"but more likely, a government could force mining organizations to allow their transactions to steal bitcoins, reverse transactions, or whatever else."

This to me just means that bitcoin users need to be more involved to ensure decentralization. We can't trust companies or governments to operate in bitcoin's best interest. Once this is realized as a potential threat, users will have even more motivation to run miners of their own. To be even more specific, they will have a continually increasing motivation that parallels their vested interest in the chain likely in reference to their local fiat currency's valuation of that vested interest. Another thing I'd like to add is that you state that

"Whereas previously this meddling would've been extremely noisy, causing a hard fork (which would have likely been ignored). With segwit, however, theft by miner collusion is a first class feature."

You phrase this as if, under the current protocol, this situation is near impossible which is far from the truth. Any government could still go to mining companies and strong arm a hard fork. Clearly, in either case, if this were to happen, users will move their capital to chains that serve the collective not some group of bureaucrats who are using their power to manipulate people as they have done for centuries.

One final note, these types of threats have always existed. None of this is news to any bitcoin or even blockchain user for that matter. The only thing I see here is that there wouldn't necessarily be a hard fork if bitcoin were to be "colluded against" by miners or mining companies that were strong armed to serve someone/a government's interest. What sort of blockchain user would use a mining company that would sweep them out from under the rug in such a way? Even a whisper of this kind of activity and users would leave the entire blockchain industry in a heartbeat. We need companies that make the set up and operation of miners easy for individuals. Perhaps even a mining warehouse where you can physically go to shut off power to their miner or change the client if they disagree with the company in any way shape or form.

I'm getting a little long here, but all I'm trying to say is that any collective or individual meddling with open-source technologies is going to have huge implications on the users. These users left the current systems and centralized server gardens to operate outside of environments with high chances of centralized manipulation regardless of what protocol is implemented to create the open-source network-based consensus algorithm (in this case at least). Any attempt at collusion against the integrity of the system (which is possible in every POW blockchain) compromises the validity of it especially in reference to how individuals were looking to interface with it. If it were true that a government meddled with it then it would render this public program to be useless in the eyes of the users who were looking to use it to avoid participating in manipulated systems. This is a risk users take every day with their blockchain(s) unless they mine to protect their vested interest in the program. In reality, mining and running a full node should be seen as a tax for users, especially high volume users, to help keep their vested interest safe. Currently, it's just investors looking for a return on their investment in hardware and electricity and that is a 'BLOCKCHAIN' problem, not an XBT or BCH only problem.