WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.140 Welcome, and thank you so much for joining us 00:00:03.140 --> 00:00:05.179 for today's deep dive. We are thrilled to have 00:00:05.179 --> 00:00:07.099 you here with us. Yeah, really excited to be 00:00:07.099 --> 00:00:09.500 here and get into this one. Today we are taking 00:00:09.500 --> 00:00:13.699 a single honestly kind of mundane sounding Wikipedia 00:00:13.699 --> 00:00:17.079 article titled Blank Check and we're exploring 00:00:17.079 --> 00:00:20.179 a truly fascinating evolution. It really is an 00:00:20.179 --> 00:00:22.859 incredible journey for a single phrase to take. 00:00:23.039 --> 00:00:25.719 Right. We are going to track how a common personal 00:00:25.719 --> 00:00:27.980 banking mistake, something we all inherently 00:00:27.980 --> 00:00:30.839 understand as just a terrible idea, morphed into 00:00:30.839 --> 00:00:33.820 this massive sweeping metaphor. Exactly. We're 00:00:33.820 --> 00:00:35.640 talking about a concept that has defined the 00:00:35.640 --> 00:00:38.640 outbreak of global conflicts. shaped modern financial 00:00:38.640 --> 00:00:42.579 markets and even become an absolute staple of 00:00:42.579 --> 00:00:45.539 classic detective literature. It's a huge progression. 00:00:45.880 --> 00:00:48.500 And it reveals a lot about how we handle trust. 00:00:49.119 --> 00:00:50.740 To really understand the sheer weight of this 00:00:50.740 --> 00:00:52.700 concept, we're going to look at it through four 00:00:52.700 --> 00:00:55.759 distinct lenses today. First, we'll examine the 00:00:55.759 --> 00:00:58.000 literal legal meaning. From there, we'll move 00:00:58.000 --> 00:01:00.399 into the financial implications, shift over to 00:01:00.399 --> 00:01:02.979 the massive political consequences, and finally 00:01:02.979 --> 00:01:05.219 end up exploring the realm of classic literature. 00:01:05.599 --> 00:01:08.120 It is quite the progression. And honestly, it's 00:01:08.120 --> 00:01:10.099 the kind of thing that completely changes how 00:01:10.099 --> 00:01:12.680 you view a phrase you probably hear tossed around 00:01:12.680 --> 00:01:14.920 all the time, you know, in the news or at the 00:01:14.920 --> 00:01:17.920 office. Absolutely. OK, let's unpack this. How 00:01:17.920 --> 00:01:20.659 does a little piece of paper with a missing number 00:01:20.659 --> 00:01:23.180 become the catalyst for the First World War? 00:01:23.599 --> 00:01:26.299 Well, to understand that massive historical leap, 00:01:26.719 --> 00:01:29.239 we really have to establish the baseline definition. 00:01:30.140 --> 00:01:33.620 Now, we all know the sheer dread of the literal 00:01:33.620 --> 00:01:36.939 blank check. Oh, yeah. Pure panic. Right. You 00:01:36.939 --> 00:01:39.180 sign a check, you accidentally leave the monetary 00:01:39.180 --> 00:01:42.519 value blank, and you lose it. Whoever finds it 00:01:42.519 --> 00:01:45.579 can write in any amount. And assuming your account 00:01:45.579 --> 00:01:48.060 has sufficient funds and local banking laws permit, 00:01:48.239 --> 00:01:50.799 They can cash it. It's a complete surrender of 00:01:50.799 --> 00:01:53.060 financial control. Go away. Which is an inherently 00:01:53.060 --> 00:01:56.219 stressful thought. But what I found really compelling 00:01:56.219 --> 00:01:59.319 in our research today is how the law actually 00:01:59.319 --> 00:02:02.200 treats this specific scenario. Oh, the legal 00:02:02.200 --> 00:02:04.439 terminology is fascinating. Yeah. If you look 00:02:04.439 --> 00:02:07.319 at American law specifically, the Uniform Commercial 00:02:07.319 --> 00:02:10.099 Code, Article 3, Section 115, subsection of that, 00:02:10.340 --> 