Special Note: Palladium Magazine will host a talk on September 10th in the Bay on my piece The Native Americans Before the Native Americans. Reserve your seats!

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib talks to Brian Chau. A graduate of the University of Waterloo and former software engineer with a background in pure mathematics, today Chau is CEO of Effort.News. He was previously with The Alliance for the Future.

Most of this conversation is around why it took so long to put together something like Effort.News, and what they’ve discovered (e.g., “The 19th-century Family Fortunes Funding Degrowth”). Chau also discusses their recruitment and capital needs as a seed-stage startup.

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

Share

Transcript

Transcript (PDF)

Today Razib talks to Kyle Orton. Orton is a freelance researcher, writer, and editor specializing in security and foreign policy, with a particular focus on the Middle East, the Syrian war, regional geopolitics, and terrorist movements including the Islamic State (ISIS), Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). His work also ranges widely across history, including early Christianity, Islam and its relationship with the West, intelligence and espionage, the Reformation, the English Civil War, Tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union, the First World War, Communism and the Cold War, and pre-Revolutionary Iran. Orton writes the newsletter It Can Always Get Worse, where he covers contemporary security issues alongside history, religion, intelligence, books, and occasional film reviews. His writing has appeared in publications including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, UnHerd, Newsweek, The Independent, The New Arab, and International Business Times.

Orton and Razib’s conversation begins with his post, The Sojourn of Arculf: An Eyewitness to “Early Islamic” Jerusalem - A Frankish bishop sheds some light on a historical dark age. Their discussion continues with probing the possibility that Islam as we know it truly did not exist any recognizable form before the 690s AD, and that the early “Saracens” as their Christian enemies referred to them were in fact a schismatic group of monotheists whose beliefs were adjacent to that of the Jews. Orton also discusses the role of Muhammad, or rather, the lack of the role of Muhammad, in the early years of the Islamic Caliphate. They also explore the possibility that later commentators largely attributed the negative reputation of Islam’s first dynastic Caliphate, the Umayyads, to the reality that they would not recognize them as Muslims. Finally, Orton talks about the reality that some of the layers of text within the Koran seem far older than the time of Muhammad, perhaps by a century or so.

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

Share

Read more

Today Razib talks to Kyle Orton. Orton is a freelance researcher, writer, and editor specializing in security and foreign policy, with a particular focus on the Middle East, the Syrian war, regional geopolitics, and terrorist movements including the Islamic State (ISIS), Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). His work also ranges widely across history, including early Christianity, Islam and its relationship with the West, intelligence and espionage, the Reformation, the English Civil War, Tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union, the First World War, Communism and the Cold War, and pre-Revolutionary Iran. Orton writes the newsletter It Can Always Get Worse, where he covers contemporary security issues alongside history, religion, intelligence, books, and occasional film reviews. His writing has appeared in publications including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, UnHerd, Newsweek, The Independent, The New Arab, and International Business Times.

Orton and Razib’s conversation begins with his post, The Sojourn of Arculf: An Eyewitness to “Early Islamic” Jerusalem - A Frankish bishop sheds some light on a historical dark age. Their discussion continues with probing the possibility that Islam as we know it truly did not exist any recognizable form before the 690s AD, and that the early “Saracens” as their Christian enemies referred to them were in fact a schismatic group of monotheists whose beliefs were adjacent to that of the Jews. Orton also discusses the role of Muhammad, or rather, the lack of the role of Muhammad, in the early years of the Islamic Caliphate. They also explore the possibility that later commentators largely attributed the negative reputation of Islam’s first dynastic Caliphate, the Umayyads, to the reality that they would not recognize them as Muslims. Finally, Orton talks about the reality that some of the layers of text within the Koran seem far older than the time of Muhammad, perhaps by a century or so.

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

Share

Read more

Razib and Hogue-Spears first talk abut China's rapid AI development, driven by provincial initiatives and significant investments in infrastructure. Hogue-Spears emphasizes China's focus on practical AI applications, contrasting it with the U.S.'s emphasis on AGI. He predicts China's dominance in AI, particularly in embodied AI, and warns of the potential global impact if China surpasses the U.S. in AI development. The conversation highlights the striking differences between the U.S. and Chinese technological ecosystems.

Note: This podcast was recorded before Jason Arday’s death. It is now being posted with minor edits (removed a few off-color jokes about the late professor).

