I write a lot of Python code. Objects are absent in most of what I write. But the 10% or so of the time I use objects, it is because objects are the best way I can think of to structure the program.
So I don't think objects in Python are useless at all. I think Python is designed in a way that allows them to be used effectively if desired, or avoided all together when there's no apparent benefit.
I maintain a couple of Django projects for a customer of mine. I wrote almost 50% of the code base. Those two projects use very few classes, probably only the models. Everything else is a bag of functions organized in modules.
It's very similar to an Elixir /Phoenix project I'm working on for another customer. Modules and functions and a couple of dozens of GenServers that act as objects to maintain status where we need it.
And yet, I easily follow the OO model of Ruby of Rails. I feel it right in that context, probably because the rails of RoR are more well defined than the ones of Django. Of course when I script in Ruby I bet rarely write a class. A few functions, actually methods of Object, are all I need there.
So I don't think objects in Python are useless at all. I think Python is designed in a way that allows them to be used effectively if desired, or avoided all together when there's no apparent benefit.