the social contract (SHA256 PoW, 10 minute solution target, 21e6 emission, 1MB max block, pay-for-priority) cannot change one iota without alienating a dominant plurality of the socioeconomic majority's critical mass.
If indeed it is true that 1MB4EVA is part of Bitcoin's social contract, and indeed anything changed in the social contract will alienate the dominant plurality of the socioeconomic majority's critical mass, then you can go back to sleep, as BU presents no risk to you.
But your being here, expending effort in arguing against BU, is an indication that you are afraid that your assertions are incorrect.
If the economic majority does not agree to some new limit, then any fork based upon that limit will die. It requires an economic majority to sustain any fork.
I can only speak for myself, but I do agree with you that there are certain attributes that I feel are sacrosanct -- without which I would divest.
However, I do not agree that 1MB4EVA is even remotely part of these fundamental principles. Further, it seems you've lost that battle even amongst the majority of those that oppose a simple maxblocksize increase at this point in time.
Must suck. Sorry.