that it's unusable for anybody and the whole system

00:28:22.300 crashes and so you kind of you need a top down you need somebody who's got like a god's eye view

00:28:26.840 who can see the whole system to say, actually, we're not going to, we're not going to pollute

00:28:30.860 the way. Nobody's going to do that. And in this atomizing liberal frame where everyone is sort of

00:28:39.120 the individual is the only dimension of analysis that matters. And, and sort of nobody has the

00:28:46.040 right to coordinate people at a, at a broader scale than that. Well, you get like, like dating

00:28:54.160 apps are this classic example of of uh where where everyone's interest is to sort of transactionalize

00:29:03.140 and commodify what they're doing and nobody's happy like i think a lot of guys think of the

00:29:09.260 dating app situation as something that's like really working out for the ladies and it's like

00:29:13.620 not at all like like nobody's happy uh but it's still in everybody's individual interest to sort

00:29:19.980 of and a lot of it's because uh you know if if there is no uh reputational capital if there's

00:29:27.800 no coordinating mechanism of of culture or expectation then uh yeah you sort of everything

00:29:35.600 gets converted into like raw transactional uh power relationships like that's what counts

00:29:41.960 And so men and women are pursuing this like really raw transactional relationship mode of forming relationships.

00:29:54.620 And it's just completely unworkable for everybody involved. 0.74

00:29:58.200 So you've kind of hinted at it multiple times, but one of the issues that we're facing here is that women used to work primarily in this domain of social capital. 0.83

00:30:09.940 Right. Like they were doing incredibly valuable work, but it didn't show up in GDP numbers. It doesn't produce economic activity. And so, you know, the managerial regime that needs to quantify everything, that needs everything to be a global market, they want to rip this up. 0.97

00:30:25.680 They want to, you know, kind of package it into discrete units that you can label with a price tag.

00:30:32.000 It needs to destroy all this.

00:30:34.280 And, you know, it's funny because a lot of people in our space talk about trustless systems, right?

00:30:39.700 Like, I want a trustless system.

00:30:42.060 And, you know, the thing I always say that makes them very angry is actually you need, we have to destroy all inhuman systems.

00:30:49.540 Like, that's the actual, like, when you say trustless society, what you mean is an inhuman society.

00:30:54.900 a society in which uh people no longer have to relay relate to each other rely on each other

00:31:00.700 um yes there used to be friction in all those moments guess what that friction's called

00:31:04.900 humanity like actually when you're removing from uh you know that that friction that economic

00:31:10.380 friction what you're removing is the human element uh you know as as good as good students

00:31:15.900 of nick land will recognize you are you are feeding uh you know quickly into that uh that

00:31:20.860 loop that uh self-exciting feedback loop that will develop capital into something entirely

00:31:25.440 different and leave humanity behind uh that that's what that's what this process is and so in many

00:31:31.280 ways uh you know ironically you know part of the thing that kind of half of the new reactionaries

00:31:37.060 want is the very thing that's defeat defeating the other thing that they really want uh and so

00:31:42.440 we're stuck in this very serious situation because as we've destroyed that social capital we've 0.85

00:31:49.220 destroyed the ability of women to operate in this world of social capital uh we have made a lack of 0.99

00:31:56.860 honor a lack of duty a lack of loyalty uh kind of a feature instead of a buck it's now the optimal

00:32:04.200 strategy with which to operate and so i guess my question to you is um how do we ever get back to

00:32:12.380 a place where this social capital is viable again because it seems that without that as you say

00:32:19.920 people simply won't breathe if they do not see a future in which there is a positive aspect of

00:32:26.380 cooperation where they can build real actual capital but in maybe a way that is not tangible

00:32:33.060 on a balance sheet they simply will not participate in the mating process so i mean what do we even do

00:32:40.600 to begin to approach that issue because it seems like this is basically like the skeleton that

00:32:46.020 defines our entire world right now then the liberal managerial regime is uh you know the

00:32:52.000 culprit but it's also the bedrock of what most people want to perpetuate when they want to

