Not sure who Mark Moss is buddy. Here's a link to the one I'm talking about. I assume you're in the States, but should be available at most amazon sites. https://www.amazon.com/When-Money-Dies-Devaluation-Hyperinflation-ebook/dp/B0042JSRU0/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=when+money+dies&qid=1620487453&sr=8-1
As you are seeing, there is a gigantic component of ideology that makes any list of reading instantly disqualifying for a large part of your audience.
I think the safest place is to begin with history, which at least must be tied to something that actually has occurred to humans on planet earth, unlike many people's belief systems.
One book I remember reading that gives you some idea on that is When Money Dies: The Nightmare of Deficit Spending, Devaluation, and Hyperinflation in Weimar Germany. I read at least 2 books on that period, but that's the one I can find the title for.
It helps as well to read about the 2008 financial crisis, and the widespread fraud that went on with it. I read about a million articles, could not give details, but I would recommend reading Matt Taibbi.
I would also recommend reading Adults in the Room: My Battle with the European and American Deep Establishment by Yanis Varoufakis to get an idea of how politics has shaped the way 2008 is still playing out. If its still up, his blog that started in the crisis, and continued during and after his time as greek finance minister was pretty revealing when read alongside Taibbi's journalism.
I think reading those two guys kind of gives you some idea of the complexity of the ways modern monetary creation is done.
Now when you get into economics, you will run into the fact that modern economics is a mathematical religion, wholly unattached in any way to reality, and its use in practice is controlled almost entirely by ideology and politics, and reading about the financial crisis and its politics will prepare you somewhat for this.
So you kind of want to go back to older stuff and work forward, IMO. The big names are Hayek (believes in free market, distrusts central control, believes mathematical modeling of such complex phenomenon is fun, but says nothing about how things really work).
Most modern economic people descend from Keynes, who believes more strongly in government ability and necessity to control the economy and advises the government to spend more when the public isn't (everyone likes this part), and to spend less when the public economy heats up (not really as cool as first part to most people).
All of this is pretty hard to get into, as you'll see conflicting recommendations where X is discredited what a PoS!: everyone agrees on this, they just don't agree who X is, and why they are crap. There is literally nothing I could suggest to you that won't get me attacked, so I'll just suggest they guy I thought made it easier to see the overall view, even though he's about as well liked as Hitler, and his desire for the gold standard is considered risible by most.
I think one of the more accessible starting points that I can recall is this argument for gold standard by a very strongly hated semi-libertarian guy name Rothbard.
If I'm remembering right, he discusses quite a bit of the history of money, how we came to our present system, and has some of the clearer discussions of fractional banking which you need to understand anything at all, and his discussion of that made it easier to read articles by and by adherents of the big schools of thought.
Even if you trust government and bankers to control money, it is good to start with a critique of those positions so you see why some people don't, before you go to the more modern readings, where people are much more pro-trust/central authority.
Once you get some familiarity you can find more details on wikipedia, in old articles, TV interviews (eg. Milton Friedman), etc.
Dude, wtf are you talking about. I'm using the comparison, because it's relevant in terms of the French occupation. I also used English occupation of Ireland. There isn't exactly a million examples of this. I guess I could have used the French occupation of most of Asia too.
What I'm saying is pretty simple. Foreign occupation is extremely difficult, if not impossible when your people are heavily armed. Foreign occupation of Germany and the forceful economic demands that it were made by the allied nations, was what directly lead to the hyper inflation in Weimar Germany. It could be argued that this hyper inflation led to serious national hate towards the jews and the rise to power of Hitler. What can't be argued however, is that these economic demands, destroyed the German economy. This would likely not have been the case if people were armed.
This book makes a compelling argument for that.