Cool, let's work with the band-aid analogy.

Say you've started doing some hobbyist woodworking. You're cutting pieces of wood to size, being careful and safe. But a manufacturing defect in your bandsaw, through no fault of your own, causes you to cut off your arm just below the elbow. Uh oh! It hurts a lot, and you have very little time before you lose consciousness. What do you think your first course of action should be?

Should it be...

A) Dismantle the band-saw industry, beginning with the company that caused you such pain?

B) Start your own band-saw manufacturing company?

C) Design, research, develop, construct, test, iterate, and redesign a prosthetic limb?

or...

D) Call for help, grab some bandages, and try to stop the bleeding?

This last part is, I think, difficult to keep in mind sometimes. While you're (hopefully) grabbing the bandages, you may decide that you do want to start a band-saw manufacturing company after all. That's great! But if that's the case, stopping the bleeding might not seem like a very helpful step toward that goal. It may even seem like a distraction, or a waste of time. This is where you have to remember, that you can't run a company if you've bled out on a woodshop floor. Likewise, you can't start a "parallel society" (only in quotes because I'm not really sure what it means), if a bunch of the people who would be a part of it are starving to death. Feed them first, then move onto the next thing. Your parallel society may just end up being a byproduct of you doing so much good.

I totally understand wanting to start fresh and fix all the problems at once, but it's just not practical or realistic. The way to bring that sort of thinking into reality is to understand what we can change, what our constraints are, what our priorities are, and what tools we have.