When I studied political science and economics in college we had a lot of really intriguing discussions around the rise of fiat currency, its pros and cons, its effect on global trade, etc. Some really well thought out opinions on both sides, from "nothing is real, who cares what this piece of paper means" to people who thought it was all a "globalist" scam and that we should be giving the grocer tiny pieces of gold in exchange for bread. This was before bitcoin existed.
Post-BTC it seems like anyone who uses the term "fiat" to describe currency in any non-academic setting is about to launch into some nonsensical "bitcoin fixes this" tirade, they think everything is some jewish space laser pyramid scheme, and you wonder if they have a sovereign citizen paper license plate on their car.
"Fiat is a pyramid scheme" is a dog whistle except the person blowing it doesn't know.
I don't understand how but somehow "fiat currency" in a comment seems fine and "fiat" seems derogatory in that "get ready to read some crazy shit" kind of way.
Eh, I'm still a goldbug who thinks fiat is a scam and I hate crypto too. I actually don't care about gold specifically, I just think currency should be backed by some sort of real good that's durable and relatively rare. The goal being to make currency harder for governments and banks to manipulate (the whole reason we backed out of Bretton Woods was because our manipulations had finally caught up to the realities of our finite gold reserves).
