Because whether it’s an attack or not is more to do with the framing than act. If you get all the miners together and can amass 51% of the hash power then you have consensus and have enough control of the network to simply not accept the EIP.
If something like this isn’t possible and you don’t actually need consensus to push through changes then the whole “distributed” part is just a fiction and we’re really talking about a centrally controlled network. Miners are just basically threatening to vote against the EIP if it comes to it.
Threatening to vote against a bill if it reaches the floor in its current form isn’t an attack or violence. It’s just a message that if you want it to pass you should probably change it.
This isn't something new, Bitcoin went through this in 2017 (relevant keywords: UASF, segwit, BCH).
You don't need a miner majority to do fork the chain, both versions (with and without fork) will exist and whichever is most valued by users/the market tends to "win" and bring miners back in because they like money.
Unlike your voting on a bill analogy, the reality of blockchains is that both universes can co-exist.
If something like this isn’t possible and you don’t actually need consensus to push through changes then the whole “distributed” part is just a fiction and we’re really talking about a centrally controlled network. Miners are just basically threatening to vote against the EIP if it comes to it.
Threatening to vote against a bill if it reaches the floor in its current form isn’t an attack or violence. It’s just a message that if you want it to pass you should probably change it.