Summary
➡ After the first Gulf War, Saddam Hussein introduced a new currency, the Saddam Dinar, to pay off Iraq’s debts. Despite the Central Bank of Iraq declaring the old currency, the Swiss Dinar, worthless, people in northern Iraq continued to use it. This situation is often cited as proof that money can function as a point system, not needing to be attached to anything as long as people agree on its value. However, the Swiss Dinar’s value was kept afloat by existing debts, leading to deflationary crashes and making it difficult to accumulate credit.
➡ The text discusses the concept of debt as a bridge between past and present, particularly in relation to currency. It explains how when a currency is disowned, debt can keep it circulating. The text also discusses the speculation that the Kurds might establish a central bank and honor existing notes, which didn’t happen. The text concludes by discussing the unknowability of certain things, such as the day of one’s death or the outcome of justice, and how this uncertainty impacts life.
➡ This text discusses the concept of uncertainty in various aspects of life, such as justice, economics, and the future. It emphasizes that the unpredictability of these areas is what keeps them functioning. The text also explores the idea of the ‘end game’, suggesting that if everyone knew when a system (like the economy) was going to collapse, it would already have happened. Lastly, it discusses the challenge of differentiating between alternative thinkers who are correct and those who are misguided.
➡ The text discusses the importance of challenging orthodox beliefs when they seem immoral, using the example of printing money and injecting it into the economy. It argues that this practice is immoral and a form of theft, and that it was not accepted before the Keynesian economic theory took over. The text also emphasizes the importance of understanding and accepting proven facts, like the earth being round, and not falling for conspiracy theories. Lastly, it suggests that true orthodoxy lies in ancient wisdom and common sense, not in modern, misguided beliefs.
Transcript
I mean, the duties keep coming. It’s a very dutiful, beautiful job I have to do and check out. Yeah, we’ll put. We’ll put the link in the description below to Phil’s interview on Liberty and Finance. I think it went fantastically, swimmingly. And Phil, we’re going to talk about. Just so we have the. The topics up front, we’re going to talk about the tale of the disembodied dinar. It’s a ghost story involving currencies. Phil’s going to whisper sweet nothings about dead currencies and how they pretend to be alive when they’re not and how they can eat your brain if you let them.
And second, we’re going to talk about the unknowability of the end game. Yes, the unknowability of the end game. Not in terms of empirical or empiricism, but the inherent unknowable nature of the timing of the endgame. And this has to do with quantum reality and knowing your own day of death and knowing what you’re going to be doing for a living, because if you knew any of these things, nobody would make a living and nobody would ever live. You know, imagine if you knew the day you were going to die. You just. You wouldn’t do anything for your life because you need the unknowability.
That’s. That’s the point of it anyway. Got to keep it alive. Yes. Also, why is it that that sound. Money circles attract weird thought processes like flat Earth or concave Earth or QAnon or whatever these weird things are. We get lumped in with truly wacky conspiracy types of thought, which we’re not. I’m not against those. You can think whatever you want, and I’m willing to talk with them. But why does it keep popping up? And finally. There was one more thing. Was there? Oh, I was just going to mention I moved my 401k. I’ll talk about that.
All right. Yeah. Phil, tell us how you’re doing and tell us about your 401k story. I’m doing great. You may notice there is a tent in the background behind me. I spent the night in sub zero temperature here is sub zero. Now plane zero camp. Doing backyard camping with my son who thought it would be great fun. And it was, it was just very cold. But I have, I have winter rated bags. So as long as I stayed in the bag I was fine. But you know, during the course of the evening your elbow rolls out of the bag or whatever and then you wake up and you have to get back in.
So that part was a little, it was a little chilly, but it was great fun. And kids have, for whatever reason, kids have a wonderful time sleeping anywhere except their own beds. Some kids. Maybe your kid is special. Yeah. Oh really? It doesn’t happen with you? My kids can sleep anywhere. Oh, they just sleep. Can only sleep in their bed and they’re terrified of sleepovers. That happens also. Really? Okay. No, my, mine is like the last place he wants to sleep is his own bed. So the. I was, I’ve. As people on the channel may be aware if you’ve seen our previous episodes.
