← Coin Stories with Natalie Brunell
Coin Stories with Natalie Brunell
Natalie Smolenski: "We're In Dark Times" — The Rise of Counter-Elites & the Bank-State War Machine
00:43:35
Loading summary
Transcript66 lines
- [00:00]
Natalie Smolenski
There's something about the relationship between bank and state that isn't good for the people. Banks, they were in a position to issue credit. Who's, you know, the biggest customer for bank credit? Governments. And what do they use bank credit for? Largely to wage war, which in turn the banks profit off of. And so what we've seen over the last few hundred years is this kind of social ratchet effect. And the challenge that Americans have right now is that it's not possible to solve this problem by voting it away. The most effective thing you can do is take back financial sovereignty and actually as an individual, be your own bank.
- [00:51]
Host
Hey everyone, welcome back to the show. Joining me this week is Natalie Smolenski. She's a software executive and anthropologist and editor of the Satoshi Papers. And we haven't heard from her in a while and this is our first in person show. So, Natalie, it's great to see you. How are you?
- [01:07]
Natalie Smolenski
It's so good to be here.
- [01:08]
Host
I was trying to find your Twitter thread and I'm like, where is she? She's off Twitter. What's happening? Give us the latest.
- [01:15]
Natalie Smolenski
I'm off. You know, this is like a little sabbatical time. After the publication of the Satoshi Papers last year, I just kind of took a step back. Okay. Have a lot of things brewing, so.
- [01:29]
Host
Yeah, no, well, we're excited for whatever they might be. When you're ready. Well, let's talk about things because I feel like the state of the world is so much more chaotic since the last time we did our show. And you were kind of forecasting this. Right. More political division, governance being questioned at various levels of society. And I would just love your reaction to sort of where we're at right now because it seems so volatile.
- [01:52]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah. There's a way in which, I mean, I think over the past year so many Americans have come to the conclusion that a lot of things that seemed like conspiracy theories in the past are true. And I think we're kind of living through a collective national identity crisis. Like, who are we? Like, first of all, who have we become as a country? And second of all, where are we going to go from here? I think we have a lot of questions now about the efficacy of democratic institutions, even something as simple as elections to meaningfully change the direction in which the country is going to. There's been, I think, a growing recognition that the American project, which was founded on the liberty of the individual person, is something that we're going to have to fight for again. And it's not clear what the paths are.
- [03:05]
Host
Well, what do you say to people who are feeling disillusioned by the whole process because it feels like no matter who you vote for, we kind of get the same, which is more debt, a deterioration of the standard of living, more questions just about how we're going to survive, sort of the challenges that are to come, whether that's with global conflicts or technologies. I mean, what do you tell people who are feeling like it's not even worth it to vote?
- [03:34]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah, the most important thing anyone can do is exercise their individual rights. It is through the exercise of rights that they become entrenched and presupposed. And what we want is a state where people don't have to think about their rights because they're just exercising them all the time. And so that's, you know, voting is one of those rights. And so I would say to anyone who's motivated to do it, to keep doing it, but to not neglect all of the other rights. Freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, the right to transact. These are all enshrined in our Constitution in ways that are historically unique and unprecedented. And it's the people who are going to be the drivers of change.
- [04:24]
Host
Which freedoms are you most concerned that we might be losing?
- [04:28]
Natalie Smolenski
I think freedom of speech is probably at the top of my radar right now. I think we've gone from a climate where maybe there was cancel culture in the culture itself to one in which that cancel culture has now moved to the state. And we're seeing increasing calls for censorship and for government sanctions against individuals who are exercising that right.
