You really need to breakdown terms when discussing this. I consider myself more of a bitcoin maximalist than not, and with such, I would argue Bitcoin (maybe 1 to 2 others) are the only truly decentralized projects in existence.
What are bitcoins guiding principles? Decentralized, peer-to-peer, cashless, intermediary-less, transactions. Now saying this is one thing, however the entity (Satoshi) that laid it out, is either still an enigma, dead, a group, etc. That is part of the decentralization that Bitcoin has over all others. Satoshi can never come back and change Bitcoin (or probably won't, assuming it's 1 person/group who still lives). Your bitcoin can never be confiscated (if its in your custody) and anyone can secure the network (yes yes, ASICS I know but in theory).
The difference between Bitcoin, and literally any other project, is that Satoshi is an Enigma or a ghost. Ethereum has the dev foundation, essentially every blockchain has a core dev team. Now I will say decentralization as I see it, can never be an absolute. It is a sliding scale in terms of how we understand the word. Some projects feature more decentralized operational tactics than others, but some are very very closer to completely (if not completely) centralized.
Now, I could drone on about this topic forever, however the key takeaway is that Bitcoins guiding principles are as close to a decentralized finance system as the globe can get. Does it have its issues even with that? Yes, of course it does. However I do believe that there is also a place for the semi-centralized/decentralized projects. It is a sliding scale, not an absolute. If we were to construe the concept as binary, then not even Bitcoin (look at mining pools...) could be decentralized, and nothing could ever be. Hence, it needs to be interpreted as a spectrum that everything sits along.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Thank you for sharing this very intersting view. I guess yiu have a point that nothing is ever completely decentralized.