This was the argument that became the basis of Bitcoin Cash's creation, which Bitcoiners subsequently shat on once some in the Cash camp made the "Blockstream took over Bitcoin" (not unnecessarily defamatory when the majority of Core and BIP contributors/developers are also Blockstream employees) and "BCH is Bitcoin" narratives the popular ones to adopt; bigger (but not ludicrously large ones, like post-2018 Cash's 32 MB block size and Shitoshi's Venture "whatever the fuck you want" sizes) blocks are the solution for on-chain scalability, but have to be balanced out with considered deliberation since there are many more attack vectors for Bitcoin. Those include the NFT grifters misusing Ordinals for their get rich quick bullshit, Drivechains being pushed by those with vested interests in its adoption, and the forever risk of a 51% attack occurring if the majority of Bitcoin nodes and mining pools are centralized.

Just an increase to 4 MB (which BCH was at for a while before its subsequent block size increases and mempool changes) would be enough to clear the backlogged transactions in a few weeks at most. The more ideal solution without any block size changes is further optimizing the proof of work mechanism making Bitcoin function as it does, and adopting some of what makes privacy coins appealing to those who snub Bitcoin. I've even thrown around the belief on Memo that Lightning and other second layer solutions on Bitcoin could be adopted on Cash on its base layer if any developers in that camp had an incentive to make it so.

Bitcoiners could easily do the same, likely without changing anything in regards to block size, although it'd take far more time to achieve that. I'm optimistic that it will happen.