- [05:01]
Host
Coinstories is proudly brought to you by Gemini. Start your Bitcoin savings account today. Plus, investing in Bitcoin has never been easier. Thanks to Gemini's orange Bitcoin credit card. I've got mine right here. Earn up to 4% back in Bitcoin on everyday purchases like gas, dining, groceries and more. No annual fee, no foreign transaction fees, and no exchange fees on your Rewards. Head to gemini.com Natalie make sure to get your copy of my new Bitcoin 101 book. Bitcoin is for everyone. It explains why life has become so unaffordable and how Bitcoin can help you build lasting wealth and freedom. It makes the perfect gift for those new to bitcoin. Just visit the link in my show Notes. Leden just introduced their lowest rates ever. No complexity, no fine print. The larger the loan, the lower the rate. These new rates apply to all new loans, refinances and renewals with Leden's Gold standard protection. Your Bitcoin stays custody, never lent out. You can activate auto top ups and alerts so you're never caught off guard and you can repay anytime with zero penalties. LED in has processed over $10 billion in LO over the last 8 years. Don't choose between a great rate and the safety of your Bitcoin. Get both at Leaden. Get a quarter percentage point off your first loan at Leden IO Natalie Speed opened the door to digital money Bitcoin. Now with Speed Wallet, users can also access other digital assets like stablecoins and Digital Gold all in one app. Once it's in your wallet, you can send it, receive it, or instantly swap between assets, including Bitcoin. You can even spend it on gift cards from brands you already use. And if you're a business, you can accept Bitcoin and stablecoin payments with Speed. They're already powering brands like Steak and Shake, accepting Bitcoin across all their locations. So whether you're investing, spending, or running a business, Speed does it all. Download Speed Wallet using my link and use my code COINSTORIES10 to get bonus stats after your first transaction. Do you think that we're moving into a stage where there's just going to be more government surveillance, more encroaching of like government sort of watching everything we do, and how do we prevent that?
- [07:07]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah, absolutely. That's the direction the train is going. Like Lyn Alden likes to say, nothing stops this train. There's a lot of trains in motion right now, and the surveillance train is one of them. I think there are a number of ways that this can be opposed to. First of all, the. Just the insistence at the individual level that I don't need to have a device, I don't need to be on a network, I don't need to do these things that have become taken for granted as just kind of part of the infrastructure of everyday life. But there's nothing in our Constitution that requires identification, that requires being visible at all times. And so just remembering that privacy is your sacred prerogative and living from that, I think that's a huge thing.
- [08:06]
Host
I want to come back to the idea of privacy with regards to Bitcoin. But first let's pull on a thread, because right now one of the headlines is the controversy over voter id. And a lot of people are saying, in order to have election integrity, we need voter id. And then there's a flip side of it, saying we do not want IDs, digital IDs. And I feel like even my audience is a little confused on where should we stand on something like this? Because on the one hand we have IDs when we drive, when we fly in an airplane, when we apply to university, why wouldn't we have them for an election? But then on the flip side, of course, as you have more of these tools where we have to give all of our information and erode pieces of our privacy, like I see that side too. So where do you stand with that?
- [08:55]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah, there. So identification is something that gets required more and more at larger and larger scale. So the less you know your neighbors, the more ID you're going to want to see around day to day activities. Voting is an interesting one because it's actually a right. And so when we talk about rights, we're talking about things that are unconditional. Meaning, you know, your, your right to, let's say, speak freely is not and can never be contingent upon you showing a valid form of identification. It is given by the creator or God given if you're a religious person. And so what, you know, what the founders of the United States had in mind was a system of government in which there is no government identification at all. Like that. That isn't something that they envisioned the state would have a role in.
- [10:02]
Host
So
- [10:04]
Natalie Smolenski
I think we need to back up to the question of principles and rights and ask the question of how is the exercise of, let's say, God given rights, fundamental rights, tied to the question of social scale. Like, we're a country of more than 300 million people. To what extent is it feasible that a government operating at that scale can meaningfully protect individual rights? And so, you know, it's, it's fine, you know, to, to say things like, oh, well, in this context, identification would be helpful or useful. I think when you start to say that it's legally required for the exercise of rights, I think you're in a very dangerous territory.
- [11:02]
Host
That's so interesting. You know, I haven't thought of it in that way. I think it's because in my years when I was a reporter in California, I saw, I really saw fraud. I saw instances where I questioned the integrity of elections, which we have to have integrity in our elections or what are we, we're like banana republics, right? So how do you, I guess, how do you have both? Like, how can we prevent something from happening where, you know, did we actually elect the person?
