Quite the opposite: fiat is what allows wealth to be built.
Under (e.g.) the Gold Standard, those who owned the gold controlled the wealth as the amount of gold was fixed and finite. If you wanted to expand the economy and needed "money" to do so, you had to literally dig up more gold. The finite amount was a limit on how economic activity could happen. And those in control of the gold could dictate terms (e.g., interest rates on loans) on its use.
And while Bitcoin can perhaps be sliced more finely (satoshis) than gold (ounces/grams), the principal is the same: there's a finite amount.
Meanwhile, in a credit-based fiat currency system, any bank can create money on demand by issuing loans. Need more liquidity to help an economy (keep) grow(ing)? Just encourage more loans.
Pretty ironic to bring up a major example of state control of currency as good example of Bitcoin adoption.
I made the point that it being used as a currency, right now
Discussion about the morality of legal tender laws is another matter