In this sub I see a lot of hate towards the meme stock subs. Probably because the masses coming from those subs to crypto subs to proselytize just keep repeating a few catch phrases and memes, and aren't very convincing about the how, what, and why of the meme stock thesis. They appear to you almost exactly how most of the world views crypto people. And just like with crypto, there are two distinct possibilities:

Possible universe 1: they are wrong

This is the default possibility. It is very, very hard to correctly predict the behavior of complex systems. It only takes one detail being wrong to invalidate the whole thesis. If they are wrong, the shorts already covered, and recent price action is only apes pumping and dumping on other apes and sophisticated traders earning off the volatility. When you haven't done any research on the thesis and you think the whole concept is stupid, you hope they are wrong so they look foolish and you look smart.

Possible universe 2: they are right

If they are right, it means that market makers were counterfeiting shares and naked shorting. This is why they think the reported short interest doesn't matter: they don't believe in the validity of the reporting system. They think it isn't transparent and it isn't trustless, and they don't trust the SEC or the market makers to enforce the rules required to create a fair market. If that is true, the entire basis of the stock market, that you own scarce assets, is false.

For crypto it doesn't matter if they're wrong or right

What matters is that this whole saga has laid bare a simple fact about the traditional markets: at this time no one can prove if they counterfeited shares or not. No one can verify how many meme stock shares are currently in circulation. They can't prove how many are short and how many are long.

I've been in crypto since almost the very beginning. I started my investment life in crypto when it was just getting started, not in the stock market. I understand the value proposition of crypto, but until this year I didn't think there was a strong reason to replace the traditional systems with trustless systems. I thought crypto systems would build their own ecosystem alongside the traditional system and offer some new utility, but I didn't really buy the idea it would supersede it.

I made a simple mistake: I assumed the traditional system has more legitimacy than it does. The traditional financial system's legitimacy is based on appeals to authority because they didn't have any better options when it was evolving. You had to trust people to do business. With crypto, you don't. This is why the GameStop NFT thing is exciting: proving unique ownership of the shares is the central problem to this whole debacle.

Even if the meme stock thesis is wrong, I've learned enough about the situation to know that there are serious, foundational problems with the financial markets: they require too much trust from people who have the incentive and ability to screw other people over. Even if they are functioning in a fair way, I have to trust a bunch of people with my assets and I can't verify that they aren't screwing me.

Now, just like in crypto, no one knows the future for sure. We're all making bets given what we know, but if the meme stock thesis is correct it will be the single most public proof that the entire crypto space is necessary.