It's not underappreicated; it's facile. Everything you do in society is backed by the state's monopoly on violence. What are you going to do when I storm into your house with guns, kill your family, and demand access to your wallet? Appeal to math?

Given that you would first have to 1) Identify me as a target worth pursuing (not possible from my wallet addresses if I practice adequate sanitizing of inputs); 2) Figure out where I live (also not possible from wallet addresses, or even people who have sent to me); and 3) Verify I even had enough shards of a key accessible to me in my home to transfer funds to you anyway (not to mention 4) Outgun me), all the violence in the world isn't going to bypass the math.

If you're violent enough, nothing is going to protect me or the people I love from you, but that's regardless of whether my money is in Bitcoin or USD. There's no disadvantage for Bitcoin here.

The added difficulty of your obtaining the reward you seek actually reduces your incentive to try. The only incentive to kill me then is blind violence, and I guess you can admit to that motivation if you want, but it's protective for me against anyone less psychotically violent than that.

What math prevents a big enough group of miners and users rolling back the blockchain?

The sheer cost of spooling up enough hardware and paying for the electricity to run it.

That's literally the entire point of proof of work.

Then hard forks would never happen, right?

I'd rather that happen to my country's wealth than have it bombed out of existence.

Seems like a non sequitur and moreover a false dilemma.

If the choice is between having my country's wealth destroyed by military invasion, versus being destroyed by someone mining blocks somewhere, I'd take the latter. You asked, not me.

I'm still not quite seeing the argument. Your country could also be bombed out of existence in order to seize or destroy its hashing power. I really don't see how bitcoin being "backed by math" saves you there.

It doesn't, obviously. But that's not what you were asking.

Now I'm curious about what I was asking!

And if I force you to give me your decryption keys or make a transfer at gunpoint, will the math still protect you?

Prevention of domestic crime and violent projection of power in international affairs are unrelated uses of the sovereign monopoly on force.

It is reasonable to object to USA's use of the latter while enjoying the benefits of the former. Indeed I do so.

It very well might. If I simply don't have enough shards of the key or keys for the multisignature address, sure, you can still kill me, but you can't get the money from me. It's impossible.

You can see my related comment below, but if you're motivated by the money, this protects me. You'll never get it if I'm dead.

If you're motivated by violence, though, nothing protects me. But the same is every bit as true if my money is in USD.