> Yes, the USD is backed by the most absurd proof of violence the world has ever seen. No organization of human civilization has ever been able to summon as much death and despair as the United States.
That has nothing to do with the currency. I'm not saying its good, or bad, I'm saying you've stapled together two unrelated concepts.
The US army is a small fraction of GDP and exists to support the defense of the US as a nation, and to further its interests abroad. That will remain the case whether the currency is fiat, gold, BTC or shoelaces. Unless you think that the army will be disbanded because BTC is going to make Xi Jinping come to the table with Tsai Ing-Wen over Baijiu and apologize, that the Sudanese are going to lay down their arms, Kim Jong-un is going to find Jesus and so on. However that's completely unfounded.
The US army predates the fiat dollar by two hundred years. World wars were fought on the gold standard.
Further, the backing of dollars is only in limited part due to "the army" - fractional reserve lending means that each time supply is added, demand for that supply is also created as the loan issued must be repaid with those same dollars. This is what actually fully backs the dollar.
It's also why countries that use the USD, like El Salvador, have their own armies. And why some countries that use fiat dollars don't have armies at all, like Japan and Iceland. There is no causative relationship between fiat money and armies. There is a causative relationship between the existence of militaristic states and armies. There are hundreds of years of proof that the backing of the currency has little or no bearing.
This theory is a pile of misconceptions stacked on top of each other.