Bitcoin extends political disagreements in the community into the money. How hard is that to understand? I'm not exaggerating anything. Go look at UASF, where a small minority of users got together in a movement and pressured Bitcoin miners to activate Segwit with the threat that they would reject their blocks otherwise. Here, the reasonable technical solution to preserve value was to just wait it out. But these users were willing to fork themselves off the Bitcoin network if they didn't get their Segwit activated right now. You won't find this level of naked populism and politics in any other form of money. Can you imagine if a minority of Americans threatened to use their own spinoff version of the U.S. dollar unless the treasury made certain economic concessions to them?
i agree about the politics that are affecting bitcoin but it doesn't set it apart from any other form of money. and your comparison is unfair since you are comparing a toddler (bitcoin) with a mature established currency in a unified community. if you compare bitcoin with a currency during unstable times and when the society wasn't mature then you'll see the same things. like after a revolution, or a civil war. i'm not familiar with US history but didn't south print their own money ("Greyback") during the US civil war? the bills even look similar and use the same sign.
wasn't 2017 scaling debate short of a civil war in bitcoin? and a bitcoin that is not yet mature.
i see both UASF (specifically BIP148) and BCH with the same eye. they were both attacks on bitcoin by a minority who have been trying to force the majority to bend to their demands. and they both could have the same risks and inflict the same damage. but also they are both product of immaturity of bitcoin and the community and that does not set bitcoin apart.
today people aren't blaming UASFers like they blame BCHers because we were lucky enough to see their "attack" fall in the same direction where the majority went into.