barring competition languages seem to stall out over time. Java fell out of favor because every java app turned into a pile of xml and factories that everyone hated and was slow to develop. The faster evolution of peer languages allowed for recognition of what people didn't like in Java (The ceremony of getting setup and invoking "app" logic).

The better parts of Scala, kotlin, and the guava library are steadily making their way into the language. But if there wasn't competition the language would absolutely stagnate again as risk aversion sets in.

Right, I think the languages that compile JVM bytecode were much more heading in a better direction than the ones who said "let's have fun and just start from scratch, and further fragment the industry"

Couldn’t you also say the same thing about Java not going with one of the earlier bytecoded VMs? Or, from the other direction, would we have seen more languages embrace the JVM if it’d been more open and things like invokedynamic had been added earlier?

I think there are some interesting points to made where you’re coming from, but this fragmented approach isn’t effectively making them. Something like a blog post might be better.

Here's a non-fragmented translation for ya: "The fewer languages there are the easier it is for developers to share code."

You’re just painting caricatures of language designers. Flamebait without substance.