Thank you for your thoughtful comment.
“The commitment to a lack of remedial armoury — the idea that a blockchain offers the capacity to transact without engaging with these questions, or offering solutions — is not necessarily a boon. Or, at least, it is not a boon that comes without a corresponding cost. And we need to be clear about whether — at the level of individual user transactions — this is a price worth paying.”
This section resonated particularly well with me. I think it’s still a little early to answer this question conclusively, but here is more food for thought:
With public blockchains, a user can decide to interact directly with the base layer (independent property rights, but no recourse) or any kind of intermediary that sits on top (weaker property rights, but stronger recourse.) Those who don’t need or want the additional autonomy don’t have to use it, while those who do, can.