Bottom Line Up front:

1. An asymmetry of information is one of the most valuable things in the world

2. In absence of shared facts political discussions are just marketing

3. You can buy body parts of historical figures on the open market

4. Truth is often inconvenient, when someone only believes facts that benefit their side, they likely have some massive blindspots.

5. Its possible for adversaries to agree on one thing: hiding the truth.

The problem with the truth is that everyone has to agree on it. 

This is what makes determining the truth so difficult.

It's also what unlocks perverse incentives which motivate people to hide the truth. Sometimes we are rationally motivated to look away from inconvenient truths. Other times, we embrace comforting falsehoods because, well, they're just nicer.

But often collusion leads to the creation of false reality because it keeps power and wealth siloed among the powerful and the wealthy. The most valuable thing in the world is an asymmetry of information.

This is what I refer to as a Napoleon’s Penis Problem (NPP). Stick with me on this, because I promise when you understand the problem illuminated by Napoleon's penis you'll see it everywhere. The problem, not the penis.

The story of Napoleon’s penis goes like this: his surgeon removed the organ following his death along with a couple other bits and bobs. This was all fairly normal in the 1800s. Some say he willed his penis to his lover, others claim the surgeon was bribed to remove it by a priest the exiled French leader insulted. We’re not going to dwell on either of these alternatives.

The important thing is that the penis of a world leader was, somehow, up for grabs.

You’re probably thinking the same thing as everyone else at this moment: this is an investment opportunity. As with anything scarce and associated with power, Napoleon’s penis became an investment instrument. In fact it was sold at auction several times including 1924 at the Sotheby’s auction house.

Let’s imagine this for a moment. A white-gloved attendant places a new item on the auction block in Philadelphia. Everyone strokes their beards, adjusts their monocles, and tightens their corsets—or whatever people did in 1924. 

They open the lid of the container, and there it is: Napoleon’s dick in a box. 

Did women faint? Did red-faced men avert their gaze and polish their monocles? (I know very little about 1924, but I assume monocles were everywhere).

One thing is certain. Some people saw what was described as looking like a dried piece of eel—and saw value.

Napoleon’s penis was allegedly purchased that day for a couple thousand dollars by a renowned collector of oddities. Mind you, at this point there was no way of determining if this was actually Napoleon’s penis or a mistreated piece of buckskin (this is also how it was described). The object traveled through history protected in the collection of one rich weirdo or another until it reached the hands of Dr. John K. Lattimer.

Lattimer was no ordinary collector. He owned Hitler’s personal medicine kit. He had one of the cyanide capsules used by Herman Göring. He even had correspondence from John Wilkes Booth. A urologist by trade, Lattimer had both the tools and the training to determine that this shriveled relic was, in fact, a penis—and, according to him, “perfectly intact.”

But here's the rub (so to speak): other collectors claim they own Napoleon’s real penis. While Lattimer’s daughter claims she has bulletproof provenance proving the veracity of the general’s genitals, the world cannot be certain. This begs many questions. Three big ones, to be exact:

1. Can’t a simple DNA test determine the truth?

2. Why don’t all parties test their desiccated members?

3. Napoleon only had one penis… so whose are these others?

And now we arrive at the heart of the problem.

The Napoleon’s Penis Problem (NPP) is bigger than Napoleon. It's a term for any situation in which the truth is knowable, but no one wants to know it—because not knowing serves everyone better. All participants have the ability to uncover the truth, but don’t, because the potential downside outweighs the upside. 

The mystery is simply too valuable.

In Napoleon’s case, once someone proves their penis is the penis, all other penises are worthless. Scarcity creates value; mystery sustains it.

We see the Napoleon’s Penis Problem everywhere.

Take politics: multiple government agencies may have access to damning information, but no one brings it to light because it would implicate too many people. Or the finance world: when an asset is built on shaky fundamentals, but the returns are good and everyone’s making money, nobody wants to pull the thread. Why ruin a good thing? That’s NPP. 

In all these scenarios, the truth is knowable. It’s just not desirable.

Here’s why this matters: we often think that if we had access to the truth, we’d act on it. But the NPP shows that this isn’t always the case. Sometimes the truth threatens the stability of a system built on ambiguity.

In an ever more combative political environment facts can move either left or right. When pundits argue over knowable numbers or cast doubt on institutions which surface inconvenient facts, we are in the presence of a Napoleon's Penis Problem.

Naming this phenomenon allows us to ask better questions. Are we keeping things ambiguous because it’s easier? What would change if we actually looked? And more importantly: Who benefits from the mystery?

 The truth may set us free — but ambiguity can make us into slaves.