Category Archives: Culture war

Eva Vlaardingerbroek’s Stark Warning About the Future of the West

'We are dealing with an enemy who wants to play God'

Eva Vlaardingerbroek delivers a forceful warning (video, 14 minutes) about what she sees as a growing crisis in Western civilisation, arguing that conservatives cannot effectively defend their values without returning to faith, morality and belief in God. Speaking at the National Conservatism Conference, Vlaardingerbroek argues that the political and cultural battles facing the West are not simply about elections or policy, but about fundamental questions of truth, morality and human nature. She criticises what she describes as globalist attempts to reshape society and warns about the rise of transhumanism, pointing to technologies such as Neuralink and artificial wombs as examples of humanity increasingly attempting to alter or transcend the limits of human nature. Vlaardingerbroek also argues that conservatives should stop being hesitant about discussing religion in public life. In her view, younger generations are looking for moral clarity in a world that has become increasingly uncertain and relativistic. Among her strongest arguments is her warning that transhumanism could be presented as a technological solution to humanity’s problems while ultimately creating a new set of dangers.

Why the New Atheist Movement “Collapsed”

Video with Stephen Meyer.

Dr. Stephen Meyer joins Michael Knowles to analyze the cultural and intellectual collapse of the “New Atheism” movement that peaked in the mid-2000s.

Meyer argues that prominent atheist apologists overplayed their philosophical hand by chaining their worldview to strict Darwinian materialism while actively avoiding major modern scientific breakthroughs. He breaks down how 100 years of discoveries in cosmology, cosmic fine-tuning, and cellular biology have continuously challenged materialistic assumptions by pointing toward a definitive beginning and intelligent design. The conversation also explores the philosophical flaws in popular secular arguments, including the common misapplication of Occam’s Razor to the concept of God. Ultimately, they track the modern cultural shift that has led unexpected secular intellectuals, and even Richard Dawkins himself, to publicly re-evaluate the foundational necessity of the Christian worldview.

Why women are easily manipulated

Explained by a woman here.

Essentially, in the past women needed affirmation by the group much more than men, because of their inferior physical strength. Men, at least masculine men, can afford to stand up against the ‘herd mentality’ of a group when they think it’s wrong. Because, if they get cast out, they can, with some effort, survive. Women, on average, would have much more difficulty surviving. So they risk standing up against the group much less.

The Successful Revolutionary “Long-March” Through Our Institutions

Article by Boyd Cathey.

Excerpt:

Yet, Soros fits Disraeli’s description of 180 years ago; if there ever was confirmation, he exemplifies it and exemplifies dozens of other like-minded figures in the world today.  He epitomizes that occult face of the “blood dimmed tide” of Revolution against God and man that poet William Butler Yeats warned of in 1919—at the very same moment in time when Antonio Gramsci was authoring his theories that would prove so fatal to the West.

He who would know the truth, must then act upon it. Over the past century or so the actual character, the real face of the Revolution, has been revealed as perhaps never before. Although lacking many of the resources and weaponry of our Enemies, those of us resolved not only to defend what is left of our culture and our Western Christian civilization, and, if possible, to begin a restoration, must be as bold and as cunning as Nathan Bedford Forrest, as wise and as prudential as Marse Robert Lee, and as patient and as calculating as our Enemies who understood that to conquer the seemingly unconquerable, it would take time, and above all, persistence, intelligence and constancy. And, for us, at the foundation of it all, Faith.

‘Why Feminized Institutions Stop Telling the Truth’

15-minute video by Liam Out Loud.

Here’s the Grok summary: 

The speaker claims that science once prioritized discovering objective truths about the universe through the scientific method, but “the great feminization” has inverted this. Many scientists (especially in psychology and related fields) now rank social equity and ideological goals above truth when the two conflict.

Key evidence cited:

  • A survey of U.S. psychology professors found 66.4% of male professors prioritized scientific truth over social equity goals, versus only 43% of female professors (a 23-point gap). Nearly all professors feared social sanctions for expressing empirical beliefs that challenge prevailing views. Younger, more left-leaning, and female faculty were especially opposed to controversial scholarship.
  • The 2015 Open Science Collaboration replication crisis in psychology is presented as a symptom of values other than truth (ideology, status, etc.) dominating the field.
  • Psychology faculty are already ~56% women; women earn 71–75% of new psychology doctorates. Projecting forward, once the field reaches ~73% women, fewer than half of professors would rank truth first.
  • Affirmative action / DEI policies that artificially increase women’s representation are said to accelerate this shift, with downstream effects on education, medicine, HR, therapy, media, policy, and culture.

The speaker further argues that women, on average, are less tolerant of controversial or opposing viewpoints than men (citing FIRE free-speech data showing the sex gap exceeds the left-right gap). This is linked to a greater emphasis on consensus, social cohesion, and reputation management. An example given is the Jason Arday plagiarism case at Cambridge and the subsequent treatment of critic Nathan Cofnas: institutions allegedly protected identity/equity signaling while punishing the person who exposed fraud.

Evolutionary and psychological framing is used to explain the pattern:

  • Frans de Waal’s observations of chimpanzee politics (female-initiated coalition aggression, preference for social harmony over pure outcomes).
  • Gustave Le Bon’s crowd psychology (loss of independent judgment in favor of group belonging).
  • Nietzsche on the “will to truth” versus herd morality, and Jung on masculine “perfection” (selective, ideal-striving) versus feminine “completeness” (inclusive).

Core thesis: Institutions that select primarily for social equity and consensus (a “feminine-coded” orientation) inevitably devalue truth, competence, and open inquiry. Science, law, and academia require discrimination on the basis of truth/justice/intelligence; treating them like families or communities that prioritize inclusion over standards is said to destroy their purpose. The speaker does not advocate blocking capable women, but opposes artificial engineering of equal representation via DEI because it changes institutional incentives and culture in ways he views as detrimental.

See also: ‘Every man must become dangerous (an Ivy League PhD explains)’, video by Dr. Claudia Consolati.