Trigger(nometry) warning: semi-conservative video.
I can’t remember who recommended I watch this video, which features satirist, author, and Triggernometry co-host Konstantin Kisin speaking for 15 minutes at a meeting of the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC). The group is described by Wikipedia as “an international organisation whose aim is to unite conservative voices and propose policy based on traditional Western values.”
The talk is laced with humor, but the message is serious: Kisin argues that societies based on “Western values” are the most attractive, as shown by the number of potential immigrants; but they are endangered by the negativity and “lies” of those who tell us that “our history is all bad and our country is plagued by prejudice and intolerance.” To that he replies that people espousing such sentiments still prefer to live in the West. (But of course that doesn’t mean that these factors still aren’t at play in the West!) Kisin then touts both Elon Musk (for “building big things”) and (oy) Jordan Peterson for “reminding us that our lives will improve if we accept that “honesty is better than lies, that responsibility is better than blame, and strength is better than weakness.”
He continues characterizing the West as special: “the most free and prosperous societies in the history of humanity, and we are going to keep them that way.” To accomplish that, he promotes free speech as the highest of Western values, and rejects identity politics, arguing that “multiethnic societies can work; multicultural societies cannot.” Finally, he claims that human beings are good, denying (as he avers) the woke view that “human beings are a pestilence on the planet.” Kisin calls for more reproduction and making energy “as cheap and abundant as possible.”
The talk finishes with the most inspiring thing Kising says he’s ever heard: that we’re going to die; ergo, we have nothing to lose. “We might as well speak the truth, we might as well reach for the stars, we might as well fight like our lives depended on it—because they do.” I’m not exactly sure what he means, nor do I feel uplifted or inspired by these words, which don’t really tell us why he thinks the tide is turning. And, at the end, I could see where this optimistic word salad came from: it’s in Wikipedia, too:
[The ARC] is associated with psychologist and political commentator Jordan Peterson. One Australian journalist identified the purpose of ARC as follows: “to replace a sense of division and drift within conservatism, and Western society at large, with a renewed cohesion and purpose”.
Do any readers get inspired by this kind of chest-pounding? I have to add that I do like Triggernometry, one of the few podcasts I can listen to, but I’m not especially energized by the co-host’s speech.
“We might as well speak the truth, we might as well reach for the stars, we might as well fight like our lives depended on it—because they do.”
I see this as extolling like-minded folks who still have some influence in our declining institutions to do something about it…rather than worry about losing reputation, esteem, and even their position and income.
To me, that seems much easier said than done. It will require some organization to distribute the risk…one or two professors standing up at a university that has been captured will simply get mauled and punted out of academia, and nothing will change.
Very probably true that standing up to campus group think can still be risky but higher ed administrators who permit ostracism-oriented and performatively-raging employees and students to harass and push out the wrong-thinking “other” suddenly face adverse consequences for their support of bigotry and exclusion. Adverse publicity and other forms of public and governmental pushback may help the educational cultural pendulum swing back toward enlightenment values. Including a search for objective rather than subjective truths. Or so I hope.
Saw this yesterday. While I find it difficult to disagree with Kisin, there is something that I am uncomfortable about.
edit … I don’t think Kisin is conservative. He was devastatingly critical of Britain’s Conservatives. But simply points out where he thinks they got it right.
Me too. Though there were some good points in there, I feel like I need a shower now.
I’ve mixed feelings about Kisin. I agree wholeheartedly with his positive comments on Western values and believe they are worth defending, but he often treads a thin line between that and xenophobia. Although he says ‘multiethnic societies can work; multicultural societies cannot’, he never comes across as a big fan of either and provides no evidence for the second part of that statement. Although I can’t blame him entirely for this, he’s very popular with the rightwing crowd on social media who endlessly post alarmist stories about no-go areas in London and how great England used to be when you saw mostly white faces on the bus and didn’t have to tolerate foreign languages in the street. It’s not exactly racist but it’s racism-adjacent. In the same way that it’s not racist to think we should monitor and control immigration, but if you meet someone at a party who talks incessantly about monitoring and controlling immigration, you smile and back away quickly.