- [11:32]
Natalie Smolenski
Mm. I think whenever, whenever we're asking that question, I think a good conservative response to that, and I don't mean politically conservative, but just in the wider sense is to scale down. So, you know, have there been, have there been examples of people fraudulently voting in American elections? Yes, there have been. But remarkably, American elections since the foundation of the country have been, have been remarkably sound. And that has a lot to do with the individuals on the ground who administer those elections. These are community servants, these are members of the community, they're local people who are deeply invested in the integrity of this, this process. And so that, that is a social fabric. That is, that is a level of integrity where you can trust that this election official, you know, who's, you know, maybe in a leadership position at her local Methodist church and is volunteering, you know, to staff this election, she is taking responsibility on behalf of her community for the integrity of that data. And so when we start to question the integrity of elections as such, what that suggests to me is that the social trust of the social fabric is falling apart. And that's an issue that can't be solved from the top down. It can only be solved from the bottom up.
- [13:17]
Host
Well, you bring up an important point. I mean, it's so core to Bitcoin too, right? Just the trust that's eroded in all of our institutions, from the election process to the banking system to the media, everything, it's just seems like it's fallen apart. People have the lowest amount of trust in their elected officials than ever before. And when trust breaks down, that turns into chaos. When it comes to even just like how we treat one another, I think. Right. It has a lot of implications. So how can we rebuild that trust?
- [13:47]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah, it starts one on one, individual to individual.
- [13:52]
Host
So it's like peer to peer, like that speech you gave.
- [13:55]
Natalie Smolenski
Yes, exactly. Being a person of integrity in all of your individual transactions with others, caring about the impact that you have on others. One of the things that destroys social trust is a lack of care. How often do you go into a service establishment or a shop today and just feel like there are a bunch of cameras watching you, but there's no one who actually cares about your experience as a customer or a patient. Like, so care can't be outsourced, it can't be automated. And this is one of the, the challenges, I think that, you know, I have a background in the software industry that I see is like in this push to automation, in this frenzy around AI and other automation technologies, there has been almost a total collapse of care. And it's care that knits a society together.
- [15:01]
Host
Do you think there's a financial component to it? Because I think Everyone is nostalgic for the decades that have passed in America, where it did feel more like a community. We were all in it together, we were more united, people looked out for each other, you didn't have to lock your door. And now it feels like the total opposite. And I don't know, I mean, maybe I'm alone on this, but I do think that there's some component where back then you could afford a house on one income and people didn't feel so panicked about the future and saving and it wasn't such like a competition with everyone else. And today it feels like this rat race where you're always, you know, five steps behind, no matter how hard you work. And then you're comparing yourself to everyone else, especially with social media. And like a lot of this has eroded our ability to maybe to actually care. And you see it, like you said in stores, it's like people don't even want to be there or they're sitting on their phones, they don't want to service you at all.
- [15:54]
Natalie Smolenski
Right, exactly. You know, this question of competition is really interesting. Competition is a big part of the ethos of capitalism, of market oriented societies, and certainly it was part of the culture for me growing up in, in America. But there's competition. You can compete about anything. And the question is, what actually matters? What are the things that are worth competing for? And how can you build a character of solidarity, of what we used to call sportsmanship, where you're competing, but there is a respect for the other person. That is what seems to have been lost. And competition is now taken as a good in itself. And children are even reared to be competitive in these ways. And I just remember thinking, you know, as a kid, like, you know, if all the kids are competing with each other, that makes it easier for the adults to control them. And I think it's the same when we talk about like social elites, like you keep the people like fighting with each other, scoring little points against each other here and there over the little things that don't matter. They don't have the time or the energy to pay attention to the things that actually do.
- [17:26]
Host
It's so true. We're distracted by all of it here while they're doing whatever it is to control us above. Right. Like where do you, where do you think it changed? Because I feel like that wasn't the core of America.
