In retrospect, Bruce's recording career arc has been almost straight downhill for me. At a time whe Rock n Roll seemed potentially played out, Bruce's first three records were (in pretty much descending order IMO) inspirational testaments to the ongoing potential of rock n roll as an art form. He stayed "within the box" and still produced exhilarating music when rock n roll was generally straying from its central organizing principle: simplicity.
It may be churlish to diminish Born to Run (relative to Wild, Innocent or Asbury Park), but it's less compelling to me than either of its predecessors. None of his subsequent recordings resonate with me. He gave it a shot with the acoustic material, but that simply doesn't play to his strength (kinetic energy) for me. His live performances are IMO certainly top tier, but there are a host of great live rock performers - I'd never point at one person as "best".
As to artists and political activism, there's little question that Bruce has been a consistent and energetic champion of change and an articulate spokesman for his particular economic causes. No matter what position you're taking, that is almost never an effort that bears fruit immediately. It's easy to be dismissive of anyone who advocates for change, but it's also misguided IMO. He's contributing his efforts to his movement and the value of those efforts won't be clear for a very long time.
Whether I agree with a person's politics (or not), whether they've been effective to date in changing policy (or not), I'll acknowledge the effort and try to remember that long-term political change is a process that plays out over time. My own politics are likely very different from his, but I certainly respect what he's doing.
I only wish that his music of the last 35ish years was of more interest to me.