I’ve been complaining for I think almost two years now that I had money stuck in a 401k that I couldn’t get out because I am under 55 and I can’t. And the only way to move it would be to change jobs. And I have a, I have a semi job. I don’t, I don’t want to get too much in my personal life because, you know, it’s the Internet. But I have semi moved jobs and I have access to my 401k. And the only downside is the IRS is not happy with the move. You cannot declare offshore investment losses against future capital gains.
Any child knows that. The way I’m structuring this, the IRS wants a decent cut of that. But I was sitting there thinking and I was like, you know, there’s a decent chance we’ll be in high, really high inflate because I don’t owe this for another year. This is going to hit in January and then it’s going to be a part of the 2026’s income tax stuff. So I was like, there’s a decent chance I may, I may dodge this bullet completely. So I have placed a, I’ve placed a considerable bet that the end game is going to happen in 2025.
Now if it doesn’t happen, I will be annoyed, but I, I actually have the money to pay it off. All right, now I’m just holding what I need to pay the IRS until 2026 in the hopes that it hyperinflates and I can paid off with a stick of chewing gum. But I would never advise anybody to ever, ever, ever put themselves in a situation where they need the currency to hyperinflate to get away from some sort of debt obligations. So. But I have, I have placed personally for myself in knowing everything I know, I have placed a considerable bet that hyperinflation is going to happen this coming year.
All right, well, we wish you luck on that bet and I hope you’re right because I would like to move on with my life and I don’t know what the next stage is going to be, but I hope it’s going to be fun. I mean, things are, things are falling apart all around me. Another country just evaporated to the north of me. Syria is in computer science now. You don’t even know if Assad’s alive. And you know what happens now? I don’t, I don’t know. I just, hopefully they stay out of here. And what do Israelis think of Assad? Because he was, he was in some ways keeping the, the sort of, the more militant jihadists from taking over.
But in general, I don’t know what Israeli’s think in general about Assad. That’s true, but what, what I think everyone’s different. But what I, what I think about him is he’s a poor Nebuchadnezzar guy. Like, I feel sorry for the guy because it’s clear he doesn’t, he never, he never was really designed for any of this. He was kind of caught between a, you know, a rock and a hard place. He wanted to be an optometrist. That’s his passion. And he really, like he said, he seemed like, aside from the situation he was forced into, he seems like a nice guy.
But he was caught with Iran on one side of him and the United States on another side of him and not really able to move much. And he had to allow Iranian weapons through his territory to get to Hezbollah so they could mess with us over here. And the thing is, we ended up fighting back. And then Hezbollah sent their soldiers over to Lebanon and he, and they were his backers. So there was no one to protect him. So he got overthrown his back, his backers took a risk attacking us and he, he paid for it and there was really nothing he can do because you can’t really say no to Iran and you can’t say no, to the United States.
So what’s, what’s the guy going to do? And now he’s probably dead. Is he dead? He might. His, his plane took off from. Was it Damascus maybe? And then they lost radar contact. Could be he turned it off. Could be like he’s like running away to Moscow. I don’t know. Or it could be you could be shot down and dead for all I don’t know. Wow. I had no idea. I’ve been, I’ve been camping in the backyard. I’ve been unaware of such things. Holy moly. Let’s talk about, about disembodied zombie money. There’s this, there’s this case of the disembodied Swiss dinar.
And Phil, you’ll tell us the story. It’s a spooky zombie ghost story and of money. And we want, you know, dim the lights and light the candles and set the pentagram on the ground. There you go. Yeah. So you, you actually sent me onto this story when you. And with your in game investor on Substack, which is a great read and I recommend everyone subscribe to it. You talked about the disembodied dinar and you were in a debate with a gentleman in Israel, I believe. Yeah, he, he brought it up and I guess you’d never heard of it before.
So you were left, you know, you were, you were caught. Yeah, yeah. He’s a, a physics professor, believes in bitcoin. Brought up the, brought up the case of the disembodied dinar, which is basically a currency that is completely disconnected from any central bank and yet it was still circulating as a money. And he’s like, well, if that can happen, bitcoin can be money. I’m like, okay, I don’t think that’s true. But you got me because I don’t know this case and I have to look into it, which is what I did. And I looked into it as well.
So let me tell the story of it. So in 1993, after the first Gulf War, Saddam Hussein was sort of cut off from all international markets, that they were trying to choke him out and choke the country out. And so the, one of the ways he started to, you know, I guess pay off the debt that the government was accruing was by issuing this new Saddam Dinar. He now, he couldn’t, he could no longer print notes of the old dinar because I think they were, the, the presses were physically not in Iraq. They were like in London or something.
