Underthrow

Subscribe and support us at Underthrow.org

Economist and commentator Peter St Onge joins host Max Borders for a wide-ranging conversation covering the current economic outlook, monetary policy, healthcare reform, tariffs, and the long-term implications of AI and automation. Here are the key takeaways.

The Economy Is Better Than the Headlines Suggest

St. Onge opened with a surprisingly optimistic near-term read. GDP and productivity growth are among the strongest since the 1980s, driven not by domestic government spending—as was the case under Biden—but by foreign investment. Trillions of dollars in foreign and domestic capital commitments are flowing in, partly prompted by Trump’s trade negotiations. The rule of thumb, he noted, is that a trillion dollars in investment generates roughly a million jobs—though the lag between groundbreaking and hiring can stretch on for years.

On inflation, the official CPI sits around 2.4%, but the private-sector tracker Truflation—which scrapes roughly 15 million prices in real time—is running below 1%. “That’s about as close to zero inflation as you can get in a central bank regime,” St. Onge said.

Why the Fed Will Never Allow Deflation (Even Though It Should)

St. Onge offered a crisp Austrian-school explanation of why the Fed is constitutionally allergic to deflation. The Fed’s own models conflate two very different phenomena: the destructive debt-deflation that follows a boom-bust cycle (which the Fed itself causes) and the benign, productivity-driven deflation that characterized America’s economic golden age from roughly 1870 to 1900—a period that saw real wages double and produced the foundational inventions of the modern world.

“The only deflation that’s bad,” he argued, “is the one the Fed creates.” The institution, he suggested, uses deflation as a convenient boogeyman to justify keeping the money printer running—a posture that happens to serve Wall Street handsomely.

The Most Hawkish Fed Chair Since Volcker?

About the incoming Fed chair, Kevin Warsh, St. Onge was cautiously optimistic. Warsh’s signature idea is a “Robin Hood” monetary stance: cut rates for Main Street while simultaneously selling down the Fed’s $6.5 trillion balance sheet to soak up the inflationary pressure. In theory, this means cheap credit for ordinary borrowers without gifting Wall Street an inflation windfall.

The catch? Selling trillions in assets would hit bondholders and banks hard, and there’s a finite amount of quantitative tightening the system can absorb before bond markets crack—as they did briefly in 2019 and more dramatically in the UK in 2022. “I love where his heart is at,” St. Onge said. “The question is whether he can actually follow through.”

Healthcare: Captured by the Cartel, Unreformable by Congress

On the Affordable Care Act and healthcare reform more broadly, St. Onge was blunt: Congress will not fix it. Every serious reform must pass through veto gates held by the AMA, hospital conglomerates, pharma, and insurers—all of whom have both parties on retainer. The filibuster requires bipartisan agreement, which is impossible when the “Care-tel” is buying on both sides of the aisle.

The only reforms that have moved the needle, he argued, are executive orders — like Trump’s most-favored-nation drug pricing rule, which would never have survived a congressional vote. This points toward a broader tension: in a system this captured, can anything meaningful happen through normal democratic channels?

The Big Beautiful Bill: A Missed Opportunity

St. Onge graded the recently passed budget legislation as decent on tax cuts—extending business and corporate rate reductions that he views as among the most economically productive changes possible—but a significant disappointment on spending. DOGE identified roughly $1.5 trillion in waste and fraud, approximately equal to the entire annual income tax take. Congress trimmed a fraction of that, then offset even those savings with border security and military spending.

“After 50 years of promising to cut spending, they did not cut spending,” he said flatly. His preferred alternative: slash taxes on small businesses (which generate five to ten jobs per dollar compared to large corporations), enact a sunset clause on all regulations, and pass the REINS Act to require congressional approval for major new rules. That combination, he believes, could push sustainable GDP growth to 4–6%—enough to gradually outgrow the debt burden even without meaningful spending cuts.

Tariffs: Bad in Theory, Defensible in Practice

As a free-market economist, St. Onge is philosophically opposed to tariffs—they’re taxes, and lumpy ones at that. But he offered two pragmatic defenses of the current approach. First, they’re working as negotiating leverage: Canada’s 90% tariff on American dairy, Europe’s barriers to U.S. goods, and similar arrangements represent genuine discrimination against American companies. Several trading partners have already reduced barriers in response.

Second, the reshoring strategy has historical precedent. Reagan-era pressure brought Japanese automakers to U.S. soil—today, most Japanese cars sold in America are built here. The trillions in announced investments from Korean, Taiwanese, and European manufacturers suggest the same dynamic is underway. “Once they move here, they tend to stay,” he noted—particularly European manufacturers, for whom U.S. cost advantages over Germany are substantial.

