I think that the biggest threats to bitcoin are not the central banks but the governments. Nowadays central banks are under governments' full control and do whatever the governments tell them.
The dangerous scenario would involve central banks controlled by governments, exactly. The Central banks could build up a power position in the Bitcoin ecosystem with a strategic reserve, and then exercise different types of pressure over the Bitcoin Core group to get influence on development.
I had opened a whole thread
about that scenario so I don't want to repeat too much from there, but imagine a softfork with new features which enhance privacy (perhaps a Taproot enhancement, or a feature making Lightning more private). There could be various types of pressures, including some Central Banks threatening to sell their stashes (obviously in a "soft" way, e.g. stating that they can't continue holding their BTC for legal reasons if the feature is introduced), spreading fear about deep crashes into the Bitcoin community and thus making it unlikely that developers and miners approve that softfork.
This scenario is somewhat of a worst case but in my opinion not impossible.
IMO the big question is if the Bitcoin community is still ready to defend the cypherpunk ideals in such a scenario, or if it's more important that Bitcoin "goes to the moon" and becomes an "accepted and fully regulated and integrated financial asset". And you're completely correct that many core features of Bitcoin, including censorship resistance, would be in danger in such a scenario.