Exactly right on every point. And they won't willingly change. And absolutely, the metaphor is absolutely right where the table is set with one brown person wi

Exactly right on every point. And they won't willingly change. And absolutely, the metaphor is absolutely right where the table is set with one brown person with one cookie, a white person with two cookies, and the oligarch with a pile of hundreds of cookies, and the oligarch is telling the white guy to watch out because the brown guy will steal his cookies. And the stupid white guy believes it. That said, when even a small portion of the people actually unite and demand change, things change. We have the USA itself (as opposed to British colonies), India, Pakistan, No French kings, etc., no slavery, women's voting, 40-hour work week, minimum wage, social security, lunch breaks, and more all because people united sufficiently to force change. There is the 3.5% rule [0], validated scientifically [1], showing it takes only 3.5% of a population to force serious change in a society. There are also situations where a rich person with power wakes up and does good things. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was one such person, tagged "a traitor to his class", but he implemented huge changes in favor of ordinary people. If you are pointing out the obstacles, we agree. If you are saying it is impossible because the rich tend to stick together, that is counter to history, and if the US people fail to respond to the latest assault from the oligarchs, they'll go down in history as the greatest losers ever. [0] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35-of-people-to-change-the-world https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35... [1] https://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/resource/success-nonviolent-civil-resistance/ https://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/resource/success-nonviol...