Examples of strawmen arguments include mischaracterizing the argument, Deflation in Bitcoin isn't bad because deflation is inherently good" as "Deflation in Bitcoin isn't bad because of some special characteristic of Bitcoin."
That's a different kind of argument, and not what I was talking about. Asserting that deflation in currency is inherently good is a general assertion, and it's something that can be debated on its own evidence. We can look at how deflation has affected currencies in the past. What I was saying was that IF we look at how deflation affects currencies in the past, and IF deflation appears to negatively affect the economy that uses those currencies, one can't just dismiss the argument by saying "those examples don't apply to Bitcoins because bitcoins are different."
Yep, deflation, it's presence during certain times, and it's implications is a unique argument with merit. It is not a diversion.
There was a US Congressman sponsored money seminar in DC where historians asserted that US deflationary periods had nothing to do with...guess what....
deflation.
But, if one were to ask the typical academia economist they would mark history as being riddled with deflationary events due to poor money supply management.
It's highly debatable.