It seems like there are different messages for different audiences. The appeal of a trustless network is stronger in places with a history of surprise currency

It seems like there are different messages for different audiences. The appeal of a trustless network is stronger in places with a history of surprise currency and banking-industry failures-- no one person can crash the system by fiat. OTOH, the use window is small-- situations where the currency is being undermined but electric/networking is reliable enough to do a large scale backup Bitcoin economy are pretty narrow. Venezuela might be the poster child for this. For another audience, the thought of "geographic independence" was appealing. It would cost the same and take basically the same time to pay someone in St. Petersberg, Russia or St. Petersberg, Florida. Really, this is still a space that conventional banking has been troublesome with. Things like the SEPA network help, but there are still loads of cases where it's cheapest to put cash in an envelope. Unfortunately, Bitcoin as-is is still pretty slow and expensive for that.