And London was not about to, you know, Print any more notes. So he got, I think it was China. I think he got China make some new presses with some new money with his face on it. So the old ones didn’t have his face on it. They had some like galloping horses and the new ones have his face on. Look, I need, I need some currency. Please print me some Chinese currency. Wow. Yeah, the Chinese notes with his. And it was apparently very poor. Even the paper was like really poor quality. But he didn’t care because he was print.
I mean, he was just, you know, money go money, printer go burr. Because he was just trying to hype, you know, he was just trying to pay it off with fake money. Anyway, so the new currency became known as the Saddam Dinar because his face was on it. And the old currency was called the Swiss Dinar. It’s a little confusing as to why it was called the Swiss dinar. But I guess people thought that the plates Switzerland, but I think they were actually in London. But anyway, it was called, it was called the Swiss dinar. So they he.
The Central bank of Iraq completely disowned the Swiss dinar. They said, this is we, we do not support this. Our reserves have no affiliation with this currency at all. These are now worthless scraps of paper. The only thing we are attached to is the Saddam dinar. And you would think, everyone would think normally that would make a currency instantly worthless overnight. However, in the northern regions of Iraq and the Kurdish breakaway provinces, they. They refused to use the Saddam dinar and they said, we will still use the Swiss dinar. And so your friend and others, there are, There are no.
If you read, if you read about this online, you will find many notes saying this is proof positive that money can be a point system and that it doesn’t have to be. It doesn’t have to be attached to anything at all as long as the people using it agree that it is, you know, you know, the money that is. So digging in. I said, I said logically, before I did anything else, I sat, I said, I literally sat in this chair and I said, logically, what is happening here? What, what would, what. You know, I channeled, you know, the ghosts of Mises and Rothbard said, what would they say is happening at this moment in time? Positive is forefathers of deductive logic.
Right? So what, what would they, what would I do? How would I approach this from that school of thought? And I said, okay, so what money has, you know, the currency, I should say currency has two. Paper currency has two factors to it. It can be converted into its underlying assets, or theoretically not these days, but theoretically it should be able to be converted to its underlying assets. You should be able to show up and get gold for your dollar, for example. The other thing it’s used for is debt. So if you cut off the convertible, which is what the dollar is, the dollar is not convertible to underlying asset.
The only thing it’s relying on is debt as well. If you cut off the central bank, if the central bank cuts off the currency from the old currency, from the new currency and just says, these are, you know, there’s no exchangeability. There’s no, there’s no official exchangeability. These are unrelated notes. The people still have debts in that old currency. So when I, you know, let’s say I bought a car and I, you know, I took out a loan and I bought a car in Mosul. And then the next day this, this dinar thing happened, I still owe the mortgage in that, in those old Swiss, Swiss dinars.
And there’s no convertibility. The two are unattached. There’s no exchange rate, there’s no official exchange rate. There is an unofficial exchange rate. And I think it went, I started, it started like 2 to 1 and it went 300 to 1 Saddam dinars to Swiss dinars. The Swiss dinar has actually gained in purchasing power despite being disembodied from any central bank. So they gained in the, they strengthened against the Saddam Dean. I’m going to get into the increase in purchasing power. I’m suspicious of that. Okay, so logically, this is what I think would happen. So I was thinking, okay, so if this is all debt based, if there’s no convertibility in anything, it’s all just.
Debt is the only thing keeping this going. So this is, it’s like every other currency Ponzi scheme. The debt must grow at an exponential rate. But in all other cases, in the US case, in the British case, in the Saddam dinar case, the debt and the currency are going up in tandem, right? Because you need to keep, to keep the deflationary crashes from happening, you need to keep the currency going up with the debt and it can never be enough. If the currency ever gets ahead of the debt, you have a hyperinflation because all the debts can be satisfied very quickly, then you have a deflationary crash, right? So if the debt gets too far high, you have a crash.
You have a crash both. And if it gets too high, you have a hyperinflation. So I said, okay, so if the Swiss dinar is locked There could be no more Swiss dinars. England has the presses. They’re not printing them. So the money supplies, the currency supply. Stuck here. But the debt must. It must grow at an exponential rate, Rafi. That’s. That’s how, that’s how these things work. So what would I expect to see? I would expect to see deflationary crashes. And then I started looking and lo and behold, what were the articles talking about? They said, they didn’t say this.
