If you’re in the majority, you have the votes to be able to accomplish something with reform. It’s not like we live in a monarchy, reform is possible under our system.
If reform isn’t working to bring about your goals, either your goals aren’t popular enough, or they are popular but the people lack the will and organization to vote for them.
If the people lack the will and organization to vote effectively, they certainly lack the will and organization to topple the government.
My area of expertise is managing complex systems and change implementation. I sincerely don’t understand how revolution is supposed to work where reform doesn’t. No one has been able to give me an answer that doesn’t bill down to idealistic hope. How is this revolution supposed to be implemented, and why can’t we build the foundation for revolution while simultaneously using the tools we have for reform? Wouldn’t widespread support for reform be the best possible proof of consensus?
The major flaw in your reasoning is that you have internalized that the state serves the people, without taking into account class. This was popularized by Kautskytes during the 2nd international, they pushed this notion that the state served as a reconciliatory apparatus among classes which you could theorically reform. Lenin on the other hand saw the state as an organized instrument of class repression, serving the ruling class, which in most of the world is the capitalists. This is further studied in Lenin’s “State and revolution”.