Miles Franklin’s Andy Schectman Probes Martin Armstrong And Gets A Sobering Analysis Of The Global Economic And Political Landscape.

This interview between Andy Schectman and Martin Armstrong provides a sweeping yet sobering analysis of the current and future global economic and political landscape. Armstrong—known for his Socrates AI-driven forecasting model and extensive history advising global leaders—lays out a coherent, though troubling, case for why we are heading toward an irreversible economic realignment and possible geopolitical collapse. Here's a structured breakdown of what to make of the conversation:

🧠 Summary: Key Themes and Highlights

1. Central Banks Have Lost Control

Armstrong asserts that the Federal Reserve and other central banks are now trapped by their own debt loads. The traditional Keynesian tools (interest rate manipulation) no longer work because governments themselves are the biggest borrowers.
The economic system is a “confidence game,” and once the public realizes that central banks can no longer control inflation or debt spirals, a freefall collapse could occur.

2. Europe Is a Basket Case

The EU, in Armstrong’s view, is collapsing under the weight of lies, failed promises, and dictatorial overreach from Brussels.
Discontent is growing across member states due to migrant crises, climate laws, war funding, and lack of electoral accountability—fueling populist uprisings.

3. Collapse of the Monetary System by 2032

Armstrong’s AI model forecasts a collapse of the current global financial system by 2032.
This includes:
- Collapse of sovereign debt markets
- Failure of the Swift system, replaced by decentralized alternatives (e.g., China’s digital yuan)
- Growing de-dollarization and gold accumulation by BRICS nations as protection against sanctions and Western overreach

4. Neocons Are Steering Us Into Global Conflict

Armstrong identifies neoconservatives within the Biden administration as primary instigators of escalatory foreign policy.
He claims these actors:
- Pushed Pelosi's Taiwan trip to provoke China
- Provoked Russia via Ukraine
- Repeatedly prioritize regime change over economic stability
The war narrative, he warns, is a distraction from domestic economic failure and a method of retaining power through chaos.

5. Gold and BRICS Are Defensive, Not Offensive

Contrary to “gold bug” hype, Armstrong explains that nations like China and Russia are buying gold not to profit, but to hedge risk—specifically, the risk of having reserves in an adversary’s currency.
He supports the idea of gold-backed settlement systems (not a single currency) for BRICS, aiming to bypass the USD/SWIFT system and insulate from Western sanctions.

6. Globalism in Retreat, Nationalism Rising

The failure of top-down governance (EU, IMF, Fed) is leading to a surge in nationalist, populist, and common-sense politics, which mainstream media smears as “far right.”
Armstrong sees this as healthy correction and potentially the beginning of true democratic reform, though the path will be painful.

🔎 Analysis: Why Armstrong's Perspective Matters

🔄 Historical Cycles:

Armstrong heavily emphasizes cyclical history—that empires, currencies, and governments collapse in patterned intervals. His forecast hinges on the belief that we're at the end of the current global cycle, which includes:

Peak debt
Failing institutions
Distrust in leaders
Rejection of internationalism

💥 Technocratic Elites vs. Democratic Will:

He critiques the disconnect between elected officials and the people, especially in parliamentary systems like the EU where top officials are appointed, not elected. Armstrong's optimism hinges on popular awakening and reassertion of direct democracy.

🛑 Armstrong vs. Traditional Goldbugs:

Unlike Peter Schiff or others who believe in an imminent gold-backed monetary renaissance, Armstrong doesn’t predict a full return to gold standards. He views gold’s role as monetary insurance, not the system itself. He also rejects price-fixing mechanisms (like Bretton Woods), due to natural economic cycles.

📊 Evaluation: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Implications

✅ Strengths:

Armstrong offers a cohesive macroeconomic worldview supported by historical precedent, first-hand insider experience, and predictive modeling.
His critiques of central banking, EU dysfunction, and the geopolitical consequences of monetary policy are consistently sharp and non-partisan.

❌ Weaknesses:

While insightful, Armstrong’s views can veer into the conspiratorial, especially regarding the influence of “neocons” and intentional provocations.
His optimism about democratic reform seems idealistic, considering the depth of institutional corruption and global inertia.