The Iraqis in northern Iraq were having a wonderful time. This currency was absolutely perfect. No, they said they were annoyed by the deflation. It was a problem. It was a real problem, I think deflation. So you and I, we like to think there’s a cathartic purge. Either a deflationary crash or hyperinflationary crash, and then we move on to the next currency. But if you look back to 1929 with the dollar, the crash in 1929 was a deflationary crash. And then by 1932, we were still deflating. Three years later, there were still these deflationary pulses. So I think deflations happen in pulses and they probably get worse and worse and worse.
So I’m thinking of that. Eleven years of the currency, the credit builds up and then crashes, and then it builds up to a smaller level, crashes harder, builds up to a small level, crashes even harder. Until people see that they’re stepping of the stock prices from 1929 to 1932. Yeah, okay. Okay, good. Yeah. There’s some empirical evidence. This is what I was. This is just what I was expecting to see in my mind. So I think to see it through the bankruptcies of the banks involved or that are falling. Right. So the. So by the end, I would expect these people just be desperate to get rid of this thing.
They’re like, you know, we, we can’t. We can’t form any sort of credit. No credit can be accumulated at all. The notes are valuable now. It’s bet. You know, in some ways it’s better than a hyperinflating currency because you can actually store value. You can hold those notes and store value, and they don’t. They don’t. They don’t turn into sand in your hands. You know, it gives the. It gives the division of labor denominator in that country a stay of execution until you can hopefully have time to organize something more stable that, you know, isn’t destined for deflationary nothingness.
Right. So before you go on, I just wanted to describe, just in a. In a single instance that’s not a good way to put it, but just to describe what the debt is actually doing. Right? So you have, you have the time when the currency is a central bank currency, which typically means there’s some amount of real assets like gold, silver, whatever they have, plus a whole bunch of debt on top of it. And then that, that is a, you know, an ostensibly functional currency. Then you have time, let’s say X where the, where the central bank disowns the currency and then it becomes disembodied.
Then you have time X +1 where you have this now disembodied currency that is now circulating. And what there needs to be some kind of a bridge between X plus one crossing over to the X where that, where that disownership happened back into the past when there was a central bank. But that’s what debt is. It’s a time bridge. Right? Because you’re saying if you, if somebody owed somebody else, if Reuven owed Shimon, like 20,000 Swiss dinars from before the bank disowned the currency, then he’s bridging the present into the time when the central bank was still in charge.
Right? It’s a time bridge. That’s what it is. So that, that’s why. But that’s why when, when there’s no more debt, when all the debt either defaults or paid off, the currency must die with it. Whether it’s because of defaults or because it’s because they printed so much money that all of that is paid off and nobody cares about any more debt because the currency is so valueless that who cares about debt anymore? Either way, it dies. Yeah. The Kurt. The Kurds could not. It’s not physically possible for the Kurds to have made a new curd.
Curd currency. They could not without backing it with something, right? They couldn’t have said, we’re going to make a new paper currency. It’s going to have the same horses as the Swiss dnr, but it has no relation to the Swiss dnr. It has no relation to anything in the past as this new paper that would not. That would never have flowed because that then. Then there’s no connection to the past. You lose that. What is it? Mian monetary regression? You lose all that and you’re trying to pass off, you know, worth totally, totally worthless paper with no debt on top of it.
Well, that won’t happen. The debt had to exist prior to the closing of the central bank to keep this thing going as long as it did. Well, there was so There was speculation that Kurt. So the Kurds were saying we’ll maybe we’ll break away and form Kurdistan and then we will start a central bank and, and we will, you know, honor these notes. So there was some tried that then. Yeah, well, they, they were saying they were going to, they never formed a Kurdistan or had a central bank, but what they, so there, there was a speculation impulse as well.
It wasn’t just debt. There was also speculation that this, these currencies will, these currency nodes will reattach to a central bank and therefore they will have value at the end as well. And they actually did. After the invasion, the coalition formed a new central bank and they honored, they offered exchange rates to both the Saddam dinar and the Swiss DNR at different levels to allow them to convert into the new coalition dinar. And here’s the evidence that they didn’t like the Swiss Dar because they were happy to take the coalition dinar, right? If, if they, if your friend was right and they had this magic currency that was disembodied from everything and everyone was singing, they were sitting around the campfires and Mosul singing Kumbaya, my Lord, Kumbaya, O Lord.
