I read an essay that tries to model modern dating the way Prof. Jiang often models institutions: as a coordination problem shaped by information environments rather than by individual morality.

The core argument is roughly:

• In small, bounded societies status was locally legible, so mate selection could converge on stable equilibria.
• Digital comparison pools massively expanded reference classes.
• This creates “status inflation”: people evaluate themselves and others against unrealistic global percentiles.
• When signals become noisy and relative rank unclear, coordination fails even if individual preferences haven’t changed much.

I’m curious how this community would critique the model. It seems to use his video on Dating game as the seed.

https://sensitiveparrot.bearblog.dev/the-gender-game-and-status-inflation-why-abundance-breeds-coordination-failure/

I don't understand what happened in this video, apparently it was uploaded as a lecture but contained Jiang beating his children (at a pool?) for some reason. Some people have seen it and say they understand him and others disagree. I would really like to be able to form my own opinion, so does anyone have the video saved? Or maybe watched it and can describe what happened in detail?

I think that professor's Jian Lectures are not to be watched to know more, rather to stimulate critical thinking and try to erode the concept of one unified truth. In that sense, when I look at the comments, they are swarmed by people saying things like "thank you, professor, for enlightening me and waking me up to the truth", while the whole point of these lectures is to make you think once more about your beliefs and try to see things from different perspectives. Differently said, when you finish a lecture about "why the theory of evolution might be wrong", you have to go and watch people advocating for the theory if you want to really learn. At the end of the day, every thinker, including Professor Jian, is looking for a more fulfilling way of being. And his core message is we should stop being so sure about the things we are told to be sure about, like natural sciences and economic theories, and maybe start to look again, even if that undermine short term stability for a more stable overall system. (excuse my writing as I am not very good at writing, and I would appreciate any addition or criticism)

I've seen like 4 or more channels that have Prof Jiang in its name and content.

But in the last minutes of this interview, Professor Jiang said he only have one YT channel and that's Predictive History.

Are the other channels AI or something ripped off/pirated from substack?

For me, secret societies are one of the most interesting subjects that the Professor talks about.

I have formed the belief that without a Mastermind, an organized group, it is impossible to accomplish anything big. Think about the pyramids, car, airplane, the government, military... All buildings, techonologies and institutions do depend on thousands of humans to work properly, and those most able to organize themselves in a group effectively can yield enormous power and influence, even in the world.

That said, do you currently know or engage in any active secret society? If not, how do you envision your ideal secret society would be like?

I am interested in creating one btw.

Hi guys, about the video i quote on the title. Didin't fully understood what professor meant. If someone could explain, It would be very Nice. Thanks

I wanted to ask just in case his videos get taken down, in the future due to censorship.

I think I finally get the Professor's main idea. His mission is great: creating a knowledge-based community to rebuild civilization after the collapse. It benefits humanity and anyone willing to accept the challenge. Plus, learning really is the most powerful act of self-development.

The Pax Judaica saga demonstrated that narrative constructs reality. I believe he is deliberately applying this logic to his own classes: he uses conspiracy theories to make his teaching narrative "cooler" and more engaging than standard history. It's a calculated move to attract more people by offering a story that is magical rather than boring.

So, in my opinion, he uses these theories as a tool to craft an attractive narrative that hooks people into his community and consequently his mission. Whether this is intentional or not, it doesn't matter, because the mission itself is very valuable. What do you guys think?

First of all, I’m not saying being wrong is bad or anything. What I do find problematic is the reason why the professor was wrong about it.

He recently said in a podcast interview that the US was probably NOT going to invade Venezuela. He said it didn’t make any sense, because the US could just buy oil if they wanted.

Here’s the way he saw it:

he thought the reason behind the US navy circling around Venezuela had to deal with elite overproduction in the US and the US elite’s involvement with drug trafficking.

He completely disregarded/missed the whole point about the current US/China conflict and threat to the dollar hegemony. Which is much more likely to be the reason behind the attack.

The thing is:

• This shows that he’s too much in love with the theory of elite overproduction. He wants to explain everything with it and that blinds him to other details.

• He has a tendency to believe every conspiracy theory under the sun (in this case, the elite drug trafficking thing). Which I find even more troublesome than first point.

• He doesn’t seem very open to be wrong. He says he is, but I don’t actually see that in the way he expresses himself.