Today Razib talks to Gabriel Rossman, a sociologist at UCLA. The author of Climbing the Charts: What Radio Airplay Tells Us about the Diffusion of Innovation, Rossman takes a deeply analytic toolkit to questions such as why 2005’s “My Humps” became a viral hit.

Razib Khan and Rossman discuss the scandal surrounding Dr. Jason Arday, a sociologist of education at Cambridge, who was exposed for plagiarism and fabricating his credentials. Arday claimed to have run 30 marathons in 35 days and raised $5 million, which were later found to be false. The conversation highlights the poor quality of his research, which relied heavily on autoethnography, a method criticized for its subjectivity. They also discuss the broader issues of ideological capture in academia, particularly in sociology, and the challenges of maintaining academic integrity amidst political biases. The discussion centers on the perception and reality of sociology, particularly the impact of political ideologies on academic engagement. Rossman, a conservative sociologist, notes the open-mindedness of most sociologists and the importance of apolitical basic science.

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

Share

Read more

Human evolutionary genomics is going through the best of times and the worst of times. We know so much more than we did at the turn of the century, but we are so much less certain about the broad overall narrative of our species’ genesis within and without Africa. An elegant and legible story has given way to complexification; the scientific preference for parsimony has had to yield ground out of necessity to the simultaneous march of ancient DNA and computational genomics in the last 25 years. The elegant house of “Out of Africa,” constructed in the late 20th century via the synthesis of paleoanthropology and molecular genetics, is now looking a bit worn and shabby a generation into the new century. But there won’t be any tear down here; there’s nothing to replace our current understanding. We face an impasse as we grasp at novel findings and probe into the dark with uncertainty.

Today, our understanding of human evolutionary origins is undergoing repeated revisions and renovations. New wings are being added helter-skelter to an already sprawling edifice; alternative paths are being laid down by the startling findings of ancient DNA, with a fresh dab of theoretical paint here and there to cover up incongruities. Something new is coming into shape, but it is yet incomplete, and so ‌definitive answers elude our grasp. A host of powerful new techniques are bombarding the old orthodoxies with result after result, modification, update, and iteration. Now researchers have begun questioning exactly how well they understand the correct shape of the past that they once opined on with such certainty to the public. Over and over, the simple power of ancient DNA has thrown a wrench into the consensus models and established orthodoxies. A generation ago, we imagined that Homo sapiens, “thinking man,” emerged fully formed in Africa over 100,000 years ago and swept away all our monstrous kin before us through dint of our sheer genius. Today, it seems more likely that it was we who were the monsters out of the dark, the demons about which Neanderthal mothers would tell their little-ones.

The exceptional race (no more)

In 2002’s The Dawn of Human Culture, Stanford paleoanthropologist Richard Klein presented what at that time was the standard model of the recent origins of humanity. Some time before 50,000 years ago, a new form of human arose through some sort of mutational jump. Klein posited that our genius, our superiority, was because of a macromutation that enabled us to generate fully articulate language. Before the emergence of this new species of human, there were many varieties of human, or, more precisely, hominin. Neanderthals in Europe and Central Asia, various “archaic” lineages in eastern Eurasia, and also descendants of other Homo forms in Africa.Ω humans, whom many popular slogans would refer to as “Africans,” rapidly swept away all these varieties of humanity after 50,000 years.

And so it was for a decade. There were dissents; in 2006 Jeffrey Wall and Michael Hammer published Archaic admixture in the human genome. This paper reflected suspicion among many evolutionary geneticists that the orthodoxy promulgated was too pat and simplistic (see also Magnus Nordborg’s 1998 On the Probability of Neanderthal Ancestry). But‌ despite an underground counter-consensus, very few evolutionary geneticists were vocal on this issue in public, no matter the private grumblings they may have had (Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending’s 2009 book, The 10000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution, was the exception to the rule). This all changed in 2010, when Svante Paabo and colleagues reported that Neanderthal whole genomes yielded strong evidence of several percent admixture into non-Africans, as well as the discovery of a new human lineage in eastern Eurasia, the Denisovans, who also contributed about 5% of the ancestry of Papuans.

