For the individual you are correct, which is why companies haven't had much trouble getting people to buy non-voting stock.

But for the system as a whole, it's pretty important that the shareholders have the ability to vote for board members who will protect their interests, even if the power doesn't get used very often. That's why the SP committee is pushing back against multiclass shares...if the company's management controls the voting shares then they control the board which is supposed to be overseeing them, removing even a vague threat of accountability in a system that's already far from perfect.

The dividends that Facebook, Google, Netflix, Tesla and so on have never paid?

Of course it's rational enough from the CEO's perspective - if your shareholders don't have any leverage over you, why would you give them money?

Define "ownshership." These are supposedly publicly-owned entities. What does that even mean if the public has no control or say in how the entity is managed?