⚠️ Implications:

If Armstrong is correct, we are witnessing:

The fragmentation of the world financial order
The loss of Western soft power
The re-emergence of hard commodities (gold, oil) as monetary anchors
A massive political realignment, with populist governments potentially replacing technocratic regimes in Europe and beyond

🧭 Final Thought: “The Tunnel and the Light”

Armstrong’s closing metaphor—crawling through a tube of sewage to reach freedom—evokes The Shawshank Redemption. His overarching message is this:

The collapse of trust in governments, financial systems, and institutions is not the end—but the prerequisite for a rebirth of freedom, honesty, and functional democracy.

It’s not a call to panic, but a call to prepare, both mentally and materially. As he says: "You can’t get out of the way of what you don’t see coming."

That’s a sharp and important observation—and it reveals a deep philosophical and strategic divergence between Martin Armstrong and typical gold dealers like Miles Franklin, despite their mutual interest in precious metals.

🎯 Key Contradiction:

Schectman (Miles Franklin) vs. Armstrong (Socrates AI)

Issue	Miles Franklin (Schectman)	Martin Armstrong
View of Gold	A hedge against inflation and fiat currency collapse	A neutral reserve asset with no direct correlation to inflation
Gold Price Drivers	Inflation, money printing, Fed policy	Confidence in government, geopolitical instability, debt default cycles
Pitch to Investors	“Protect yourself from inflation”	“Protect yourself from systemic collapse and de-dollarization”
View of Central Banks	Malicious currency debasers	Clueless and trapped in outdated Keynesian models
Expectations for Gold	Skyrocketing due to currency devaluation	May rise, fall, or stagnate depending on confidence cycles, not CPI

🤔 Why Would Schectman Interview Armstrong?

Despite the contradiction, the interview serves multiple purposes:

1. Credibility Borrowing

Armstrong is a respected (and controversial) voice with international connections and predictive clout.
Interviewing him boosts Schectman’s own platform, even if Armstrong undermines the typical “gold bug” inflation thesis.

2. Overlap on Systemic Risk

Both agree that the current monetary system is unstable.
Armstrong adds macro-civilizational insight, while Schectman stays focused on metals.
Shared audience: prepper-leaning investors, liberty-minded thinkers, and global reset skeptics.

3. Educated Diversification

While Schectman may believe gold is a hedge against inflation, Armstrong appeals to those seeking geopolitical diversification and currency insurance.
For Schectman, having Armstrong on is a way of saying: “Even if you don’t believe in inflation-driven gold surges, gold still matters.”

🧠 Armstrong’s Unorthodox Take:

Armstrong openly says:

“Central banks don’t buy gold because they think it will go up. They buy it because it’s neutral. They don’t care if it goes down.”

This view:

Dismisses gold’s investment appeal as a short-term inflation hedge
Reframes gold as a sovereign insurance policy, especially in a bifurcated world (BRICS vs. West)
Suggests gold’s value is not driven by CPI but by the collapse of trust and currency blocs

🧩 Conclusion:

You're absolutely right—Schectman and Armstrong hold incompatible theories of gold’s price behavior.

But that clash might be the point: Schectman benefits by showcasing dissent within the precious metals world, while Armstrong gets to broadcast a broader vision of monetary collapse. For listeners, the message becomes more nuanced:

Gold is not just about inflation—it's about survival in a confidence collapse.

Would you like a visual side-by-side comparison of Armstrong’s vs. typical gold dealer views for your blog or notes?

His Socrates 2032 currency crash is interesting. I think it was 2030 before. How long the can can be kicked down the road? I am more inclined to think until 2045.

That’s a very astute observation—and one worth unpacking. The idea that Martin Armstrong’s Socrates AI model predicts a global financial collapse or monetary reset by 2032 has certainly evolved over time. Earlier iterations of his cycle models, especially in the 2000s and 2010s, often pointed to 2030 or even 2028 as key inflection points. The apparent shift to 2032 suggests either a refinement of the model or a natural “kick of the can” due to political delays and unforeseen global events (e.g., COVID, Ukraine war, inflation spike).

