Which is essentially what I am doing, reminding people that they do have this freedom of choice. The freedom we have depends on our collective political culture, this is in some ways similar to state democracies. If we see the proof of work concensus as a type of election or vote. Then it can be argued that having an election with only one party is totalitarianism. Having only one choice is the equivalent of having no choice. This is why we need more viable and respected alternative implementations of the Bitcoin protocol, in order to better and more accurately reflect the will of the economic majority.
This is all fine ... but why use the word totalitarian when those devs are standing shoulder to shoulder with you asking for more implementations and contributing parties? Have any devs suggested otherwise, do you have any evidence that they don't want other implementations?