Imagine if for some reason the word "bitcoin" turns out to be problematic (maybe it means "Shit/fart/poop" in Spanish and Chinese, which means most people in these countries wouldn't wanna use it, so the bitcoin people decide to rename the project to "Cryptocoin", are you going to say that clearly this violates the fundamental principles of bitcoin because Satoshi called it "bitcoin"?
Because based on what I read on Satoshi's communication, he would take 2 mins to change the name to something else (look how easily he applied the block size limit when the need arrived).
Similarly, there are essential attributes to what bitcoin is, and there are accidental attributes to it. Clearly the name of bitcoin is not necessary for it to be bitcoin.
What about the 'cash system' part? Clearly you and I disagree on this. I believe that cash part doesn't mean that the basic token must be trasnferable on layer 1.