If that were to happen, and the quorum were higher, then no changes could be made.
A system where the people who don't want to be involved in the day-to-day operations elect representatives to protect their interests would be a more appropriate fit here.
Of course, the large shareholders are all people who created the company, early employees, and early investors in the first place.
So yeah, there's the illusion that votes from all shareholders matter, but if a company required even 30% of shareholders to vote to make changes, nothing will ever get done unless a few holders comprise that 30%
With DAOs governance tokens are basically shares, so why does 1% make sense there?
Which is how many DAOs don't require many votes to pass as the limit gets lower until they are able to reach a conclusion at all.