From Disgust to Cringe to Vitalism: Examining the Evolution of Cultural Frameworks

In this insightful discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the evolution of cultural frameworks in modern society, tracing the transition from disgust-based morality to cringe culture, and ultimately to the emerging age of vitalism. The couple delves into the factors that have driven these shifts and the implications for our understanding of morality, identity, and social norms. Malcolm and Simone begin by examining the era of Protestant Christianity's dominance in the United States, characterized by a disgust-based moral framework that often led to the persecution of marginalized groups, such as the LGBTQ+ community. They argue that the recognition of the flaws in this system led to its eventual downfall and the rise of cringe culture, which relied on secondhand embarrassment and conformity to shape social norms. The discussion then turns to the emergence of vitalism, a cultural framework that celebrates individuals who unapologetically embrace their identity and break free from the constraints of cringe culture. Malcolm and Simone highlight examples of vitalistic figures, such as Tiger King and Donald Trump, and explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of this approach. Throughout the conversation, the couple emphasizes the importance of personal choice in belief systems, the value of austerity, and the role of faith in shaping one's outlook on humanity's future. They also touch on the concept of anti-racism as an ontological framework and the potential for anti-DEI consulting to promote meritocracy and combat bigotry in the workplace.

Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] I think it was the recognition that disgust based morality was leading to immoral actions. Like the persecution. No, hear me out here. I genuinely think it was the disgust based morality caused the persecution of LGBT individuals that led to the destruction of that system. Because That's not

Simone Collins: just how ridiculous it ultimately was.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Cause many people were like, why am I attacking somebody for something about themselves that they can't change? I think it's the new cultural framework that is going to dominate in the next age, which is the age of vitalism. So vitalism I would define as A cultural framework that sells itself with a love of existence and a love of being who you are unapologetically. One of the problems with the vitalist system, I'll also explain why it's going to potentially eventually crash, is often the people who care the least about how [00:01:00] society judges them like us, for example because of that, they lack a general moral framework and they'll just do narcissistic stuff all the time in a way that like the Tiger King or Trump does, right?

Would you like to know more?

Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. We are going to be discussing a very interesting topic today, and there's going to be a long amble at the end of this because sometimes we just have casual conversations before them. And we had a really interesting one before this episode, but I'm going to be discussing a concept That I have been thinking about personally, and a fan sent me some ideas that actually helped me flesh out this concept into a broader concept about how our society functions and where we are moving as a society and a, a realistic path through the pervading nihilism of our current age.

This story starts in the age of our childhood or our parents when the [00:02:00] dominant cultural group in the country was Protestant Christianity. These were the days of the satanic panic and a lot of the anti gay stuff and stuff like that.

Simone Collins: We're talking the 80s, early 90s.

Malcolm Collins: There was, and I love this.

Some people still think we're there. Like they still think like the Republicans are like the anti gay party or something like that. It's freaking insane. Like I cannot, it's insane. 45 percent of gay men voted for Trump, by the way. Like we are no longer in that the gay party and the non gay party.

Society has done a 180 since then. But anyway, back to what we were saying here. Or at least that was one study. Some people go, it's only one study. Yeah, because it doesn't agree with what you want to believe. You just throw it out. We need to take it back here. In that world, While there was a philosophical structure for what the conservative ideology was, like the Christian philosophical structure, everything like that, it wasn't that [00:03:00] philosophical structure that motivated individual action.

Voting and decision making among the Republican Party when they were communicating was the mob, I guess you could call it. Specifically, the way that they communicated was through disgust. And by that, what I mean is they're like, doesn't it disgust you when you see gay people kissing, for example?

Therefore, we should ban that. Doesn't it disgust you when you see, X or Y, like that is how they motivated the export of their cultural value system. And in reaction to that interestingly, the far left begin to deify. Things that disgusted them. That was how they fought this.

And you actually see this in leftist art. One thing I always mention is that Van Der Hoeven, he's being interviewed about Star Trek Troopers. Really, you should watch our Star Trek Troopers video if you haven't seen it. I think it's one of the best that we've done. But in the interview, he was like, I was [00:04:00] surprised that people didn't realize it was supposed to be a parody against ultra right wingism.

Because everyone I casted in it, And I thought that people would recognize that meant that it was supposed to be evil, like they were supposed to be evil, like bad guys. And I just love this world perspective of, if a thing is beautiful, it is therefore evil. And you actually see this in a lot of post modernism and stuff like this.

And it actually helps me understand a little bit of the hatred of us. We've gotten online hate for naming our kids after bad guys. Romans like Octavian, for example. They're like, this is a sign. We're Scandinavians.

Simone Collins: We get heat for that too.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. The Roman one is more interesting to me because we actually do have Scandinavian heritage.

That is your family's original last name before Ellis Island. The Roman one is interesting because I don't have Roman heritage. Romans were not white Romans, subjugated and enslaved white people. They were a Mediterranean population group. I guess if you want to call them white. You can.

Historically in the United States they were not treated as white. Italian immigrants were not treated [00:05:00] as white immigrants. They were treated very badly. Yeah

Simone Collins: Irish weren't treated as white immigrants either, in many ways,

Malcolm Collins: and this is why, probably, the Hispanic immigrant group today that is seen as a separate ethnic group is not going to be seen as a separate ethnic group.

They're no less white than Italians. But anyway yeah, Italians had a problem with organized crime and everything too so remember that. Where was I going with this? Oh yeah but why do I elevate this cultural group that stomped mine, right? That civilized us, right?

They took us when we were savages. In the woods, worshiping stones and stuff like that. And they brought us a different system. And I think that system made us better. And then we went out and we exported that system all over the world. This was period of imperialism. And a lot of people are like, Oh, that was such a horrible thing.

And I think that they capture something true about us when they're like, why do you look up to the Romans? We don't look up to Romans because we are the Romans. We look up to th