So yeah, I'm definitely not "telling people it's a democracy". If anything, I want what we still delude ourselves into calling "democracy" in the outside world to be more like Bitcoin.
Perhaps I'm just reading it the wrong way because you're effectively calling consensus itself an oligarchy. To me that just feels perverse.
There are no benevolent oligarchies. Sooner or later they'll be initiating transfer of wealth into their own pockets by fair means or foul. Just more corrupt centralisation by another name.
We have power division well structured in bitcoin, that is unlikely to happen. Bitcoin is not like a private central bank.
It is administered publicly by nodes voting in a voluntary matter, while you also have the expertise of the oligarchs who hold the majority of bitcoins steering it in the right direction.
It's their money, they have invested in it, of course they want the best to succeed for bitcoin, it's not altruism, it's greed, but it works, and bitcoin is 10 billion thanks to that.
So there are 2 major forces, in fact even 3 (if there is separation between miners & oligarchs): nodes, miners & oligarchs.
And you also have minor forces like : bitcoin media & bitcoin developers who hold less power and only influence indirectly.
Hardly a centralized system
