Agreed.

I very much dislike the whole "Is the leader/revolution sometimes WORSE than the leader they're trying to overthrow!?!" Well I'll be, what an interesting plot point that hasn't been done before! But whatever, Collins is a liberal and I shouldn't expect much different from her ideological beliefs.

I do wonder if the cultural impact of the book has been a net positive or net negative though. One the one hand, I think it put an unnecessary amount of weight on a single act of defiance in its overthrow of a bad regime which I can't help but wonder has influenced many well-meaning people who might have otherwise gone full left into going "Well if I just manage to find this one act or habit that's SO subversive and defiant to US culture then I can be like Katniss and help end what the US is doing overseas!" and thus perpetuated individualism-but-left instead of realizing that it's imperative to talk to your peers and organise and strike and realize that collective action is how this capitalist regime will be overcome.

On the other hand, I don't think I'd prefer it if the Hunger Games didn't exist just because it's not a perfect representation of what revolutions are. I feel like it might be the closest a liberal like Collins could reasonably get to opposing the United States in its current concept and slowly pipelining people is valuable if frustrating.