There is at least some recognition in those cases that they introduced the new thing because they got it wrong in the old thing. That's different than saying they should co-exist on equal terms.
Yes, that says each has good and bad points and you should weigh them against each other in the context of your application, to figure out which one to use. I.e. equal terms.
Zen would be: pick one of the two approaches, keep its strengths while fixing it to get rid of its weaknesses, then declare the fixed version as the one obvious way to do it. You might still have to keep the other one around for legacy support, but that's similar to the situation with applying functions across iterables.
This is what Go did. Go has one way to do concurrency (goroutines) and they are superior to both of Python's current approaches. Erlang has of course been in the background all along, doing something similar.
I'm not sure who is claiming that. Here's the OP we're replying to:
> They are techs with different trade off, and life is full of opportunities.