Hash rate increases with user usage, not purely by miner decisions. A fork that occurs due to a UASF and a URSF at the same time for example would result in 2 Bitcoins. Using an older version of the client does not resolve this conflict. Miners may choose to support one initially, but if the other one has more user support, miners will switch due to profit incentive.

Hence, Bitcoin is a social construct. The answer to "What is Bitcoin" is entirely determined by the people who use Bitcoin, not the repo, not miners.

To blow your mind even more, it is entirely probable that cryptography becomes entirely broken, but some other method allows for the same security. Because the previous version of Bitcoin is inoperable and the new version is functional, the new version is Bitcoin and in this scenario doesn't use cryptography, therefore is not "crypto"

Saying Bitcoin is crypto is essentially that same as saying dollars are paper. It misses much of the picture. Dollars are required by the people living in the US in order to pay taxes. That this means it has to be money and nothing else can compete is can and should be challenged by the onset of Bitcoin.