BTC was crippled by co-opting the dev eam (with the
excusethreat of 1MB change being contentious), thus the blockchain itself which is the primary permissionless part of Bitcoin was limited as to drive the bulk of the tx’s to a 2nd layer which is less threatening to fiat.
Since BTC is open source and can be forked most of the resources were aimed at preventing hardforking from ever successfully happening and to force everyone into their standard of choice – the doomed to fail version of Bitcoin. When BCH forked it was the first real attempt threatening to break free from the chain they control.
nChain was created in advance in preparation to the eventuality someone will try to make a permissionless version outside their control and was meant to either try to take over the main client of the uncrippled chain (“fulfilling Satoshi’s vision”), or to disrupt the chain if that fails.
nChain’s endgame was to prevent BTC from hardforking successfully.
Any other chain which will stand a real chance to be uncrippled will suffer the same fate as BCH.
This isn’t a conspiracy theory, it was done in some well known examples when standards were crippled to decrease their disruptive potential (e.g. https standard).
Some BTC supporters agree with the above and believe the powers that be are siding with BTC, but in reality what they’re doing isn’t helping BTC succeed but making it the only coin which could succeed in case people still want to use it crippled.