If you count up all the revolutions and divide by total grievances raised over history, you get an extremely small ratio.

Just because the treasonous colonists took up arms against the King (after many years of trying other means), doesn’t mean that a zoning issue, a gerrymandering concern, a dissatisfaction with the Electoral College, or a debate over UBI should move quickly to armed revolution if the first response isn’t to your liking.

Exactly. See my other response for how I think abiut violence and nonviolence

Very few direct, popular revolutions against feudalism were successful. Most successful ones ultimately involved the layer of people who were as successful and wealthy as it was possible to be without being in the "inner circle" deciding to break in.