They have discovered magic money. They would. No, we don’t want to, we have perfect money right here. We don’t need this coalition Dar, because you’re going to print more, you’re going to print more of this coalition dar. We don’t want a part of that. Right. But no, they did not like the Swiss dinar. They were having a lot of trouble with it. So now the, empirically, this part of the problem is a lot of this was very hard to measure. So I, you know, you read these, I read the news articles and it said the prices remain stable in the Swiss dinar.
Well, how do they know that? Did they go, did they send a census taker to the, you know, the boondocks of Iraq war? And this is the war torn areas, right? This is, this is the areas where Saddam gassed his people a few years ago. And they’re, they’re in a simmering state of rage against the, the ruling government. So did they, did someone send a census taker to go different stores and say, what’s your pricing? What’s your price? No, what they did was, I think what they did at the border areas where were, because at the border areas people were probably taking both, you could probably take the, both the Saddam dinar and the Swiss DNR and they could see the Saddam dinar which was hyperinflating.
They could see the prices exploding. And the Swiss dnr, even if it went up a little bit, and maybe it did, maybe it didn’t. I don’t know. It looks. I mean, compared to a hyperinflate currency, it looks like a rock solid stability. Phil. There’s also the challenge that even if prices were going down in the Swiss dinar, if that’s because of deflation, that means that fewer and fewer people have any Swiss dinars or they have less and less, their incomes are going down. So if their incomes are, like, plummeting and nobody has any. If prices are going down, it doesn’t matter because nobody can afford to buy anything anyway.
Yes, that’s true. So that’s. That’s another way of looking at it as well. So, you know, it’s no guarantee that, like, they were just prospering and everything was great up there. The main thing they were using to test was the exchange rate. And the exchange rate did explode. You know, it started to two Saddam dinars to one. Swiss DNR ended up 300 to one. But the new coalition formed, they moved on, and the Swiss dnr, you know, ended up in the dustbin of history. Um, so it’s. No, it is not. It is not proof positive that we are wrong in our show and we’re too.
We’re a couple of cranks and Austrian school can go soak their head. No, none of that’s true. Can you. Can you get. Can you get a Swiss dinar on ebay? Like, probably, I’d like to get one. I want. I want a disembodied currency. There you go. Yeah, try it out. Spook my kids with it. Like the next topic. I’m going to share a screen here. And so unknowability of the timing of the end game. Yes, yes. So, Phil, I’m gonna have you read from Midrash Rabba. In English. In English. You don’t have to read the Aramaic.
We’re talking about Kurdistan. Actually. You know Ivan Bayuki of Wall Street Silver YouTube channel? He’s actually Kurdish, so he knows some Aramaic. So we had some. A little bit of an Aramaic chat. So this is a source translated from the Aramaic. Hebrew mix, right? And it’s quoting Isaac. And he’s old and he doesn’t know when he’s going to die. So he. He calls in his son to bless him before he dies. Genesis 27:2. Behold, I have now grown old. I do not know the day of my death. Phil, take it away. It is taught there are seven matters that are obscured that are obscured from people the day of their death, the day of consolation, the profundity of justice.
A person does not know through what he will profit. A person does not know what is in the heart of another. A person does not know what the woman is carrying in her pregnancy and what the evil empire and when the evil empire will fall. Okay, so the rest is proofs. The rest is, you know, proofs from verses that these, these are the seven things. And there’s seven hints throughout the Bible that, that these are the seven unknowable things. So if you look through this list of things that are inherently unknowable, it’s not a matter of empiricism.
It’s not like God had, like a whole bunch of options as to what he was going to obscure from us. And he picked these seven things, and that’s what they are. And that’s just the nature of the world. And he could have picked seven, any seven things, and that would have. That’s not the point. The point is that all these seven things are inherently unknowable. Because if you think about what happens if you know these things, then what happens to the future, right? So if you think of the day of your death, if you know the day of your death, if you know when you’re going to die, your.