I feel the same. Like Douglas Murray, he treads a thin line between Western values and xenophobia. Perhaps Murray already (probably?) has crossed that line, but still:
I like to watch them both. But certainly don’t accept all they say as “Sacred Truths”
I live in Norway and here we talk about “Svenske tilstander” (Swedish conditions) where multiculturaism certainly has failed. Sweden have turned 180 degree on their former liberal immigration politics (few years ago) and it’s understandable
Are there examples of either multi-ethnic or multi-cultural societies working well? That is, the different groups get along fine with little tension? I’m struggling to think of many.
If I think about the countries that seem to be the most content places to live (which is not the same as richest), they do seem to tend to be relatively small, single-ethnicity, single-culture nation states.
There are many examples of highly successful multi-ethnic societies. The US in the 1960s (not now) would be one example. Singapore (in 2025) would be another example. Successful multi-cultural societies? I can not think of any examples.
Canada.
Canada is much like Switzerland. The separate cultures live in separate regions. Not quite what the advocates of multi-culturalism have in mind.
“If I think about the countries that seem to be the most content places to live (which is not the same as richest), they do seem to tend to be relatively small, single-ethnicity, single-culture nation states.”
I don’t think the evidence supports this. Of course, there’s no definitive list but if you search up ‘happiest countries’ there are hardly any that are not wealthy. And several are clearly multiethnic, multicultural or both, including Brazil, Israel and Australia. Canada’s often there, a country that goes out of its way to promote multiculturalism. Switzerland is usually on the list too, a country so multi-ethnic that there is literally no such thing as Swiss ethnicity. Interestingly, Japan is never in the top 10 or even top 20, despite being renowned for both its wealth and its single ethnicity.
One recent list: https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabegleybloom/2024/03/19/ranked-the-20-happiest-countries-in-the-world-in-2024/
Brazil is hardly a success story
The values discourse is often a trick to avoid talking about race/ethnicity, which is the real thing that defines a “Western” country today (it used to be Christianity, but no longer). Many of the Western values touted are also only a few decades old, if you look at attitudes towards interracial marriage, homosexuality and the like.
I’m cool with calling them white Judeo-Christian values, what Kipling meant by the white man’s burden. If other races and cultures want to imbibe them and live according to them, more power to them. It’s a big tent. We just don’t want others cutting the guy ropes and pulling out the tent pegs because they are hostile to those values.
I thought that was pretty good when I heard it. His triggernometry podcast has many good guests and he and his partner are excellent interviewers.
D.A.
NYC
I think Kisin is drawing from this :
“There are no low-energy rich countries” :
energyforgrowth.org/article/how-does-energy-impact-economic-growth-an-overview-of-the-evidence/
… and the declining birth rate which in itself has ideologically been made into the goal of something like an ideological target function.
It’s complicated, right? As in, I’m not going to defend or refute these ideas here in comments – but I thought I’d put those ideas I’ve noticed up to connect Kisin’s lofty thought to.
It’s like he’s trying to deliver what religion sells, but without religion.
The short-sighted anthropocentrism and “Drill baby drill” attitude is disgusting to me and spoils any of his valid points. Judging from the posted excerpts, he seems to be the kind of conservative who hates environmentalism and does not see a place in the world for other species, nor for controlling global warming. He doesn’t just ignore other species, he also ignores the well-being of future generations of his own species.
I don’t think he has any science background at all. Such people are extremely susceptible to global warming denialism.
It’s an area where there’s been a huge of propaganda, funded by oil companies. I think they’ve stopped now but a huge swath of population has now been convinced.
I suspect he has a similar views as Leslie MacMillan below. He is probably not exactly a global-warming denialist but a person who does not care much about what happens to most of the people on the planet, or care about the other species that share our planet. He probably looks forward to turning Chicago into the new Miami and to being able to drill oil in the arctic without an ice cap to get in the way.
