Maxwell et al's position is nothing so high-minded. The real crux of the debate here is whether Bitcoin should begin requiring users to send a substantial fee to the miner that verifies a given transaction now (no change to block size) or later (block size increase solves it now, but the problem will definitely occur when the network stops awarding miners with newly-minted coins, once there's ~22 million BTC in existence).

People who've primarily invested in the mining infrastructure obviously want the fees to go up now. People who've invested in more customer-facing elements of the bitcoin ecosystem want the fees to stay low as long as possible so that adoption isn't deterred by the necessity of including a substantial fee whenever you send a bitcoin transaction.

The technicalities of the bitcoin platform have played out such that those who don't want the size of blocks to grow have a disproportionate number of votes. Most users and most bitcoin companies want BIP 101, but they've been outvoted by the interest group that wants to start collecting rents on their mining power ASAP. In human terms, it's like land owners finding a loophole that allows them to vote 10x more than non-owners. I don't believe that was ever part of the intention of Satoshi, but the way Bitcoin's difficulty mechanism works has entrenched it as a very real problem that probably can't be circumvented.