- [17:38]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah. Before. I think there are a number of factors. There's a sense in which there's been a fundamental, I mean, there have been fundamental transformations in the Structure of the family in religious practice. The third spaces that people used to go to that weren't work or home have for many people, gone away or they've become a lot of additional work, discretionary effort that they don't have the time to do. Financial procuritization, a debt economy, a sense of institutions scaling up. So, like, let's say college universities. These are often, when you raise children in the United States, or at least this used to be the case, their trajectory was to go through education, make it to college, and then find a career. These institutions, which used to be much smaller, have a lot less capital, were nevertheless able to afford a kind of care of the soul of the children or the young people coming there. That is no longer the case now. They're factories, they have customers, they're hedge funds, maybe with educational institutions attached to them. So I think that there's been a financialization of everything and an erosion of local communities and local power that together have created this precarious dystopia.
- [19:27]
Host
I completely agree with you. I think that's so well said. What are you thinking about? How global conflicts have accelerated in this moment in time?
- [19:37]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah, no, it's. It's really interesting because it seems like the financialization of the world or the economy seems to be going hand in hand with an acceleration of warfare. And how are these things possibly connected? Well, I think one of the intuitions that many bitcoiners had, which has been proven out, is that there's. There's something about the relationship between bank and state that isn't good for the people. And, you know, the nature of that problem has been described in various ways. But I think at root, the issue is that once banks historically consolidated as protectors of commodities and facilitators of exchange, they were in a position to issue credit and bank credit. Who's the biggest customer for bank credit? Governments. And what do they use bank credit for? Largely to wage war, which in turn, the banks profit off of. And so what we've seen over the last few hundred years is this kind of social ratchet effect where you have these two institutions. Banks which control the money, governments which control violence. And they're mutually. In this symbiotic relationship where they're all profiting. And so what does that lead to? It leads not only to war, but to the proliferation of credit asymmetrically, of course, through the Cantillon effect. So that generates high inflation, makes saving impossible, and also creates volatility, high asset volatility, which in turn is an opportunity for Those with insider knowledge to profit. And so the acceleration of war and the acceleration of financial profits go hand in hand. They are tied together. And the challenge that Americans have right now is that it's not possible to solve this problem by voting it away anywhere in the near term. Like you can't vote to end this bank government nexus. The most effective thing you can do is take back financial sovereignty and actually as an individual be your own bank without an intermediary. And that's why obviously governments don't, don't like this because their entire model falls apart.
- [22:21]
Host
Yeah, the vote is essentially buying Bitcoin and becoming sovereign. If you've been listening for a while, you've probably heard us talk about bitkey. Bitkey is a private multi sig wallet that removes the biggest point of failure in traditional self custody. The seed phrase. Things get lost, phones get replaced. Life happens. Right. Bitkey is designed so your bitcoin stays secure and recoverable without demanding constant attention or expertise. Use code stories for 20% off @bitkey World we're being spied on by big tech and big Brother. But did you know there's a way to be truly private for real Privacy? Schedule a 30 minute consultation with the team at the Bitcoin Way. They'll get you set up to browse privately and ensure your phone isn't just spyware in your pocket. Visit the Bitcoin Way.com Natalie Today I hope to see all of you in Las Vegas for Bitcoin 2026. We'll be celebrating five years of women of Bitcoin with a spring special evening bash. And we've got to give a big shout out to our title sponsor Mara. And I'll be signing copies of Bitcoin is for everyone at the Bitcoin bazaar. Use code HODL for discounted passes and I will see you this April. Finally, Bitcoin IRA. With Bitcoin IRA you can invest in Bitcoin24.7 inside a tax advantaged IRA. Choose a traditional IRA to defer taxes or a Roth IRA for tax free withdrawals. When you retire, take control of your Future with Bitcoin IRA. Head to Bitcoin IRA.com Natalie for up to a $1,000 funding bonus. This is also fascinating because again, even going back to our earlier question, a lot of people voted a certain way thinking they wouldn't get war. And now you have it either way, right? So people are again increasingly frustrated. But I was kind of curious if you think that this is all sort of a controlled demolition because it looks chaotic and like, people are just not even thinking at all. And there's incompetence abound. But sometime I hear from analysts and thinkers in the space, thought leaders that are like, no, this is actually all part of the plan. Like, they're strategically pulling things apart in order to build the kind of world that they want, which includes, again, kind of this surveillance state, more control, more impact on our daily lives. Like, what do you think?
