I think we in the bitcoin community are facing a situation which is similar to what is described in this video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y1-0o0cSw24
To illustrate the evilness of some of the folks refusing a block size limit increase I point you to the example Luke Dashjr also known as Luke-Jr. He has been employed on occasion by Blockstream, and is a co-author of the sidechains paper supported by Blockstream, and is also a supporter of the roadmap in Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system scaling. See https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/capacity-increases. Luke Dashjr has deliberately attacked at least one new alt-coin (CoiledCoin) by mining blocks without transactions thereby blocking the confirmation of transactions. That attack killed the fledgling new coin. He even carried out the attack using mining power he took without prior accept from miners. He was/is the owner/admin of the Eligius pool. See more on https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3472/what-is-the-story-behind-the-attack-on-coiledcoin and https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56675.0
EDIT:
It appears Luke Dashjr is even a co-founder of Blockstream. He had previously been hiding that fact but revealed it at https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/47f0b0/f2pool_testing_classic/d0d6ekz:
We founded Blockstream to fund our work on Bitcoin. Basically we’re just spending full time doing what we were already planning to do without pay. So no, I don’t think the existence of funding has influenced the recommendation at all, even for Blockstream employees.