Macron’s Missing Marbles

The knifeless frog taunts Russia into a nuclear conflict. [The Rude Awakening] March 15, 2024 [WEBSITE]( | [UNSUBSCRIBE]( Macron’s Missing Marbles [Sean Ring] SEAN RING Dear Reader, Beware the Ides of March, the apothecary told Caesar. The deeply unpopular French President needs his own warning vis-a-vis Russia. Why this jackanapes wants to poke the bear is beyond me. France doesn’t hope to beat Russia, with or without NATO at its side. And quite frankly, America has neither the money nor the appetite to go the whole hog with Russia. So what’s up with Macron? Let’s take a look. A War With Russia According to the [Global Firepower Index]( France is Continental Europe’s second biggest military power after Italy. (The United Kingdom isn’t on the Continent.) You may laugh, but it’s true. The problem is you can’t go to war with Russia when the Nigeriens just kicked your ass out of their African backyard. It’s madness. Note: Nigeriens (pronounced nee-ZHAIR-ee-ens and spelled with an “e”) are from Niger (pronounced nee-ZHAIR). Nigerians (pronounced NI-jeer-ee-ens and spelled with an “a”) are from Nigeria (pronounced NI-jeer-ee-a). Russia would pound French positions into surrender, par usual. You have [(1) item]( on hold at our warehouse: Item #: [51987]( Status: On hold Value: Approx. $300 Claim by date: MIDNIGHT TONIGHT To see how to claim yours before midnight, simply [click here]( our Head of Customer Experience will show you what you need to do. [Click Here To Learn More]( What Macron Really Wants Pierre Le Vigan just wrote in the [Arkos Journal]( What does Macron want? Firstly, to divert attention from his remarkable unpopularity in domestic politics. His visit to the Agriculture Show nearly resembled the worst moments (for him) of the Yellow Vests crisis. By escalating drama and fear in foreign politics, Macron makes the French populace forget how much his policy — and even he himself — is detested. The second aim of Macron’s statement is to be taken literally, focusing on foreign policy. To recap the context: in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, it has become clear that Ukraine cannot win. What does this mean? It won’t regain lost territories, let alone Crimea, and if the war persists, it will lose more territories (Odesa?) — which it could have avoided by negotiating in 2022, a course the USA dissuaded it from, being ready to support Ukraine to the last Ukrainian. Le Vigan goes on: Another minor, yet significant advantage of Macron’s declaration: to create a French anti-Russian ‘patriotism’ and portray the National Rally (RN) as pro-Russian, with any anti-war position being deemed pro-Russian. Hence Gabriel Attal’s statement: ‘The RN [Marine Le Pen’s party] supports Russia more than Ukraine.’ (5 March 2024). Any party not aligning with Macron’s warmongering stance is labeled pro-Russian. And more than La France Insoumise, it’s the RN that’s targeted, aiming at the European elections of spring 2024, but even more so at the presidential elections. While the RN has continually normalized and made concessions to Atlanticists, big capital, and even the EU, it’s not yet (or no longer) the oligarchy’s first choice. Weakening Europe… But At What Cost? Unfortunately, America doesn’t like strong allies. It likes allies that pay up and say “yes.” Almost no NATO countries pay the 2% of GDP allegedly required to be a part of the alliance. So France, with its big military, nuclear weapons, and UN Security Council veto, becomes the most important country in Europe for the United States—yes, even more important than Germany, especially since the Americas have already conquered Germany. This is where Le Vigan’s piece takes a darker turn: However, Ukraine’s failure is primarily NATO’s failure. Macron had already declared this alliance ‘brain dead’ (8 November 2019). Some saw this as a new form of Gaullism. It was not. It was preparation for a handover. What can NATO do now? Delay or even prevent peace between Russia and Ukraine. That’s what NATO, meaning Washington and its lackeys, has done since 2022, achieving NATO’s only true success. Prolonging the war and isolating Europe from Russia, a situation Europe suffers from more than Russia. That was the goal. Thus, the objective is to continue NATO’s work but Europeanise it. That is Macron’s project, his mission. Why? Because it aligns with the interests of International Capital, closely tied to American interests. Macron is the man of Capital, currently heading the French section of the International Capital. Macron is inevitably, first and foremost, an agent of American capital, as it dominates global capitalism. When the periphery is doomed, it must be sacrificed to save the core. That’s why, after destroying French industry following Hollande, Macron aims to dismantle what remains of industry in Europe, and hence German industry. It’s happening: American gas costs Germans six times more than Russian gas. Consequently, their industry is no longer competitive, leading to the relocation of German industry to the USA. That’s why Macron did not oppose the ‘sanctions’ policy against Russia, which were essentially self-sanctions against Europe. Do not imagine for a moment that Macron is unintelligent. He knew what he was doing. His mission? To save capitalism. To stem the decline in profit rates. Thus, primarily to save American capitalism. In this sense, Macron is doing the ‘job’. Europe was stripped of