What they ' re really referring to is socialists . Socialists fuck things up and give their ideology a bad name , then they adopt entryist tactics to take over a new label , until they fuck that one up . And so the cycle continues . Liberalism is dying , so they ' re making their move on the greens and libertarians . <| sep |> I think that the current and past stance of Core developers ' stances on block size increases have been grossly misrepresented by assuming that one or two more vocal Core developers represent all opinions among the Core developers , and those opinions then having frequently been exaggerated . There are a few Core developers that are very conservative towards blocksize increases . There have been several proposals and discussions in the past that indicate both that there is interest in performing blocksize increases and research into how those may best be introduced into Bitcoin going on . Fact is that there was no consensus for a hard fork blocksize increase as the next step among Core developers , but there was consensus for SegWit , which is why SegWit was implemented and proposed to the community . I ' m unaware of any Core contributors that completely reject the notion of ever increasing the blocksize . The most oppositional position is that the current blocksize is already somewhat too big , and the second most oppositional is that it shouldn ' t be increased yet . The above diverse positions and discussions have been largely presented in rbtc as Core or Blockstream will never allow an increase of blocksize besides SegWit . In my opinion , this misrepresentation is a large contributor to the conflict we are seeing .