Cryptocurrencies are for when we want to be responsible for our selves. I don't think either extreme (banks vs crypto) works for all cases. I just want the choice.
I always understood that Bitcoin have appealed to the Ayn Rand followers. But what Ayn Rand have advocated for is selfishness and not a society. You can dress that as "be responsible for our selves" but in this case, much as with a lot of cases, spreading out the cost of building and operating a secure system across many people have proven to work much better than individuals doing the same.
To provide a concrete example, I use Bitcoin where I don't trust a provider to not charge me again in the future.
Some banks give you some tools to protect against this case like generating debit card numbers with an exact balance on it. But Bitcoin generalizes over the case.
Your comment is the sort of all-or-nothing mentality that I don't understand. I look at banking institutions vs cryptocurrencies as different options just like credit cards vs cash: I want to be able to choose, and I don't want to be limited to one single solution.
It's kinda of like the decision between an iPad vs a techie's laptop. I think the most common cases (e.g. my parents' needs) are best served by an iPad or a banking institution, but it's dangerous when someone begins telling me that I don't need such a powerful laptop.
All too often I see cryptocurrencies dismissed with the condescending implication that nobody is capable of evaluating the trade-offs.