AI, Robots, and the Future of Work

St. Onge pushed back on both utopian and dystopian AI narratives. His core argument: AI and robotics will reshape the economy at very different speeds. AI software is effectively free at the margin—a company already paying for ChatGPT can replace junior lawyers or customer service staff with minimal additional investment. Robots, by contrast, require enormous capital deployment: “You need one AI for 8 billion people, but five robots for every McDonald’s.”

His reference point is electrification. Electricity was proven superior to steam power around 1890. Half of American factories weren’t electrified until 1920. Installed base and capital costs create enormous inertia even when the superior technology is obvious.

The longer-term picture, he argued, is likely to follow the pattern of every previous automation wave: temporary dislocation followed by the creation of more and better-paid jobs. The Industrial Revolution eliminated roughly 90% of existing occupations—nearly everyone in 1800 was a farm laborer—and replaced them with something far better. The AI transition will likely do the same, with a particular expansion in human-to-human services: personal training, childcare, elder care, bespoke craftsmanship, experiences that people want precisely because they’re human-made.

“Humans love humans,” he concluded. “That’s what’s going to save us all.”

On Bitcoin, Gold, and the Political Horizon

On the recent divergence between gold (up) and Bitcoin (down), St. Onge offered a simple explanation: Bitcoin investors expected more from the Trump administration—particularly a strategic Bitcoin reserve—and didn’t get it. Meanwhile, gold, silver, and AI-adjacent assets are currently competing for exactly the same investor profile: skeptical, technically minded, Fed-hostile. “They’ll be back,” he said of Bitcoin holders.

Asked for his magic-wand policy, he didn’t hesitate: abolish the income tax, end the Federal Reserve, and pack the Supreme Court with justices willing to enforce the Tenth Amendment and dismantle the post-New Deal administrative state.

Peter St. Onge publishes daily economic commentary at @profstonge on X.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe

Subscribe and Support: UNDERTHROW.org

What does it actually take to become a mature, resilient, self-aware human being—and why does it matter so much right now?

This week, Max Borders sits down with Michael D. Ostrolenk—master coach, psychotherapist, and founder of Resilience Optimized. They explore some of the most pressing questions about personal development, masculinity, and what it means to show up well in the world.

The Broken-People Problem

The conversation opens with an uncomfortable observation: there seem to be a lot of people trying to fix the world who haven’t done much work on themselves. Ostrolenk identifies two telltale markers—emotional dysregulation and what he calls “tunnel blindness,” an inability or unwillingness to engage with worldviews outside one’s own ideological bubble. His prescription isn’t to stop caring about the world, but to do the inner work before focusing on the world’s problems.

How Change Actually Happens

Rather than dwelling on why people behave the way they do (the psychodynamic “my mother, my father” approach), Ostrolenk focuses on how—specifically, how people physically and emotionally experience their own reactions. By developing somatic awareness of what anger, anxiety, or defensiveness actually feels like in the body, people can begin to create a crucial gap between stimulus and response. That gap, he argues, is where freedom and maturity live.

The Problem with Modern Therapy

Max raises the provocative thesis of Abigail Shrier’s Bad Therapy—that a lot of contemporary therapeutic practice makes people worse by locking them into a victim identity organized around their wounds. Ostrolenk largely agrees. He describes his own four-part framework (wound healing, self-regulation, evolution of consciousness, and physical optimization) and argues that therapists too often get stuck on the wound piece, keeping clients cycling in a merry-go-round of pathology-as-identity rather than moving them toward healing and growth.

Resilience 2.0

Together with former Army Ranger J.C. Glick, Ostrolenk has developed what he calls “Resilience 2.0.” While Resilience 1.0 is the David Goggins model—hard training, mental toughness, discipline—2.0 integrates that with something harder for many men: the capacity to sit with one’s own inner experience without reaching for a distraction. Porn, alcohol, overwork, endless scrolling—these are all ways of avoiding what’s actually going on inside. And what’s going on inside, Ostrolenk insists, is valuable information.

Victimhood and the External Locus of Control

The conversation turns to the cultural epidemic of victimhood mentality—the way social media amplifies and rewards the performance of grievance. Ostrolenk connects this directly to a weak internal locus of control. True sovereignty, he points out with a certain dry humor, isn’t what a man thinks it is when his wife can push his buttons at will. Real self-mastery means being able to observe your own psychophysiology and choose your response rather than being at the mercy of whoever last said something that triggered you.

Smiling at Adversity

Bad things happen. That’s not a flaw in the design. It’s the design. Ostrolenk’s approach draws on both the psychological literature on post-traumatic growth and ancient wisdom traditions (he and Max spend a wonderful few minutes on the Tibetan Buddhist story of Milarepa, inviting his demons in for tea). The key shift is from “why is this happening to me?” to “what is this happening for me?” This is not toxic positivity, but a mature orientation toward adversity that enables growth.

