You may as well ask why doesn't a genius out there topple the Trump administration or why did no one topple Stalin? It's unclear that power structures are so vulnerable to even the best-laid plans.
The metaphor is unsalvagable.
Yes, but you can leave non-governmental power structures; the power of the Foot Veto is huge. By your logic, no new companies ever form because existing companies will strip you of your power to form them. Your logic predicts a society a great deal less flexible than the one we actually live in.
The metaphor is unsalvageable.
I suggest to you that it may be worth your time to meditate on this a bit more for your own health, which I mean fully literally. Your worldview quite easily leads to an excessively fatalistic feeling of a lack of control, which is a major factor in depression. Escaping non-governmental power structures may not be easy, but what worth doing in life is? It is well within the domain of possible.
Imagine the following thought experiment: the entire faulty of Harvard goes off and starts a new University (call it Garvard). Now, obviously, the quality of education at this new school is going to be just as good as Harvard. But which school are parents going to want their children to go to: old Harvard, with a newly hired crop of top professors, or Garvard, with the original professors? I suspect that Garvard would get less applicants, and would likely have to charge less.
This market force is why the cost of education is going up quickly while educator salaries are not rising as fast. In higher education right now, branding is more important than product.
"Good" universities benefit from outsized tax-sheltered endowments, which can be spent on anything from rock climbing walls, employee perks and bonuses, restaurants, accommodation to land acquisition. Let's do another experiment, what if Harvard's $36 billion endowment was swapped with that of a less prestigious university in a major city, say Seattle University (SU). With now an almost $2 billion in annual expenditure, SU could hire some great faculty, and invest heavily in R&D. Meanwhile, Harvard would need to rely on huge tuition increases (via student loans), equaling $160k a year per student, as each student currently indirectly receives an additional $100k per year in endowment spending, and minimal financial aid. Maybe some wealthy alumni could try and prop it up, but I think it would take less than a generation for Harvard's prestige to sag, and SU's to soar.