The truth may be more simple: the economy lost faith in core to solve the scalability problem.
And yes, this is a takeover. Core forgot that bitcoin is not just development, but also economy and politic. They ignored the needs of the economy, and the politics of consensus. It's not fair to
only blame big blockers when we slide into a contentious hardfork.Maybe their way can be considered technical better - but politically it was not the safest and secure, but the most dangerous way: the way that increased the risk of a contentious hardfork.
Is the economy supposed to decide on the technicalities of the system? Are we going to let people who major in economics and politics make the most important decisions that people with an IT degree need to be making? If so, then I might as well tear apart my 'degree'.
We need both IT experts, economists and political thinkers in order to fully understand and decide the paths we choose to take. Bitcoin requires a multidisciplinary approach in order to gain a better and wider understanding of its mechanisms and effects. Not everything in Bitcoin can be understood from an engineering perspective, economic arguments and issues have been highly prevalent in the blocksize debate for instance. This is why the Bitcoin Unlimited Articles of federation states this explicitly.
The voices of scientists, scholars, developers, entrepreneurs, investors and users should all be heard and respected.