Allow me to elaborate further.

Nowadays, we witness numerous marketing campaigns labeling technologies as "innovative" merely because they incorporate some form of "blockchain". However, upon closer examination, we quickly discover that it is often a smokescreen.

Blockchain, in and of itself, holds no intrinsic meaning.

Contrary to common belief, the consensus algorithm alone does not carry significance either.

Consider for example a fork of Bitcoin, where only the government of the United States can participate in the network due to its closed nature, mining Bitcoin for subsequent distribution. To address a practical and sensible need, a blockchain-based technology must adhere to at least the following requirements:

Any blockchain that fails to meet even one of these criteria is likely sub-optimal, overkill and inadeguate for its intended purpose.

Those that do meet these requirements typically implement a form of property/value defense mechanism. What truly enhances the utility of a blockchain is a robust underlying game theory.

It is straightforward to ascertain that the entire set of consistent blockchain implementations (i.e., those meeting the above specified requirements) converges into an optimized system for the preservation and transmission of value across space and time, with minimal additional functionalities.
This is not a flaw; rather, it represents a paramount feature.