00:02:12.379 they don't even use the word check to describe 00:02:12.379 --> 00:02:14.849 it in this state. No, they don't. They use this 00:02:14.849 --> 00:02:17.530 incredibly clinical term. They call it an incomplete 00:02:17.530 --> 00:02:21.650 instrument. Incomplete instrument is such a perfect, 00:02:21.909 --> 00:02:25.689 precise piece of legal terminology. It isn't 00:02:25.689 --> 00:02:28.650 just a piece of paper. It's a tool, an instrument 00:02:28.650 --> 00:02:30.849 that hasn't been fully forged yet. Right. And 00:02:30.849 --> 00:02:32.990 the uniform commercial code doesn't stop there. 00:02:34.229 --> 00:02:37.650 In Section 3407, it gets very specific about 00:02:37.650 --> 00:02:40.069 what happens when someone decides to finish forging 00:02:40.069 --> 00:02:42.370 that tool for you. This is the part that got 00:02:42.370 --> 00:02:45.539 me. Writing an amount in a blank check without 00:02:45.539 --> 00:02:48.460 the explicit authority of the signer is legally 00:02:48.460 --> 00:02:51.659 termed an alteration. And that detail completely 00:02:51.659 --> 00:02:53.479 reframed this for me. I mean, you would think 00:02:53.479 --> 00:02:55.139 that because you signed the bottom line, you've 00:02:55.139 --> 00:02:57.099 essentially given away the keys to the castle. 00:02:57.340 --> 00:02:59.240 A lot of people assume that. But under the law, 00:02:59.460 --> 00:03:01.460 filling in that blank without permission is straight 00:03:01.460 --> 00:03:04.860 up tampering. This unauthorized alteration is 00:03:04.860 --> 00:03:06.939 legally equivalent to changing the numbers on 00:03:06.939 --> 00:03:10.770 a completed non -blank check. Precisely. If I 00:03:10.770 --> 00:03:12.930 find your signed blank check on the sidewalk 00:03:12.930 --> 00:03:15.830 and write in $10 ,000, in the eyes of the law, 00:03:16.289 --> 00:03:19.069 I've committed the exact same offense as if I 00:03:19.069 --> 00:03:21.250 had taken a completed check you wrote for $10 00:03:21.250 --> 00:03:25.419 and maliciously added three zeros to it. The 00:03:25.419 --> 00:03:27.879 signature itself does not grant me the authority 00:03:27.879 --> 00:03:30.979 to dictate the terms. That is such a vital distinction 00:03:30.979 --> 00:03:32.979 for anyone listening to understand that the signature 00:03:32.979 --> 00:03:35.419 isn't a magical shield for whoever finds the 00:03:35.419 --> 00:03:37.300 check. No, it's not. But at the same time, it 00:03:37.300 --> 00:03:39.919 highlights exactly why an incomplete instrument 00:03:39.919 --> 00:03:42.960 is so terrifying in everyday life. Because if 00:03:42.960 --> 00:03:45.460 someone does abuse it, the damage is already 00:03:45.460 --> 00:03:47.539 done to your bank account before the legal system 00:03:47.539 --> 00:03:49.740 even gets involved. It's just an open door. It 00:03:49.740 --> 00:03:52.919 is. And that extreme vulnerability, that exact 00:03:52.919 --> 00:03:55.860 sense of handing over complete unrestrained power 00:03:55.860 --> 00:03:58.000 to someone else and just hoping they don't abuse 00:03:58.000 --> 00:04:00.840 it is exactly why the phrase didn't stay confined 00:04:00.840 --> 00:04:03.460 to the banking world. It's a concept that perfectly 00:04:03.460 --> 00:04:06.319 describes certain human dynamics. Here's where 00:04:06.319 --> 00:04:08.819 it gets really interesting. We start seeing this 00:04:08.819 --> 00:04:12.419 transition from a literal piece of banking stationary 00:04:12.419 --> 00:04:16.839 to a powerful real world metaphor. We start using 00:04:16.839 --> 00:04:20.139 blank check to describe any situation where an 00:04:20.139 --> 00:04:22.560 agreement is made that is incredibly open ended. 