Is marginalizing the role of gold in the monetary and financial system an innocent mistake or a deliberate one by universities and economics books?

The events currently shaking the global economy leave no doubt that there is a deep gap between what is taught in economics faculties and research centers and what actually happens in markets and financial systems. This gap is no longer theoretical or justifiable academically; it has become clear evidence of an economy disconnected from reality.

For decades, economic models based on ideal assumptions have been promoted: stable currencies, financial markets, and central banks capable of controlling inflation through nominal monetary tools such as interest rates. But reality has revealed that these models are merely fragile theoretical constructs, collapsing with each real crisis—something that has happened repeatedly over decades of economic collapses and crises.

Gold is deliberately marginalized, not because it has lost its role, but because recognizing it as a reference for value threatens the foundations of the current fiat currency-based monetary system. Trust in this currency is not based on its scarcity or discipline, but on the suppression of the alternative that exposes its fragility—$BTC
gold(.

The exclusion of gold from economic curricula and textbooks was not a scientific decision but a political choice cloaked in academic language. The presence of gold at the core of economic analysis exposes the reality of a debt-based system and reveals that fiat currency is not true money but a sovereign tool for managing deficits and delaying collapse.

Modern economic education has fully aligned with the fiat economy—interest rates, debt instruments, financial derivatives, mathematical models. Meanwhile, it has marginalized the real economy based on resources, energy, and minerals, especially gold as money and a measure of value. This imbalance has left many economists unable to explain today’s phenomena:

- The failure of monetary policies to curb real inflation?
- The rise in asset and mineral prices despite tightening?
- The continuous loss of currencies’ purchasing power regardless of tools?

The simple answer, often overlooked, is that gold measures truth, while fiat currencies measure policy.

What we are experiencing today is not a crisis of passing events but a crisis of understanding. An economist who has not studied that gold is a historical reference for value, and that its separation from the monetary system was a political decision, will continue to interpret collapses with tools that caused the collapse itself. The result: misleading analyses, incorrect recommendations, and policies that repeat the crisis with each cycle.

Fixing this imbalance begins first with education—redefining money, not just currency; teaching gold as a reference of value, not as a speculative asset; linking currency to energy and resources; and also teaching the history of previous monetary systems.

Gold was not marginalized because it failed, but because it always succeeds in revealing the truth. Fiat currency only exists in the shadows, far from any real measure of value. What is taught today is not economics but a theoretical justification for an unsustainable monetary system.

And until this cycle is broken, we will continue to produce economists who understand charts but do not understand why everything collapses when gold begins to rise again.