00:32:55.720 perpetuate our current society so how do we address this yeah well i mean uh humanoid robots

00:33:03.800 is basically the uh that's that's that's what um all of the people i know who are like fans of

00:33:11.580 managerialism fans of where things are headed their answer basically is just the slow replacement

00:33:19.200 of all human activity with machines and um i think that's unworkable um for for a lot of reasons

00:33:27.620 but i think our solution the the solution for people who who value humanity is uh number one

00:33:36.680 so i i wrote a piece a couple of months ago this fertility collapse is the good news like

00:33:41.660 it is actually uh really good news that like human beings won't live like insects and they

00:33:51.220 Like they, they, they won't tolerate, uh, this profoundly dehumanizing mode of living

00:33:56.900 and interacting with each other.

00:33:58.120 Like, uh, basically the, what the message there is that the, uh, the, the, the parasite

00:34:10.180 is going to destroy its own ability to survive before it can actually kill the host.

00:34:15.600 And so what I see as the answer is, I mean, I see it as basically human judgment, human institutions are coming back one way or another. Like this system is unsustainable on all kinds of axes, the security axis, the financial axis, because there's no incentive to sort of save for the commonwealth of the United States.

00:34:43.740 because what's what's happening right now is like if i don't spend this money that's what you got

00:34:47.640 with like the five thousand dollar dividend right uh you know whether or not you think that'll happen

00:34:51.460 whatever it's like uh the the the political incentives on both sides are uh yeah we need

00:35:00.800 to loot the treasury and distribute it to our clients as quickly as we possibly can

00:35:05.100 because if we don't then we'll lose and the other side will do it right and um that's sort of the

00:35:10.920 race to the bottom zero sum game on the on the financial side there's no there's no plan for the

00:35:15.700 deficit none whatsoever and so uh you know basically like do you believe that is sustainable

00:35:22.800 on an infinite timeline i don't similarly i mean uh sort of the burning down of the social capital

00:35:28.460 and the uh the the intensification of the fertility crisis it's very it's a very analogous phenomenon

00:35:36.260 It's kind of the same thing. We are all incentivized to like burn down this commons until it's completely non-functional. And so what's going to remain, in my view, is like the fundamental substrate of human relationships, which is your family and the people that you know and love and have a shared history with.

00:35:58.280 It's going to stop being these abstract ideological teams, and it's going to be who's actually going to make sure that I get to eat, who's actually going to make sure that my family's safe. It's going to be people you know and care about.

00:36:13.740 And so everything that I do is about building those human relationships in that shared history. That's what Exit is about, my fraternity. It's about getting people together to build things with stakes so that they can place bets and have those bets pay off.

00:36:32.440 and then they've got this shared history so that when things get much more complicated

00:36:36.420 and much more difficult, they sort of know who their friends are.

00:36:40.040 And that's one of the things that we're changing about the conference.

00:36:45.260 We're going to be doing NATOCon 3 early next year.

00:36:49.400 And the first two were very much like, let's look at the charts and graphs.

00:36:54.020 Let's talk to the think tank people.

00:36:55.920 Let's talk to the academics, see what they have to say.

00:36:59.580 That was good.

00:37:00.480 It ran its course.

00:37:01.200 we sort of, we sort of got the picture of like, what, what this, what are the shape,

00:37:05.180 what's the shape of this problem and realized it's going to be just human connection. Like

00:37:10.760 you're not going to solve this for, for the system at scale. You're going to solve it for like your

00:37:15.940 kids and your friends. And so the next round is going to be much more about like much more like

00:37:22.080 low ticket, like let's just connect like-minded young people and families. So I largely agree

00:37:29.180 with that but i'll play devil's advocate here um this sounds like accelerationism right well

00:37:35.820 things will get worse and then things will collapse and then my thing will arise and uh the thing

00:37:43.300 that you know people often point to when it comes to accelerationism is actually just worse is worse 0.83

00:37:49.140 right there are still shit libs in south africa so yeah uh ultimately um you know is it good that 0.97

00:37:57.500 the entire society will more or less eat itself alive uh you know is that ultimately actually 0.99