Your life is going to be a mess, right? You’re going to say, oh, I’m dying on this day, so why do I have to go out to work today? Why do I have to go spend time with my kids? Why do I even have to have kids, have a wife? What’s the point? Like, I’m just gonna, I’m gonna die on day X. So, like, it just saps, it saps your will to go on, right? We have to not know this day in order to live, right? The profundity of justice, that means that we. Nobody knows how much justice is going to be served in this world.
Like, we don’t. We don’t know if we take, if we take a course, if we take a case to court, we don’t know if the judge is going to agree with us. We don’t know if justice is going to be served. But if, if we did know, right? If we knew that a certain court system was just completely corrupted and there’s no chance of anything, and we knew this for certain, then the justice system cannot function, right? You cannot know exactly how much justice is going to be served in the right way in a justice system.
And justice cannot be perfect. The third one is in that case, society would break down, right? If the third one is a person does not. Oh yeah, this is the economic one. A person does not know through what he will profit. Person doesn’t know what exactly to do for a living. If he knew what the most profitable thing was. Then you have the Rothbardian problem of the evenly rotating economy, which is impossible. Prices and goods and services never change prices. And everybody knows everything in economic certainty. What makes an economy an economy is the uncertainty of it, right? If you have any certainty as to what you should do for a living, nobody can function.
Society falls apart. All these things. Society falls apart. So when it comes to the end game, right, that’s just a corollary of economic unknowability, right? And if you want to extend it to what’s in, what’s in the womb of a woman, it doesn’t mean boy or girl, doesn’t mean gender. It means like who is the person, what is this person that’s growing inside her? Is he going to be good, Is he going to be bad? Is it going to be productive, is it going to be a bum? Nobody knows. You can’t know because if you knew, nobody would reproduce.
So these are, these are all by nature unknowable. The end game must by nature be unknowable. Because if everybody knew when the dollar was going to die, the dollar would die, right? Now it’s the non knowability of it that keeps it functioning. Eventually it will end, but if we knew when that was, it would already happen. It’s, it’s a, it’s an internal paradox, right? So that, and, and I think that’s reflected in the nature of space time, right? With the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, you can’t know the position and momentum of a particle at any given time, right? And when we first discovered this with the double slit experiment and Schrodinger’s cat and all these other quantum reality, when we found out in the 1920s that reality is really a probability wave and not exactly what it seems to be, the act of measuring changes things in a physical sense, that kind of blew all of our minds, but it’s, it’s really reflected in the unknowability of all this other stuff, reflected in space time itself.
So if you’re asking how do we not know when the end game is coming, we can have an idea of where the, the position and the momentum of a particle is, but we cannot know for sure ever. Just as we might have an idea of when we’re going to die, it could, but it could be tomorrow, it could be in five minutes, or it could be when we’re 95. We do not know. We can estimate. That’s the best that we can do. Yes. Okay. Anything to add? So I have a question, I do, I want to have a question on this.
The curve of the debt, the curve of the accrued debt, is that not an indicator of the coming imminence of the hyperinflationary event? Yeah. So can we not measure it based on that? You’re saying there is a definite, there’s a definite curve that hasn’t, that has an equation to it? Yeah. If we did a regression like if you did an aggression, a regression of the national debt and just extrapolated, extrapolated from there where it goes vertical, would that, would that suffice? I don’t think so. I think if someone, I think if someone could have done that, it would have been done already or he would have been able to, and he would have been able to prove it from other monetary systems.
The thing is, there might be a rough curve that it follows, but it doesn’t go smoothly. Right. There are moments of crisis where, for example, I think Daniel Oliver would put it that Federal Reserve assets or liabilities are way below what they need to be to sustain the curve. And so suddenly they’re over here and they have to jump up and then keep there and then there’s another one and it just jumps up. So you don’t really know exactly what curve you’re on. You can, you can draw it by, by points on the, on the axis of crisis, but even, even then it’s not going to be exact.
Like again, you can, you can have a vague idea for what a woman’s baby is going to be like if you know the nature of the parents. But you could also be wildly off or you can estimate these things. You just can’t know. So how do you know you don’t have another 10 years of the in game investor in front of you? I hate that question. Don’t ask stupid questions. Look, the simple answer is I don’t know. I don’t know. But I can track the relative insanity of people and cross check it or cross reference it with the growth of debt and then cross reference that with past cycles and look into how society interacted with the monetary system in the past.
