Can you give an example? “spread out and be somewhat resistant to censorship from governments” is just a description of blockchain's strengths¹.
> why do you talk about it if it isn't relevant?
If I didn't mention it, I'd be lying by omission. In order for this discussion to make sense, I have to make the implicit assumption that blockchain is good for anything. I have never, in my life, encountered a situation where blockchain is better than alternatives. Heck, I'm half-convinced that Bitcoin would've been better off with a block-graph (like Git); it models the dependencies better, and means attempted double-spend attacks have a lower impact on the rest of the ledger. (51% attacks would be a little easier, but only for very recent transactions, assuming even distribution of wealth² and a free market economy³.)
¹: though it isn't particularly good at either of those things in practice
²: this is a bad assumption, but it would only affect wealth hoarders so I don't care
³: this is a really bad assumption, but it wouldn't take much improvement to the world to make it a sufficiently reasonable assumption