Healthy and Unhealthy Masculinity

On the question of masculinity, Ostrolenk frames it as a continuum rather than a binary. At one extreme: withdrawal (”taking your toys and going home”). At the other: hyperaggression. The healthy middle is genuine assertiveness—knowing what you want, expressing it clearly, and doing so without either shutting down or blowing up. Aristotle would recognize this as the golden mean; Ostrolenk just works with couples who haven’t found it yet.

The Virtue of Curiosity

Asked for his single most important piece of relationship advice, Ostrolenk lands on curiosity. Most relationship conflict is ignited by misinterpretation—assuming the worst intent behind a partner’s words or actions and then reacting to that interpretation rather than checking it. Being genuinely curious (not strategically curious, not lawyer-curious) before you act is, he says, one of the most powerful tools available for defusing conflict before it starts.

Michael Ostrolenk is the founder of Resilience Optimized and co-leader of Team Fudoshin, a men’s development group integrating warrior discipline, somatic intelligence, and depth psychology.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe

Subscribe and support Underthrow.org

Editor’s Note: At root, I am committed to a doctrine of Respect for Persons. To the extent that we must live with a violence-monopoly government, law enforcement agents should be trained to respect the life, liberty, and property of every person they encounter. To the extent that citizen protestors seek to exercise their right to express themselves or protest, they have a responsibility to engage peacefully or reckon with the consequences of civil disobedience. Therefore, authorities and activists alike should take all reasonable measures to stay within the bounds of morality and law. This should go without saying.Of course, reasonable people can disagree about the justice of existing laws and the manner in which they should be changed. But adherence to any principle of reciprocal nonviolence is difficult to maintain when human beings consistently cross these lines, whether in the service of strategy or enforcement. Multiple dangerous interactions will almost certainly invite trouble—not ‘good trouble,’ but deadly trouble. This video essay is not intended as tu quoque or a partisan screed. Instead, I invite viewers to consider the issue in its totality and ask whether any descent into tit-for-tat violence is worth people on either side becoming pawns on power’s chessboard. If not, what should we do? —MB

In this video essay, I present a dark theory about the intersection of immigration policy, demographic change, and political power in America.

The Setup

Under President Obama, aggressive deportation policies (2.7+ million removals) drew little protest from the American left. Meanwhile, blue states like New York, California, and Illinois were hemorrhaging population to red states, which meant losing congressional seats in the 2020 census—seats that translate directly to electoral college votes and House representation (apportionment).

The Theory

What if the dramatic shift in border enforcement under Biden (10.8+ million encounters from 2021-2024) wasn’t just a policy change, but an integrated strategic response? Since census apportionment counts the total population—not citizens or voters—importing populations to blue states could preserve congressional seats regardless of voting eligibility.

The Players

The video essay traces funding and organizational networks through George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, John Podesta’s involvement in the Transition Integrity Project, and socialist sinophile Neville Roy Singham’s activist funding operations.

The Escalation

As Trump promises deportations, street confrontations between protesters and ICE agents intensify. My theory suggests these volatile situations are strategically orchestrated—creating martyrs, delegitimizing enforcement, and turning public opinion in crucial midterm cycles and future census counts.

The Question

Whether accurate or not, the underlying facts remain: blue states lost seats, Biden-era border enforcement dropped dramatically, millions entered and were transported to key states, and isolated political violence is escalating.

I ask readers to consider whether this represents a merely organic policy evolution or a series of calculated strategies in a partisan competition for political power.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe

Underthrow.org: Subscribe and support!In today’s episode, Max sits down with screenwriter and co-founder of The Story Incubator, Erin O’Connor, for a fascinating exploration of how storytelling can bridge political divides and repair our fractured culture.

O’Connor argues that America has “shattered into warring factions” and entered what political scientists call “lethal mass partisanship.” But rather than accepting this doom loop, she offers an alternative—strategic storytelling that works on the brain in ways political arguments do not.

The Neuroscience of Story. When we engage deeply with narratives, our brains literally merge with the characters. fMRI studies show we don’t just observe characters—we become them, experiencing their lives and emotions as our own. This unique cognitive process allows stories to enlarge our sense of who we are and reduce barriers between different groups.

Real-World Impact. O’Connor shares compelling examples of stories that changed society: Will and Grace softening attitudes toward gay marriage, The X-Files inspiring the “Scully Effect” that drove women into STEM careers, and Dallas Buyers Club sparking the bipartisan Right to Try movement that became federal law.

Beyond Preaching. The conversation tackles why preachy messaging fails. When confronted with arguments that challenge our worldview, our brains experience it as a physical threat. Stories offer an “end run” around this defensive response, allowing us to explore new perspectives without triggering tribal reactions.

The Miss Virginia Case Study. O’Connor discusses her work on this film about school choice, demonstrating how to frame a politically explosive issue in terms of universal values—a mother’s love, civil rights, and equal opportunity. By transcending partisan talking points, the story made space for people across the political spectrum to find common ground.

