"Could" being the operative word here.

But then, this is where Bitcoin is genius: the code isn't everything.

There's a whole bunch of built-in economic incentive feedback loops.

And getting to an "Economic Majority" is very unlikely to happen because none of the participants have to gain from that change.

Also: since a bitcoin is divisible to 10e-8, it's going to be a very long while before there's an actual shortage of the darn thing.

>There's a whole bunch of built-in economic incentive feedback loops.

Is the implication that monetary and fiscal policy also not driven by economic feedback loops? Of course they are; just different ones.

21M is the basis of bitcoin for most hodlers.

Any fork or decision by anyone to change this 21M number means that for me (and most hardcore bitcoiners I know) the chain which sticks to Satoshi's 21M becomes the REAL bitcoin chain.

21M is non negotiable. If it doesn't have 21M, it simply isn't BTC.

It can also be changed if Mathematicians all decide to redefine what numbers mean, which has just about as much chance of happening.

What does this concept of Economic Majority look like of we consider it for the US Dollar, rather than btc?

economic majority for the USD is the Federal Reserve Board

Doesn't apply. The feds control the USD and if there's one thing the fed isn't it's a democratic mechanism.

This should actually scare "investor" speculators: if the number of mining pools gets much smaller, miners collude, or someone performs a DDOS attack some miners, fundamental assumptions of the currency go out the window.