It is in the interest of the establishment to manipulate all price levels to make it *appear* that their issued money has the most stable value. This has been going on for about 500 years and is nothing new. The gold and silver standards over the centuries were just very good versions of today's not-so-elegant manipulations.
What matters here is whether the economy grows over the long term. If it comes about through manipulation, then so be it. It looks like you fail to understand that the manipulators ("the elites") are in the same boat with the manipulated ones. They are also vitally interested in the growth of the economy at large. Or do you really think that kings and rulers lived better lives than most people today in the developed world?
This is a key point. Growth is a function of advances in technology, management, etc. and in its natural state needs have nothing to do with the monetary system. What state-money has done is to create artificially fast growth, during the inflationary phase of the asset bubble. We are incentivized to buy things we don't really need. When the asset bubble eventually crashes, we have economic pain.
I somewhat agree with you that a monetary system should not create an artificial growth, though this is a separate and very complex topic in itself, with arguments both in favor and against such growth. But how does it challenge my point that the elites are also interested in the common good over the long term? Besides, the problem with a limited-supply monetary system is that it heavily interferes with the economic growth. Basically, money should make economic relationships easier or, at the very least, not stand in the way. However, a limited-supply currency takes away some percentage of economic growth as it rewards holders for just holding that currency.
But if you reward someone, you should necessarily take from someone else. There is no free lunch. In this case you take some share of the revenue from producers who are actually doing something useful and give it to someone who doesn't do anything productive, who does nothing apart from sitting on their money. Why should they get rewarded?