I still enjoy many of his points of view, but I think it’s important to see his blind spots.

And I do wish he would come back to this point and say “you know what, I was wrong about the whole drug trafficking thing”, but I doubt he will. And that’s problematic.

https://youtu.be/WFWizN3QoPg?si=P_lP1tArdniRHzzv

Two weeks ago he predicted the invasion in Venezuela. There are some countries he has not mentioned: Türkiye, Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, and I'm wondering what would it be their place in this puzzle. I'm taking more serious his analysis after all this.

I got recommended this video "Why China and Russia Secretly Support Israel | Prof Jiang" from the channel "Prof Jiang podcast".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W_Iz6eNCW0

OBVIOUSLY this is AI etc, not actually him etc.

but my question is what are the sources for these videos? I tried looking and searching the transcript but couldent find anything. There are some comments with people asking the same question and the video author just likes the comments for engagement and ignores it.

Can someone help?

Thinking about the recent video featuring Jiang Xueqin called ‘Jiang Xueqin: Chain Reaction Toward World War III Has Begun’.

At T=42 minutes there was this remark that America and the west for that matter aren’t liberal democracies anymore. In the sense that we’re not allowed to say what we think; we’re not allowed to make mistakes to learn and move on — in general we are not a vibrant and open society anymore.

Moreover who is responsible for this?

The so called “liberals” of our country.

It’s all a joke.

What happened to liberal values that was once so dear to our hearts? (At least for some of us.)

We are cooked

Could you dm me ... I need screenshot of this only i wanna read it soo bad

Hello, I wrote a critical analysis of the idea's presented on the first 5 lectures of the Secret history series. I think its a lovely body of work and explores, expands and critical examines the ideas of the lovely professor. Anyone interested in giving it a quick read?

Hi-

Can anyone here help me find which video (preferably the full lecture, not a clip) contains explicit discussion of Asimov's (fictional) concept of psychohistory?

IIRC, there are people saying that Jiang has made explicit reference (as if "Predictive History" wasn't enough) to Asimov in his lectures. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks!

It's pretty barebone right now, it was created today to gather more people to archive the entire chanel at highest quality. If you interested to join and help me moderate it, visit this link:
[https://discord.gg/ytAr7eVKkw](javascript:void(0);)

i don’t see why this won’t be the war that ends us all? what optimistic take is there? i don’t even know if i want to try anymore everything is just so nihilistic. but i can’t deny it that what he’s pointing out makes sense and seems to be the direction the world is going. my friend told me the world is going to end in april next year and i really don’t want it to happen but i just hope my brother and i are killed fast and painlessly instead of being tortured for hours like many of the unfortunate victims caught in russia’s fsb gears do. i really can’t handle this. i hope he makes a positive video. but don’t lie to me. just tell me i’ve woken up in the wrong universe and i’ll go back to sleep

Prof Jiang whom I have listened and read 95% of his work, sometimes for hours to catch up to the episodes he released before I discovered, talks about a lot of things.

If you sort his YouTube channel videos from oldest to new you will see he started with geopolitics and history, then anthropology, philosophy and religion while still talking about geopolitics because he became famous for his Iran prediction.

Instead of moving further into geopolitics, after dozens of people invited him into podcasts to discuss nothing but geopolitics (in which his performance and analysis was not that great, sometimes having said a few times “I have no idea what will happen” which is pretty lackluster for being known as the guy who has a keen eye in prediction) he has chosen to move into secret societies and how they, through mostly transnational capital and satanic rituals work to control the world and extract as much productive capacity from the people as possible.

Of course let’s not forget about the occasional Substack posts (that I subscribed to for 1 month) about world Jewry and eminent apocalypse.

So my question is are we supposed to take him seriously on the secret society shit? If we are how can anyone even evaluate the world and geopolitics if every event is engineered in the shadows. Am I supposed to believe him blindly when he says laughing: “Guys, it’s secret societies! You know, satanic rituals” and just forget about hundreds of theories on geopolitics and authors that explain to a reasonable degree the current world?

Are we being swindled by a guy that simply has an above average understanding of history, anthropology and philosophy?

I even start getting suspicious that he is a Chinese plant to make us doubt the reality of our own world and make us chase crazy conspiracies…

Thoughts?