Bitcoin is not a democracy, the majority can't dictate what Bitcoin is to the minority. Bitcoin is a sovereignty, you decide for yourself what fork to follow and consider the true Bitcoin. You can follow the fork with 6 billion gorillion coins if you want, it has zero power over me following the original fork. There are, of course, some social/economical consequences if a lot of people switch to an inflationary fork (loss of exchange value). However, you can still follow the original one and mine it together with the others sharing the idea. Economically, the least changing fork (the original) should eventually win simply because its rules are more stable and it's more scarce. But it will take time and conviction from that fork holders.

Fortunately, it's been proven hundreds of thousands times already if you consider all shitcoins "economical forks" that distract people from the only coin that matters. All of them went to zero and died, including most Bitcoin hard forks, and the remaining two (BCH and BSV) are also on their way to irrelevance. This history yet again works as a good social argument against the future forks. Bitcoin is people first, the societal and historical arguments are *much* more important than technical details.