You don't get it. It's not sound money if it can split up in that way, definitely not more sound than gold. You can put all your value in gold and at least be assured that it won't split apart into two competing forms of money. You won't ever need to allocate between two different forms of gold and watch them compete with each other in the free market. Your casual dismissal of Bitcoin breaking into two with a "so fucking what?" shows that you don't really understand why Bitcoin has value in the first place.
With all due respect, it looks like you don't understand why Bitcoin has value in the first place. Bitcoin is the only "crypto" that has unforgeable costliness. Technically, that could change, but game theory says that it won't.
Anyone can create as many chains as they want. I could spray paint clay bricks to look like gold bars. Perhaps I could con some people into buying them. In fact, I could spray paint foam bricks to look like gold bars. Then I could say my new form of gold is more valuable because it's less dense and easier to transport. How would this impugn actual gold?
Segwit2x burned out a lot of people, it was stressful and caused massive amounts of harm and distrust among members of the community. We can't go through that each and every time a faction of the community wants to change Bitcoin in some way.
I also want you to pay attention to your language, because the language we use reveals a lot, you say "And, also not having to resort to something less than overwhelming consensus to get segwit passed", does that not almost sound like a legislative battle, something that would be said about a political process? Replace the word "segwit" with "obamacare" and it sounds like a sentence you would hear to describe something that happened in congress.
You can't just bury your head in the sand and completely ignore how political this stuff is. You do yourself a disservice, presumably you have a lot of money tied up in Bitcoin, just like most of us. So you should really know what you're getting involved with here.
I don't see a problem here. That's the nature of open source software. Have you seen some of the heated arguments from the linux mailing list?
Frankly I see this as one of Bitcoin's greatest strengths. It has democratized the world's hardest money. Wasn't that one of the reasons Bitcoin was created? So we could finally have a form of money that wasn't controlled from the top-down by central banks and kings?