Luke Broyles Is Making The Case For Bitcoin
With a Movie in the Works, This Filmmaker Is Planning to Orange-Pill the Masses
Meet Luke
After listening to Luke Broyles’ appearance on Robert Breedlove’s What is Money? podcast, I knew I wanted to learn more about what this guy is doing. Before diving into all of that, and strictly speaking about information-delivery techniques, Broyles’ processing power felt reminiscent of Saylor, stacking meaning-like functions that elucidate the first principles of a particular event or technology.
Listen to Broyles discuss why bitcoin will overtake the U.S. dollar and how centralizing money inherently devalues it:
Bitcoin Documentary
Broyles is working on a documentary entitled The Case For Bitcoin. The idea is to make a film that is highly consumable by mainstream culture, and thereby create a bigger imprint in terms of awareness and education. The film is in progress and interested supporters can donate via a link available with the short trailer on YouTube. It has currently raised ~$14,000 of its $20,000 goal. Part of Broyles’ fundraising strategy is the proposition that every dollar donated will generate one new bitcoiner.
Broyles: The Interview
I’ve been listening to the What Is Money? show for at least a year, probably two, and have listened to at least 70% of that content. Particularly fascinating is the foundational series with Michael Saylor, which is the first batch of recordings that Breedlove released on the show. Breedlove “highly recommends” this series, or you can catch the consolidated 1-hr version.
Broyles reminded me of Saylor in the way he thinks about systems and in particular, game theory. I reached out to see if he’d answer a few questions for Bankless Publishing about his views on finance and his role as a filmmaker.
Can you tell us a little bit about your background in filmmaking?
I began making films many years ago when I was young, well before making movies exploded with the invention of smartphones and digital cameras. I made feature films, short films, a documentary in Mali, and a few other documentaries that did quite well in the film festival circuit.
I’m also currently working on a few non-Bitcoin side film projects that are moving along slowly and steadily including a documentary about stove installation in Guatemala. I remember back when the big debate in the film industry was whether film was better or digital cameras would overtake it. Here we are 15 years later, that debate is settled, and numerous more technologies are on the horizon — Bitcoin being the most urgent, in my view.
How did you first learn about Bitcoin and what fascinated you about it?
I first heard of bitcoin when it was $10,000 or so, in 2017. What really made it begin to click for me was realizing how billions around the world do not have property rights, and bitcoin theoretically made that possible for them. They haven’t been able to own the rights to the land they live on, buy into the American stock market, or securely store gold or paper currency savings other than under their mattress due to a lack of banking. That alone is enough to obsess one’s mind for years. We very well may double or triple the number of people with property rights in the coming decade(s).
What would be the ideal result of The Case for Bitcoin becoming a successful documentary?
The goal is to ‘orange pill’ at least 20,000 people. Since the cost/budget of the film is $20,000 this would equate to $1 spent per new Bitcoiner. We all know it takes numerous hours for people to consider a new technological concept, especially one that is digitally native, so if we can achieve tens of thousands of new Bitcoiners with this effort I view that result as fantastic.
I aim to achieve this by defining the problem of human-controlled currency so well that the solution of apolitical money becomes obvious. All other forms of money are either directly (political currency, corporate stock, paper notes) or indirectly (gold, silver) controlled by the human beings that either issue the currency or secure its authenticity. Bitcoin is the first that doesn’t succumb to this weakness.
One of the more fascinating elements I’ve heard you discuss is that if money can be centralized, it inevitably will be. What does that mean and how does it work?
I believe no human being is perfect and everyone is capable of corruption and destruction. I don’t think there is any human who is moral, righteous, and ‘good’ enough to handle that responsibility over time. I personally believe if there is an avenue or loophole where humans can exploit money, they inevitably will every single time; hundreds of trillions of dollars of incentive makes the eventual distortion inevitable. Even if 99% of the world was without this temptation, all it takes is a single person to exploit and thus erode.
Why did cutting Russia out of the SWIFT network damage the network itself?
It’s game theory. The U.S. cutting Russia out of SWIFT was the most logical move to make, and yet this will escalate the long-term destruction of USD. A currency has value based on its network effect, so cutting out one of the largest participants in a given network inherently erodes the value of the network. This is why we call it a “debt spiral”, in that each progressive move escalates the destruction, and yet it is the only move that makes sense.
Think of a bank run… You will want to withdraw your money immediately, which ironically puts all the remaining funds held by the bank at higher risk. Your own move for self preservation today is increasing the probability for destruction tomorrow. It’s the same problem with insolvency and negative feedback loops. Just as a credit card addict must take out more debt to finance this month’s expenses, while digging themselves a deeper debt hole, governments fall into negative feedback loops too. The only option to avoid the pain of the addiction today is to make the consequences of the addiction tomorrow greater.