00:04:22.699 --> 00:04:25.379 Exactly. It's inherently vague and therefore 00:04:25.379 --> 00:04:28.639 highly subject to abuse. And we see this metaphorical 00:04:28.639 --> 00:04:31.480 use formalized right in the world of high finance. 00:04:31.620 --> 00:04:34.079 It isn't just an idiom. It's an actual structural 00:04:34.079 --> 00:04:37.490 concept. Yes. For instance, consider the blank 00:04:37.490 --> 00:04:40.250 check company. Just the name alone implies you 00:04:40.250 --> 00:04:42.790 are taking a massive leap of faith. I was looking 00:04:42.790 --> 00:04:45.189 into the financial side of this, and the concept 00:04:45.189 --> 00:04:47.629 of the blank check company blew my mind. It's 00:04:47.629 --> 00:04:49.889 wild, isn't it? By definition, this refers to 00:04:49.889 --> 00:04:51.910 a company in development that actually has no 00:04:51.910 --> 00:04:55.290 specific business plan. None at all. It is entirely 00:04:55.290 --> 00:04:58.089 formless. A special purpose acquisition company, 00:04:58.310 --> 00:05:01.230 commonly known as ASPAC, is a prime example of 00:05:01.230 --> 00:05:03.769 this modern financial phenomenon. So if we think 00:05:03.769 --> 00:05:05.769 about the psychology of that for a moment, as 00:05:05.769 --> 00:05:07.970 an investor, you are essentially handing over 00:05:07.970 --> 00:05:10.569 your money based on a vague, open -ended promise. 00:05:10.889 --> 00:05:13.370 You aren't investing in a set business model. 00:05:13.769 --> 00:05:16.689 You aren't buying into a specific revolutionary 00:05:16.689 --> 00:05:20.310 product or some proven service with a track record. 00:05:20.310 --> 00:05:23.009 Not at all. You are essentially handing the founders 00:05:23.009 --> 00:05:26.410 an incomplete instrument. You are. You're trusting 00:05:26.410 --> 00:05:28.829 them to fill in the blanks later with a profitable 00:05:28.829 --> 00:05:31.790 business plan. You sign your name, offer your 00:05:31.790 --> 00:05:34.509 funds, and give the management team the authority 00:05:34.509 --> 00:05:37.009 to decide how those funds are applied down the 00:05:37.009 --> 00:05:40.290 line to acquire another company. It's the ultimate 00:05:40.290 --> 00:05:43.389 bet on human capital over a concrete product. 00:05:43.870 --> 00:05:46.949 It requires an immense amount of trust. And just 00:05:46.949 --> 00:05:49.759 like the literal check, It's highly subject to 00:05:49.759 --> 00:05:53.180 abuse if that trust is misplaced or if the management 00:05:53.180 --> 00:05:56.220 team just makes a poor acquisition. Because you've 00:05:56.220 --> 00:05:58.540 already surrendered the capital. Exactly. Which 00:05:58.540 --> 00:06:00.720 is exactly why it perfectly embodies the metaphor. 00:06:01.519 --> 00:06:03.639 But if handing over a financial blank check to 00:06:03.639 --> 00:06:06.660 a corporation is risky, handing over a geopolitical 00:06:06.660 --> 00:06:09.399 one can literally alter the course of human history. 00:06:09.480 --> 00:06:11.480 Oh, absolutely. When we look at the political 00:06:11.480 --> 00:06:14.060 application of an open -ended agreement, the 00:06:14.060 --> 00:06:16.310 stakes become unimaginably high. Which brings 00:06:16.310 --> 00:06:20.709 us to July 5th, 1914. This is arguably the most 00:06:20.709 --> 00:06:23.550 famous and certainly the most devastating blank 00:06:23.550 --> 00:06:26.110 check ever issued in human history. Without a 00:06:26.110 --> 00:06:29.250 doubt. We are talking about the moment Germany 00:06:29.250 --> 00:06:32.670 gave Austria a blank check regarding its handling 00:06:32.670 --> 00:06:35.829 of the punishment of Serbia following the assassination 00:06:35.829 --> 00:06:38.430 of the heir to the Austrian throne. And as the 00:06:38.430 --> 00:06:41.949 historical record clearly shows, this specific 00:06:41.949 --> 00:06:44.279 blank check led directly to the start of the 00:06:44.279 --> 00:06:47.430 First World War. Yeah. It is the ultimate example 00:06:47.430 --> 00:06:50.910 of a vague agreement spiraling into global catastrophe. 