I think empowering ZEC holders by giving them some direct say in the governance process (e.g. one vote in five in the context of governing the dev fund, or the ability to signal their preferences in important decision-making situations) makes sense. But for reasons already discussed in this thread, it would be irrational to give coinholders too much power. Sure, ZEC is open to “attack”, and so is every other governing scheme or entity. But each has it’s strengths also.
Coinholding is an expression of skin in the game, plus it’s open and permissionless, as long as you’re willing to put your money where your mouth is. I don’t like using such expressions - they don’t align well with the way I see the world and how I think human interaction is best organized. But ZEC is a fundamental element of the Zcash system and perhaps holding it should come with an opportunity to participate in governance without the threat of plutocratic takeover. It could be part of a good solution, not the solution.