The Dallas Buyers Club Research. In a groundbreaking study, O’Connor and her team tracked the neurological responses of liberals, moderates, and conservatives while they watched Dallas Buyers Club. The research explores whether diverse viewers were watching “one movie or three movies”—and how the same narrative allowed each group to anchor themselves philosophically while reaching the same conclusion.

Practical Methodology. O’Connor reveals principles for creating high-impact stories: respecting characters across the political spectrum, creating moral complexity, allowing space for competing viewpoints, and understanding that storytelling is “not a game—it’s power.”

The episode concludes with a discussion of the challenges facing storytelling in our short-form, scroll-through digital environments, and how creators might adapt these principles for an age of fragmented attention.

This is essential viewing for anyone interested in bridge-building, cultural change, narrative strategy, or the intersection of neuroscience and storytelling.

Guest—Erin O’Connor, Screenwriter and Co-founder of The Story IncubatorHost—Max Borders, Underthrow Podcast

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe

Garrett Baldwin writes at “Me and the Money Printer” on Substack, where he analyzes liquidity flows, insider behavior, and the mechanisms of modern finance that traditional media ignore. For anyone saving for retirement, this is a must-see.

Subscribe and support us at Underthrow.org.

For most Americans, the financial system operates like a black box. We hear about interest rates, inflation, and stock market valuations, but the real machinery driving our economy remains hidden from view.

In this wide-ranging conversation, financial analyst Garrett Baldwin pulls back the curtain on how modern markets actually work—and why everything we learned in Econ and Finance might be dangerously outdated.

The Shadow Banking System Few Discuss

Baldwin’s journey to understanding finance took him through three graduate schools and 17 years of study, ultimately leading to a shocking revelation: the banking system today operates nothing like it did before 2008. The key insight? Markets don’t run on fundamentals anymore—they run on liquidity.

“Liquidity is not just money,” Baldwin explains. “It’s the idea that you’re going to have money in the future.” When that confidence evaporates, markets don’t gradually decline—they collapse violently, as we saw in August 2024 and April 2025. These weren’t driven by poor earnings or economic fundamentals. They were collateral crises in the shadow banking system that most people don’t even know exist.

The mechanism is complex but crucial to understand: Hedge funds buy Treasury bills, use them as collateral in the overnight lending market (repo market), borrow more money, and repeat the process 6 or 7 times. A $1 million position can balloon into $2.5 billion in leveraged exposure. When liquidity tightens, this unwinds catastrophically.

From Manufacturing to Financialization

Since 1971, when America left the gold standard, the economy has undergone a fundamental transformation. Manufacturing has fallen from 25% to 11% of GDP, while finance, real estate, and insurance have jumped to 25%. This isn’t just a statistical shift—it’s a structural curse.

In a financialized economy:

* Homes aren’t places to live; they’re speculative assets

* College becomes a lending product

* Healthcare becomes a billing product

* Corporations buy back stock instead of investing in production

The strong dollar benefits consumers but devastates domestic production. Economic growth now depends on credit creation and asset price inflation rather than building things. And those closest to the “money printer”—the hedge funds, sovereign wealth funds, and shadow banks—capture the gains before inflation hits Main Street.

This is the Cantillon Effect in action: those nearest to newly created money benefit most, while everyone else pays through higher prices down the line.

The Perpetual Bailout Machine

Since 2008, we’ve experienced multiple “K-shaped recoveries”—where top shareholders get bailed out while everyone else runs in place. The Federal Reserve’s balance sheet exploded from essentially nothing to $9 trillion, then “normalized” to $6.7 trillion.

Baldwin predicts it could exceed $10 trillion by 2027-28.

The Treasury Department now finances 22% of federal debt with short-term bills (under 12 months), up from just 11% in 2017. This provides the collateral that shadow banks need to create leverage, but it also makes the system dangerously fragile. As Baldwin notes, we’re no longer asking if the system will hit a wall, but when—likely 2026 or 2027.

The Fed’s actual mission has shifted: “I don’t believe the purpose of the Federal Reserve anymore is to manage inflation and manage the labor markets. I think it is to provide stability to global markets at all given times.”

What Wealthy Families Have Known for Ages

When Baldwin studied historical crises—from 60 AD Judea to the French Revolution to Weimar Germany—he discovered something remarkable: wealthy families always own the same things.

The pattern holds across millennia:

* Gold and silver

* Land and toll roads

* Infrastructure that controls movement

* Choke points in the economy

Today’s equivalents are companies like Prologis (last-mile delivery infrastructure), pipelines, digital infrastructure, and electricity generation. These are exactly what sovereign wealth funds prioritize—not currencies, but hard claims on physical assets.

The investment principle is elegant: If it moves, invest in it. Money flowing through payment systems, goods moving through supply chains, data moving through networks—these represent the modern toll roads that generate perpetual cash flow regardless of currency debasement.

