For instance?
(Full Disclosure: I was one of the larger of the financial contributors to get this thing made. Peter Todd was the driving force behind it. Since I've gotten involved with Bitcoin I've seen bloat as being the Achilles' heel based on what influences it will have on the evolution of the ecosystem, and I've put my money where my mouth is. I posited back in 2011 that the most effective way for TPTB to kill Bitcoin would be to embrace it and make it grow it's way into a situation where subversion was possible.)
Why don't we start with the fact that the video defined "participate" (as, in "everyone can participate in the Bitcoin network") as meaning that everyone can donate resources to operate a Bitocin node, but they'll only actually be allowed to use Bitcoin two or perhaps three times in their life.
I've long (many years) anticipated subordinate chains which require users to support the backing chain as a function of supporting (and hopefully simply using in lots of cases) the subordinate chain itself. Obviously the backing chain is key to the survival of the subordinate chains and thus all subordinates will be supporting a single backing chain.
What this means is that it makes perfect sense for everyone who is geared to support any chain at all to support native Bitcoin whether they ever use it directly or not. Using it indirectly is nearly as important as using it directly anyway.
This is a big reason why it is important (to me at least) that the actual value core remain lite and tight. The easier it is to support the more people will be inclined to do so.