Alone, yes, but not necessarily if they band together in a large group to represent their interests, and traditionally rambler’s associations and other such groups have had strong connections to the labo​ur movement and s​ociali​st poli​tics for exactly that reason in the UK, and have been able to win certain freedoms (whether that’s about protecting ri​ghts of way across land, or about wor​kers rights, the “apes togethe​r strong” thing does actually have a lot of truth to it)

My granddad, god rest his soul was very active in his local rambler’s association (and they won a fair few battles against land ow​ners, about keeping public rights of way open, and well signposted).

You’re right that gover​nments don’t really care about or give anything to the com​mon people out of beneficence, that’s why organisi​ng communities and wor​kplaces is so important

… no, not at all?

You think the hikers and right to roam activists, whose main cause involves taking on landowners and opposing the extension of private property rights over public rights of way, represent “rich people with connections”? Lol

Similarly in the UK’s “slightly commie old nature enjoyers” vs “4x4 owners” battle, which side do you think is the one with more money, lol

This isn’t a simple “rich & connected” vs “poor and powerless” battle at all really, more a clash of values (between 2 vague coalitions that contain disparate groups themselves, both rich & poor), but even if you did oversimplify it to that, I think it would as a first order approximation be more like the opposite of the way you’re painting it than the way round you have it there. Generally the automotive lobby is the one representing moneyed interests, & for big 4x4 cars (a luxury good & status item for the upper middle class in the UK) even moreso.