Queen Victoria was basically the 19th-century version of a hardcore weeb… but for Scottish culture.

She fetishized tartans, kilts, and fake clan traditions so hard that she forced visiting nobles to show up in made-up “clan tartan” outfits — and they actually did it. Today, huge numbers of Scots genuinely believe this stuff is ancient… because Scotland’s education system is apparently cursed.

Meanwhile, Nassim Taleb fans keep preaching the “Lindy Effect” (longer something survives → longer it will survive) as gospel in crypto, culture war, and trad circles. But in 2025–2026 reality — with hyper-rapid technological, economic, and memetic change — the Lindy Effect has basically inverted.

In this episode we cover:• Queen Victoria’s Balmoral weeb arc and how she single-handedly invented the modern Scottish aesthetic• Why almost nothing you use or celebrate is actually “ancient” (spoiler: most traditions people call timeless were invented 1850–1980)• The original Lindy deli comedians meant THE OPPOSITE of what Taleb claims• Survivorship bias, Fortune 500 churn, disappearing classics, collapsing orchestras…• Why rigid “antiquity = virtue” thinking is suicidal in the modern world

Episode Transcript

Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] So Queen Victoria

Simone Collins: Imagine a weeb invented our modern perception of Japanese culture, even as believed by the Japanese. That’s what Scottish culture as we understand

Malcolm Collins: so she then. Starts telling any of the Scottish nobles who visit her house, that they have to come in their clan tartan

Simone Collins: and in their, and

Malcolm Collins: they’re like and they’re like, my what? And so it’s like, it’s like a weeb. Goes to Japan and he says that everybody’s daughters have to come in their magic girl costume.

Simone Collins: He’s come in your formal Goku hairstyle, sir. .

Malcolm Collins: And these, and these Japanese people are like, like, and they’re like, it’s the, it’s the queen. I’m gonna dress up my daughter like a matching girl. We’re going, we’re going all in on this. And the funny thing is this, since Scottish people today, the country has such a terrible education system that many of them believe that all this stuff,

Speaker 9: We saw the lochness monster. When all of a sudden this huge creature, this giant Ste from the Pete Lithic air comes out of the water. I yelled. I [00:01:00] said, what you want from US? Monster? And the bent down and said, I need about three 50.

Simone Collins: How much of a weave Queen Victoria was. She also allegedly would, would while visiting Balmoral slip into this fake Scottish brogue. So you can imagine like a weeb going to like spend their summers in Japan, like speaking in ic, Japanese accent.

And you would imagine

Malcolm Collins: built their entire culture off of her we fantasy.

Would you like to know more?

Malcolm Collins: . Hello Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are gonna be talking about one of the ideas that has become popular in pseudo intellectual circles. And I want to talk about how wrong it is.

Simone Collins: Are we, so intellectuals, is this one of our circles?

Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah, it’s, it’s called the Lindy Effect. And it often comes up in the concept of something being anti Lindy or a heuristic where the longer, a non-perishable thing like an idea [00:02:00] technology, cultural practice, book or institution has survived the longer its expected remaining lifespan as its proven robust against time and disorder.

So this concept is really, really, really popular in the conservative space. So they’ll look at something like techno puritanism, right? Like our family’s religious practices. And they’ll be like, oh, well it’s very anti, right? Like, it’s very new, and therefore it’s unlikely to survive a long time.

Simone Collins: Oh,

Malcolm Collins: and I’m going to point out that this is both a misattribution of an idea. It’s a misattribution of a bad idea that even in its very conception was taken to mean the exact opposite of what it originally meant. Which is just like e everything about this idea is bad.

One is that, first of all, the idea is just wrong in a modern context. It worked a lot when you were dealing with a static economy and society because then that was like a evolutionary environment. If something becomes evolutionarily advantageous and out competes [00:03:00] other things and the environment it has outcompeted them with has stayed stable, it is going to continue to be advantageous.

That just like an obvious truism, right? And that is true for cultural environments, right? Like if you’re dealing with a long period of human history where things were broadly the same from one generation to the next an idea or a book or a technology is going to be much more robust if it has out competed other technologies within a similar context.

However, that is no longer the world we live in. Things change dramatic. In terms of the global economy, in terms of the global culture, in terms of how we communicate and in terms of global mimetic sets so rapidly now that you almost have an inversion of the very concept of the Lindy effect.

Second, what I’m gonna be talking about is a lot of the things that lead to the perception of the Lindy effect, and we’re gonna be going over these are illusions. Mm-hmm. They are instances in which an [00:04:00] individual today believes something has antiquity because either of just a myth, right. Or they believe it has antiquity because something in antiquity had a similar name.

An example of this would be somebody who will say something like, well, Christmas or Easter has been around a long time, and we’ll go into not in anything that’s meaningfully close to the way today these things are practiced. If you said that, you know, if, if you’re applying the Lindy effect to.

Let’s say something like Christmas or you, you would apply it to Teop Puritanism, eg. What I mean by that is in a hundred or 200 years, if techno Puritanism becomes widespread and is like a common belief system everyone would say, well, this just follows the Linde effect because it’s Christianity.

And Christianity has always been around, but people within our generation would be mortified if somebody said that. Yeah, you said that the way that Christmas is practiced today, or Easter is practiced [00:05:00] today, is historic to somebody in the Middle Ages or something like that. They’d look at you way crazier than saying

Simone Collins: technically.

Well, and certainly, you know it like, you know, the year, like for bc they’d be like, what do you mean? What are you talk, this is an apocalyptic Jew, just like all the other ones. What do you. Yeah. So,

Malcolm Collins: She’s talking here about what a lot of his historical Jesus researchers think about Jesus within that context.

But the, the, and the other reason why this is hidden from a lot of people, and we’ll go into this, is a lot of these traditions use their manufactured antiquity to try to give themselves a veneer of authenticity. Whether it is the practices of the current Catholic church or modern Judaism, or modern Orthodox Judaism even.

And when individuals. Question these things, you are often literally questioning somebody’s self-perception and worldview. Mm-hmm. So it [00:06:00] is incredibly, like the, the people wanna fight against it as hard as they can, because for some people, if you could show that their faith or belief system lacks a lot of the antiquity that they believe it has, then they would see that as invalidating it because they see that as its core, like argument for existence.

Simone Collins: Hmm.

Malcolm Collins: And so, we’ll, we’ll go into that as well.

Simone Collins: That’s a really good point. I, I wanna say, I, I can, first, I just wanna give credence or I don’t think people are crazy to have an intuition in favor of this effect because up until the scientific method or like empiricism became widespread and more systematic and we had ways to very quickly.

Validate whether something that was true that didn’t involve literally dying. The only way you knew that something was a decent, like health intervention or safety intervention was because it was a tradition that was passed down from generation to generation. Because all the, the generations that tried something new and [00:07:00] different that didn’t work, died and all the surviving ones did the thing that did work.

And so it was really good to do the thing that was old because that means that everyone who did it before. Well, they, they lived so it’s probably a good sign.

Malcolm Collins: Well, it’s, it’s not even that they lived, it’s actually, and you bring up a really fascinating point that God, I could do a giant deep dive on like an episode in itself.

But there was a period in European history that went from like the late Roman period to the high medieval period. And in this period of, of, of history, this is when the Catholic church really dominated. Oh. And they created an a, a mindset around the sciences and around things like, a medicine where you would always reflect on an older and proven older way of doing it or teaching.

And the antiquity of a thing was in this sort of early version of Catholicism proved that things authenticity. And this existed outside of the church. This was the period where [00:08:00] you had like Ga Galen medicin...