Repugnant: The Asian Nationalist Gold Hoarder
In the West, it’s often mistrust—a hedge against governments, banks, and systems they suspect will eventually fail.
In parts of Asia, it’s often trust—in the quiet assumption that gold will always be safe because someone says so.
Both are emotional, not rational.
But the second one—the trust reflex—is more dangerous.
When Safety Becomes Submission
In economies where real estate is over-priced, savings rates are high, and domestic growth has slowed, gold becomes a psychological refuge.
People aren’t chasing returns; they’re chasing reassurance.
They see currency devaluation, shrinking opportunity, and stagnant wages.
They feel the decay but can’t articulate it as loss of optionality—the ability to act, adapt, or design their own outcomes.
They cling to what feels sovereign—gold bars, government-minted coins, safe deposit boxes.
But safety isn’t sovereignty.
It’s stagnation disguised as security.
How the Narrative Flipped
Global media often romanticizes this behaviour:
“Look how disciplined Asian savers are. Look how wise their long-term view of gold is.”
That’s not wisdom.
That’s systemic conditioning.
It’s a cultural algorithm that mistakes obedience for intelligence.
The result is a generation of investors who think they’re protecting themselves while reinforcing the very structures that limit them.
The Optionality Paradox
Gold doesn’t protect against stagnation—it enshrines it.
When citizens pour their capital into inert assets instead of innovation, they forfeit optionality.
They trade mobility for comfort.
Optionality isn’t about waiting for collapse—it’s about designing consequence.
The Recurrence Mindset
Contrast that with recurrence: a system built on iteration, authorship, and consequence creation.
It doesn’t rely on faith.
It doesn’t need to believe that “the state will fail” or “the emperor will save us.”
It just acts, continuously, architecturally.
Recurrence compounds because it lives in motion.