PoS does not reinforce historical consensus. Every subsequent block in a PoW chain makes the history below it more secure because the cost of reversing it is superlinear in the number of blocks built on top. In PoS, this is not the case, the cost of producing a block is a constant, therefore the cost of reversing history is a constant
Sorry to tell you , that you are wrong, but you are wrong.

In many proof of stake coins, you burn Coin Age when you stake, as unlike PoW ASICS which has constant access to try and find a block,
In proof of stake , when a block is generated, those coins become dormant for a length of time and can no longer affect block generation until a specific amount of time has passed and they build up enough age to stake again.
(Varies with different implementations)
Also the cost of trying to reverse a Proof of stake history become more difficult with every block generated.
Because there is no way to maintain a dominant % when you are constantly losing a coin staking % & age every time you stake.
In Short , If I have 51% of a PoW mining operation, I can maintain control of that network constantly.
(Like the Chinese with Bitcoin & Litecoin)But in a PoS network, my 51% will be a constant flux with the rest of the network, meaning constant control of the PoS network is not possible.
Which is one reason PoS is superior to PoW, energy efficiently being the other.

FYI:
If you purchased 51% of a PoS coin network, you drove the price of that coin sky high.

if you once sit on your 51% Pos of Shit - there are no externalities (operational risks) that will change this in any future and you will be king for ever. This centralization is than for EVER.
In a PoW system you have by far moar skin in the game and that makes a PoW moar secure by far - since you have a latent / permanent decentralization pressure (by far higher than in a PoS by the in PoS absent op risks) at work ALL THE TIME
Simple example: PoS is like buying ONCE a cool firewall system - and than never care about it later / ever ...