(Out of 5)
Title: The Bitcoin Standard: The Decentralized Alternative to Central Banking
Author: Saifedean Ammous
“In The Bitcoin Standard, Ammous offers a take on why Bitcoin is the best version of what Austrians call “sound money” and why he believes that makes it the only cryptocurrency worth paying attention to. Beginning with a history of gold, Ammous looks at different types of money in history and shows how Bitcoin fits in.” (by Taylor Pearson)
Saifedean is passionate about his subject: Bitcoin. As am I. And I appreciated his framework he used to present the case for Bitcoin. A framework/foundation that highlights the fragility of centralized money (this is the key point of the book) and the need for decentralized, people-controlled money.
The only trouble I had with his foundation, was the strong bias against any centralized asset/commodity or money and relating economic theories. Many of these theories and assets themselves do still have a place in modern society, and are at least worth considering, and I found his constant bashing of them a bit unnecessary and overdone. This incessant demeaning made me do some research, and I found a review by British economist Frances Coppola on his book, whereby she questions even some of his historical accuracy.
Having said that, I guess he was trying to emphasise his point: The need for decentralized money. And he does this well, and presents an outstanding case for why Bitcoin is the silver bullet for a truly free and fair society. I love this argument and the way he presented it!
He bashes blockchain technology a bit, which highlighted his opinionated style. It also highlighted his only limited understanding of the tech (he is an economist, not a technologist, after all), whereby saying things like “blockchain is only good for Bitcoin and nothing else” is extremely narrow-minded and restricts people’s worldviews on the technology.
Had he focused on the qualities of Bitcoin itself, without overly demeaning the likes of blockchain technology, alternative economic theories and their relating assets, etc. I probably would have given this book a 5 star rating.
Don’t hear what I’m not saying though: It deserves a 4-star rating, and was well worth the time I spent reading it.
— – – – – – – –