because it historically has never done so

This is an extreme position. Yes, the cards are stacked, and yes, the thieves will fight tooth and nail to preserve their privileges, but there have definitely been examples of a certain election result making things better. My country got independence[1], and the British people got public healthcare, because they voted Labour in 1945. We kicked out a strongwoman in 1977, and reined in a strongman last year. These are just examples from my country.

[1] I'm aware that there were other causes as well, but Churchill would probably have tried to hold on even after the British position became logistically and economically unviable.

Except that it has historicaly made things better, sure, not in massive scale votes, but in smaller votes? In local elections? I fully agree that protests are necessary, and they are alot of what causes positive change, but that doesn't render voting completely useless. In the current systems that exist, capitalism does turn large votes into what is essentially a dick measuring contest. But in smaller scale, local votes there is less money being put into the system, so voting becomes more impactful.