00:06:51.149 --> 00:06:53.610 It's a staggering consequence. But what I find 00:06:53.610 --> 00:06:56.769 so compelling is how exactly this check was written. 00:06:57.050 --> 00:06:59.110 Obviously, it wasn't a physical banking document. 00:06:59.189 --> 00:07:01.110 No, it was a diplomatic message. Right. From 00:07:01.110 --> 00:07:03.509 German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmen -Halweg 00:07:03.509 --> 00:07:06.709 to the Austrian ambassador in Berlin, basically 00:07:06.709 --> 00:07:08.949 confirming that the Austrian emperor had the 00:07:08.949 --> 00:07:11.350 support of the German Kaiser. And the phrasing 00:07:11.350 --> 00:07:13.589 of that message is absolutely critical to analyze. 00:07:13.670 --> 00:07:15.170 And let me read the exact translation of what 00:07:15.170 --> 00:07:29.920 the Please do. He stated, I just want to pause 00:07:29.920 --> 00:07:31.680 right there because there is so much layered 00:07:31.680 --> 00:07:33.680 into that one statement. When you break it down, 00:07:33.939 --> 00:07:37.120 it's a master class in dangerous diplomacy. What's 00:07:37.120 --> 00:07:40.680 fascinating here is the incredibly formal, polite 00:07:40.800 --> 00:07:43.540 diplomatic language, being used to deliver what 00:07:43.540 --> 00:07:46.100 is essentially a consequence -free pass. Right. 00:07:46.300 --> 00:07:48.459 It's dressed up in the language of duty and tradition, 00:07:48.680 --> 00:07:51.019 but functionally, it's an incomplete instrument. 00:07:51.300 --> 00:07:52.899 Exactly. Look at how it starts off. It's almost 00:07:52.899 --> 00:07:55.420 entirely hands off. His Majesty, of course, cannot 00:07:55.420 --> 00:07:57.839 interfere. It is a matter not within his competence. 00:07:58.480 --> 00:08:00.259 It sounds like Germany is trying to step away 00:08:00.259 --> 00:08:02.139 from the conflict entirely, washing their hands 00:08:02.139 --> 00:08:04.800 of the specific details of how Austria handles 00:08:04.800 --> 00:08:08.100 Serbia. But then comes the fatal pivot. The blank 00:08:08.100 --> 00:08:11.439 check itself. The message continues. The Emperor 00:08:11.439 --> 00:08:14.139 Francis Joseph may, however, rest assured that 00:08:14.139 --> 00:08:16.579 His Majesty will faithfully stand by Austria 00:08:16.579 --> 00:08:19.600 -Hungary, as is required by the obligations of 00:08:19.600 --> 00:08:22.360 his alliance and of his ancient alliance. They 00:08:22.360 --> 00:08:25.420 are telling Austria, whatever you decide to do 00:08:25.420 --> 00:08:28.500 to punish Serbia, however far you decide to take 00:08:28.500 --> 00:08:31.660 this military action. You have our full, unrestrained 00:08:31.660 --> 00:08:34.610 backing. It's the ultimate open -ended agreement. 00:08:35.110 --> 00:08:37.289 Germany didn't cap their liability. No, they 00:08:37.289 --> 00:08:39.370 didn't. They didn't say, we'll support you through 00:08:39.370 --> 00:08:41.889 diplomatic channels or we'll back you up with 00:08:41.889 --> 00:08:44.429 a specific number of troops if Russia mobilizes. 