Definitely understanding fiat money and more generally monetary history is the place to start when wanting to understand Bitcoin. The Bitcoin Standard does this very well although Ammous is rather more harsh on Keynesian economics than a neutral commentary would justify but perhaps we can allow some poetic license just for fun. The biggest problem I see in Bitcoiners general bias is in their near absolute rejection of the requirement for government to participate in the economy in order to promote wealth creation and prosperity- yet the history clearly shows that wealth, security and prosperity are all interdependent and all to some extent dependent upon the quality of government you have in place. Because Bitcoin has restored and enhanced the individuals access to monetary sovereignty by building upon the limited issuance model of gold most Bitcoiners then extrapolate from this inferring that all government is bad. What has really fucked up fiat and Keynesian model is the capture of western governments by bankers who have removed the Keynesian prohibition upon commercial banks issuing fiat debt finance to any purpose other than one that is potentially productive. Because most Bitcoiners only have a negative understanding of Keynesian economics they fail to understand that it has been subverted by bankers in the above manner and that Bitcoins true primary value is in providing a competitive alternative to fiat money. Bitcoin is itself a socialist-collective model- with voluntary inclusion and all participants treated precisely equally without fear or favour. Somehow Bitcoin and the general narrative around it has been captured and dominated by narrow-minded uneducated Libertarian extremists who do not understand the true nature of Keynesian theory, or Bitcoin.