Practical Signals for Everyday Investors

Baldwin offers several actionable insights for retail investors navigating this treacherous landscape:

Watch insider behavior. CFO purchases have outperformed the market since 1968. When multiple executives buy their own stock simultaneously (cluster buying), especially at companies with economic choke points, pay attention. Insiders collectively called the bottom of every major downturn since 2008.

Track the insider buying-to-selling ratio. When this spikes alongside accommodative policy changes (even if they’re not called “QE”), markets typically recover.

Follow momentum, not hope. Use the 20-day moving average. If a stock trades above it, and the average is ascending, consider buying. If it drops below, step aside. Buy dips at the 100-day moving average when momentum is positive.

Listen for policy clues. When the Fed announces new lending programs—whatever they call them—it’s money printing by another name. Combined with heavy insider buying, this signals an opportunity.

Preciousssss Metals

Silver represents a particularly compelling case. It’s both a monetary metal and a critical industrial input for AI, EVs, missiles, and advanced electronics. China is hoarding strategic commodities while export controls tighten global supply. Meanwhile, the paper markets show signs of stress—there may not be enough physical silver to meet delivery obligations on major contract expirations.

Baldwin holds both physical metals and ETFs such as PHYS (Sprott Physical Gold Trust) and SLVR, which represent direct claims to vaulted metal. But he emphasizes patience: “This can go on a lot longer. This could go on another 15, 20 years.”

Hitting the Wall

Multiple forces converge toward a reckoning in 2026-27:

* Record Treasury rollovers at elevated rates

* Accelerating entitlement obligations

* Waning foreign appetite for US debt (China isn’t buying, Japan has its own problems)

* Shadow banking requires constant collateral expansion

* Passive investing now represents over 50% of market flows (up from 5% in 1997).

Two catastrophic scenarios loom: foreign capital fleeing US markets, or short-term Treasury rates spiking as confidence erodes. Either could trigger the cascading liquidations that leverage creates.

The solution won’t be pretty. It likely involves the Fed’s balance sheet exploding past $10 trillion, new forms of monetization, and continued extraction from those furthest from the money printer.

What You Can Control

Baldwin’s advice echoes through the conversation: focus on what you can control.

Control your health. Control your wealth through strategic positioning in real assets and companies with genuine competitive moats. Control yourself by avoiding the panic that causes retail investors to sell at bottoms.

The system is complex by design, opaque by necessity, and rigged by structure. But understanding its mechanics—liquidity waves, insider signals, and the primacy of real assets—provides a framework for navigating the storm ahead.

As we face an increasingly bifurcated world, with the US taking the Western hemisphere and China the Eastern (echoing the Spain-Portugal division of the 1500s), the old rules dissolve. The question isn’t whether change comes, but whether you’ll be positioned to survive it.

The wealthy families of Rome, the merchants of the Renaissance, and the sovereigns of today all learned the same lesson: own what moves, own what’s scarce, and own what’s real.

Everything else is just paper promises in a world running out of credibility.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe

The conversation continues with Brian Rivera and Mark McGrath—The Whirl of Reorientation—explaining John Boyd’s OODA Loop framework (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) and its application to organizational performance and decision-making. Then Brian and Mark discuss the influence of Marshall McLuhan on their work as organizational consultants.

Key Themes: John Boyd

Boyd’s Core Question: How do we win in a world moving faster than we can process it? Boyd addressed a fundamental challenge: How do we win in a world moving faster than we can process it? His framework describes what successful people and organizations inherently do—those who understand it explicitly can achieve geometric advantages over competitors who don’t.

Orientation is Everything. The guests emphasize that orientation—not observation—is the critical starting point. Orientation is a “world model” or “controlled hallucination” shaped by genetics, culture, language, and experience. It acts as a filter, determining what we see, how we interpret information, and, ultimately, how we decide and act.

Better decisions are products of better orientation, not standalone skills.

Inattentional Blindness and Weak Signals. Research shows roughly 17 percent of people in any group see things differently due to varied orientations. Organizations often suppress these “weak signals” because the majority doesn’t perceive them. Leaders must create psychologically safe environments that leverage cognitive diversity and neurodivergent perspectives to capture novelty and detect early trends.

Connection to Austrian Economics. Mark connects Boyd’s work to Ludwig von Mises’s praxeology, arguing they describe the same reality from different angles. Both explain how humans envision desired end states and purposefully act to achieve them—constantly reorienting in a world of flux, uncertainty, and incompleteness.

Embodied Learning Over Prescriptions. The consultants reject “pills and quick fixes,” instead helping leaders subscribe to deeper understandings. Real mastery requires embodied practice—like athletes training in game-realistic simulations rather than abstract drills. They use “Flow Learning Labs” that simulate complex environments where teams can develop intuition, mutual trust, and adaptive capacity through constrained experiential learning.