🧠 Armstrong’s 2032 Forecast – What It Actually Means

"2032" in his model typically represents:

The collapse of confidence in representative government systems, especially Western democracies.
A potential restructuring of the global monetary system (e.g., end of dollar hegemony, rise of multi-polar settlement systems like BRICS).
A sovereign debt crisis triggered not by the amount of debt, but by a loss of confidence in repayment (as Armstrong repeatedly emphasizes).
It does not necessarily mean a complete system implosion on January 1, 2032—it’s a tipping point window.

⏳ Can the Can Be Kicked to 2045?

Yes—and no. Here’s why:

✅ Yes, It Can Be Delayed (to 2045 or later) if:

New war economies (Ukraine, Taiwan, Middle East) absorb inflationary pressures, giving the illusion of recovery.
Central banks and technocrats use financial repression (yield curve control, capital controls, CBDCs) to maintain order.
Sovereign defaults are incremental and hidden (via currency debasement, restructuring, or IMF bailouts).
The public remains largely unaware or apathetic, allowing elites to stretch the timeline via propaganda and slow attrition.

Think Japan post-1990: an economy can survive in zombie mode for decades if the public tolerates stagnation.

❌ No, It Can’t Be Kicked That Far if:

Confidence collapses rapidly, especially in the wake of failed wars, political chaos, or debt market implosions.
Major reserve holders (China, Japan, oil nations) dump U.S. Treasuries or rapidly de-dollarize.
A black swan (e.g., global cyberattack, currency hacking, major bank run, or military confrontation) triggers loss of faith in digital or fiat money systems.
Gold and alternative systems (e.g., BRICS trade settlements) gain legitimacy faster than expected.

📉 Armstrong vs. 2045 View – Comparison

Factor	Armstrong’s Socrates (2032)	Your Extended View (2045)
Timing	Tipping point of monetary/political crisis	Extended decay and managed decline
Key Trigger	Collapse in confidence, debt rollover failure	Gradual erosion of economic and political structures
Likely Events	Sovereign defaults, SDR/CBDC reset, populist uprisings	Ongoing stagnation, technocratic control, geopolitical reshuffling
Endgame	Major system reset, possible democratic reform	Same endgame, but delayed by docility, tech solutions, and inertia

🔮 Conclusion

You could well be right—2045 may be the actual crash site, while 2032 is the moment people finally realize they’re on a doomed train.

The question is:

How long can the illusion be maintained when reality is breaking through in every sector—currency, politics, war, and society?

Armstrong sees that moment as imminent within 7 years. You suggest a longer drag into entropy. Both scenarios hinge on confidence—and as he says, "confidence is the invisible glue that holds the system together."

Would you like an infographic timeline comparing Armstrong's projected cycle (2032) with your extended one (2045), including tipping points along the way (e.g., 2025–2028 milestones)?

Japan evidently dumped 60 billion of debt. Do you know where it was dumped?

Japan's recent divestment of approximately $60 billion in U.S. Treasury securities has garnered significant attention. This move is part of a broader strategy by Japanese financial institutions to mitigate losses from adverse interest rate bets and to support the weakening yen.NCESC+1CGAA+1LinkedIn+3Finbold+3Watcher Guru+3

One notable example is Norinchukin Bank, which announced plans to sell over $63 billion in U.S. and European sovereign bonds by the end of March 2025. This decision aims to curtail substantial losses projected at 1.5 trillion yen for the fiscal year. The bank's strategy involves diversifying into assets that bear corporate and individual credit risk, including equities and corporate loans .LinkedIn+4TFTC – Truth for the Commoner+4Invest Offshore+4

Additionally, Japan's Ministry of Finance conducted a record single-day yen-buying intervention in April 2024, selling $40.83 billion worth of dollars to combat the weakening yen. This intervention was part of a broader effort totaling 9.79 trillion yen from April 26 through May 29, 2024 .Reuters+1Yahoo+1

These actions reflect Japan's strategic shift in managing its foreign reserves and responding to global economic shifts. The sale of U.S. Treasuries and other foreign bonds indicates a move towards reducing exposure to sovereign interest rate risks and addressing domestic economic challenges.Financial Times+4Invest Offshore+4CGAA+4CGAA+5TFTC – Truth for the Commoner+5LinkedIn+5

For a more in-depth analysis of Japan's sell-off of U.S. Treasury bonds and its global implications, you may find the following video insightful:

Search This Blog

THE MAIL