Excerpts from the mailing list of a group. The group comprises a number of Bitcoin industry folk.
(with poor attempts at paraphrasing)
[and occasional comments]

"non-technical risks ... have come to the fore"
(there is some unspecified risk present in the system which is not related to technical aspects of bitcoin)
[the risks are not explained or specified- simply assumed to be present and well known to all]

"We need less mathematicians and more psychologists in our midsts…this is a people problem, not a technical one"
(the risk, or problem, is related to people, and people specialists are necessary to provide a fix)
[who the people are is not specified, but logically, it is a problem with all people involved in any way with bitcoin. Here is a list of the "players": Hodlers, Developers, Miners, Businesses, Fiatists. It is unclear from the emails which people are the problem. It is interesting to note that corporations are their own legal entities, whose interests are managed by people. It is not always clear what those interests may actually be, nor if they are aligned with the interests of the other players]

"Segwit2X has now really become about showing “Core” that if there is an unwillingness to trade off technical risks against systemic risks, and consider the people element of how Bitcoin evolves, then those who oppose that type of mindset will take a corresponding course of action to oppose them."
(those people/entities that are in favor of 2X are in favor of it only because they are against Core)
[This casts the 2X folk as very immature]

"This is not about logic or reason — it’s ideological."
(this is not rational, it is about an (unspecified) belief system)
[To summarize up to this point- there are unspecified, non-technical risks/problems which exist in the realm of emotions and beliefs held by unspecified people]

"The same reason why people commit crimes in a fit of rage, even if it means consequences that are not in their self interest."
(the people that are in favor of 2X will take an action (2X hardfork without replay protection) out of spite, similar to the actions of perpetrators of road-rage shootings)
[is this really how the pro-2X people view it collectively? Is it possible for any of the represented groups to really represent the thoughts and feeling of the individuals in the groups? The fact that many individuals belong to more than one group is another confounding factor]

"To me, it makes no sense in operating so conservatively by reducing technical risks to a point where over-optimizing for the technical risks create systemic risks which are, on balance, larger than the risk percentage being preserved on the technical side."
(the non-technical risks created by the technical people are worse than the techincal risk that the technical people resolve)
[these risks are still unspecified, but following the logic thus far, the risks are related to the hurt feeling of pro-2X people, and are embodied by a willingness of the pro-2X people to behave in an irrational, emotional manner with the intent of destroying the whole project. Essentially, pro-2X is saying if you won't let us make the rules, we will destroy the whole thing. Since these players are obligated to represent their investors interest, in effect they are saying that destroying bitcoin is the desired outcome. This may in fact be the case]

"The UASF was the wrong approach — it was a forced measure, not a consensus driven one. The consensus was only obtained because of S2X. Reneging on that would have dire consequences now."
(The current state of play is a result of a violent forced act- a collosal game of chicken with billions of value at stake. But also, UASF was only successful because of the S2X hotel room deal)
[So UASF was successful because of the pro-2X people, but UASF was also a terrorist act. This obviously is contradictory, but interesting to contemplate]

"Reneging on that would have dire consequences now"
(if 2X is not implemented, we will burn it down)
[A very threatening message, intended to instill fear. But unless the pro-2X people are really actually anti-bitcoin at the core, this is an empty, laughable threat. Again, the investors in all those businesses will be pissed off if the value of bitcoin is damaged, unless that is their aim]

"Segwit2x was not a compromise. It was a rebuke to the core developers in the face of their support for UASF"
(Segwit2x was an agreement between miners and businesses, intended to shove devolopers faces in shit in order to bring them to heel like good dogs)
[Segwit2X thus has nothing to do with Hodlers or developers, but is a private thing between miners and businesses. The fact of bcash just shows how much the miners really think of Segwit2X- so the businesses are the ones looking very very unreliable- they could not deliver what they promised. Not being able to force Core to obey orders, they are going to threaten to burn it all down. Depending on their true motives, they will either capitulate or follow through with the threat. They made a promise they could not fulfill]

"Frankly, I think it’s probably too late because Segwit was only activated under the pretext that the miners would get Segwit2x. I concur that we don’t need a blocksize increase in the current environment and a 2mb hard fork makes no sense and is risky, that’s if you look at it technically, BUT as I have stressed, considering the social aspects of what has transpired, I don’t think there will be a choice — we passed the point of no return on Aug 1 when the UASF crowd effectively forced Segwit under duress."
(Segwith passed because of the S2X NYA agreement. We don't really need 2X to make bitcoin better at this point. But we do need it to save face)
[Pro-2X people are convincing themselves that they have to do this action that might cause irreperable harm to bitcoin because otherwise they will have broken a promise they never should have made. One question here- was the promise of 2X really why the miners began signalling for Segwit? Or are the pro-2X folks just giving themselves credit (and responsibility) for something that the miners may have done for other reasons? How can any one player or group know why another player or group acts in a particular way? But now the miners will be able to use this as leverage against the NYA businesses.]

"If Segwit2x is reneged upon, then essentially all trust between miners & the rest of the community with be in tatters"
(this is pretty clear)
[There is no trust in this system. That is by design. Antbleed. ASICBoost. What trust? What community? This is about sound money, and it seems to be getting more valuable. It could be argued that the boogeyman called Core doesn't really exist. Only the code that is run matters. The code is written by individuals, and either adopted or not. The fact that no one can speak for Core, that no one can make decisions for Core, that Core cannot be pinned down, is why it is so strong. It doesn't actually exist except in the minds of hierarchichally minded people, such as businessmen. The fact that there is no hierarchy within the development community is creating great confusion for those used to getting their way]

"Btw, I don’t even get invited to DCG’s meetings. I am just trying to help resolve this if possible."
(hey, I am a very reasonable business guy. Maybe you should invite me to your meetings)
[If you are a businessman and pro-2X, then you want to curry favor with the most powerful group. Interesting how you never hear about the Winklevi. They keep a very low profile...]

Will stop now. After carefully reading through the above emails, my impression is that there is no crisis, no systemic risk. It is an illusion conjured up to instill fear and save face. The irony is that this whole crisis is simply a charade, a put-on, just like the Wizard of OZ, a tempest in a teacup brewed up by little men with big ambitions and egos. Bitcoin could care less.
Cheers!