Decentralized Decision-Making. Those closest to problems have the best orientation for decision-making. This mirrors why centralized political decision-making fails—politicians are furthest from the action and have the poorest orientation to ground truth.

Key Themes: Marshall McLuhan

Overcoming Institutional Bias. Mark addresses a common barrier: organizational prejudice that dismisses military-derived concepts as less valuable than prestigious business school frameworks from Wharton or Harvard. Once leaders recognize that these principles apply universally to human behavior and complex systems, they can achieve breakthrough results.

Top-Down Meets Bottom-Up. When organizations master orientation-based thinking, leadership alignment (top-down) naturally converges with frontline insights (bottom-up). This creates mutual trust, focused direction, and competitive advantages that leave competitors unable to understand or respond effectively.

Orientation is Fractal. Mark’s key insight: orientation exists at every scale simultaneously. An individual has an orientation. Two collaborators develop a shared orientation. Teams, divisions, and entire organizations have orientations. This fractal property means the same principles apply whether you’re working with a single person, a small team, or a Fortune 500 company.

Interconnected Thinking. By integrating Boyd with McLuhan, Hayek, and other interdisciplinary thinkers, leaders gain a fractal lens that reveals patterns and opportunities invisible through conventional business frameworks. This enables organizations to thrive rather than merely survive.

Universal Application. The conclusion reinforces that these aren’t just military concepts or academic theories—they describe fundamental realities of how humans and organizations interact with complex environments, making them applicable across all domains.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe

This is a special edition of the Underthrow podcast. Too many things are happening in the world for this episode not to get out to you. —MB

Many of our readers have wondered what “underthrow” means. It’s like overthrow, only more gradual, peaceful, and processual. But sometimes bad people in power get what’s coming to them. And it ain’t pretty.

مرگ بر دیکتاتورها —The Iranian People

Right now, we are seeing significant world events characterized by overthrow. That is, repressive regimes are being ousted in Iran and Venezuela, only through two different means: endogenous and exogenous. The former is a popular uprising that heats up enough to blow the lid off. The latter is the result of outside help.

None of this is a strict binary, of course.

Iran is probably crawling with spooks from Mossad and the CIA. Consider that, after ten days, Iran still has Internet access, which should be impossible, given that the IRGC usually has kill switches. Yet, the Iranian People are a hair’s breadth from ousting the mullahs and restoring a constitutional monarchy in Iran. Bizarrely, the most significant event in that country since 1979 has been featured on page seven of most Western mainstream outlets, if at all.

And we have to wonder why.

The case of Venezuela is more clear-cut. The Trump Administration sent an intervening force to collect Maduro and left the country to a puppet who, though still a socialist, is apparently willing to play ball. While we might celebrate Maduro’s ouster—I turned backflips—we still have to ask about the constitutionality of such a move, followed immediately by, “Okay, what’s next?” (Surely not nation building, for God's sake.)

Of course, the mainstream press is all over this one.

Join James Harrigan and me for a roundup of these events, plus our takes on the prospects for peace, freedom, and abundance in these transitional countries.

Big props to TousiTV and Goldie Ghamari for the amazing indie coverage of Iran.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe

Today’s conversation features Brian “Ponch” Rivera (CEO of AGLX Consulting) and Mark “Moose” McGrath, co-authors of The Whirl of Reorientation, discussing how they apply insights from Austrian economist F.A. Hayek and military strategist John Boyd to help Fortune 500 companies build decentralized, high-performance teams.

Key Themes of Part One

Austrian Economics in Practice. The guests explain their preference for Austrian economics over mainstream approaches, criticizing traditional mathematical models as disconnected from reality. They particularly value Hayek’s insights on decentralized knowledge, spontaneous order, and the limitations of central planning—concepts they find directly applicable to organizational consulting.

Decentralization vs. Central Planning. A core focus is helping large organizations shift from centralized decision-making to distributed approaches. They emphasize that knowledge is “tacit and dispersed”—leaders cannot centrally plan for complex human systems the way they might engineer a machine. The bigger the organization, the more critical this insight becomes.

Taylor’s Scientific Management Problem. They critique Frederick Winslow Taylor’s early 20th-century management philosophy, which removed agency from workers closest to problems. This connects to modern “agile” movements that emphasize distributed decision-making with centralized intent rather than centralized planning.

Boyd’s OODA Loop Misunderstood. Mark highlights a common mistake: treating John Boyd’s OODA framework (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) as a linear template rather than as Boyd intended: a way to understand how our orientation shapes perception and decision-making in complex environments.