+1
I find irksome Kisin’s lecturing women to have more children. Perhaps he’d like to be women’s collective legal guardian or conservator and lead, guide and direct them in activities, procreative or otherwise. I’ll have to reconfirm if his motivation is economical like that of certain economists who view other people’s children as mere human “capital” and “resources.” I’d like to hear him define the Earth’s carrying capacity.
I think enthusiasts for the idea of western nations somehow increasing their birth rates to prevent ethnic suicide do privately acknowledge that this only works if African and Islamic infant mortality can be made, again somehow, to return to historical norms. From a carrying-capacity viewpoint, it doesn’t matter how many of them there are, only how much they eat and how much coal and oil they can afford to burn. And of course how effectively they can be prevented from reaching western shores and airports. Oceans and harsh deserts — cold or hot — are handy to have between oneself and excessive humanity one is rationally xenophobic about.
The western nations also have a carrying capacity.
Only ideologically self-imposed. The consequences of global warming will not mostly be borne by us. The most effective way to moderate our own emissions, if we should ever decide we seriously want to as a favour to poor foreigners, which we won’t, is to prevent immigration of low-emitting people where they turn into high emitters. Switching to electric cars is trivial by comparison.
I know I’m a disgusting human being.
Leslie, I wish I could watch an episode of Real Time with Bill Maher with you as a guest. The two of you riffing on current culture would have the audience howling with laughter while squirming a bit at uncomfortable truths. An interview to remember.
“I know I’m a disgusting human being.”
It’s hard to believe that you really don’t care about what happens to the rest of the world, or what happens to nature. But even if you really don’t care, logically you should still want the world to address global warming, because nothing pushes global immigration like having Bangladesh under water, etc. And even if the west’s efforts to stop global warming were only unilateral, this would still reduce the problem.
This will be my last comment (Da Roolz).
“Our greatest responsibility is to be good ancestors.”
Jonas Salk
As I have commented on multiple times, you are not a disgusting human being – just a short-sighted one.
To Leslie: Wait. Are saying you believe that westerners in favor of increased birth rates (of their “own kind”) secretly want more African and Muslim babies to die?
Can’t speak for Leslie but I’d guess that they want most of those babies to stay where they are, in the societies in which they were born.
I don’t agree that increased birthrates are a solution to anything BTW. Quite the contrary, in fact.
It will work if birth rates fall globally, which they do.
Watch this talk then from the same ARC meeting. “Demographic collapse” is a real problem for the first world and virtually all of the most desirable places to live in are experiencing it now. Countries can offset a lack of reproduction by allowing immigration but that’s not a long term solution. Deferred child bearing has national consequences because smaller young populations will be unable to care for the elderly, nor pay enough taxes to support them. This ends badly. Then where is the great country for all these aspiring immigrants to move to for a better life?
Yes, the Earth’s carrying capacity concerns but all demographers know the world’s population is set to contract. ‘Why vilify procreation and young peoples’ future with doomsday scenarios 50 years from now?’ is the point he’s making.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=F6KptpOuo7E&t=18s&pp=ygUZYXJjIGNvbmZlcmVuY2UgcG9wdWxhdGlvbg%3D%3D
I find it an interesting phenomenon that many of the inhabitants—of all races—of Western societies complain of racism and injustice endemic therein, yet non-Western immigrants continue to flock to Western shores. Of course, the detractors are driven by motives which I believe to be akin to Marxist ideals – plant seeds of division in hopes of receiving a bumper crop (lawsuits; destruction of status quo; et al.). Interestingly, it seems to me that many of the complainers come far closer to exhibiting racist tendencies than those they accuse thereof.
My spouse—non-European ancestry— came to this country as a student. After our marriage, and the subsequent and ongoing disintegration of her homeland, she became a citizen, and one earning a good living. Funny, but she doesn’t seem to see the problems that are so frequently touted by the haters – she sees opportunities for those who are willing to make an effort.
If you want to know what ARC is, then take a look at the About page on their website
https://www.arcforum.com/about
The wikipedia definition doesn’t capture this. ARC isn’t directly about right-wing politics (at all). It is more about articulating and developing a positive vision and solutions for society.
Peterson may be the poster-boy of the conference, but he isn’t the driving force.
