But I am an advocate of sound money, and historically, gold is THE sound money. Gold may feel a bit anachronistic, as today many people have never even seen or held it, and it IS indeed just a "weird yellow metal" to them. We could use something like oil as a more modern substitute for the ancient yellow metal, but the principle is the same. Fixed resources are difficult to steal.
Fixed currencies are terribly easy to manipulate though, because if usury exists, there will be deflation, and there is either way going to be credit scarcity at some point. That's why I don't buy into the crypto revolution any more.
If you oppose parliamentary democracy, then the government having the ability to produce interest-free credit doesn't pose a problem, because people won't just buy votes from the useless people. I'd be more in favor of a work guarantee any way.
Gottfried Feder, a person little known today even though his manifest against interest was at one point called "the catechism of national socialism", pretty much described the problem, and I think the history of both the US and Germany vindicate him.
Whenever the state actively works to reduce private debt as much as possible and makes investments solely on the basis of strengthening the industrial sector, the market is allowed to breath and the productive segments of society are pulled back into action.
We've basically already figured out how to run an economy well, like, 150 years ago. Every good episode we've had didn't collapse because they weren't done right, but rather because interlopers ended them on purpose.
America after Lincoln, Germany after the Zollverein and then Bismarck, Germany after 1933, and then again Germany in the 50s and 60s all essentially used the same recipe with a couple of modifications. If the state, with control over the currency, lowers credit scarcity, sets standards for good wages, keeps private debt low and the streets safe, productivity goes up immensely. That seems to apply at least to countries with a largely European population, but possibly most others as well.
The "Austrian School is Hebrew nonsense" pill is tough to swallow in many dissident circles, but it's a necessary step in the evolution of thought.
We now have the luxury of being able to read primary sources from those periods and also the collected works of Michael Hudson, who, while suffering from plenty of boomerisms, has an excellent insight into the pre-jewish takeover inductive economic schools of thought.
EDIT: Christians shouldn't be ideological to begin with, and I've also come to the conclusion that metapolitical debate is largely useless. Ultimately, what you want is a good king, and Scripture goes to great lengths to explain to us that that is something God gives us.
Someone will take power and take good steps if society is repentant. If not, people will support the next dirtbag.
Democracy is definitely a spook and a ridiculous thing to believe in. "Western Democracies" are usually marked by the feature that the opinions of the elites and the general populace on political matters diverge very widely. They have very little to do with actually manifesting good outcomes, because relativism on what those outcomes should be is already baked into the cake.
That being said "antidemocracy" also isn't really a thing. A monarch can be corrupted, an autocratic president can, too.
Good governance is usually a confluence of different factors, the most important of which is a solid foundation in Christian morality. In its absense, there are no "good systems". The never ending debate about the parameters of good governance isn't really one for the masses and it was only created to give people a fake political identity that leads nowhere.
