Satoshi directly contributed to two digital currencies, Bitcoin and Namecoin.
He did not "contribute" to Namecoin in any way. Stop trying to rewrite history.
Anybody can read the BitDNS threads and decide.
That is not Namecoin, it's BitDNS, which wasn't even his idea. He just chimed in a few suggestions on how a BitDNS would work -- this was before the creation of Namecoin, which again, he had nothing to do with.
Bitcoin was an example of how a 'pseudo commodity', could be created in a fair way if a person trusts the underlying cryptography.
But aside from that, bitcoin does absolutely nothing.
Namecoin has vastly important uses,
The market disagrees with this take by a near infinite ratio.
and that is probably why Satoshi contributed to BitDNS.
He didn't even "contribute" to BitDNS, because BitDNS never existed. It was just an idea.
That reminds me of the dystopian thinking in George Orwell books.
Namecoin was the product of bitcoin and BitDNS.
Satoshi worked on Bitcoin, then he shifted to BitDNS, as evidenced by the fact that most of his last posts were on BitDNS.
If a person wants to support a project based on celebrity endorsement, Namecoin is as strong, or stronger than, bitcoin.
If a person wants to support a project which will encourage survival of smaller groups apart from the melting pot, again, Namecoin is stronger than Bitcoin.
ENS is not a substitute for Namecoin.
If a person has a quarrel with Namecoin because of distribution e.g., it is not controlled by the West like Bitcoin, then they should create a new fair release fork with a slow emission curve.