The driving force is a fine, generous, and modest but steely person who you won’t have heard of (try and figure it out), because their leadership style doesn’t include (or require) self promotion, and who has a strong record of successfully implementing initiatives that have helped the less well off.
I don’t go to their meetings – I can’t afford it. But the vision is a good one in my view.
I saw a lot of the people I “know” at the ARC conference and just wanted to hear what their latest was. None disappointed. I’ve no idea who ARC is but just b/c something is left or right coded doesn’t effect the accuracy of what the guests are saying.
Sort of. Like…. you can put anything on The View in the head injury category and other “tells”. hehe
I listened to a few people I didn’t know and they weren’t crazy or stupid. I’m not right wing. I’m a tad left of center (like PCCE or Sam Harris) socially and think the left has beclowned itself esp in the last decade. A decade that has seen more social change than the 1960s as I see it. I was never OK with left’s childish economic ideas. (I was an equities/options trader and venture capitalist earlier in my life so I’m very happy with markets and capitalism.)
And very happy – as anybody over 50 should appreciate – the internet provides a really full variety of opinions. We didn’t get that growing up enough.
D.A.
NYC
Konstantin Kisin was born in the Soviet Union and this has affected his outlook considerably.
Konstantin Kisin first came to my attention when I was referred (I think from something on this
blogwebsite) to an article of his, The Day the Delusions Died, a short must-read, with the money quote: “Many people woke up on October 7 sympathetic to parts of woke ideology and went to bed that evening questioning how they had signed on to a worldview that had nothing to say about the mass rape and murder of innocent people by terrorists.”I then (and therefore) read his book, An Immigrant’s Love Letter to the West, the best non-fiction book I read last year; I highly recommend it to everyone. One does not have to agree with everything he says (as has been pointed out on this very website on a large number of occasions) to extract quite a bit of value from his thoughts. I absolutely disagree with his anti-environmentalism, but (and I recognize the validity of Frau Katze’s statement, “Konstantin Kisin was born in the Soviet Union and this has affected his outlook considerably” in #9 above) it’s hard to argue against the idea that the West is best–at least if one counts as valid people voting with their feet–a point that he stresses, along with the value of free speech, and the fact that the far left is trying to destroy this culture (which ironically has given them the freedom to attempt), even though they pretend that what they are striving for is justice (does anyone believe that??).
I’ve known several Russians; they uniformly loathe Russia. Similarly, my wife has taught ESL to numerous Iranians; listening to her recount what they have to say about Iran will blister your ears; the only thing they like about Iran is that they are no longer there. In #7, above, Dan W comments about his wife “she doesn’t seem to see the problems that are so frequently touted by the haters – she sees opportunities for those who are willing to make an effort.” Can one say that about Russia? Or Iran?
PS: There is a generous selection of quotes from the Kisin book at his Wikiquote page. I limit myself to just one here:
“The radical left is the home of the unhappy—and how best to create more miserable people than to break down the roots that give us security, stability and fulfilment?”
To your question of “Do any readers get inspired by this kind of chest-pounding?” Yes. It feels good to laugh and be reminded that I am not alone. Optimism is a good thing, often missing from conversations.
It did something for me. I quite like Konstantin Kisin, I particularly liked the comment about Elon Musk as well as the video’s general message.
The explanation why can be that I am an optimist in general and techno optimist in particular, one of those people who think that climate change should be solved with technology, that we should do ambitious projects (like putting people on Mars) and am leaning towards the opinion that scientific and technological progress has slowed down in last decades (I work in academia). Moreover, I am European and Europe has been lagging behind in these areas, but hopefully the lost of reliable US will wake it up.
Kisin is basically a business conservative. Which isn’t a bad thing, but he has the belief that the UK can grow themselves out of their current crisis through tax cuts – which is a prime example of motivated reasoning. The UKs problems are in good part structural due to demographics and in good part driven by inequality – primarily of wealth.
His “cheap energy” spiel is just the cover for the brutal truth, that he has given up on collective action and wants to choose “Antagonism” over “Cooperation” in the prisoner’s dilemma of climate change.