The conversation emphasizes interdisciplinary thinking, authenticity to original thinkers, and applying complexity theory to real organizational challenges.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe

I’ve begun work on a serious project. I’ll be helping to pilot a fellowship society for men ages 18-28. The idea is to help the most promising men find solidarity with other men and mentors, not just so they become more virtuous, excellent, and successful. They will also pursue paths of mastery and adopt a code. If you know of a promising candidate, please feel free to send them this link or contact me directly. There’s more to come.

Transcript

You grew up hearing that your kind is toxic. The implication was that it’s better to feminize yourself. You should express your feelings more, they said. You should be more “vulnerable.” Otherwise, they told you it’s time to step aside and let the girls be the heroes for a while, which wasn’t in your nature. Still, you suppressed your masculinity.

You were allowed to be an onlooker, a well-wisher, or an “ally.” Otherwise, you were asked to stay in the background as part of a grand social engineering experiment in which time, attention, and resources were lavished on female empowerment. More girls were portrayed as protagonists. More boys were portrayed as oafs or villains. I’m sure all this must have had some effect on your emerging self-concept.

As you withdrew from this collective castigation—the original sin of being male—you found comfort in a pair of rectangles, one big, one small. They would always be there for you: Call of Duty on the big screen; YouTube on the little screen. Each experience was a drip of silliness or ragebait or empty distraction: Dopamine, adrenaline. Dopamine, dopamine, adrenaline. On and on, and you were hooked. My generation let it happen.

Influencers who stayed afloat in that ocean of brain rot are more contrarians than role models. Some of you found Andrew Tate or Andrew Wilson and thought they were cool. Andrew Huberman was better. Nick Fuentes and his incel army? Not so much. Jordan Peterson got a few of you to stand up straight and clean your room. But others wanted you to become exactly what the social justice types always said you were.

Sadly, much of the manosphere that developed in the early twenties was a response to that great wave of social justice fundamentalism. But that became a self-fulfilling prophecy as this grotesque wave spread through the institutions. You should never allow them to define you, neither for cynical reasons nor out of spite.

Instead, ignore all of it. You have a job to do. You have to save the world. I’m not kidding. You have to save the world, and you won’t be able to unless you have your head on straight, your heart in the right place, and your s**t together. So before you can save the world, here’s what you need to do:

First, dump your therapist. If you find yourself unable to cope without digging up your traumas every week, you are probably just enriching someone who benefits from your wallowing. People who tell you you’re a victim, whether of society or systems, are robbing you of your agency.

Second, find your footing. You are a man. You were born to build, and this requires the confidence of one standing solidly on two feet. You must be capable of looking in the mirror and seeing your entheos—your inner god. Unleash that god by becoming more sovereign in your spheres of influence. Start with yourself, then move to your friends, then your community, then the world.

Third, find your philosophy. Not just any philosophy. You need the kind that best answers the question “How are we to live?” Not relativism. Not nihilism. It should be philosophy that inspires and guides you to make meaning out of every precious grain of sand that falls through life’s hourglass.

Fourth, practice the virtues. There are social virtues like nonviolence, integrity, and compassion. And there are personal virtues, such as centeredness, courage, and resilience. Virtues are not abstract ethical reflections. They are moral practices. And that means you have to practice them as you would music or martial arts.

Fifth, find your fellowship. Surround yourself with others who are ready to spiral up and out. Spiraling up means continuous improvement. Spiraling out means exploring the edges of possibility. You want not only to become better but also to find wonder in your becoming. It’s crucial to seek out others willing to do the same. Personal growth can be stressful, but stagnation will leave you far worse off. Find the sweet spot between anxiety and ennui and draw strength from your brothers. And never stagnate.

Just know that men with grey in their beards have a lot to share with you, whether their wisdom or their scars. You can learn from our failures, seize your success, and then save the world.

This is your calling.

I won’t talk much about relationships today, except to say that demographics in the West are not looking good. We need the best among us to make families. I realize dating can be a minefield. Some guys are just out to put notches in the butts of their guns, while the rest swipe to rejection. But stay the course. The human race depends on it. Find someone with whom you can make a life. Be the man who commands respect and admiration, and seek the same in her.

Now, when it comes to saving the world, I’ll leave you with the most important advice I can think of: Find your mission. Then pursue it. If it’s a mission you share with others, that’s even better. Then you can form a fellowship to serve that mission. My chosen mission is pretty audacious. I want to liberate humanity from those who would manipulate, coerce, or control us. I want to help build a consent-based social order. You might have a different mission, but if you don’t, you’re welcome on the battlefield with me.

You see, the world’s problems are best solved when people are left free to solve them. It’s too easy to outsource our problems to faraway officials. It’s lazy and corrupt. Men of substance, virtue, and excellence build civilizations. And I hope you are one of those men.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe

I’m Niklas, the guest on this week’s Underthrow podcast.

Max Borders asked me to reach out because he thought this would resonate with you as a reader, especially if you’re already familiar with Prospera, the free city in the Caribbean.