its last industries (9% of GDP in France corresponds to industry, leaving little to liquidate), and plundered by the USA — that is the interest of international capitalism and thus Macron’s goal, since he is one of its authorized agents and its ‘delegate for France’. Had there been crumbs available for national French capitalism, Macron wouldn’t fundamentally object, but that’s no longer feasible. ‘No worries,’ as managers say. France and Europe are sacrificed. Wrap Up Retreat to America to protect profit? Say it ain’t so! Le Vigan’s point of view is interesting, but I’ll keep it simple: Macron diverts French attention from his failing domestic policies to foreign policy. All politicians do it, and he must do it well to save his legacy. However, the result will be that more companies will flee Europe as it’s too expensive to set up shop there. I hate to sound like a broken record, but the sanctions must end. Have a wonderful weekend! All the best, [Sean Ring] Sean Ring Editor, Rude Awakening X (formerly Twitter): [@seaniechaos]( P.S. I’m hosting Rickards Uncensored today at 10 a.m. ET. Dan Amoss, the hardest-working man in the newsletter business, will ride shotgun with me. We’ll talk about DEI, Boeing, and a host of other juicy topics. Come along… it’d be great to see you! In Case You Missed It… Worth Its Weight In... Silver? [Sean Ring] SEAN RING My friend and esteemed colleague Byron King hit another one out of the park. As you well know, Byron is a geologist, lawyer, and former naval aviator. His views are both well-rounded and well-substantiated. That’s why this piece hit me so hard. Traders call this kind of analysis “relative value.” Relative value gives us an idea of where one asset trades against another. Sometimes, the difference or “spread” between the two assets makes sense. Sometimes it doesn’t. If the spread is too cheap and we expect it to widen, then we buy the spread. If the spread is expensive and we expect it to tighten, we sell it. We usually do this with, say, US Treasuries versus German bunds. (Yes, the Germans can’t say “bond” properly, so it’s “bund.” They pronounce it boond.) Or you can trade Ford versus BMW. Other traders like to look at intermarket trades, such as how stocks trade relative to bonds. But what Byron harvested for us today? Something I wasn’t even thinking about. Could something weightless, electronic, and doesn’t throw off cash flow be worth more than all the ancient Roman denarius from 221 BC until now? Dear reader, Byron is about to clean your monetary clock. All the best, [Sean Ring] Sean Ring Editor, Rude Awakening X (formerly Twitter): [@seaniechaos]( [Trump, Biden, _______?]( There are three potential outcomes of the 2024 presidential election – and not a single one is good for the American people. In fact, the secret “third candidate” that no one’s talking about poses the biggest threat of all… [His identity revealed here](. [Click Here To Learn More]( Bitcoin Outshines Silver:Monetary Terra Incognita, or Perhaps Jurassic Park [Byron King] BYRON KING Big news in both metals and crypto, and definitely for Bitcoin. If you follow Bitcoin, you know it’s been on a tear lately. It's been up over 60% since the beginning of 2024. Not bad for a bunch of electrons. At $60,000 just a few weeks ago, Bitcoin’s total value surpassed that of Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway. At over $72,000 the other day, Bitcoin’s market cap exceeded $1.4 trillion, which edges out the total value of global silver. What does this mean? In monetary terms, we’re in terra incognita (an unknown land), or perhaps it’s something else, like Jurassic Park. So let’s think it through… First, here’s the chart: [Top asset chart] Top ten assets [ranked by market cap - CompaniesMarketCap.com](. Now, Some Background What’s behind this chart? It’s basic math. Take all the Bitcoin out there, add them up, and multiply by the $72,000 price. There’s your $1.42 trillion. By comparison, take all the silver in markets and inventories – for practical reasons, it must be an educated estimate – times the current price per ounce (about $24.20), and it’s about $1.39 trillion, which is less than that total for Bitcoin. Everything changes over time, of course. Bitcoin doesn’t just go up-up-up, as anyone who has held it over the past couple of years can tell you, when it went down or traded in a range for weeks on end. But for now, of late, Bitcoin is rising. Meanwhile, silver has also been on a rising trajectory (along with gold) based on widespread perceptions of continuing U.S. inflation and related government fiscal mismanagement. It’s a generational flight to safety among those with much to keep safe. The long and short is that, right now, Bitcoin is the eighth largest financial asset in the world, larger even than Meta, formerly Facebook. And it’s the second largest commodity (loosely defined) after gold, which ranks far ahead at number one. All things being equal – and things are never truly “equal” – if Bitcoin hits $85,000, it will be larger than Alphabet/Google; and if it tops $94,000, Bitcoin will be bigger than Amazon. Bitcoin is big and getting bigger, but how should we think about this? Terra Incognita, or Maybe Jurassic Park? First, step back and consider what it takes to become one of the world’s largest financial assets. Some things are obvious. Gold has over 5,000 years of recorded human history. Its use as a form of money dates back to ancient Samaria