I've often wondered this, especially when I quit a company out of principle, expecting that I wouldn't be the only one. But even when an entire department quits en masse, it turns out that none of us are ever as important as we thought we were. The guys on the top who make the real decisions are on the top because they are experts at driving their vision forward regardless of whatever happens underneath or around them. They might make pretenses toward being servant leaders or listening to upward feedback, but the reality is if they have convinced enough investors or board members to back them, or if they independently own a majority stake, they can and will do whatever they like. The rank and file employees do not matter.

I think most workers have accepted this reality. Workplaces are not a democracy. Even if most of the workforce disagrees with a policy that was approved from on high, there is little they can do to change it. Especially in the tech industry, where jobs are so highly-paid and sought-after, there isn't really the option of collective bargaining. And that's even assuming the kinds of snowflakes who tend to work in this industry would accept that Break The Build Joe deserves the same pay as Rewrote It In Rust Rob.

Personally I maintain my own principles around what will drive me to leave, but I have long given up hope that my decision to quit will have any impact whatsoever on the direction of the company. In the past it's barely even had an impact on the people I directly worked with. I'm just not that important, and neither is any other IC or low-level manager. I think most of us try to find a company whose direction we can tolerate just enough to continue working there for the cash. And, I suppose, there are thousands of people for whom Meta still passes that bar.