I am biased because I see a lot of value in the current fiat system that Bitcoin directly impacts. I am also biased because I don't buy the arguments that the current fiat system has enough issues to indicate it needs replacement.

As an example, I am against any system that takes us back to a world where governments no longer are able to use the soft power of economics to react to other countries. The alternative being that they will need to result to hard power which means physical violence.

The rest of the stuff like being a haven for criminals, grifters, and scam artists is related to but not really the cause for my bias.

> I don't buy the arguments that the current fiat system has enough issues to indicate it needs replacement.

Said like somebody who never had a problem with the financial system and had access to banks for their entire life. It's great that money works for you, for most people on this planet the same can not be said.

> where governments no longer are able to use the soft power of economics to react to other countries

The idea that monetary policy is the only way to influence economics seems kind of absurd? You're surely not suggesting that removing fiat currencies would remove economics from the world of politics?

Currency controls are the most effective mechanism we currently have. I don't see this idea as absurd at all.

Ok, your previous comment seemed to imply that the only alternative to monetary policy was violence/war, that sounded absurd. Now you seem to confuse currency controls with monetary policy? Anyway, maybe it would be a good idea to read about lists of economic policies to get a better view of the matter?

Nah, currency controls are a significant method of economic power. My point is unchanged.