00:38:03.060 going to solve the problem won't the vast majority of people actually just crash and burn and destroy

00:38:08.140 themselves and you know kind of die alone at 80 with no one to watch them as they eat you know 1.00

00:38:14.080 whatever dog food is brought to them by uh you know a haitian immigrant uh in in the welfare home 0.93

00:38:19.900 you know what like ultimately uh you know we're looking at a scenario even as you describe it 0.88

00:38:25.260 the problem kind of solves itself where only a very small number of people actually make it

00:38:29.260 through to the other side yeah yeah worse is worse um like it's it's gonna be hard i think

00:38:37.900 and i i would say uh what you're observing now all you don't have to believe that like there

00:38:46.060 will be like i think i think the fundamental uh error of accelerationism is that there will be

00:38:50.700 and there will be a reckoning and awakening and, and, and the people will rise up as one. Like

00:38:55.700 that's, yes, that's stupid, but there are, you, you observe even in South Africa, um, the people 0.99

00:39:05.700 who are doing the best are the people who are building direct human ties and, and direct 0.99

00:39:13.280 relationships and who are acquiring optionality. And, uh, another thing I would say about the

00:39:19.740 whole, like there are no, you know, there's still libtards in South Africa is a lot of that is held 1.00

00:39:26.940 together by the bigger system. South Africa doesn't exist in a vacuum. South Africa exists 0.99

00:39:33.580 in a world where there are 11 American carrier strike groups. And the, the, not, not to get too

00:39:41.280 far afield, but like the South African private security industry is like, I don't know, six times

00:39:47.480 the size of the south african military with like and depending on how much of that you've actually

00:39:51.740 how much of like the south african military's budget actually goes to like war fighting capacity

00:39:56.200 uh they actually dramatically overfund them as well so it's like uh there's clearly something

00:40:02.600 holding that disequilibrium together and uh and i would argue that that's going to change uh in the

00:40:09.580 south african case in particular uh but so so what does that mean for for for the broader picture

00:40:16.580 Or you just look at like, what is happening?

00:40:19.420 Can the system hold together under these circumstances?

00:40:23.200 You know, if you're looking for, if you're looking for things to get worse in a way that

00:40:34.400 generates the political appetite for change, yeah, you're going to be disappointed.

00:40:38.480 Like that's not a real thing.

00:40:39.360 It doesn't happen.

00:40:39.860 If you're looking for things to get worse in a way that like the sort of basic functionality of these big, like the way these systems deliver value, deliver what is necessary to people, that breaks down.

00:40:55.740 It's like, well, it's already happening. And you look at like, you look at these, these Somali enclaves, or you look at sort of what you look at this, this late unpleasantness in, in Texas, with the, with the migration situation. 0.97

00:41:10.540 um the people who are the best placed to uh exploit that situation are uh these sort of 0.97

00:41:22.200 illegible uh tribal groups you know people who people who know each other personally and who

00:41:29.460 also are sort of aligned in the abstract and uh they are they are playing a pre-modern game

00:41:36.760 And it turns out that playing that pre-modern game under these conditions is like super adaptive. So I basically what I would argue for is like, you just need to understand that like Mediterranean times call for Mediterranean solutions. Like you just have to be, you have to learn how to play that game a little differently. So it's, yeah, it's not accelerationism. It's just like, look at what, look at the, not, not like where it's going. Look at the reality on the ground right now and like adapt to that.

00:42:02.340 so one more question before we go to uh the super chats here but one of the things that i have

00:42:11.420 been observing is of course the rush to ai um every state recognizes the need for it at the

00:42:19.500 moment uh largely driven by warfare obviously artificial intelligence already is and will

00:42:25.160 continue to play a large role when it comes to the defense industry and your ability to

00:42:30.780 kind of project power and protect your country but also because they recognize that ai might 0.71

00:42:38.360 be a solution for the liberal managerial class uh to the kind of the destruction of their their

00:42:46.300 way of life right like right now manager managerial liberalism is kind of collapsing under its own