- [24:31]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah, well, what we're seeing right now is the rise of counter elites. So you could think about the. Basically, the last decade or so has been an insurrectionary era in American history. And this was fully on display in the 2016 election where, you know, you had Hillary Clinton, who was kind of the consensus, you know, regime candidate, let's say, and then there was Bernie Sanders on the left and there was Trump on the right. They were both insurrectionary candidates. Trump and his circle are outsider elites. So they have grievances against the establishment, the political establishment. They felt shut out. They felt like they were disrespected, they were denigrated that they didn't have a path to power in that institutional structure. And so they've done what, like, historian Peter Turchin has talked about a lot of. In the process of civilizational collapse, which is intra elite conflict manifests as counter elites knocking established elites off of their throne and taking control. And the way they typically do this is they can't do it alone, so they have to enlist people who aren't elites, the broader population, to support their cause. And so, you know. Absolutely. The Trump movement did this.
- [26:05]
Host
And ironically, you had a lot of Bernie people who ended up voting for Trump.
- [26:08]
Natalie Smolenski
Yes.
- [26:09]
Host
Which you would think wouldn't happen.
- [26:11]
Natalie Smolenski
Absolutely.
- [26:12]
Host
But it was that populist down with the current establishment.
- [26:15]
Natalie Smolenski
Exactly, exactly. So the insurrection continues. But now what you have is, what we're seeing is that the agenda of the counter elites has diverged from the agenda of many of the common people, let's say, who they enlisted in their cause. And the question is, how much momentum can they preserve without the allegiance of the population?
- [26:43]
Host
Right. Well, this is where I think that a lot of people are worried about the upcoming election in general, because it's a fear of ushering in more control, more centralization. And it could, it could seem like it has great intentions. Right. We're going to help, we're going to increase government programs, we're going to increase spending, but the average person doesn't understand that that just means, again, destroying your purchasing power and creating more of this almost caste society. That's emerging in America, which I certainly don't think my family ever expected to see. Right.
- [27:17]
Natalie Smolenski
No, it's, it's actually been wild to hear, you know, statements from, you know, some of these counter elites about the inevitability of slavery, of slave society. We just have to, you know, we, we just have to accept that that's the direction we're going in.
- [27:41]
Host
Is that with the kind of like the digital slavery idea?
- [27:44]
Natalie Smolenski
Well, it's, there's a, there is an ideology that some of these counter elites have that we need to go back, that the problem with liberal society is that it tries to get rid of social hierarchies, natural social hierarchies. So there's an aristocracy which are people who are better than the masses and because they are superior, they should rule over them. And there has been a concerted effort by some people on this, let's say, conglomeration, this cultural constellation to begin defining who that aristocracy is and what are the characteristics of this aristocracy. And so some, some people are insisting that it's, you know, genetic, biological, racial. Others are, you know, saying that it's more religious, cultural, has to do with wealth or whatever. But there is, there's this kind of fantasy that the world order prior to liberalism was more stable because everyone knew their place. And that is the most anti American possible thing. I mean, this is a country that was founded on the abolition of the aristocracy. We were not going to have an aristocracy. We were not going to have a royalty, a royal family. And so this needs to be fought out now in the public sphere. I think the vast majority of the American people hold the belief that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with inalienable rights. I think that's a core belief, but that's something that we need to restate and fight for again.
- [29:47]
Host
Can we dig into that a little bit more? Because I feel like there's a misunderstanding of where the individual should reside in terms of the importance of protection of rights versus protecting the collective right, the public good. And there's a lot of friction between these forces because some people are all about the individual. I would say that bitcoin represents that right. Ultimate individual freedoms. It's a meritocracy. But, but obviously, I mean, and I understand it, it's like you want to help the disadvantaged, you want to help the poor, you want to reach out and make sure that as a collective, we are a healthy society. How do you have both?
- [30:26]
Natalie Smolenski
Well, the way you have both is to think of rights as limits to the power of others over you. So the individual is the bearer of rights. That just means you can think of it almost like a force field, like a bubble around the individual. Others may be able to do things to you or make claims on you, but only up until a certain limit. That means you can still choose to do whatever you want in a collective with other individuals. So if you want to, let's say, pool your income and redistribute it to the poorest among you, that is something you can do, you are free to do. What you can't do is violate that force field of rights like coerce someone
- [31:21]
Host
else, impose something on someone else.