Previous work had almost entirely been a matter of inference derived from contemporary populations. You looked at genetic variation in people alive today and worked backward to plausible models of how that variation could have arisen. In the 1980s, geneticists examined mitochondrial lineages, which represent the direct matrilineal genealogy. Geneticists noticed that all non-African populations nested within African genetic variation. They soon replicated this result with the Y chromosome, passed only through males, and the autosomes (markers on chromosomes 1 through 22) representing the whole genetic heritage. These results neatly dovetailed with the findings of paleoanthropologists like Chris Stringer of the British Museum of Natural History, who argued that modern human morphology, mostly exemplified by traits in human skulls, reflected continuity with African Homo, and not Neanderthals. Following the molecular genetic results, researchers applied similar phylogenetic methods to morphometric traits and discovered the same pattern of non-Africans nesting within African variation.

It was an immaculate and tidy story. The broader public became very familiar with this narrative not just because of the scientific literature, but through documentary series like Nova’s 1987 Children of Eve or Spencer Wells’ 2000 Journey of Man, the latter of which was viewed by tens of millions. It’s no surprise that the first ten minutes of Journey of Man lead up to Wells boarding a flight to Africa, where he reassures us that the human story began.

And that still seems to be much of the story. But not the entire story. Over the last few years, geneticists have concluded that a much higher fraction of non-African DNA was originally Neanderthal. In an interview with Dwarkesh Patel Harvard’s David Reich asserted that as much as 10-20% of the overall heritage of early non-Africans, just as they were expanding out of the Near East 50,000 years ago, may have been Neanderthal. How then is that today we detect only about 2% Neanderthal genes outside of Africa? The genome rapidly sheds genetically incompatible segments within a few thousand years via purifying selection. Because Neanderthals diverged from our predominantly African ancestors 600 to 700,000 years ago, their overall genetic makeup exhibited much more striking incompatibilities with the expanding Africans than occurs when different branches of our own species mix (the deepest division in our own lineage dates to about 200,000 years, when Khoisan ancestors diverged from everyone else). No doubt the same phenomenon applied to Denisovan admixture, which today in some Oceanian populations, like those in New Guinea or the indigenous populations of the Philippines, approaches 5% or so.

What does this all mean? Because natural selection changes allele frequencies in ways that are out of step with the overall genome, the signatures that we get from modern and ancient DNA are deceptive as to the demographic dynamics of early anatomically modern humans and the Neanderthals (and Denisovans) whom they encountered. All the evidence, both ancient and modern, points to a tiny non-African ancestry population between 50 and 60,000 years ago, a few thousand individuals at most (some models posit a bottleneck of 200 breeding individuals!). If 10-20% of the ancestry of the early modern human expansion, also known as the Initial Upper Paleolithic (IUP), was Neanderthal, that implies the integration of hundreds of Neanderthals, as opposed to ten or twenty. What might the cultural implications of this be? Perhaps early modern humans integrated some Neanderthal folkways, and even loan-words from the Neanderthal ur-language? The reduction of Neanderthal ancestry was a genomic-scale process that took approximately 1,000 years, during which cultural exchange could still have occurred in the mixed individuals.

Read more

First, they talk about the economic and social impact of socialism in Venezuela under Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro. Di Martino describes the country's decline, including hyperinflation, shortages, and corruption, leading to a significant emigration of 30% of the population. Di Martino also discusses the potential for Venezuela's freedom under the Trump administration and his ongoing work on immigration and economic policy. He advocates for a selective, high-skilled immigration policy in the U.S., emphasizing its economic benefits and the need for a moral approach to enforcement. They discuss Di Martino's report, The Fiscal Impact of Immigration, and how Indians in America fit into that picture more precisely.

As I note in this monologue, I am sitting on a podcast previously recorded about Jason Arday because of his recent death. Instead, I’m posting my thoughts about what happened before he died, and since then, and how it relates to Nathan Cofnas.

Links:

• DEI Fraud and Cover-Up at Cambridge-University refuses to investigate DEI star’s plagiarism

• Institutional Failures in the Garden of Great Intellects

• Professor’s Death Leaves Behind Hard Questions for Cambridge on Race and Hiring

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

Share

As I note in this monologue, I am sitting on a podcast previously recorded about Jason Arday because of his recent death. Instead, I’m posting my thoughts about what happened before he died, and since then, and how it relates to Nathan Cofnas.

