Money and political clout might appear like non-violent means, but in reality, they breed violence, except those are the top aren't affected.
But you seem to be advocating that people not at the top engage in ritual violence, which still wouldn't affect the people at the top, and wouldn't diminish the power of money or politics. There are plenty of examples of cultures which allowed retaliatory violence, duels or ritual combat. The balance of power in those societies was not equitable as a result, the rich remained rich and exempt from harm and the poor just lived shorter, more violent lives.
I'm sorry but it seems like you just want to live in a Chuck Palahniuk novel but you've lost the plot.