00:08:44.889 --> 00:08:47.149 They just signed the bottom line of the alliance 00:08:47.149 --> 00:08:50.110 and let Austria fill in the amount. And the amount 00:08:50.110 --> 00:08:53.429 Austria filled in ultimately ignited a world 00:08:53.429 --> 00:08:57.070 war. It is a chilling historical example of how 00:08:57.070 --> 00:08:59.970 failing to place parameters on your support can 00:08:59.970 --> 00:09:02.490 pull you into a disaster. Truly chilling. And 00:09:02.490 --> 00:09:04.509 the reality is this isn't just an artifact of 00:09:04.509 --> 00:09:06.629 early 20th century diplomacy. It's a political 00:09:06.629 --> 00:09:09.970 metaphor that we still see utilized in much more 00:09:09.970 --> 00:09:13.549 recent history to describe massive, unquantifiable 00:09:13.549 --> 00:09:16.159 commitments. We really do. Jumping forward to 00:09:16.159 --> 00:09:18.500 modern times, we see this exact concept applied 00:09:18.500 --> 00:09:20.679 to modern budgets instead of military alliances. 00:09:21.360 --> 00:09:24.220 Yes. In March 2003, Gordon Brown, who was the 00:09:24.220 --> 00:09:26.080 British Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, 00:09:26.440 --> 00:09:28.320 made a specific statement during the lead -up 00:09:28.320 --> 00:09:31.860 to the war against Iraq. Yes. Gordon Brown effectively 00:09:31.860 --> 00:09:35.220 offered a modern financial blank check for the 00:09:35.220 --> 00:09:37.799 war against Iraq. Right. The specific phrasing 00:09:37.799 --> 00:09:40.759 he used that earned this comparison was his public 00:09:40.759 --> 00:09:43.759 statement that he would spend what it takes to 00:09:43.759 --> 00:09:46.740 tackle Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Spend 00:09:46.740 --> 00:09:50.299 what it takes. Those four words are so incredibly 00:09:50.299 --> 00:09:52.899 powerful. They really are. Now, to be absolutely 00:09:52.899 --> 00:09:55.419 clear to you listening, We are looking strictly 00:09:55.419 --> 00:09:58.320 at the language and the historical budgetary 00:09:58.320 --> 00:10:00.240 record here today. We are not weighing in on 00:10:00.240 --> 00:10:02.500 the politics, the ethics, or the justifications 00:10:02.500 --> 00:10:05.000 of the Iraq War itself. Exactly. We're just looking 00:10:05.000 --> 00:10:07.460 at the source material. Right. But if we impartially 00:10:07.460 --> 00:10:10.120 analyze that specific phrase, spend what it takes, 00:10:10.539 --> 00:10:12.659 you can immediately see the mechanics of the 00:10:12.659 --> 00:10:15.200 blank check metaphor at work. Absolutely. When 00:10:15.200 --> 00:10:16.940 a chancellor of the Exchequer says they will 00:10:16.940 --> 00:10:19.820 spend what it takes, they are deliberately removing 00:10:19.820 --> 00:10:22.710 the ceiling. Standard budgetary language usually 00:10:22.710 --> 00:10:25.549 involves specific allocations. You know, we have 00:10:25.549 --> 00:10:27.929 allocated X million pounds for this operation. 00:10:28.289 --> 00:10:30.409 By removing that number, it becomes the very 00:10:30.409 --> 00:10:33.009 definition of an open -ended agreement. It is 00:10:33.009 --> 00:10:36.169 a verbal incomplete instrument. Yeah, there is 00:10:36.169 --> 00:10:38.789 no monetary cap placed on that statement. There 00:10:38.789 --> 00:10:41.809 is no conditional limit. It communicates to the 00:10:41.809 --> 00:10:44.529 military, to allies and to the public that whatever 00:10:44.529 --> 00:10:46.929 the financial costs ends up being, regardless 00:10:46.929 --> 00:10:50.250 of how high it climbs, the funds will be provided. 