00:42:51.760 complexity you know if you want to go with the turchin model like you know you're getting uh you

00:42:56.320 a drop

00:42:58.280 in marginal utility when it comes to each layer

00:43:00.320 of complexity and so

00:43:02.020 that on top of the fact

00:43:04.380 that managers are basically being

00:43:06.180 promoted because of their

00:43:07.720 skin color and sexual

00:43:10.140 proclivities and not because they have any level

00:43:12.240 of talent means that the

00:43:13.760 labor structure that once

00:43:16.240 undergirded the managerial regime is falling

00:43:18.320 apart. They simply cannot squeeze

00:43:20.620 any more utility

00:43:22.200 out of the bureaucracies

00:43:24.320 that they're creating and this means there's

00:43:26.320 they're kind of failing to meet their obligations for the miracle of progress that's kind of

00:43:31.300 put them in charge that's been their legitimating uh you know political formula previously ai

00:43:37.200 offers them the opportunity to create um a uh something that will bear the large amount of

00:43:45.000 the manager load uh but never you know degrades because you're only selecting for people who are

00:43:52.940 part of some kind of polycule you know like it it avoids a lot of the human problems with the

00:43:59.480 managerial regime and gives it an option to kind of buoy itself beyond its previous capacity and

00:44:06.300 i know that artificial intelligence can be a disruptive agent in many ways a lot of our guys

00:44:12.160 are going to use artificial intelligence to disrupt things like you know the the movie industry the

00:44:17.860 gaming industry. They're going to be able to disrupt all kinds of entrenched interests because

00:44:23.140 AI kind of gives you a possible advantage that you did not have previously in those asymmetric

00:44:30.580 fields. However, it could also just become the thing that makes total control by the managerial

00:44:37.100 regime possible, right? Giving them a capacity that they previously lacked in the same way that

00:44:42.420 the state by adopting managerialism was ever able to expand, you know, rapidly by bringing to bear

00:44:48.840 a power of scale that never existed previously. So my question would be, what are your thoughts

00:44:55.160 on AI perhaps extending this regime well beyond what would be its natural life cycle? What if it

00:45:01.480 doesn't collapse because AI props it back up? So I would say it basically that I see it as

00:45:09.420 are like sort of two possibilities one is that ai really can do all the thinking that we can do 0.99

00:45:13.840 um and if it can then you know all bets are off maybe you'll be a brain in a jar in 20 years like

00:45:21.880 who knows um and i i view that possibility as sort of comparable to like what if uh what if

00:45:32.980 a cosmic ray burst like fries the atmosphere tomorrow and all human life is eradicated so

00:45:39.000 there's no way to plan for that. Like that's a, that's sort of a meaningless possibility.

00:45:44.480 Um, nothing you can do about it. So stop thinking about it. But, but the other possibility is that

00:45:51.200 there are like sort of fundamental limits to it. And what I observe is that, yeah, it, it doesn't

00:46:00.260 seem to be centralizing. It doesn't seem to be increasing their ability to control. In fact,

00:46:09.560 I mean, what I observe it doing in sort of my domain is the things that I keep an eye on

00:46:16.000 is it's making all of these organs of narrative control that that system used to depend on just

00:46:25.780 completely clogged with slop like nothing's knowable like everything's falsifiable and so

00:46:33.800 uh i i see that as only intensifying the importance of human connection and human

00:46:40.920 relationships i see it as as uh making it more essential for me to like have individuals i trust

00:46:48.760 who are like seeing things rather than accepting sort of what's delivered to me narratively now

00:46:54.460 if you're talking about like, does it make it easier for them to analyze the output of security

00:46:59.540 cameras or to operate swarms of drones? Right. And so like you get this sort of dystopian,

00:47:06.220 like they're going to control us by just watching our every move and killing us if we step out of

00:47:10.780 line. Uh, that I would say, uh, is, is the more realistic possibility. But when I think about

00:47:21.000 the vulnerabilities of that system, it's like, I have a friend who's deeply involved in the drone

00:47:30.800 space. And he's like, yeah, the Chinese, they make more drones. They make better drones. And 1.00

00:47:35.620 so they're going to control the world because the future is drones. But what I've talked to him

00:47:41.340 about, and I haven't gotten a satisfactory answer, is like, how are you going to gate? Because a

00:47:47.700 The drone is a relatively simple thing.

