All valid points. He can frame Bitcoin as not a currency but it doesn't stop us using it as one. I think that's the difference. He's preaching a message that suits him and his audience like we all do. Primarily I want Bitcoin to absorb all the fiat capital and neutralise the system, preventing the state from printing money and shrinking it down. Saylor's efforts align with that. There's also an element of don't take the state head on, trojan horse that shit onto everyone's balance sheet then win the battle. The winners dictate terms afterwards.