No, but the top 1% running the show would oppose the resource distribution, and the inevitable outcome would probably be economic chaos and everyone being the worse off for it for the foreseeable future.
I am not even arguing that we shouldn't theoretically try to distribute wealth/resources better. But things have gone so far I don't see any way of going about it that wouldn't make things much worse in the short term, and possibly long term, and I dunno it I want to risk it.
Obviously part of this is pragmatism on my part, as I am basically upper middle class so I have a lot to lose and not really a lot to gain. But from a worldwide perspective this is pretty much everyone in the United States, so noone here is truly incentivized to burn it all down.