00:47:49.620 It's like some rotors and some batteries

00:47:51.140 and guidance system that like now we can,

00:47:53.720 we can operate that with like a Raspberry Pi. 0.99

00:47:55.180 I mean, you look at like the Russians, 1.00

00:47:56.140 they're like putting them together with duct tape 1.00

00:47:57.560 and bailing wire and bubble gum.

00:47:59.560 Like it's very, it's once you have

00:48:03.080 sort of the raw components,

00:48:05.320 it's very difficult to control that technology.

00:48:09.120 And all kinds of infrastructure

00:48:12.420 that produces this technology

00:48:14.400 is vulnerable to that technology,

00:48:17.160 whether it be you know a cyber attack or whether it be you know bombing a fiber optic cable or

00:48:22.900 bombing a factory like all of the like i i see uh it's like you know you say um well the stirrup 0.90

00:48:31.700 and and the composite bow is how the mongols conquered the chinese and it's like well the 0.86

00:48:37.580 chinese could make more bows and more stirrups and more horses and more horsemen so why didn't

00:48:42.260 they win and it's like well it's just it's a fundamentally decentralizing technology like it

00:48:47.120 fundamentally does not reward scale the way that an aircraft carrier rewards scale and so i i see

00:48:54.880 it as like i can do all kinds of things now that i used to need the sort of sufferance of a

00:49:02.160 multi-billion dollar multinational corporation to get done it's it's basically it's we've taken

00:49:07.960 a tomahawk cruise missile which only like a handful of countries even in theory had the

00:49:13.960 industrial base to build and we've made it something that like literally anybody can make

00:49:18.900 and so that's that's sort of how i see it i currently like as it stands right now it seems

00:49:24.200 like a fundamentally decentralizing technology so there is a way in which you know we are already

00:49:31.780 we've already seen this when it comes to the media space obviously uh you know used to be that if you

00:49:37.300 wanted to speak to millions of people about your political views you had to play the game and get

00:49:42.540 on cnn or msnbc or fox news those were the only options available to you now you know anybody with

00:49:50.080 a microphone and uh you know a decently okay web camera can uh put something out and possibly

00:49:57.520 reach just as many if not more people uh of course uh in a lot of ways you know people will

00:50:03.100 uh say that podcasters are already terrorists so there's no big difference between that and

00:50:07.960 building the military technology to do the same thing but but there is a you know but there is a

00:50:12.480 real you know a point where ultimately you know these systems that were built on uh that uh kind

00:50:20.780 of hegemonic uh advantage of scale uh simply cannot survive uh the disintermediation they

00:50:28.020 simply cannot survive uh the fact that people can completely disconnect themselves from that

00:50:32.700 economy and still compete or even outperform in many ways we're already seeing you know hollywood

00:50:38.820 having going through this cycle where everything you know they built themselves into the blockbuster

00:50:44.220 model you know every studio needed to make a 300 million dollar 400 million dollar film

00:50:48.420 and that's where all of their revenue came from and if it you know went bust well then there was

00:50:53.760 just no money and now they're quickly realizing oh well actually we could just hand some youtuber a

00:50:59.240 million dollars and if he makes 20 million dollars well he 20xed our investment in a way that the

00:51:04.620 marvel film is never going to do and so if we just you know do that so we're already seeing

00:51:10.200 adjustments you know in in spaces that are not as serious you know not not arms manufacturing that

00:51:15.900 kind of thing uh but the principles hold you know these are similar problems that are being addressed

00:51:20.820 uh you know the scale is still i think having that impact so i think that you're right and i and i've

00:51:26.360 said this multiple times i'm still very worried about you know kind of uh the centralization

00:51:31.660 that's going to occur in the meantime like these these people might not be able to build the system

