it is the Unix way that is preventing it from going further
So you are saying any violation of the Unix philosophy will make it "go further"? Probably not, but if yes, I give up on you.
If no, are you saying linux kernel, or other "good" non-systemd things never violate the unix philosophy? If so, you are wrong. ZFS, and Btrfs violate the Unix philosophy quite spectacularly by merging filesystem, LVM, checksum etc. into one monolithic piece. Linus himself was against this initially (especially in the context of encryption), but he has come to terms with reality. Looked at very narrowly, emacs is a violation of the Unix philosophy because of being large, complex and multi-functional. But there are good reasons for those violations.
So smart violation of Unix philosophy is already underway. The remaining argument is about whether systemd stuff is violating Unix philosophy in a smart or a dumb way. Let us define smart to be something that improves the software rather than increase profits of a company while making lives of users/customers/administrators miserable.
I don't see an argument from you about how systemd kind of violation of Unix philosophy is a smart. If not, systemd's existence itself could be the "crime" here.