We are talking about two very different concepts here.

In the arguments I am making, I am referring to the success of Bitcoin as the success of a censorship resistant monetary technology, while you seem to be referring to the success of Bitcoin as an arbitrary Dollar number.

I would argue that the majority of Bitcoin holders don't really care about censorship resistance at this point, they care about the Dollar value – meaning that changes undermining Bitcoin's censorship resistance would likely be little opposed by economic actors (many have in fact already spoken out in favor of things like sanctions), therefore *not* reducing the price of BTC.

Your argument therefore should actually go the other way around:

Why should someone decide _against_ keeping their money on the dominant value chain to protect censorship resistance, when a fixed market cap – not censorship resistance – is considered BTC's value proposition by the majority of economic nodes?