@SgtPowerPickle Said
"The aim of argument, or discussion, should not be victory, but progress." -Ole Joey Joubert
Ideas can become progress the more they're discussed. So why not?
If that discussion isn't rooted in reality than the discussion is not worth having. If we decided to have a discussion about the political ramifications revolving around whether or not Krypton was real than, while interesting, everything talked about would be pointless. The same goes for if the Confederates won the civil war or if Napoleon had succeeded in conquering Europe. Your entire argument is based on the idea that change is inevitable and that it will make things better. That simply existing is enough of a catalyst to make the world a better place.
For instance, if I were to go back in time and describe to someone living in the 16th century a television, they would think I was describing magic. That's not to say it can't happen. Television most certainly did happen. What I'm saying is that simply describing the advancements that can be had without considering how you're going to get there doesn't do much of anything.
At best, you plant the idea in someones head, but THEY'RE the ones who still have to do the lion's share of the work when it comes to theory and fabrication. The process of change doesn't stop at an idea. It simply starts there. This talking about hypothetical situations about the prominence of third parties? It's just that. Hypothetical.
If you want to pin your hopes that lady luck will slap the asses of third parties into prominence than fine, hope for that. Just recognize that to other people that's all it looks like, blind freaking hope.