The Fiduciary’s Final Word: Why Geopolitical Risk Is Not a Political Choice
Separating Partisan Noise from Portfolio Protection in a Post-Rules-Based World
To my readers and critics alike:
For over two decades, I have written as a licensed fiduciary investment firm owner, manager and professional analyst. My guiding principle has always been the refusal to accept “garbage” in reports—whether that garbage is hallucinated data or the delusion that politics and markets exist in separate vacuums.
Today, an American reader expanded on the criticism of my article, “The Carney Calculus,” suggesting that my assessment of the current US administration is merely “chic” bashing or a sign of personal bias. This requires a final response—not as a political activist, which I am not and have never been, but as a risk manager.
The “Apolitical” Fallacy
In 2015-16, while living in Havana, I attempted to introduce real estate and capital markets education to Cuba. When I presented my plans for a new health center to a senior corporate director and investigation team from China, she asked how the plans would be accepted politically. I replied that I was apolitical. Her response was a lesson I carry today: “But everything is political.”
Today, the world order is being pulled into the orbit of a single administration’s ‘transactionalism’. It is not “chic” to join the millions who refuse to “go along to get along” with a system that treats global alliances, the judiciary and the Federal Reserve as personal leverage; it is a necessity for anyone responsible for protecting capital.
Why the “Carney Doctrine” Matters to Your Money
Critics suggest that Prime Minister Mark Carney’s vision is a “fantasy”. As a fiduciary, I disagree. Whether or not I care for his personal politics—and I have historically been a harsh critic of his policies—Carney represents competence. In a world where the old “rules-based” system is in a state of “rupture,” competence is the only currency that matters.
We are seeing a structural shift that dictates where your money should be over the next 5 to 10 years:
The End of the Unipolar Order: The US-led system that provided stable sea lanes and financial predictability is fading.
The Rise of “Friendshoring”: Nations are building “sovereignty and resilience” by deepening ties outside traditional US channels.
Actionable Allocation: This is why my “Carney Doctrine” research suggests an overweight tilt toward Canada, the Nordics, and NATO-aligned middle powers in sectors like energy, critical minerals, and defense.
Returning to the Work of Investing
This will be my final word on the political distractions surrounding the current US administration. As a senior chief analyst at billcara.com, my job is to filter out the “garbage” and provide you with legitimate, fact-based publications for serious investors.
If you are here for political rants, you are in the wrong place. If you are here for professional investment management rooted in the world as it is, I invite you to follow the legitimate research we produce:
The Navigator Report: My featured weekly 600-page deep dive.
The Daily INSTAT Market Pulse Reports: Daily market technical analysis based on trading data of over 2,000 instruments (stocks, bonds, ETFs, Treasuries, forex, and commodities trading on over 30 financial markets worldwide.
The Cara Playbook: Daily market overview and strategic and tactical analysis and actionable guidance that I am relaunching on or about February 1.
Managed Portfolios: A diverse range of investing strategies driven by proprietary INSTAT technical signals and Ziggma fundamental scoring.
We are entering an era where middle powers must act together or be “on the menu”. I choose to position my clients and readers for the world being rebuilt, not the one that is fading.
Thank you.
Now, onwards and upwards.
Your point about the historical link between reserve currency transitions and conflict is noted. However, the 'might is right' calculus has a fundamental modern limit: nuclear weapons. Leaders can threaten Armageddon, but mutually assured destruction makes those threats a bluff. Putin can't nuke London without dooming Moscow; the power base he relies on would be ashes.
The more likely pressure point is domestic. In the US, Congress reflects public sentiment, which is already showing deep displeasure with escalatory actions from this administration. As rhetoric ramps up, so will protests and political constraints. What we're facing isn't necessarily a path to world war, but the potential for a prolonged cold war. I foresee a managed, continuously tense breakdown of diplomacy and cooperation.
As someone who considers myself neutral/cynical in politics, i avoid showing favor for anyone domestically or intl. It would not surprise me if all of them had orgies together. Friends behind doors, frienemies in front of cameras. The main financial point you make cannot be ignored. The smart money is rotating into specific sectors and regions. The potential for USD being dethroned is real. But a transition away from an incumbent reserve never happens without a world war.