This is the current paradigm and it works. Your right, centralization is highly efficient because it brings control and ideally, experts can make better decisions... but there is a third way:
Using the big data of the users as democratic input. Not asking what they want like in our democracies, but looking for what they do. This is what Facebook is doing, but with a real DAO you dont need a Zuckerberg anymore.
When you see some concentration of voting circles and strong self-votes and you can correlate this with loss of users, THEN THIS IS already a DEMOCRATIC DECISION. You only need to translate it into action.
But I fully agree, most witnesses are the same amateurs as we users are. Them having a big stake is no argument, its a fallacy/a bias and as we see in Steem it leads to HFs which are maybe not the best decision. Is a witness an expert in social media marketing? Are the people who have penetrated..uhmm I mean voted the witness have any expertise? No! But Facebook is an expert just by selection.
There are many things that should/ could be modified.
However, there are fundamentals that should not be even touched.
Cars must have 4 wheels, not 5, not 11. Four wheels.
And if you want to hire someone to be on a well paid position - you shoul make an open call, make some selection and chose those who fulfill the criteria.
Simple as that