00:10:50.490 --> 00:10:53.169 It relies on the exact same underlying mechanism 00:10:53.169 --> 00:10:56.549 as the German message in 1914. It's a promise 00:10:56.549 --> 00:10:59.289 without a predetermined limit. It really is. 00:10:59.450 --> 00:11:01.450 And while we've established that this concept 00:11:01.450 --> 00:11:04.111 is incredibly dangerous in real world geopolitics, 00:11:04.110 --> 00:11:07.090 politics and terrifying in personal banking, 00:11:07.669 --> 00:11:09.730 it turns out to be an absolutely fantastic tool 00:11:09.730 --> 00:11:12.009 for storyteller. Really it is. Which brings us 00:11:12.009 --> 00:11:14.649 to the literary world and a fantastic phrase 00:11:14.649 --> 00:11:16.649 we borrowed from the French that operates in 00:11:16.649 --> 00:11:19.169 the exact same metaphorical space. Cart Blanche. 00:11:19.330 --> 00:11:21.830 Cart Blanche. Literally translating to white 00:11:21.830 --> 00:11:24.590 card. It functions identically to the blank check 00:11:24.590 --> 00:11:27.309 metaphor, symbolizing complete freedom or authority 00:11:27.309 --> 00:11:30.009 given to someone to act as they see fit. And 00:11:30.009 --> 00:11:32.629 no one utilized this narrative device quite like 00:11:32.629 --> 00:11:34.419 Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in his Sherlock Holmes 00:11:34.419 --> 00:11:37.019 stories. Oh, he used it brilliantly. When a client 00:11:37.019 --> 00:11:40.860 finally arrives at 221B Baker Street to see Sherlock 00:11:40.860 --> 00:11:43.799 Holmes, they are usually at their absolute wit's 00:11:43.799 --> 00:11:47.759 end. Conan Doyle uses this concept of the carte 00:11:47.759 --> 00:11:50.980 blanche or the blank check to instantly communicate 00:11:50.980 --> 00:11:53.919 to the reader just how utterly desperate a client 00:11:53.919 --> 00:11:57.659 truly is. Brilliant narrative shorthand. Instead 00:11:57.659 --> 00:12:00.080 of spending pages describing a character's anxiety, 00:12:00.639 --> 00:12:02.679 the author just has them suspend the normal rules 00:12:02.679 --> 00:12:05.220 of finance. I want to look at two specific examples 00:12:05.220 --> 00:12:07.360 from the Sherlock Holmes canon because the dialogue 00:12:07.360 --> 00:12:11.179 is so crisp. First, in A Scandal in Bohemia, 00:12:11.639 --> 00:12:13.879 Holmes is speaking with his client, who happens 00:12:13.879 --> 00:12:16.440 to be the king of Bohemia. A very wealthy client. 00:12:16.679 --> 00:12:18.759 Right. Holmes is getting down to logistics and 00:12:18.759 --> 00:12:20.919 asks a very practical question. He says, then 00:12:20.919 --> 00:12:23.419 as to money, the client responds, you have carte 00:12:23.419 --> 00:12:25.799 blanche. And Holmes, ever the skeptic, presses 00:12:25.799 --> 00:12:28.460 him. He does. He asks, absolutely. And the client 00:12:28.460 --> 00:12:30.899 replies, I tell you that I would give one of 00:12:30.899 --> 00:12:33.059 the provinces of my kingdom to have that photograph. 00:12:33.100 --> 00:12:35.379 A literal province of a kingdom. If we think 00:12:35.379 --> 00:12:38.759 about the mindset of a monarch, land is their 00:12:38.759 --> 00:12:42.149 ultimate asset. Offering a province for a single 00:12:42.149 --> 00:12:45.549 photograph shows that the item is quite literally 00:12:45.549 --> 00:12:47.730 priceless to him. It does get much more open 00:12:47.730 --> 00:12:50.450 -ended than that. Exactly. And it happens again 00:12:50.450 --> 00:12:53.669 in The Adventure of the Barrel Coronet. The client 00:12:53.669 --> 00:12:57.309 is practically begging Holmes and says, I understand 00:12:57.309 --> 00:12:59.610 that you give me carte blanche to act for you, 00:12:59.850 --> 00:13:02.009 provided only that I get back the gems and that 00:13:02.009 --> 00:13:04.539 you place no limit on the sum I may draw. And 00:13:04.539 --> 00:13:06.899 how does the client respond? The client immediately 00:13:06.899 --> 00:13:09.360 agrees, responding, I would give my fortune to 00:13:09.360 --> 00:13:12.139 have them back. Notice how the very literal language 00:13:12.139 --> 00:13:15.240 of banking is woven directly into these literary 00:13:15.240 --> 00:13:17.659 interactions. No limit on the sum I may draw. 00:13:18.059 --> 00:13:19.860 They're talking about finance, but they're actually 00:13:19.860 --> 00:13:22.639 using it to express intense emotional stakes. 