I agree! However large reorgs are disruptive, to uses, to markets, to bitcoin price, and will generate pushback. Bitcoin will not be seen as "just working" if large reorgs are cheap and common. So that's the trade off. Every path involves trade offs, and the challenge is to find the least bad.
Discussion
The least bad tradeoff is pure nakamoto consensus. Everything else devolves to cult-of-personality/politics. Allowing checkpoints at all opens a door that must remain closed.
If reorgs are a problem, the solution is for recipients to demand more confirmations. This is what exchanges do when shitcoins get 51% attacked. The more confirmations you require, the more expensive it is for your attacker to maintain their attack. Attacks can be made arbitrarily expensive simply by waiting.
So there’s already an in-built, PoW preserving mechanism for answering reorg attack shenanigans, without deferring to checkpoint politics: patience.