and before. So, gold is a no-brainer as a key financial asset and instrument. Silver is in the same boat as gold. People have used silver for finance since time immemorial. Roman, Greek, Egyptian, Chinese, and other ancient coinages speak for themselves. The archaeology is there. Indeed, silver has long been money. Just because President Lyndon Johnson removed silver from U.S. currency in 1965 doesn’t mean the metal has lost its roots in finance. Now, look at another massive play on that list of ten market caps above: Saudi Aramco. Where’s the value there? In oil, of course, meaning in a useful and valuable form of energy. Everybody in the world uses oil, and most people wish they could use more of it. It stands to reason that oil will be around for decades, if not centuries. If anyone tries to tell you that the modern oil age is over, zero-carbon, etc., just walk away because they are silly and don’t know what they’re talking about. (Long story; not now.) In other words, gold, silver, and oil have value straight out of the ground. It’s easy to think of them as key elements of global finance. Now, look at those other massive financial assets: Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, Amazon, Alphabet and even Meta. What’s the claim to financial fame for those companies? They’re tech plays, and it’s not like they have any history as sources or stores of value. They’re all less than fifty years old; for example, Microsoft was founded in 1975, and Apple in 1976. And the others are all even more recent. As business concepts, the companies are built around a mix of digital hardware and software, with related sales operations underneath to create massive cash flow. But none of the tech companies have any roots as “money” by any classical definition. Nor do they make pretenses to be currencies. Okay, we’ve covered nine names on that top ten market cap list, bringing us back to number eight, Bitcoin. And here’s that terra incognita: Is Bitcoin anything like the other nine names? Does Bitcoin “sell” you something, like Amazon or Microsoft? No, you don’t buy books, sporting goods, or software from Bitcoin. And Bitcoin is definitely not a microchip play like Nvidia, or an iPhone like Apple. Nor is it a relational database and search engine like Alphabet or Meta; Bitcoin doesn’t generate cash by sucking up all the advertising revenue in the world. Meanwhile, Bitcoin does not produce energy like Saudi Aramco. Indeed, for the amount of, say, electrical energy required to “mine” just one Bitcoin (about 1.5Mw), you could melt about five tonnes of steel (about 300Kw each, more or less). This means that Bitcoin is a significant energy net user and not at all a net energy producer. To be sure, Bitcoin is not gold or silver. It’s not tangible. It has no mass. It’s not even fungible in the sense that an ounce of pure gold or silver is the same as any other ounce, not including metal shaped into coins, of course. In other words, there’s no Bitcoin on the periodic chart. According to Investopedia, Bitcoin is a “virtual currency designed to act as money and a form of payment outside the control of any one person, group, or entity, thus removing the need for third-party involvement in financial transactions.” In other words, Bitcoin is a mix of energy and computing power applied to blockchain code. In the end, it’s electrons in a storage device (your Bitcoin wallet, so to speak), leading to a defined, unique, and specific item within the digital ecosphere. The current cachet of Bitcoin is that it’s a form of payment, which presumes that a market system sets prices for real goods, and people will transact for those goods in this virtual currency. Well, okay, but so much for eliminating “third-party involvement.” All this, and Bitcoin is quite new to the world, conceived way back in… (checks notes)… 2009. That’s not exactly the deep historical pedigree of gold, silver, or oil. And the other large market cap plays listed above are actual businesses that predate at least 2009, even the current chipmaking darling Nvidia. As financial instruments go, and in terms of valuing an asset, Bitcoin is not just a new kid on the block, it’s an unknown play or terra incognita. And it’s probably not out of bounds to wonder if there’s a (metaphorical) Jurassic Park behind the wires here. What Could Go Wrong? Right now, lots of people are making a lot of money in a hurry from Bitcoin, right? So what’s the problem? Begin with the idea that when lots of people make a lot of money in a hurry from the same idea, there might just be problems. First comes Bitcoin's energy-intensive angle, noted above. Again, you can melt five tonnes of steel with the same electricity required to mine one Bitcoin. That’s a lot of electrons. So, one problematic issue is that Bitcoin – along with other cryptos, and definitely with artificial intelligence (AI) – is among the growing players for access to downstream electrical loads on the U.S. and global grid. And that electricity must come from somewhere. On the plus-side, people have come up with innovative energy methods for mining Bitcoin. They use solar power out in the desert; or burn “stranded” natural gas in far-off oilfields to power computer banks; or they set up shop in Iceland with its ample geothermal power. But the point is that Bitcoin uses high levels of energy in a world where energy is becoming more difficult to produce in amounts that nations and continents demand. Then