00:13:22.740 --> 00:13:25.179 It's so clever. And Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wasn't 00:13:25.179 --> 00:13:27.440 the only master of the mystery genre to employ 00:13:27.440 --> 00:13:31.059 this tactic. Dame Agatha Christie used the exact 00:13:31.059 --> 00:13:33.460 same concept right at the dawn of her career. 00:13:33.559 --> 00:13:36.580 Yes, she used it in her very first published 00:13:36.580 --> 00:13:39.500 book, The Mysterious Affair at Stiles, which 00:13:39.500 --> 00:13:42.360 is a monumental book anyway because it introduced 00:13:42.360 --> 00:13:45.259 the reading public to Hercule Poirot. In chapter 00:13:45.259 --> 00:13:47.279 12 of that book, which is wonderfully titled 00:13:47.279 --> 00:13:49.980 The Last Link, Poirot is speaking with a character 00:13:49.980 --> 00:13:53.779 named Mary. He needs her cooperation to set up 00:13:53.779 --> 00:13:57.539 his classic grand reveal, and he asks her, Madame, 00:13:58.000 --> 00:14:00.220 I have your permission to hold a little reunion 00:14:00.220 --> 00:14:03.269 in the salon. It is necessary for everyone to 00:14:03.269 --> 00:14:06.070 attend. And Mary smiles sadly at him and says, 00:14:06.509 --> 00:14:08.610 You know, Monsieur Poirot, that you have carte 00:14:08.610 --> 00:14:10.990 blanche in every way. To which Poirot simply 00:14:10.990 --> 00:14:13.970 replies, You are too amiable, madame. Carte blanche 00:14:13.970 --> 00:14:16.610 in every way. It's not just a financial blank 00:14:16.610 --> 00:14:18.490 check in this case. It's total freedom of action. 00:14:18.649 --> 00:14:21.389 It's social permission. Exactly. She is giving 00:14:21.389 --> 00:14:24.250 him the authority to do whatever it takes, regardless 00:14:24.250 --> 00:14:26.730 of the social fallout. Wow. If we connect this 00:14:26.730 --> 00:14:29.470 to the bigger picture of why mystery writers 00:14:29.470 --> 00:14:32.580 rely on this device, It becomes very clear. When 00:14:32.580 --> 00:14:35.320 a character hands a detective a blank check or 00:14:35.320 --> 00:14:37.960 gives them carte blanche, it instantly communicates 00:14:37.960 --> 00:14:39.840 to the reader that this character is willing 00:14:39.840 --> 00:14:43.340 to consider any expense and any consequence to 00:14:43.340 --> 00:14:45.899 achieve their goal. It tells the reader the normal 00:14:45.899 --> 00:14:48.620 rules of society no longer apply to this character. 00:14:48.820 --> 00:14:52.360 They are all in. All in. It's a shortcut to showing 00:14:52.360 --> 00:14:55.840 complete desperation, complete trust, and absolute 00:14:55.840 --> 00:14:59.240 determination. So what does this all mean? We 00:14:59.240 --> 00:15:01.080 started with the anxiety of a missing number 00:15:01.080 --> 00:15:03.019 on a personal check, and we've traveled through 00:15:03.019 --> 00:15:05.039 the clinical language of the Uniform Commercial 00:15:05.039 --> 00:15:08.120 Code, to the massive leaps of faith in corporate 00:15:08.120 --> 00:15:10.820 SPACs, to the diplomatic disaster that sparked 00:15:10.820 --> 00:15:14.100 a world war, and finally to the salons of classic 00:15:14.100 --> 00:15:16.549 mystery novels. It's quite a journey. Why should 00:15:16.549 --> 00:15:18.950 you, the listener, care about the history and 00:15:18.950 --> 00:15:21.370 application of a banking term? You should care 00:15:21.370 --> 00:15:24.090 because