- [31:23]
Natalie Smolenski
Right, right. And so you know, this is, this is where people, individual people in actual practice have to assert and stand up for what they take to be those limits. So if someone's encroaching on your rights, you have the obligation as the rights bearing subject to fight them. Because it's only that pushback, that encounter with resistance that protects those rights over time. If there's no pushback, then rights go away.
- [31:58]
Host
So let's go back to privacy then, the right to privacy. Because again, in a digital world, it seems like a lot of people assume that there is none anymore. I mean, honestly, so many times I talk to people and they're literally like, yeah, I'm sure someone's looking at all my text messages and it's almost like they just don't care or something. There's a complacency because they assume this is just the way it is. Sort of like people assume inflation is just the way it has to be.
- [32:23]
Natalie Smolenski
Right.
- [32:23]
Host
But what are your thoughts on where we stand when it comes to protecting privacy? And what do we need to do in order to ensure it's not eroded?
- [32:31]
Natalie Smolenski
I think the, the major thing right now is the centralizing effect of networks. Basically any technology that is networked is already co opted or has a possibility of being co opted. And that's a big problem because virtually all of our day to day life has now shifted onto networked devices. And so the question now becomes, how do you create digital personhood in such a way that you can actually move it between platforms and between networks? So this is what we used to call digital self sovereignty when I first started working in software. How do you have this portable, interoperable identity digital self that you own that no network can constitute or turn off? And that's an open technical problem.
- [33:40]
Host
Yeah, we don't have that, do we?
- [33:42]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah, no. I mean we have the first kind of inklings of it and in fact, bitcoin is an example of that because it's.
- [33:52]
Host
Yeah, for our finances it is.
- [33:54]
Natalie Smolenski
Right. But there's still a lot of work to be done on, you know, connecting the principle of self sovereignty via the bitcoin architecture to other spaces.
- [34:09]
Host
What are your thoughts on stablecoins in this area? Because I feel like some people are associating stablecoins with CBDCs which you've done so much extensive research and work on, but they're not really the same. Right. Because one is issued by a government and the other is a private issuer. So I think of, okay, well if they were to censor you, if they were to programmatically create a situation where they leave you out, they debank you, you could just move to another issuer, can't you? Right. It's not at the state level. But what are your thoughts about these types of forms of money that are emerging in the digital world?
- [34:40]
Natalie Smolenski
Yeah, stablecoins are, you know, I think they're, they're interesting. I mean they're, they can be likened to different types of like commercial money, bank, bank created money, bank issued money. You know, they've been called crypto dollars by some to liken them to the euro dollar, for example. They're a source of demand for US Treasuries. So some, some people like them for that reason. But they, I mean they're ultimately still connected in with the central banking system that is a part of this ratchet effect of war and inflation. And so they can only do so much. They're not a self sovereign technology. They don't promise the same kind of individual empowerment that let's say a bitcoin does. And they are a path to CBDCs for, for many countries, including in the United States, the same, the same technologies you use to implement stablecoins can and likely will be used to create a cbdc. And so there's no, there's no expecting bank and state to police themselves, to limit their own power. Whatever they can do, they will do. And so the individual now has the responsibility. Whatever they can do, they must do.
- [36:17]
Host
It's so interesting because now when I go to digital asset conferences, all the talk is focused on stablecoins and this side of the technology and not as much on bitcoin. And I'm sure maybe you felt it too. I feel like the last cycle, that fervor for spot bitcoin self custody, all of that has seemed to die off. They're investing more. Sure. Adoption has grown. People are investing via the ETFs but at that sovereign level, I feel like not the masses are not coming into bitcoin saying yes, I want to be my own bank and take self custody. Do you worry about that? Where do you think we're going? And like why do you think this shift happened? It seems like we're going more towards a centralized version of Bitcoin with how most people are interacting with the network.
