This is an opinion editorial by Mickey Koss, a West Point graduate with a degree in economics. He spent four years in the infantry before transitioning to the Finance Corps.
Barely a week into 2023, and I’ve seen Anthony “Pomp” Pompliano debate Michael Shellenberger and Joe Rogan interview Peter Zeihan. While these media impressions may seem unrelated, a common thread is sewn between the two: experts in different fields confidently professing uninformed opinions on Bitcoin.
Zeihan’s misunderstandings can be heard in the last 20 minutes or so of the interview. In fact, our friend Guy Swann just made a nearly 90-minute long episode of “Bitcoin Audible” dedicated to tearing Zeihan’s analysis apart. Café Bitcoin did the same recently in the first half or so of its January 9, 2023 episode.
Shellenberger made it a little easier to locate his misunderstandings, apparently going on Pomp’s podcast for the sole purpose of demonstrating his complete and utter ignorance.
I think one of the most pertinent questions to consider following these conversations is: How are either of these two gentlemen qualified to make such assessments in the first place?
How could someone feel so comfortable saying something they so obviously know so little about? If these two are so confident with opinions that are so obviously wrong and uninformed, why should I trust them on anything else?
While discussing these two interviews in a small group, one of the members said something that inspired the idea behind this article:
“For now they both feel secure in their assertions. In the next bull cycle these clips will haunt them and tarnish their credibility.”
He even turned that sentiment into a tweet, seen below:
A characteristic common to Bitcoiners is their low time preference — the willingness to sacrifice short-term comfort for long-term gains, as opposed to following every whim.
These individuals are the personification of what the fiat system is doing to people, a symptom of what happens when the money ceases to communicate clear pricing signals. Their time preference has been so skewed that they are willingly sacrificing their long-term credibility for short-term notoriety. They do it thoughtlessly, with little understanding of what they’re even critiquing, let alone the long-term implications of what they’re saying. They do it because they must, lest they be cast out as simpletons, like the rest of us.
What ever happened to simply saying “I don’t know”? Perhaps more importantly, what happens when all these naysayers are not just proven wrong, but completely, spectacularly and absolutely wrong in every way?
I predict in the months and years to come, that those who chose to speak carelessly will begin to quickly lose any semblance of the credibility that they once had.
The Cure For Gell-Mann Amnesia Is Absurdity
“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward — reversing cause and effect. I call these the ‘wet streets cause rain’ stories. Paper’s full of them.
“In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”
Bitcoin is the orange pill that wakes you up from the matrix, yes, but what if the narrative became too absurd? What if the critiques and the gripes became so obviously wrong that these so-called experts were no longer respected, let alone listened to?
I was a fan of Zeihan. I found his books interesting and informative. They appeared well thought out and thoroughly researched. But after that interview, I don’t know what to think anymore. After hearing him speak, before even hearing his Bitcoin critique, all I really heard was a quasi-automaton; a character who was well rehearsed at speaking in polished sound bites. His Bitcoin analysis was so smooth, well worded and confident. Man, was he confident. And everything he said was absolutely wrong.
I see the next few years as the precipice for the dissolution of current day experts. Much like the economist uncle in the dystopian tale “The Mandibles,” these experts will have answers for everything, and yet won’t be able to explain a thing. Slowly but surely, people will realize that the world that these “experts” have created inside their theoretical minds no longer exists. Reality will eventually come crashing down.
But you don’t have to wait for that.
Once you understand Bitcoin, you understand that the long-term price is slowly approaching infinity as central banks gradually, then suddenly, add monetary units to the system in order to manipulate the cost of capital as they see fit.
Saving in bitcoin may be a bumpy road for those who do not yet see the value, but in my eyes, it’s the safest thing that I own. As I sit to reflect during this tumultuous week in the bear market, I feel that I have never been more bullish than I am right now.
This is a guest post by Mickey Koss. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.