And you can see all the signs of the absolute insanity of people, especially since 2020 when everybody just kind of lost it. And when that happened, I said like this, this has got to be the end stages I don’t know exactly how much time left, but any more time and we’re going to destroy this planet. Yeah, I mean, I’ve been predicting the endgame is imminent for a couple of years now, so. And I still think it is imminent. I mean, I really do. And I’ve living my life according to an imminent, imminent end game. But could we be wrong? The broader point is, once you get the logic, once you understand that we’re not in any kind of a new era, that this has happened many times before, then if you’re off, it’s like it doesn’t, the criticism doesn’t really get to you much anymore.
And like people celebrating about bitcoin, hundred thousand dollars. Well, good for you. Like, well then why don’t you just like cash out and go buy a bunch of stuff now? But nobody does that. It’s because they’re, they’re all hooked into the drug system. But yeah, we, we know it’s going to end. We know how it basically is going to end. We know that we’re going to die. We know that the justice system is not perfect. We know all these things that are unknowable, but they happen eventually. It’s going to happen with this too. And the criticism, oh, you’ve been wrong for so long.
It doesn’t really mean much because you’re not wrong. You’re just early. You could say that my job is not to get the timing perfect, it’s to get people to understand that it’s inevitable and you can work with it instead of work against it. I like that. Yeah, that’s, that’s pretty much what my channel is too. All right, third topic. We wanted to talk about the inevitable, not the inevitability. It was the. Oh, why? Why sound? Money attracts alternative, alternative thinkers who often have some pretty wild ideas out there. And I think. Is that on the corollary question? There’s that.
Keep that in mind. But is that in the corollary question? How do you differentiate between when the alternative thinkers are spot on and when they’re just like on their own twirly madness that they’ve been on, which happened to coincide with where the world was going for a while, but now they’re spinning off in their own direction and the world is going off in a different one? Yes, I’ve gotten. So you probably get the same. I get emails from people telling me, you know, not only is money sound, but the earth is flat. And, you know, we don’t really exist.
We’re all in a simulator. Whatever you know, there’s a lot, whole bunch of, whole bunch of different ideas out there and they want to, they want me to, you know, agree with these other ideas as well as the sound money ideas. And you know, I, you know, I usually demure and say, well, you know, we can agree, we can agree on some things. So my question is, how do we know though, that we are right on the sound money front? And we, because we’re, what we’re doing is we’re challenging the orthodoxy. We’re saying the orthodoxy is wrong.
And all, you know, everyone in the Fed is wrong, everyone on TV is wrong. We are really taking a position that a lot of very smart people and well connected people and powerful people are in fact dead wrong. So I can see why we look like a couple of absolute cranks to a normie. So the question is, we believe these two things are true or these things are true, and we are driven by our logic. And you and I can talk, we agree with each other. We can talk for hours and hours about why we’re right and we can explain to people why right, And a lot of people listen to it, and a lot of people agree with us.
But how do we know that orthodoxy is wrong on this specific front, but the orthodoxy is not wrong on, say, the earth being a concave bowl and not a sphere? Okay, so I’d say the first part of that question. I think I can answer the second part of it. How do we differentiate flat earth or even just, or let me, let me put it this way. How do you know when to challenge orthodoxy and when to agree with orthodoxy? There you go. When, when orth, when the seeming orthodoxy is plainly immoral, then I will challenge it, like clearly immoral.
The idea, the idea of printing money and putting it into the economy is a clearly obviously immoral, immoral position that you should not be able to manage an economy this way. There’s nothing moral about it and it is open theft. But if you, if you go into, you know, orthodoxy is, and you trace the development of orthodoxy long before the 1930s, 1920s, 1910s, right? Nobody, nobody believed that you can print money forever and just keep it going, because that, that’s is completely insane. So the orthodoxy before the Keynesians took over agreed with us. And there’s, there’s plenty of evidence for that.
And it’s not, and it’s not like Austrian economics was a new thing so much as it was just a school that was able to express deductive logic in things that people already understood intuitively for many centuries. Beforehand, we’re just. The Austrian school just fleshed it out into, you know, it’s what Hayek says, like, there’s no, there’s no discoveries to be made in economics. It’s just humans interact with each other under certain principles, and we know what those principles are, even if for many centuries we could not articulate them. And then it took the Austrian school to say, you know, what’s been happening for these thousands of years, this.
