I don't think money is entirely political. It started off as a technical solution - an abstraction of value from things themselves to things (coins) that represent value, all based on an understanding that everyone would agree that the coins represented a certain amount of value. Of course this is simplifying it, because coins were made of silver etc that already had an agreed value, but I think the basic point holds.
I would say that it became political because control and manipulation of value is a way to control and manipulate power. The people in charge always try to control society and organise it in their own favour, it's just easier to do this with money than it is without that abstraction of value.
At the center of his conclusion that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have no real value proposition is that the top Western currencies have no store-of-value problem.
This sort of conclusion by "experts" drives me crazy! Crypto offers far more than being a store-of-value, it's not merely a further abstraction of metal coins into an intangible equivalent - that's already there with bank accounts, bank cards etc. To say crypto is simply a store of value without physical form is nonsense. Crypto offers far far more, not just the immutable record, not just speed, not just security... it goes on and on, what about smart contracts for example?