The Gavin Andresen/Mike Hearn hard fork proposals were very likely bankster moves against Bitcoin (as both have connections with either the banking or corporate establishment). They proposed to put huge unnecessary loads on the network, and dialed back the size of the extra load they proposed by several factors, several times, and still their plans were rejected.
The hard fork mechanism is important if there is a genuine disagreement on direction, or if the ethics of the repo maintainers become significantly questionable. We don't have that problem though. The problem was hard fork proposals that intend to install rogue development teams, not the current dev team.
What did we do? We argued against it, successfully, against an army of shills. They're re-mobilising right now, and it's hilarious.
Exactly, this is what we need to do, we will need to keep on fighting and this will be a never ending war.
Ethereum able to bail out, XRP able to freeze user funds, both funded and backed by bankers are trying to destroy everything Satoshi wants to build upon.
In the current crypto scenario, i would go with Monero after Bitcoin as they uphold Bitcoin values.