>>7668068
>There is, it's called violence
This only works if everyone agrees to do it en mass to mitigate the risk of punishment from authorities.
A few lone wolves popping off rando executives here and there will only make the others get more intense security, law enforcement will now be even stricter and appear more justified in bigger budgets and militarization, and the others of the ruling class will want to punish the underclass for their insolence through economic oppression.

However, if several thousands of people get together to run over several bank headquarters at a time, there will be nothing any government or other group can do about it except capitulate.

This is why so much time and money is spent on spook agencies conducting surveillance, spying, disinformation and astroturfing here and everywhere else, to prevent the poors from actually unionizing and organizing for another Peasants Revolt. See what happened to the trucker protest in Canada, they infiltrated that movement early to convince them to be "peaceful", which allowed the rulers to dismantle them through freezing bank accounts and arresting key people. Had the truckers collectively used violence instead, the outcome would have been very different and Canada may have become a better place because of it.

The same thing happened with the original Socialist movement when Marx was sent in by the Phillips family to also convince the poors to be peaceful and not commit violence, leading to the destruction of the workers movement there and possibly forever.