Links:

• DEI Fraud and Cover-Up at Cambridge-University refuses to investigate DEI star’s plagiarism

• Institutional Failures in the Garden of Great Intellects

• Professor’s Death Leaves Behind Hard Questions for Cambridge on Race and Hiring

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

Share

Steve Sailer is an American journalist and blogger, born in 1958 in Los Angeles, who worked in market research before turning to full-time writing in the 1990s, contributing to National Review, The American Conservative, Taki's Magazine, and the webzine VDARE, as well as his long-running personal blog. He is best known for coining the term "human biodiversity" (HBD) and for pioneering a data-heavy style of commentary on race, immigration, IQ, crime, and demographics. This approach made him persona non grata in mainstream outlets. Long relegated to the fringes and often labeled a race-science promoter by critics, he published an anthology, Noticing, in 2024.

In the first hour, Razib and Hanania discuss his career, his use of social media, and his new book. They delve into the rise of populism, defining it as a movement that divides society into righteous masses and corrupt elites. Hanania argues that populism often leads to poor economic performance and authoritarianism. They also touch on the impact of AI on the legal profession, the role of social media in amplifying fringe views, and the challenges of immigration and institutional trust. Hanania expresses a preference for a merit-based immigration system and criticizes the identitarian deference on both the left and right. In the second hour, Razib and Sailer discuss the demographic and economic changes in Southern California, highlighting the impact of Latino immigration and the rise of new immigrant groups from the former Soviet Union. They recount the environmental movement's role in halting development in Beverly Hills and the potential of robot taxis to transform urban commuting. Sailer reflects on the decline of Chicago's Fortune 500 companies and the challenges faced by cities built on water transport. They also discuss the evolution of race and IQ debates and the importance of affirmative action in diverse fields. Likely to the surprise of many Sailer defends affirmative action for black Americans. He also expresses optimism for the future, despite the current political climate.

Steve Sailer is an American journalist and blogger, born in 1958 in Los Angeles, who worked in market research before turning to full-time writing in the 1990s, contributing to National Review, The American Conservative, Taki's Magazine, and the webzine VDARE, as well as his long-running personal blog. He is best known for coining the term "human biodiversity" (HBD) and for pioneering a data-heavy style of commentary on race, immigration, IQ, crime, and demographics. This approach made him persona non grata in mainstream outlets. Long relegated to the fringes and often labeled a race-science promoter by critics, he published an anthology, Noticing, in 2024.

In the first hour, Razib and Hanania discuss his career, his use of social media, and his new book. They delve into the rise of populism, defining it as a movement that divides society into righteous masses and corrupt elites. Hanania argues that populism often leads to poor economic performance and authoritarianism. They also touch on the impact of AI on the legal profession, the role of social media in amplifying fringe views, and the challenges of immigration and institutional trust. Hanania expresses a preference for a merit-based immigration system and criticizes the identitarian deference on both the left and right. In the second hour, Razib and Sailer discuss the demographic and economic changes in Southern California, highlighting the impact of Latino immigration and the rise of new immigrant groups from the former Soviet Union. They recount the environmental movement's role in halting development in Beverly Hills and the potential of robot taxis to transform urban commuting. Sailer reflects on the decline of Chicago's Fortune 500 companies and the challenges faced by cities built on water transport. They also discuss the evolution of race and IQ debates and the importance of affirmative action in diverse fields. Likely to the surprise of many Sailer defends affirmative action for black Americans. He also expresses optimism for the future, despite the current political climate.

Nikolai Yakovenko is back on the podcast because of the Hugging Face hack. Yakovenko is a former professional poker player, and was a research scientist at Google, Twitter and Nvidia. With a decade in computer science, Yakovenko has been at the forefront of the large-language-model revolution that has driven to prominence companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, and DeepMind, and an ecosystem that has birthed hundreds of smaller startups. He is also the founder of DeepNewz, an AI-driven news startup. His latest startup is HuggingNews.

Razib and Yakovenko talk about the implications of OpenAI’s inadvertent hack of Hugging Face, and whether he has been too sanguine about the possibility of AI-apocalypse. Though Yakovenko hasn’t gone full doomer, he admits that this sort of behavior by AI agents is alarming. That being said, he cautions we need to keep perspective. They also discuss predictions of the coming obsolescence of software engineers…Yakovenko notes that in some ways Dario Amodei was correct to predict the end of software engineering as a profession: very few write code unaided by LLMs today. In a few years, many professions, especially in tech, have transformed, but warnings of mass unemployment have not materialized.

