The premise of this discussion nicely encapsulates the problems with the cryptosphere, especially the advocates and maxis. The idea that you can't discuss technical issues because they might be political is the height of CC absurdity.
A few years ago I wrote a browser based PvP rougelikelike. Just a hobby project. I wanted to add microtransactions. Payouts for NPC and player kills, along with a mechanism to bid into the game. The near religious devotion to different cryptocurrency ecosystems was off putting when looking for a solution. That, and the multitudes of projects with flashy landing pages, poor documentation, ridiculous tooling and loads of gotchas for implementation.
In the end I found another altcoin that satisfied my needs for the project. No fees, decentralized and validated transactions in seconds or less. Simple to use, less gotchas and flashy marketing, but as with any coin there were plenty of maximalists.
That didn't stop users from asking, "Why didn't you use [favored coin]?"
Technical merits were of no concerns for maximalists, who continually emphasized, "number go up" or some imagined impending price action. Nobody seemed to care what was actually delivered, but everyone was constantly espousing the technological virtues of their preferred ecosystem.
If cryptocurrency is to be taken at face value, as a mechanism for transacting, one would expect that usability would be a concern. LN is a good example of this. There are simply too many steps and potential failure modes. Yet that isn't a concern for advocates. They're more interested in the valuation and their own sunk costs.
This is why cryptocurrency isn't taken more seriously. Yes, there is the potential to transact and do things with it, but the community is more interested in speculation. Critiques about 'politics' are a good illustration of where speculative mania overtakes the actual value proposition. Hope you can appreciate the irony.