00:51:35.540 but they're sure going to try right like that's why we're doing this we're doing this because

00:51:39.540 they all think this is the solution even if it isn't uh and so ultimately they are going to try

00:51:45.000 to implement this and in the meantime i think it behooves us to be very careful about how we allow

00:51:49.960 this technology to be implemented but i think you're right that ultimately a system built on

00:51:55.460 that level of technological control is really uh you know it the foxes will eventually lose to

00:52:02.520 just a single lion walking in and knocking down their their very carefully constructed

00:52:06.780 edifice uh and so it doesn't take very much but a few a few uh strikes somewhere could easily

00:52:13.500 knock out that entire apparatus and make it very difficult to govern well kevin uh this is a very

00:52:19.000 fascinating conversation it's something i've been thinking a lot about and uh your article on this

00:52:23.900 was absolutely excellent so before we go to uh the questions of the people can you tell where

00:52:28.900 tell everyone where they can find your article and everything else you do yeah so the article's

00:52:33.280 on our our uh blog blog.exitgroup.us that's the that's the website for the fraternity

00:52:38.480 excellent all right to the questions of the people cherry coke nixon says clancy is a symptom of of

00:52:47.380 Oh, Clancy is a symptom like OF is a symptom. We're experiencing a crisis of radicalized and

00:52:54.240 entitlement by women fueled by thirsty men. So we'll just get into the gender discourse for a 0.96

00:53:03.700 moment here, Kevin. We didn't spend a lot of time in it. Is this men's fault? Is it women's fault?

00:53:08.580 Do we just need a few good men to tell women what to do? I think the obvious answer is both, 1.00

00:53:14.780 but you know where where does most of the fault lie how critical how do we create critical good

00:53:20.160 men's scarcity it's the um yeah so i i think uh what what they're getting at that's this absolutely

00:53:29.060 true is like it's just there's infinite buyers and sellers for anything that you want to buy or

00:53:33.240 sell. And so, uh, there's no point at which, you know, uh, an, an attractive, uh, 22 year old girl

00:53:46.140 does not find someone willing to put up with her nonsense, like, because there's just an infinite

00:53:51.200 supply of men. And, uh, you know, conversely, if, if, uh, if you sort of are a man who's got

00:53:58.060 a lot going for him um there's an infinite supply of women to defect against and it's just there's

00:54:05.260 no that's it's this weightless there's no consequences for any of it uh and it's impossible

00:54:11.740 to impose consequences at this scale so uh so yeah i mean they're kind of right i anything where like

00:54:20.380 you know a hundred million people have suddenly started behaving badly

00:54:26.460 i i have a hard time defaulting to like oh all hundred million of them like got worse

00:54:33.180 all of it like what was china inherently addicted to opium or was there an effort

00:54:39.300 you know to to perhaps encourage you know that behavior right yeah there's like something else

00:54:43.600 going on sean wyland says always good to hear uh positional goods fred hirsch be referenced in

00:54:51.160 this regard likewise i keep going on about uh post-materialism ronald inghart inglehart and

00:54:58.660 illusions of post-industrial society sean has many references there some which i recognize some that

00:55:05.620 i don't any thoughts about that uh yeah i mean well i guess what he's getting at i'm not familiar

00:55:10.780 with them either but i guess what he's getting at is like there will always be something to

00:55:16.060 compete over like there's not there's no such thing as post scarcity because some things are

00:55:21.460 inherently scarce right uh nixon says islam is right about women no christianity is right about

00:55:28.640 women and as christian turned into the west we are paying the price for secularism yeah there's

00:55:35.160 nothing inherently weak about christianity when it comes to uh the role of women or how society

00:55:41.380 should be constructed guys sorry to break that to uh you know any one of these societies as soon as

00:55:47.460 they get cracked open by modernity has the same problem i'm trying to remember uh that engineer

00:55:52.980 guy on twitter uh who was talking about christianity and how it failed society uh devin

00:55:59.980 something or other uh i like the guy in general he makes a lot of good points but i think i think

00:56:04.200 just has this incredibly wrong like sorry but this is a modernity problem not a christianity