this concept, this mechanism of the open 00:15:24.090 --> 00:15:26.250 -ended agreement is everywhere in your life. 00:15:26.450 --> 00:15:28.830 It really is. Understanding the mechanics of 00:15:28.830 --> 00:15:30.990 a blank check isn't just about protecting your 00:15:30.990 --> 00:15:33.850 personal bank account from an incomplete instrument, 00:15:34.169 --> 00:15:36.570 though that is obviously practical advice. It's 00:15:36.570 --> 00:15:38.889 about recognizing the power dynamics at play 00:15:38.889 --> 00:15:41.730 when agreements are made around you. Exactly. 00:15:42.389 --> 00:15:45.029 Whether you are navigating a vague corporate 00:15:45.029 --> 00:15:47.950 agreement at work, or analyzing geopolitical 00:15:47.950 --> 00:15:50.110 alliances on the evening news, or just trying 00:15:50.110 --> 00:15:52.409 to figure out who the murderer is in an Agatha 00:15:52.409 --> 00:15:54.870 Christie novel, understanding this metaphor is 00:15:54.870 --> 00:15:56.830 crucial for your own critical thinking. Very 00:15:56.830 --> 00:15:59.750 true. You have to be able to recognize when someone 00:15:59.750 --> 00:16:01.850 is being handed an open -ended agreement that 00:16:01.850 --> 00:16:04.710 is highly subject to abuse. You have to be able 00:16:04.710 --> 00:16:07.029 to spot the blank check before the amount is 00:16:07.029 --> 00:16:09.409 filled in. This raises an important question, 00:16:09.649 --> 00:16:12.370 a rather profound paradox based entirely on the 00:16:12.370 --> 00:16:14.049 history and literature we've explored today. 00:16:15.169 --> 00:16:18.110 We fear the literal blank check in our personal 00:16:18.110 --> 00:16:20.710 checkbooks because it represents a complete, 00:16:21.169 --> 00:16:24.370 terrifying loss of control. Under the law, it's 00:16:24.370 --> 00:16:27.210 a dangerous, incomplete instrument vulnerable 00:16:27.210 --> 00:16:30.059 to malicious alteration. Yet when we move into 00:16:30.059 --> 00:16:32.820 politics and literature, we frequently use this 00:16:32.820 --> 00:16:35.720 exact same concept as the ultimate expression 00:16:35.720 --> 00:16:38.960 of loyalty, of unwavering support, or of complete 00:16:38.960 --> 00:16:42.000 trust in another person. We really do. We offer 00:16:42.000 --> 00:16:44.639 our geopolitical blank checks to our closest 00:16:44.639 --> 00:16:47.259 allies, and we give carte blanche to the detectives 00:16:47.259 --> 00:16:49.960 we trust to save us. We use our greatest vulnerability 00:16:49.960 --> 00:16:52.539 to show our greatest commitment. Precisely. So 00:16:52.539 --> 00:16:54.299 I'll leave you with this final thought to explore 00:16:54.299 --> 00:16:57.379 on your own. Why is it that our greatest expression 00:16:57.379 --> 00:17:00.350 of commitment to others? Our ultimate proof of 00:17:00.350 --> 00:17:03.429 loyalty and trust is modeled directly after our 00:17:03.429 --> 00:17:05.670 most dangerous financial vulnerability. That 00:17:05.670 --> 00:17:08.170 is a phenomenal question. Why does true trust 00:17:08.170 --> 00:17:10.410 require us to hand over an incomplete instrument? 00:17:10.710 --> 00:17:13.269 Why is complete vulnerability the ultimate sign 00:17:13.269 --> 00:17:16.089 of trust? That is something to chew on. Thank 00:17:16.089 --> 00:17:17.809 you so much for joining us on this deep dive. 00:17:17.980 --> 00:17:20.079 We hope you enjoyed exploring the surprisingly 00:17:20.079 --> 00:17:22.900 vast, historically rich world of the blank check 00:17:22.900 --> 00:17:26.160 with us. Keep questioning the words, the agreements, 00:17:26.279 --> 00:17:28.039 and the metaphors you encounter every single 00:17:28.039 --> 00:17:29.480 day. Until next time!