Why Bitcoin standard would reduce wars compared to fiat standard?

This assumption is based on several theoretical and practical points.

1. Limitation on Money Printing

Fiat Standard:

Governments can print money to fund wars without immediate fiscal constraints. This ability to create money out of thin air has historically enabled extensive military spending.

Bitcoin Standard:

Bitcoin's fixed supply (21 million coins) prevents arbitrary money creation. Governments would need to fund wars through taxation or borrowing, making the costs of war more transparent and potentially less politically feasible.

2. Economic Restraint

Fiat Standard:

The ability to print money can lead to reckless spending, including on military engagements. The lack of immediate financial repercussions makes it easier for governments to engage in prolonged conflicts.

Bitcoin Standard:

With limited monetary expansion, governments would face greater economic restraint. The immediate impact on national finances could act as a deterrent to unnecessary or prolonged military engagements.

3. Public Accountability

Fiat Standard:

Central banks and governments can obscure the true cost of war through inflation and debt accumulation, which the general public does not (immediately) perceive.

Bitcoin Standard:

The need to raise funds through direct taxation or borrowing would make the costs of war more visible to the public, (potentially) increasing resistance to unnecessary conflicts.

4. International Trade and Peace

Fiat Standard:

Currency manipulation and competitive devaluations can lead to economic tensions between countries, escalating into military conflicts.

Bitcoin Standard:

A neutral, global currency like Bitcoin could reduce these economic tensions, promoting stability and cooperation.