- [37:05]
Natalie Smolenski
I think that there is. So yeah, I agree with you that the culture of the space has changed and it's wild to think, you know, it's not that old. I mean the technology was introduced in 0809 and it's, you know, it's not that long ago. But there have been so many eras already of bitcoin adoption. I think there's a real way in which people who do buy bitcoin, the majority are not speculators, they're not short term speculators. So they see it as a savings technology and that means they are looking to take profits in the future. And so one of the things that analysts have pointed out, for example about the price cycle is that you have long term holders who are taking profits at certain intervals and that is creating some of the price dynamics that we've seen. Perhaps what some have called price suppression is in fact just long term holders taking profits and then new buyers ratcheting up the price to the next level, the next tier. I think Bitcoin is going on its own trajectory that is separate from Stablecoins, separate from CBDCs. It really is its own thing. And there's still a way in which in the minds of the public, the market, it is kind of seen on the one hand as like a tech stock, a volatile tech stock, and so it's treated as a risk asset. But then it's also seen as digital gold. And so we see this often, like for example, when there's a conflict, a new conflict like the war in Iran, Bitcoin will drop and then it will very quickly recover and it will recover faster than other assets like gold or, or others or equities. And so I think we need to continue letting bitcoin become what it is going to be. It is taking the time that it takes, but it's on an unmistakable upward trend. Particularly if you price it against gold, for example, like it's, it's continuing to go up very steadily. And so it's almost like it's, it's in a different world from other assets.
- [39:51]
Host
Can you paint us a picture of what role you will you think that bitcoin will play, let's say over the next five, 10 years and also beyond, because it seems like you're, you're not worried about the idea of bitcoin becoming suddenly centralized and that someone can co opt it and destroy the properties that have made it so perfect as a form of money for the people. I hear that concern sometime, but my sense is you're a believer that ultimately this will be a tool for freedom.
- [40:22]
Natalie Smolenski
I have very high confidence in it. I have conviction I have had from the very beginning. I'm not technical, so I'm not a party to some of the technical controversies around network architecture and protocol. But it doesn't take a lot of people to change the world if they know where their leverage is. And I think the, the community of bitcoin developers who are committed and are passing on their knowledge to new generations are doing the kind of, well, some philosophers would call them functionaries of humanity, meaning they're working on behalf of humanity. And that's something that, that's an idea. Like no one can kill an idea.
- [41:15]
Host
Yeah, well, before we start to wrap up, I mean, what, what do you want people to know? Because I feel like so many are sitting there. Bitcoin's price is down and I know that that's not the most important. Right. But we're just in this chaotic time. People are worried there's going to be a recession, global war. People don't know if they're going to keep their job because AI might displace them. Right. And of course bitcoin is down. So what do you want people to take away from your message today?
- [41:41]
Natalie Smolenski
Well, we're in dark times. Those times are likely to get darker. But we have everything we need as individuals and as a people in our American tradition of liberty to see us through. We just have to remember who we are and not forget that there are going to be a lot of powerful forces pushing us to make compromises and to make short term trade off decisions that will benefit us at the expense of the future. And we have to just be strong.
- [42:25]
Host
So if people are saying, well, how do I do that? Like, should I read a book? Should I follow something like what do they do to actually implement what you just said?
- [42:34]
Natalie Smolenski
Become the best person you can possibly be.
- [42:37]
Host
I like that. I think bitcoin helps us do that. I really do.
- [42:40]
Natalie Smolenski
I think so too.
- [42:41]
Host
Thank you so much, Natalie. It's always so great to talk to you. I feel like we could unpack any one of these questions for hours each. So hopefully we'll have you back on soon, but thank you. Congratulations on the Satoshi Papers. We can't wait to see what research and writing you're doing. I hope you share it with us soon. And we miss you on X. So thank you, thank you. Thank you so much for checking out this episode of Coin Stories. Make sure you're subscribed to the show so you don't miss any new episodes. If you can, turn on those notifications and leave us a positive review, they really help the show grow organically with new listeners. We have a free weekly newsletter. You can sign up@thenewsblock.substack.com this show is for educational and entertainment purposes only. Nothing should constitute as financial investment advice, and you should always do your own research. I'm always open to feedback and guest suggestions, so please feel free to reach my team at info@talkingbitcoin.com. i'll see you next time.