I think you are making a false dichotomy. I am very, very pro TDD and very, very against mocking.
The problem is that certain architectures are very hard to test without resorting to either mocking or integration tests. In those cases you have to weigh which is better, writing painful integration tests (or not having test coverage at all) or changing the architecture, or in certain exceedingly rare cases mocking.
I guess mocking or not mocking was not my take from either of their articles. I thought they were both about test scope. Mocking is one way of limiting test scope but there are others.
I'm ok with different readings of the articles as long as TDD doesn't start automatically being associated with mocking.
The problem is that certain architectures are very hard to test without resorting to either mocking or integration tests. In those cases you have to weigh which is better, writing painful integration tests (or not having test coverage at all) or changing the architecture, or in certain exceedingly rare cases mocking.