Collective action through widespread unity and organization. In other words, revolution. This method has successfully evolved society time and time again.

Revolution is good at destroying things. Not creating new ones.

Occasionally, the present needs to be destroyed regardless. But it's really a final resort.

I completely agree. And I would argue that small changes aren't "wasteful" in this context since they start conversations and demonstrate commitment and credibility.

Hopefully you are on the winning side, otherwise you may be re-eduacated, disappeared, thrown in a camp, hung, shot, beheaded or otherwise exterminated. at the very least will suffer the tyranny of the majority.

Isn't the whole point of Democracy that it allows for peaceful revolution?

It seems to me that you've made the assumption that all revolution involves violence and purges of dissenters.

I don't necessarily disagree, but you're making the assumption that democracy is a given and immutable. "Peaceful" revolution through democracy can very easily become exactly what you're describing because it also relies on the defeated side to comply with the decision (to a certain degree, there's obviously more nuance).

peaceful revolution != peaceful transition of power

historically speaking, revolutions are a crapshoot.

forward looking, revolutions are a crapshoot (often sold by people not acquainted with history).

With the environmental crisis we're in, either the environmentalists win, or everybody suffers.