Personally I think it comes down to your preference for gradual change over decades or centuries, during which time the systemic harms continue (mass homelessness, climate change, horrendous living conditions in impoverished nations, declining mental health, etc.), but instances of exceptional harm flaring up in (increasingly smaller) privileged populations/regions of the globe are minimized by regulation and policing.
Or for rushing revolutionary change at the cost of greatly increased harm over a comparatively (to the alternative) small time-frame.
Personally my preference is for the latter and for the reasons I've explained I believe that the optimal course of action for activists is to cease any efforts to engage with the existing systems of governance, basically abandoning the fight for regulation, which would as you say result in deregulation.
But far from doing nothing I believe the best course of action is in banding together to form small but co-operative groups that instead "opt-out" of the existing economic system, reducing reliance on it to zero by setting up "off-grid" production of necessities like food, power and housing, focusing on recruitment and growing their population as it becomes an increasingly common/normalized and increasingly attractive alternative to the current global capitalist system as both conditions for everyone but the ruling class and the size of the ruling class itself continue to decline.
Probably whilst simultaneously preparing for escalating (and ultimately violent) conflict with institutions of the existing system.