We have already gone over this multiple times.

All guidelines point to only mapping what is on the ground and which can be verified using ground truth.  Items that no longer exist should be deleted and instead be added to OHM.  As discussed previously, at what point do we not add razed features?  Razed is very different from all removed.  Having non-existent (or no longer existing) features is not beneficial to the goal of OSM of only having what exists.

Should abandoned=woods or razed tags be added to plains, woods, and wetlands since at one point they weren't residential buildings and roads?  Hell, to a further extent, we might as well tag everything in the US as a razed ocean since at some point this area if earth was underwater before the land masses moved from Pangea.  If we use the example of borders, can we added native american tribe borders?  Might be some evidence using rivers as boundaries, and I am sure there are some maps that can be used - no, we can agree these belong on OHM instead.

I am not sure why there is such insitence to go against OSM guidelines and everything OSM is trying to acheive, rather than adding it to the right repository - OHM.

If it is because ORM can't pull from OHM, then that is an issue with ORM, not OSM, and further, mapping for the renderer is very explicitly prohibited, so this point falls flat.  As has been maintained all along, "historical" features should be added to OHM, not OSM.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nonexistent_features
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

If you believe non-existent items should be added to OSM, you should take it up with OSM to change the guidelines changed.