Surely a cool, calculated, orderly effort to solve the problems described by the GP would be better than bloody revolution, which is a mere outpouring of anger that might not even solve the problems and would probably create entirely new ones. Do you think that no other option is possible at this point?

Edit: Talk of revolution makes me think of the song "Won't Get Fooled Again" by the Who, particularly the closing lines, "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."

Revolution may or may not improve things for the underclass, but it certainly ruins things for the upper class -- at least they are forced into playing political games all over again and cannot rest on previous political success (though, yes, if they are trained or predisposed towards politics at least they have a chance). And the credible threat of revolution forces that cool, calculated, and orderly effort to go somewhere, instead of merely watching the arc of history bend as slowly as the earth's surface.

Britain, for instance, was not irredeemably terrible during the American Revolution, as evidenced by them being basically as reasonable a place as America today and not having had a revolution of their own since then. And they even managed to do some things better (e.g., they banned slavery before America did). But the American Revolution was still worthwhile, and that gave credibility to the American approach instead of the imperial one.

>Surely a cool, calculated, orderly effort to solve the problems described by the GP would be better than bloody revolution

Well yes, but talking about cool, calculated, orderly solutions has a tendency to get you labeled a "dirty socialist" by the Right and a "dirty reformist" by the Left, with the former being overwhelmingly stronger.

Wait, are we talking about humans or our nascent AIs? Humans need hope and social / political pressure-release-valves or else ... bloody revolution.