Running things comes with a cost (and here I think better high for a few good miners, instead high fees for users)
Only if you get incentives for good infrastructure, you think and are really willing to help it runs best for all users - for low fees.
You're welcome to that opinion. If you can find users who agree with that stance, you're free to form and secure a different blockchain with them (and clearly you already have). But that doesnt appear to be the stance of the users who are securing
Bitcoin's network. And, since they're the ones paying the cost, it's their choice. You aren't in a position to force your ideals upon them.
That's how network governance functions. If you want to change the rules to offer lower fees, find the people who agree with you and go ahead. Just don't expect others to tag along. You also have to accept the consequences of your ideals when they invariably result in a weaker and more centralised network.
- is what the profit in Bitcoin just drives and emerges from, even with small blocks or whatever protocol changes , it cannot be countered / mitigated ever