I’ve spent the last 3.5 years in Prospera building a VC fund and now leading Infinita—a biotech-focused district that hosts events and pop-ups. We’ve welcomed Naval Ravikant, Bryan Johnson, Balaji Srinivasan, Tim Draper, Brian Armstrong, and Vitalik Buterin—all of whom have become strong supporters.

After the crucial Honduran election in a few weeks, we’re optimistic about 2026 and want to celebrate liberty and human enhancement with friends old and new.

That’s why we’re hosting the Infinite Games 2026—a series of competitive and recreational tournaments designed for athletes, biohackers, and anyone who values freedom and progress.

Bring your team, your family, or come solo.

The setting? Roatán, a tropical paradise just two hours from Miami or Houston. It’s perfect whether you want to explore what living here could look like or simply want a quick getaway.

Hope to see you there. —Nik

Episode Overview

In this engaging discussion, entrepreneur and venture capitalist Niklas Anzinger speaks with host Max Borders about his work building Infinita City within Prospera, Honduras—a startup city experiment that’s redefining governance and innovation in Latin America.

Topics

Layers One and Two Framework

Anzinger describes Prospera as “layer one”—the foundational governance and legal infrastructure—while Infinita City operates as “layer two,” focusing on bringing people, industry, and community together. Prospera provides the common law-based legal system and special economic zone framework, while Infinita specializes in biotech startups and community building. Multiple layer two projects are emerging, including Bitcoin, wellness, and fashion-focused districts.

Survival and Growth Against the Odds

Despite a hostile socialist government that campaigned on shutting down the project, Prospera has maintained an impressive 80 percent year-over-year growth in new businesses. Anzinger attributes this to focusing on early-stage startups that benefit from regulatory advantages and a supportive investment community, including Tim Draper, Brian Armstrong, and Balaji Srinivasan.

Building Culture and Community

The conversation explores how culture emerges organically rather than through rational planning. Anzinger describes various cultural touchstones that have developed naturally—from biohacking experiments to “electric knife fights” in the “Infinita Dome.” The community maintains a roughly 65-35 male-to-female ratio, which is healthier than that of many tech-focused environments.

Local Integration Success

Approximately 50 percent of residents and businesses in Prospera are Honduran, and Anzinger’s own team reflects a similar draw of home-grown talent. He emphasizes working with over 100 local businesses and creating more than 1,000 jobs directly and indirectly—a level of local involvement he believes is unmatched in the competitive governance movement.

The November Election

Honduras faces critical elections with three major candidates—two favorable to Prospera, one opposed. Anzinger estimates 60-80 percent odds of a positive outcome. A friendly government could unlock 27 pending zone applications that were blocked by the current administration, potentially bringing billions in foreign investment within a year.

The China Parallel

The discussion touches on China’s special economic zone model, particularly Shenzhen’s transformation from a fishing village to a manufacturing hub. While acknowledging the differences between political systems, Anzinger sees parallels in how economic liberalization in designated zones can drive national prosperity.

Competing with Established Hubs

When asked about competing with places like San Francisco, which benefit from built-in network effects, Anzinger focuses on serving founders at the margins—those for whom regulation is the primary barrier. Rather than competing head-to-head with established centers, Prospera targets entrepreneurs whose innovations are stifled elsewhere, particularly in biotech and crypto.

The Infinite Games 2026

Anzinger announces a two-month event (February 1 - March 31, 2026) with a broader cultural appeal than previous pop-up cities. Infinite Games 2026 will feature athletic competitions, longevity challenges, poker tournaments, a STEM olympiad for teens, and a biotech residency program culminating in a demo day.

Notable Supporters

The project has attracted prominent figures, including:

* Tim and Adam Draper

* Naval Ravikant

* Balaji Srinivasan

* Brian Armstrong (Coinbase)

* Brian Johnson (longevity entrepreneur)

* Vitalik Buterin

Key Insights

On Incentives and Ideas. Anzinger emphasizes that successful movements require more than ideological commitment—they need concrete benefits that make adopting new ideas economically rational, as Bitcoin did by educating millions about monetary theory through financial incentives.

On Starting Cities. Building from scratch requires accepting “venture risk” with uncertain returns. Success depends on coordinating early adopters willing to make irrational individual bets that become rational collectively if enough people participate.

On the Movement. Anzinger believes Prospera’s success or failure could accelerate or delay the competitive governance movement by 5-10 years, making the upcoming election critically important for similar experiments worldwide.

Conclusion

This conversation reveals the practical challenges and strategic thinking required to build a new city and governance model from the ground up. Anzinger’s approach combines entrepreneurial pragmatism with long-term vision, focusing on margins, building genuine local relationships, and creating value propositions that make the “irrational” decision to relocate increasingly rational for pioneers willing to help write the next chapter of human flourishing.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underthrow.substack.com/subscribe