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

Share

Today, Razib talks to internet personality Werner K. Zagrebi. A statistics and machine learning student at Carnegie Mellon University, Zagrebi has led a peripatetic existence over the past few years, from being Curt Yarvin’s personal assistant and editor of Gray Mirror, and working to launch a media company and think tank . Of late, he has been posting …

Read more

Today, Razib talks to Collin Hogue-Spears, a cybersecurity and artificial intelligence governance expert with more than 20 years of experience in technology, product management, federal compliance and software security. He serves as Senior Director of Solution Management at Black Duck, where he focuses on application security, regulatory compliance and emerging risks associated with AI. Hogue-Spears is also an independent researcher and the author of From Lab to Life: How AI Works in China. His analysis has appeared in publications including The Wall Street Journal and Politico.

Razib and Hogue-Spears first talk abut China’s rapid AI development, driven by provincial initiatives and significant investments in infrastructure. Hogue-Spears emphasizes China’s focus on practical AI applications, contrasting it with the U.S.’s emphasis on AGI. He predicts China’s dominance in AI, particularly in embodied AI, and warns of the potential global impact if China surpasses the U.S. in AI development. The conversation highlights the striking differences between the U.S. and Chinese technological ecosystems.

Subscribe now

Share

Give a gift subscription

Read more

Razib and Scharf discuss the growth and appeal of Austin, Texas, highlighting its booming tech scene and business environment. Scharf discusses why he moved from San Diego during the COVID-19 pandemic. They compare Austin's population growth to other major cities, noting Austin's rapid expansion from 400,000 in 1990 to over a million in 2020. They also talk about the impact of autonomous vehicles, the potential for high-speed rail, and the importance of infrastructure and talent in sustaining Austin's future growth. The conversation touches on the broader Texas Triangle and its economic significance to the American economy today and in the future. They highlight the libertarian and business-friendly environment in Texas, allowing for significant developments like Tesla's Gigafactory (the world's second-largest building), and the planned Terfab. Razib compares Austin and San Antonio, noting the former's rapid growth and the challenges it faces, such as infrastructure and housing. They also touch on the cultural and economic dynamics in Texas, emphasizing the importance of storytelling and narrative in shaping the state's future.

Maxwell Meyer is an American writer, editor, and technology-policy professional known for his optimistic advocacy of capitalism, technological progress, and American civic renewal. A native of Iowa, he studied geophysics at Stanford University, received a Boren Award to pursue language study and research in Israel and the Middle East, and served as editor-in-chief of the Stanford Review. Meyer later worked as policy chief of staff to venture capitalist Joe Lonsdale at 8VC and founded Arena Magazine, a print and digital publication focused on technology, enterprise, culture, and civilizational progress. His essays and reporting have appeared in The Free Press, Quillette, and other publications, covering subjects ranging from SpaceX and Silicon Valley to politics, religion, and American identity.

Razib interviews Meyer Arena Magazine’s focus on high-quality print content amidst the rise of AI-generated low-quality content. Arena, which has been publishing for two years, aims to provide a positive, pro-America perspective on technology and industry. Meyer discusses the magazine’s unique position as a tech-right publication, its strategic use of AI for administrative tasks, and its appeal to both reading and non-reading subscribers who value its aesthetic. They also touch on the broader political and economic implications of AI and the future of work, emphasizing the importance of individual choice and innovation over community input.

Subscribe now

Share

Give a gift subscription

Read more

On this episode, Razib talks to Daniel Di Martino, a Venezuelan-born economist, speaker, and fellow at the Manhattan Institute, where his research centers on immigration policy, including selection, assimilation, and high-skilled migration. Born in 1999 and raised in Venezuela, he witnessed firsthand the impacts of socialism, including hyperinflation and shortages, which prompted him to immigrate to the United States in 2016. He earned a BA in Quantitative Economics from Indiana University and a PhD in Economics from Columbia University. He writes for publications such as City Journal, and USA Today, and serves on the board of advisors for Young America’s Foundation while sitting on New Jersey’s advisory committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

First, they talk about the economic and social impact of socialism in Venezuela under Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro. Di Martino describes the country’s decline, including hyperinflation, shortages, and corruption, leading to a significant emigration of 30% of the population. Di Martino also discusses the potential for Venezuela’s freedom under the Trump administration and his ongoing work on immigration and economic policy. He advocates for a selective, high-skilled immigration policy in the U.S., emphasizing its economic benefits and the need for a moral approach to enforcement. They discuss Di Martino’s report, The Fiscal Impact of Immigration, and how Indians in America fit into that picture more precisely.

