> What's then the point?

It eventually makes things hard enough for the normal people that they revolt and (hopefully) replace the government.

That may be the intention, but that's not the reality of sanctioned countries. Iran, North Korea, Cuba et al are still rolling with their old rich leaders in pleasure, but an agonizing populace. It's really sad-- some countries are just unlucky :(

We can argue that it's not even the intention. If a government shoots civilians, there is little hope to overthrow them by riots alone. Things can change if police, army and riot police start to disobey order. Also when there is foreign aid to arm people.

FWIW, I believe that sanctions serve to

1- Limit the reach of a regime's activity overseas. Iran's government was supporting several militant groups in the middle-east. Sanctions also had a huge effect on the country's nuclear program.

2- Force them to negotiate. That actually worked with Iran (but Trump reversed it)