And your final comment about 'backing' something by the public expectation of value is simply laughable, no one with a clue as to the meaning of the word 'backing' would call fickle public expectation a backing, that is the exact OPPOSITE of a backing. Without a backing public expectation is like a ball at the top of a hill, as soon as it begins to roll it accelerates as BTC has consistently done. Something with a backing is like a ball in a valley, when it moves it's pushed back towards equilibrium.
His logic is a bit perverted here, but still is pretty clear and correct though its premises may be wrong. As I got it, backing up of a store-of-value is not important in itself, it is the ultimate result it produces that actually matters, i.e "the expectation that the public perception of its value will persist". If we can get there without anything that would help retain purchasing power and the public perception does actually persist, then, yes, he is correct
Whether it is possible in reality or not is another question...