I understand how Solana validators maintain censorship resistance.
However, client's transactions are being received by RPC nodes, which (at least in some/many cases) separate from the validators. The RPC nodes (at least the ones that are completely separate from validators) are not part of the consensus mechanism.
So if RPC nodes conspire to ignore my transactions, they would lock me out. WITHOUT needing some supermajority of stake.
I think this cannot (or at least should not) be that way.
What am I missing here? How can censorship resistance be maintained, while the work of accepting the clients' transactions is delegated to separate RPC nodes which are not part of the consensus mechanism?