if you cant comprehend that core want to change the rules without consent
You have it backwards. Core isn't trying to change rules without consent. They have not proposed to break consensus at all. Soft forks are implicitly accepted by bitcoin users since the Bitcoin software accepts the longest, valid chain. Arguing against soft forks is arguing that the longest, valid chain is not Bitcoin. Pretty silly.
consensus=consent.
the NEW RULES and new verification requirements doesnt require consent in a softfork. old nodes cant block or invalidate or orphan a softforks new rules.. they just blindly pass it on unchecked
passing it on unchecked is not consenting, or agreeing. its no longer being fully part of the consensus mechanism. because they dont have the full list of rules any more.
infact what they think is "blocksize" has a totally different meaning to softfork nodes..
but hey lets just tell everyone that their nodes are perfectly fin being blind, no longer verifying the new data.. infact lets just tell everyone that old nodes are (wrongly) still full nodes).
lets pretend there isnt any consensus (consent) issues purely to let bitcoin change without nodes having to make a choice, lets just brush consensus(consent) under the carpet and pretend consensus(consent) was never part of bitcoin.
lets just call it CORE rules instead of consensus rules.