As I see Bitcoin it is merely a very useful technology/tool. All useful technologies/tools could be used by any kinds of people good or bad - BTC as a technology does not discriminate against anyone in any way. Bitcoin miners being mostly regulated entities is a thing, as well as hash rate concentration between a small number of mining pools is. But one has to look at it practically - what can those pools technically do to influence the Bitcoin network in a malicious way? They can do pretty much nothing, and all the individual miners can easily change the mining pool in the same way NOSTR users can easily switch relays if they start to misbehave. Bitcoin indeed is fully traceable, however there are existing ways to effectively obfuscate each bitcoins history. As for the fungibility, one could argue that it is more fungible than not, everywhere in the world 1 BTC = 1 BTC. If you want to argue against that, you have to also accept that cash is not truly fungible as each banknote has its unique number. But using such logic nothing is truly fungible in this world.
If you agree that fiat is inherently evil and is used as an enslavement tool, how can you still support it in the form of cash? The principle stays the same and people who hold their savings in cash are being continuously robbed of their energy and time. It is true that WEF/banksters would prefer CBDCs to banknotes, but that does not change the fact that cash is still fundamentally evil. If one needs a good physical form of money, the only thing realistically available is gold - it has all the benefits of cash without being a tool of enslavement.
As for me, I definitely am against any government, that does not mean that I am against nations, cultures and languages. Government ≠ Nation. This also does not mean that I am for one global currency. I am for letting people decide what they want to use as money or currency on the individual level in a free market. I do however think that it will naturally lead to one major form of money being used more widely, and I do not think that it is a bad thing in itself if it is not forced upon anyone.
Most people currently indeed are quite naive/stupid and are easily duped. But you have to consider that the current state of man was artificially nurtured through centuries of government led negative selection, indoctrination and especially in the last few centuries literal poisoning of the bodies and brains of the people. So this stupidity is not a natural state of men, but rather artificial created by governments and people who control them in the first place. So relying on the same governments who are mostly responsible for the state of things currently to change it for the better is not very a very logical thing to do, in my opinion. Whatever you call Rothschild-capitalism is exactly that - a distorted free market capitalism that is better described by term crony capitalism. This has nothing to do with free markets, and definitely does not showcase how the world would look in a purely capitalistic society.
I agree that forced digitalisation is bad, no argument there. If it’s voluntary on the other hand then who are we to judge the choice of people. As for definition of money that includes it being non-digital, it is highly debatable and I don’t agree with it. Bitcoin UTXOs can also be stored and traded offline literally on pieces of paper.