And that’s why it makes sense. And then people are like, oh, you know what? Yeah, that’s true. They’re not saying to change it. And then the Keynesians come in and say, well, you know what we should do now that we never did before? We should do that. And then, and then we’re like, dude, that’s not the orthodoxy. And then they get louder and louder and louder. And then we’re like, it’s not the orthodoxy. And then they just keep getting louder. And then we’re like, you guys are all nuts. And then, and then we look crazy. That’s what happened.
Okay, so the thing is, we are actually the secret orthodoxy. We are the orthodoxy with flat earth. Like, I don’t care morally if the earth is flat or it’s round. It doesn’t matter what it is. I don’t think the earth is flat because I see the evidence and I understand the evidence that the earth is round. And you’re telling me that they’re trying to trick me into thinking that the earth is round because they have like these world domination plan. Like that doesn’t. That sounds loopy. No, no, the earth is round. Okay, just like calm down.
So one of our very early episodes, I, I made the bold proclamation that there are no anti grabbers. I said there’s nobody who’s anti gravity. There’s nobody who’s like, gravity doesn’t exist. Right. Because this is a testable hypothesis. And then on the chat and the comments of the YouTube, I don’t know if they’re trolling or not. We have people. I had, there were people posting on the comments like, no, gravity is not real. You know, it’s, it’s not gravity. So. But it’s, there’s still a force. Like, you’re not saying that you, you know, you’re not saying that you can float.
And if you are saying you can float, I would love a demonstration of your floating. So whether you call it gravity or something else, or whether you think it’s not caused by the mass of the earth, you know, pulling us into the center of it at 9.8 meters per second squared. Whether you think it’s something else, that’s. That’s different. You still, you still agree. I would, I would think everyone in the com. And maybe, maybe I’m about to get blast in your comment sections again, but I think everyone agree there is something that is keeping us on the ground, whether the ground is flat or round.
Right? Yeah. So I don’t. Yeah, let me see. Okay. I guess that answered the question. I don’t really have anything. I don’t have any other further profundity to add to that, because I think you answered it very well. That we actually are the secret orthodoxy. That our. That our thoughts are what people thought was common sense in the 1800s. Okay, so there’s really nothing. You know, the heresy is what happened in 1933. Well, you know, you can. I can take another example from the Torah and go back to Abraham, right? He had this whole idea that there was actually just one God and there weren’t many gods.
And it was this whole new thing. And this is mostly in rabbinic literature. It’s not explicit in the Torah itself. But the point with him was that he wasn’t the first guy to think that there was to understand there was one God. Obviously Adam, who was created in that same narrative by God, understood there was one God. God was talking to him, God talked to Cain, God talked to Noah. You know, so they understand that there’s one God. And then all of a sudden, like, Abraham is considered the first monotheist in rabbinic tradition. Well, but he’s not the first monotheist.
The first monotheist was Adam because he was created by one God. So what are they saying? Well, it’s the same principle. It wasn’t that. That there was an orthodoxy. And then. And then Abraham’s the first guy to subvert it. He was returning the world to theological reality as he understood it. And he was the only one who left who was the monotheist. And he was able to bring the world back to this monotheist idea, at least in this school of thought. So when you’re trying to think about what the real orthodoxy is, you got to go back in time to not what all the jabbering idiots are saying now, but what have they been saying for hundreds and thousands of years in the past? And they might not have been 100% right all the time, but, like, there’s a.
You know, there’s like a sine wave, and the truth is somewhere in that sine wave and all of a sudden. We’ve, like, just gone over here, and we’re not making any sense right now. So it’s Farber’s orthodoxy regression theorem. Okay. There you go. Ancient wisdom. You know, Ancient wisdom. There you go. All right. Well, that’s good. I think that’s it. Well, everybody tune into the Bitter Draft on Rumble. It’s also on YouTube, but. But Phil hates YouTube. And I’m gonna start a rumor that I think that Phil is actually Matt Gates in disguise. And he has better.
He has a lot better hair than I do. So that’s. I’m putting. If I’m Matt Gates, then I’m putting on a pretty nice toupee on top of me. On top of what I got left up here. You could. You could be the. You could be, like, a stunt double for him. Take the incoming sniper fire. No, thank you. I do not want to physically resemble a politician right now in any way, shape, or form.
[tr:tra].
See more of Rafi Farber on their Public Channel and the MPN Rafi Farber channel.
Author
