WHY DO LIBERTARIANS NOT UNDERSTAND MONEY? I’m not engaging in this conversation

WHY DO LIBERTARIANS NOT UNDERSTAND MONEY?
I’m not engaging in this conversation because I don’t feel like debating at this late hour. But no, you’re parroting jewish libertarian dogma not the evidence or the logic – though this is admittedly a subject fraught with ambiguity that makes the discussion challenging.

Money, as the term is used, is a catgory.
Yes. Money proper consists only of commodity money.
Most all other money in the category of money is a commodity money substitute.
Fiat Currency is a money substitute that for all intents and purposes is a divisible share of the economy of the state.
The benefit of Credit Money and Fiat Currency is the end of shortages of money which allow money-holders to rent seek via interest on the growth in demand they did not contribute to – the people and the government did.
This is why jewish libertarians object to fiat money – it deprived the money changers of rent seeking. And the Jewish strategy is to discover and exploit all possible means of baiting into hazard, rent seeking, and winning whether the other party wins or loses.
All jewish libertarianism seeks to restore the utility of baiting into hazard, asymmetric risk, rent seeking, and privatization of commons vs socialization of losses. That is the purpose of jewish libertariamism.

I don’t know anyone who has done more work on this subject than I have, and while Mises took a good shot with what he took from Simmel and Weber, and perhaps I rely on that work of his above anyone other than Simmel in my ‘sciencing’ of money.

Reply addressees: @Tu_Quoque_4_U @Thaeus4 @bryanbrey @saifedean @R_Tyler_Smith