Actually there IS something that can justify NOT doing this. By changing the transaction capacity in this way you change bitcoin's value proposition and you destroy its digital gold properties (ie an inflation hedge). This would tank the system. And also by doing so you open up these qualities and parameters to perpetual political debate which everyone agrees would be terrible for the long term health of the system.
More importantly though, you need a founded scientific argument to propose the system in order to change it, and since there isn't one, there is no hope of you getting your way. The entire security of the system is held together by science and guarded by (computer) scientists.
If you think changing the block size limit from 1MB to 2MB will 'tank the system', you simply don't understand the Bitcoin design at all.
Satoshi designed Bitcoin with no block size limit, he later added a temporary 1MB limit to prevent spam, it was set to 1MB because it was 2010 and the average block size was less than 1k, he clearly stated this 1M limit was temporary and should be removed in the future.
In October 2010, two months before Satoshi vanished he talked about increasing the block size limit, he actually talked about it on this forum:
It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
Satoshi believed block size should increase after block number 115,000.
We are now 7 years later at block number 459,111.
Nothing can justify keeping block size limit at 1M.
Stop pretending you're smarter than Satoshi, you're not. This reply alone shows me you don't even know the basics of Bitcoin.
You share the same problem with Lauda: Your mouth keep moving but your brain can't catch up. You are forced to make replies but you run out of things to say, so you try too hard and end up going off on a tangent and become white noises.
. 
?! I wonder what a communist Bitcoin economy would look like 
communists are the worst. They're even worse than nazis. I'm seeing Bitcoin as a capitalist community where the stakeholders should be in charge. Miners are big stakeholders but actual bitcoin holders are also stakeholders. Everyone else, including Blockstream and others are just parasites to the system.