we get to the issue of degraded power grids across the world, which in the U.S. means a system that’s generally old and maxed out. In the U.S., this growing power demand is absolutely a problem. Cryptos like Bitcoin (and related energy demands like AI) are about to super-strain the grid, leading to brownouts and blackouts. Move on to the communication and financial system required to utilize Bitcoin. Yes, we have the Worldwide Web, undersea cables, overhead satellites, and more. But if you’re looking for a way not to involve third parties in transactions, this isn’t it. In so many ways, the fate of your Bitcoin is in the hands of others. The world is filled with pitfalls to global communication, both accidental and intentional; the cut communications cables at the bottom of the Red Sea stand out, for example. The takeaway on this energy point is that storing and accessing your Bitcoin will require more than minimal third-party reliance. And now we arrive at the Tyrannosaurus Rex of Jurassic Park, to cultivate that metaphor I laid out before: What happens when governments want in on the action? Because it’s foolish to think that Bitcoin is some sort of unbreakable code. There’s no such thing. The biggest and best codebreakers in the world work for the likes of the U.S. government at the National Security Agency, if not counterparts in Russia, China, and other locales. Sooner or later, someone somewhere will figure out how to pickpocket your crypto wallet. Perhaps the government's touch will be benign, in the form of merely taxing your wealth or just the “gains,” as defined by tax-writing bureaucrats. Or perhaps things will be darker, and some government actor will wage electronic warfare on you and your Bitcoin just because they can. You never know, right? (Ask a Canadian Trucker whose bank accounts were seized.) One way or another, you should accept the fact that, sooner or later, Bitcoin will come within government reach if not under government control. This is not to say don’t swim in the Bitcoin pool. It’s to remind you that this electronic creation has come along fast, in a tumultuous time of monetary and fiscal irresponsibility, certainly by the U.S. government. Understandably, many people want to escape from the hand of the government; however, it’s just too bad that the government thinks differently. (Vote harder, I guess.) As everything plays out, how will Bitcoin remain denominated? In dollars? In other foreign currencies? Well, if that’s the case, then it’s back to playing in the government sandbox. Meanwhile, think outside the Western box here. Russia, China, and many other nations are accumulating gold and silver, and they, too, can do blockchain accounting. So what happens when those nations decide to pool their metal holdings and back each ounce with a blockchain code, essentially establishing their own gold-backed cryptocurrency? Perhaps a digital, gold-backed ruble or yuan. Well, overnight your code-backed Bitcoin will have to compete against a gold-backed electronic currency. And that pulls the plug on a key aspect of maintaining underlying value. Something Big, But… To sum up, yes, many people are doing well with Bitcoin. And yes, Bitcoin just overtook silver in terms of market cap. Something big is happening. But this big Bitcoin thing is also a new financial thing with no real history. Don’t be myopic or target-fixated on Bitcoin. In the big scheme, we’re all up against traditional gold, silver, and oil, as well as geopolitical competition from other nations that may not want to play by the Western rules anymore. If you’re doing well with Bitcoin, enjoy the ride. But all rides come to an end. And don’t forget to buy into the sturdy old classics, gold and silver, with their millennia of heritage. That’s all for now. Thank you for subscribing and reading. All the best, [Byron King] Byron W. King Senior Geologist, Paradigm Press Group [Paradigm]( ☰ ⊗ [ARCHIVE]( [ABOUT]( [Contact Us]( © 2024 Paradigm Press, LLC. 1001 Cathedral Street, Baltimore, MD 21201. By submitting your email address, you consent to Paradigm Press, LLC. delivering daily email issues and advertisements. To end your Rude Awakening e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from Rude Awakening, feel free to [click here.]( Please note: the mailbox associated with this email address is not monitored, so do not reply to this message. We welcome comments or suggestions at feedback@rudeawakening.info. This address is for feedback only. For questions about your account or to speak with customer service, [contact us here]( or call (844)-731-0984. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. We allow the editors of our publications to recommend securities that they own themselves. However, our policy prohibits editors from exiting a personal trade while the recommendation to subscribers is open. In no circumstance may an editor sell a security before subscribers have a fair opportunity to exit. The length of time an editor must wait after subscribers have been advised to exit a play depends on the type of publication. All other employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. Rude Awakening is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We do not rent or share your email address. Please read our [Privacy Statement.]( If you are having trouble receiving your Rude Awakening subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox by [whitelisting Rude Awakening.](