Your question is to narrow to be taken seriously. You pretend the 1600's use of a nation's people and lands to finance wars was legitimate, and that such claims of "assets" by royalty to back loans by international bankers is somehow different from the independent Federal Reserve loaning the US government its own currency at interest based on the lands and people of this nation as collateral.
And "Other Than That," you ask why fractional banking shouldn't be used to further exploit the generation of debt under such a system, when the assets of the supposed "loan" can be inflated at any time by "loans" from the Fed upwards of trillions of dollars?
Please.
Let us assume, for purposes of discussion, that the amount of money loaned in the US last year was $10T.
Under the system you seem to be proposing, that would be probably <$1T/year.
The economy would utterly and totally collapse.
All I’m talking about is the volume of money available to be loaned, not whether its source or methods of distribution are right and proper.