The design purpose of traditional institutions is indeed to maintain a certain order and fairness.

Courts exist to adjudicate disputes.
Regulation exists to prevent fraud.
Deposit insurance exists to protect depositors.
These institutions are often corrupt, inefficient, and captured, but their narrative of legitimacy is built on the promise that "we are here to protect you."
When they fail, they break their promise, and people get angry but still understand that these institutions should exist, just that they need improvement.
Blockchain's technical capabilities far exceed those of these institutions.
Immutable code execution is more reliable than any court.
On-chain transparency is more thorough than any audit.
Smart contracts are more precise than any legal contract.
But those who come to build on this technology, their purpose from the start is not to uphold justice.
It is to issue tokens for fundraising and then rug pull, to design tokenomics so early holders extract money from later ones, to build leveraged casinos to collect fees, to package rug pulls so that the code "trustlessly" executes the extraction.
The result is an absurd inversion.
Weaker institutions with the purpose of justice win a certain degree of trust.
Stronger blockchains with the purpose of extraction lose all trust.
People find that a system that "immutably executes malicious intent" is more terrifying than one that "often betrays good intent."
Because the latter at least has the possibility of repair, while the damage from the former is irreversible.