Using terms like "malicious attacker" doesn't convey any useful information, it's an attempt to make people feel a certain way about the topic being discussed. And that is what makes you a sophist.
With statements like these you just look like an outright idiot that can not admit to being wrong. Does this remind us of some individuals? I'll give you a hint, one starts with a R and with a J. Debunking your correction easily:
If [someone] wanted to, they could fill these block up over night [by spending a lot of money on fees].
What fees? No congestion = very low fees or no fees at all.
Either that, or you could get enough demand that would fill it up very quickly [which is both what we want and why we need it].
Let me get this straight: You want to put further centralization pressure on Bitcoin with 2 MB blocks and you hope that they get filled right away so you can
demand even more centralization pressure for more throughput?

You will end up asking for X MB afterwards, which would further centralized Bitcoin whilst not improving [efficiency].
A block size increase is not an improvement.
Anyone has the right to send any amount of transactions they want for any reason or no reason, that's one of the main points about bitcoin. No middlemen regulating what is allowed.
Let's stick our head into the send and ignore malicious individuals who do not do any kind of financial transactions nor valid data storage, but just create transactions for the sake of spamming. Wake up. These kinds of stupid statements make you look like a government shill.
Wow, so I can almost triple my money? .... kidding.

You wouldn't 'triple your money' if people actually listened to engineers and not business men or laymen like Ibian. You'd probably see a tenfold increase.

Jimbo, do you buy from BTMs? You're always "rushing out to buy." In which case, holy commission batman?
IIRC he did state once that he buys from BTMs.