I agree with your entire first paragraph. I have a couple of quibbles with the second.
QUOTE(everyking @ Thu 16th October 2008, 12:07pm)
To suggest that the composition of the ArbCom is irrelevant is simply ludicrous--in the context of Wikipolitics, nothing is more important than the composition of the ArbCom.
I would argue that the behaviour of the WMF Board is more important, but this depends on your definition of Wikipolitics (though even under a narrow definition, I'd argue that the behaviour of the WMF Board ought to be more important than the composition of Arb Comm).
QUOTE
It's only irrelevant if you think Wikipedia itself is irrelevant, and therefore whatever future direction the project takes is inconsequential.
It's quite possible to believe, as I think many do here, that Wikipedia is relevant but that Wikipolitics, even broadly-defined, are not. I think that's the view of the faction that believes that Wikipedia is beyond hope, but that it's too harmful to be ignored.