Subscribe now

Give a gift subscription

Share

Read more

Razib Khan interviews Destiny about his current position on the center-left, with the rise of the far left and the ascendancy of MAGA. Destiny criticizes Trump's foreign policy as irresponsible and incoherent, citing examples like the Venezuela invasion and the Iran situation. He also discusses the challenges of defining political labels, the impact of social media on political discourse, and the need for better messaging from the Democratic Party. He emphasizes the importance of nuanced discussions on issues like transgender rights and foreign policy. Razib and Destiny touch on cultural war issues, particularly the left's obsession with racial identity and the right's response. They debate the impact of DEI policies versus the DOJ's actions under Trump. Destiny argues that conservatives' disengagement from cultural institutions led to their current dominance by the left. They also discuss the media's role in shaping public perception and the decline of ideological debate due to social media echo chambers. The conversation touches on the MAGA movement's reliance on Trump and the lack of genuine engagement in modern political discourse.

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning we have a double-feature with Richard Hanania and Steve Sailer. Hanania holds a law degree from the University of Chicago and a PhD in political science from UCLA, and was previously a research fellow at Columbia University’s Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies. He founded the Center for the Study of Partisanship and Ideology (CSPI) and writes the popular Substack newsletter Richard Hanania’s Newsletter, where he covers politics, foreign policy, and social science from a heterodox, broadly libertarian-leaning perspective; his book The Origins of Woke argued that civil rights law, rather than culture alone, drives modern identity politics. His latest book is Kakistocracy: Why Populism Ends in Disaster.

Steve Sailer is an American journalist and blogger, born in 1958 in Los Angeles, who worked in market research before turning to full-time writing in the 1990s, contributing to National Review, The American Conservative, Taki’s Magazine, and the webzine VDARE, as well as his long-running personal blog. He is best known for coining the term “human biodiversity” (HBD) and for pioneering a data-heavy style of commentary on race, immigration, IQ, crime, and demographics. This approach made him persona non grata in mainstream outlets. Long relegated to the fringes and often labeled a race-science promoter by critics, he published an anthology, Noticing, in 2024.

In the first hour, Razib and Hanania discuss his career, his use of social media, and his new book. They delve into the rise of populism, defining it as a movement that divides society into righteous masses and corrupt elites. Hanania argues that populism often leads to poor economic performance and authoritarianism. They also touch on the impact of AI on the legal profession, the role of social media in amplifying fringe views, and the challenges of immigration and institutional trust. Hanania expresses a preference for a merit-based immigration system and criticizes the identitarian deference on both the left and right. In the second hour, Razib and Sailer discuss the demographic and economic changes in Southern California, highlighting the impact of Latino immigration and the rise of new immigrant groups from the former Soviet Union. They recount the environmental movement’s role in halting development in Beverly Hills and the potential of robot taxis to transform urban commuting. Sailer reflects on the decline of Chicago’s Fortune 500 companies and the challenges faced by cities built on water transport. They also discuss the evolution of race and IQ debates and the importance of affirmative action in diverse fields. Likely to the surprise of many Sailer defends affirmative action for black Americans. He also expresses optimism for the future, despite the current political climate.

Subscribe now

Share

Give a gift subscription

Read more

Razib and Robertson discuss the political and economic challenges facing the UK, particularly since the 2019 election and Brexit. Robertson highlights the shift in political allegiances, with the working class moving from Labour to the Tories, and the subsequent rise of Nigel Farage's Reform UK party. They address issues like economic stagnation, high energy costs, and the impact of net-zero policies. Robertson criticizes the inherited socialist Fabian agenda of Labour and the lack of integration among new immigrants. They also touch on the rise of radical Islam and the need for stronger national identity and sovereignty. The conversation concludes with the announcement of CPAC UK, aiming to unite conservative movements globally.