Erik Voorhees -
Adam - I appreciate that position. However, the ~2MB soft-fork solution, through SegWit, applies even more significantly to a bitcoin with 2MB native blocks. In other words, the good and valuable work of SegWit is made MORE valuable by a 2MB block than by a 1MB block, for SegWit roughly doubles the max tx quantity.
So, portraying it as an either-or situation isn't correct. It is not the case that "either" SegWit soft-fork 2MB happens, OR hardfork 2MB happens. Both can, and IMO both should happen. Increasingly, it appears both will.
The question is then, how to do it most safely? In an ideal world, Core would realize the vast support for larger blocks (made increasingly apparent by Classic's momentum), and would work to incorporate that 2MB support into Core. Core has stated that absolutely will not happen, however. Fine, that's professional disagreement. But it means a fork will occur without Core's stewardship.
SegWit is a great compliment to blocks of any size, and for that reason, perhaps paradoxically, SegWit will not satiate the demand for 2MB or greater blocks.
Ultimately, Classic is not about a magic 2MB block size. It is about showing the world that one group of devs doesn't have monopoly power on the protocol. It has become an experiment and lesson in decentralization. Even those who denounce Classic should be able to appreciate that sentiment.