"Fiat currencies have value because their issuing institution has a local monopoly on violence. Your phrasing is much more palatable." It does not have to be v

"Fiat currencies have value because their issuing institution has a local monopoly on violence. Your phrasing is much more palatable." It does not have to be violence, you know. It can be non-violent -- like a general agreement by everyone that they will abide by the rulings of courts, even when those rulings work against their personal interests. Most debt disputes are resolved peacefully, even when people are watching their cars being towed away and even when they need to leave their homes. Even here in the USA, where the police are soldiers and more people are in prison than anywhere else, the majority of legal disputes are resolved peacefully and the majority of people at least try to follow the law. It is also false to claim that non-fiat currencies are not subject to this. A currency backed by, say, gold, is still a currency whose value arises because of the law -- a law that connects the paper money to gold in some way, and that requires some form of mandatory payments in that currency. If the US government decided to return to the gold standard, gold would be currency again -- whereas right now it is nearly impossible to trade gold for anything, even on the black market. So yes, the government does and will always have tremendous power over currency. Currency and law are inseparable except on the smallest scales.