How does BRICS play into the evolution of financial systems on a world wide scale?
BRICS is a group of nations that are attempting to create a new form of currency backed by gold and commodities to compete against the U.S. dollar, however, this will inevitably not solve the problem they seek to resolve. Bitcoin is the answer they don’t want to hear, yet the only true solution in my opinion.
You mentioned in your interview when game theory is applied to finance, bitcoin inevitably wins. Can you unpack that for our readership?
The reason this is important to elaborate upon is for people to understand this in their own lives. If you sell off 5% of your bonds for bitcoin you put the remaining 95% of your bonds at higher risk, thus justifying a faster selling off of bonds for bitcoin.
Selling bonds to buy bitcoin is like pouring gasoline on the house fire every single time you buy fire insurance. If one diverts energy away from the insolvent system towards a solvent system, they increase the insolvency in the former system.
In the rumor of a bank run your only logical move is to withdraw all of your cash as soon as possible, which, as mentioned, ironically makes the probability of the bank run increase. Buying bitcoin is withdrawing your money from bonds and insolvent money, which in turn escalates the insolvency and decline of those forms of money.
This is the idea of game theory. We can see it in practice. When Michael Saylor decided to adopt a bitcoin strategy for his company, he sold off his own stock and raised as much debt as possible to acquire as much bitcoin as possible. Likewise, when a person comes to understand the game theory of bitcoin they sell off the weak assets as quickly as possible for the perceived stronger asset.
In the same way, we all already trade our perceived weaker assets for stronger assets, many — if not all — will do so if and when opinions change on Bitcoin.
Do you see Ethereum playing a role in the financial future of digital ownership? If so why? If not, why not?
While I used to be more optimistic on Ethereum I’ve become less convinced over time that Ethereum plays a role in this future. I have numerous concerns, including:
- pre-mine/token distribution
- the switch from POW to POS
- multiple shifts in monetary policy.
There is no solution to the Blockchain trilemma (scalability, security, and decentralization), and I think the trade-offs Bitcoin made are better than the ones Ethereum made. The best comparison is that of the “internets” of the early days that failed, and yet it was TCP/IP that survived. I think for this reason, Bitcoin has a much higher upside potential than Ethereum as well as much lower downside. Bitcoin is absurdly more secure and because it is far more secure it is far more justifiable for large organizations to allocate towards it.
Ethereum may have innovations in the coming years, but I suspect these innovators will trend towards the highest-security protocol as their industry grows in size. People can do what they want with their money, but Bitcoin is a far more convincing argument to me since (unlike Ethereum) its monetary policy is not controlled by boards of humans.
What do you think the price of bitcoin will be in 5 years, and why?
I don’t like to speculate on the fiat price of bitcoin because I believe fiat itself is a flawed way of measuring value. If I had to guess I would say in the $100,000s.
However, if we repriced unfunded liabilities into the remaining bitcoin to be bought, a $10,000,000 bitcoin is not just feasible but conservative. While it’s possible, my expectation is far lower.
Who are some inspirational thinkers in the Bitcoin space that you follow, and why?
Some good folks I’d recommend would be Jeff Booth, Michael Saylor, Jason Lowery, Lyn Alden, Alex Gladstein, Adam Back, and even the original writings of Satoshi and Finney. There are things I disagree with each of these individuals on, however, I find their perspectives each unique.
What is your favorite book related to this subject, and why?
The Price of Tomorrow (Jeff Booth) is probably the best source for understanding the nature of inflation and deflation, which ultimately is at the crux of the argument for a finite-supply form of money.
Broyles: The Conclusion
The role of inflation in the purchasing power of currency is clearly a major issue in the economy. Broyles contends that bitcoin may be an antidote to this pernicious devaluation process. Luke is very active in the financial space, currently working for The Bitcoin Adviser, where he helps clients understand Bitcoin basics and assist with collaborative custody and multisig solutions.
Author Bio
Frank America is an author, musician, and comedian. He is Editor-in-Chief of The Rug News, and a Content Manager/Staff Writer at Bankless Publishing.
Editor/Designer Bio
trewkat is a writer, editor, and designer at BanklessDAO. She’s interested in learning about crypto and NFTs, with a particular focus on how best to communicate this knowledge to others.
BanklessDAO is an education and media engine dedicated to helping individuals achieve financial independence.
This post does not contain financial advice, only educational information. By reading this article, you agree and affirm the above, as well as that you are not being solicited to make a financial decision, and that you in no way are receiving any fiduciary projection, promise, or tacit inference of your ability to achieve financial gains.
Bankless Publishing is always accepting submissions for publication. We’d love to read your work, so please submit your article here!
More Like This
The Future of Bitcoin Beyond 21 Million by Frank America
The Crazy World of Bitcoin by Tigi76
WTF is a Hash Rate? by Frank America