00:56:09.560 problem uh and and it doesn't get any better when you look at any other religion it's just a

00:56:14.220 universal solvent like it's not yes has nothing to do with that nixon also says of the last five

00:56:20.340 women i went to dates with three hinted at straight up asked for money to cover various

00:56:24.620 bills i doubt this is a unique experience that is kind of an incredible thing you know it's it

00:56:30.260 it's very funny that before uh obviously when marriage was kind of the implicit social norm

00:56:38.020 uh you know we had all these feminists talking about uh how basically a woman was slaved her

00:56:44.120 husband because she was dependent on him and basically this was like transactional but we

00:56:48.760 just wouldn't agree with it or we wouldn't say it out loud and now the thing that's actually

00:56:53.560 occurred is not like well women get you know uh liberalized they they they're uh you know 0.67

00:56:58.520 freed from these bonds and they become self-sufficient now they just become explicit

00:57:03.380 more explicit about the transactional nature of the interaction it becomes even more crass it's

00:57:09.160 kind of amazing thing to behold yeah i mean i and again it's like if if there's no

00:57:16.400 expectation that there will be a long-term relationship if there's no there's nothing

00:57:23.940 holding that together and and requiring you to well like and it's things things can bind you

00:57:30.680 and also liberate you right like if if uh if you know that everyone shares a common expectation

00:57:37.220 then you are liberated to to follow that expectation and it's uh yeah that's that's 0.85

00:57:43.940 the moloch trap that's what you're observing and sean says when women take uh provisioning 0.51

00:57:49.780 and protection for granted men will drop out of those roles like atlas shrug men are quietly

00:57:55.120 going on strike uh but at the end of the day right it's kind of your assertion kevin that

00:58:01.500 it's the men that don't go on strike that will probably you know be on the other side of this

00:58:06.360 right or at least i guess uh require a higher perhaps a higher level of commitment before

00:58:12.980 providing those uh you know those things but ultimately will have to continue to provide

00:58:18.080 them for society to function yeah i mean you you just have to find a counterparty that you can work

00:58:24.760 with like uh yeah i do think a lot of guys are checking out i think it's really that's really

00:58:32.940 unfortunate for everybody involved it's not like it's not like a viable long-term strategy for

00:58:36.920 anybody right right like you can't like that's not going to work but i i get why people are doing it

00:58:41.980 yeah it's the same you know it's the old uh what if women went on strike tomorrow thing the 0.68

00:58:46.580 feminists are always doing right like well and then you know then you would all recognize how 0.97

00:58:50.640 much you miss it like no that never works and it's not going to work the other direction especially 1.00

00:58:53.980 since there's literally no sympathy for men at least where women you know their tears mean

00:58:57.980 something sorry guys but uh you know the the the tears of men mean absolutely nothing like it will

00:59:02.900 it will never get you anything don't let anyone lie to you about that negative value actually

00:59:08.000 yeah yeah actually uh nixon says uh this happens on the first date don't even know them yeah man

00:59:12.980 that's that's wild uh that is an incredible uh yeah the dating market is as bad as everyone

00:59:19.340 says it is there's just there's no arguing with that one all right kevin well once again it's

00:59:23.980 been fantastic speaking with you everybody should go read his article it is very good and you can

00:59:29.260 actually just listen to it on substack which i'm very glad you did that you know it's at this point

00:59:33.400 it's mandatory if you're going to write an article of that size you have to let people

00:59:36.840 be able to listen to it we got things to do man we got things to do uh that said though if it's

00:59:41.560 your first time on this channel uh please go ahead and click subscribe bell notifications all

00:59:46.780 that stuff so you know when we go live if you want to get these podcasts as podcasts you need

00:59:51.080 to subscribe to our macintyre show on your favorite podcast platform thanks everybody

00:59:55.140 for watching and as always i'll talk to you next time

The Auron MacIntyre Show - September 14, 2026

Mom Is Working for Moloch ｜ Guest： Kevin Dolan ｜ 9⧸14⧸26

Episode Stats

Transcript