A majority of eth miners and users decided to change the rules and ignore the promises of immutability previously made to all.
Having a majority does not make an action ethical. Hence the term: tyranny of the majority.
This serious breach of faith soured many people on the project, and the mis-trust continues to this day.
Pricing is not "tyranny of the majority." If nobody wants to buy what you are selling, you are not being oppressed.
Given that people decided they would much rather buy the coin with the altered ledger, it is more valuable.
As a meta note: Crypto seems to bring out the most low-brow critiques on either side. Maybe because it has become popular with a mass audience?
I don't see how ethics plays into it; it's a judgement call and the existence of the forked Ethereum isn't an attack on ETC.