At least the OP is clearly willing to openly profess their protectionist apologist tendencies. You seem to be in denial.
You seem to be being provocative for it's own sake, which is a working definition of internet trolling.
You keep suggesting developers of alternative clients should pursue their own chain because you're terrified of a little competition on this one. I'm suggesting that post fork, all developers are welcome to tag along, follow the longest chain and keep releasing their own clients, that, while compatible with the new consensus, can still propose changes to the rules of the network. Post fork (whether soft or hard), it's not a zero-sum game if dev teams are willing to carry on competing. Free and open. Glorious.
Why would anyone need to compete with Bitcoin on it's own chain if their coin is better? You're welcome to question why anyone would need to compete with Core on the current chain, but it's not my place to answer. Some people want to and they're entirely free to do so. Are you saying you don't want them having that right? Would you willingly take away their freedom to do it if you could? If so, it doesn't strike me as very liberal of you.
It is your place to answer, you're the person I asked. And your poetic tinged bohemianist smoke-screen isn't altering the fact that you are avoiding the question because you don't like the answer.
And people are, of course, entirely free to do all sorts of foolish things. Free choices are not necessarily good choices.