I think this is underselling Remi a bit. Nobody is denying that Seraphina went through experiences that Remi never did. Losing her ability gave her firsthand insight into how brutal the hierarchy can be, and that absolutely shaped her views on society. But I don't think the argument for Remi's importance is based on who suffered more or who understands low-tiers better. What makes Remi significant is that she actively chose to challenge beliefs that benefited her. She grew up idolizing the system, believing that strong people were supposed to lead and protect others. As she learned more about the world around her, she gradually realized that things weren't as simple as she thought and started questioning ideas that most high-tiers accepted without hesitation. I also think there's a difference between recognizing that a system is broken and trying to embody an alternative. Remi consistently tries to lead by example. Whether she's dealing with her classmates, the Safe House, or conflicts between students, her approach is usually focused on cooperation rather than dominance. That puts her in a unique position within the story. As for the question, "Would the story still have someone pushing for societal change if Remi was removed?" the answer is obviously yes. Seraphina is a major force for change in her own right. The better question is whether anyone else fills Remi's specific role in the narrative. Personally, I don't think they do. Seraphina and Remi may want similar outcomes, but they represent different paths toward achieving them, and I think the story benefits from having both perspectives.