8. Commensurate with a non-imperialistic foreign policy: dramatically modified agenda, operations, and size of the Departments of Defense, State, and Homeland Security; the entire intelligence community; the FBI; and revocation of all laws and regulations requiring police state surveillance of citizens.
9. Replacement of all warfare handouts and bailouts to the war-national security industry with federal assistance for its gradual conversion to a peacetime economy.
10. A reoriented SEC and Department of Justice to regulate and prosecute scofflaws in the industry and its ally, Wall Street, and to hold shareholders accountable by eliminating corporations' limited liability.
11. New antitrust regulations and federalized corporate chartering that reduce the size, nature and power of corporations.
12. Major defense corporations become exemplary models of organizations.
Between implementation of the strategic plan and achievement of those ultimate outcome objectives are many immediate and intermediate outcomes (e.g., a charge of committing a war crime is actually taken to court). They are necessary for tracking progress and making adjustments in the plan and initiatives when indicated, but they will not be discussed here.
Targeting the triumvirate's major source of power: The Federal government
This triumvirate is so vast that one might wonder just where to start in seeking to pacify it; until we realize that while the war-national security industry may seem more powerful than "our" government it is only because it acquiesces to that industry. That industry could not exist without hand outs from the Federal government. There is thus only one overall source of real power, subservient as it is; the governmental part of the triumvirate and the list of objectives reflects that fact.
The governmental part includes the warrior-in-chief; his vice president; political appointees overseeing, managing and/or advising one or more aspects of the military-national security-industrial part; Congress; and State and local officials in jurisdictions doing business with the triumvirate. I neglected to mention in the overview article the judiciary. It can usually be depended upon to justify the rest of the corpocracy when it is legally challenged.
I want to briefly discuss the implications in planning strategic reforms of just the first three objectives on the list. In doing so it is very pertinent to note what a distinguished American authority on international law has said: "---more than 30 top U.S. officials, including presidents G.W. Bush and Obama are guilty of war crimes or crimes against peace and humanity---."
1. Alternative presidential election rules. Dumping the "party twins" will be impossible to do without major changes being made in the way presidential candidates get on State ballots and the way in which votes for them are counted. Third parties, not unlike thwarted eligible voters, run into all sorts of legal and other hurdles. Theresa Amato, former campaign manager for Ralph Nader and founder of the NGO, Citizen Advocacy Center, wrote in her own book that "unless one has been running a political race outside the two primary parties, it is impossible to imagine the injustices of the two-party-tilted electoral process."
I'm not an authority on this issue and will defer to those who are with one exception. I think it is absurd for the States to have any authority in a nation-wide presidential election on how the presidential candidates are determined and the votes for them counted. The Federal Election Commission, a rather worthless entity as it now exists in my opinion ought to be authorized and empowered as an independent commission to set and oversee impartial rules for determining the candidates nationwide.
It matters not, however, if electoral changes remove the biases in the rules but there are no viable presidential candidates on the ballot who are progressive, antiwar candidates. That was not the case in the 2012 presidential election, but we need to be sure that there is a "pipeline" of such candidates in the future. That is precisely the mission of at least one NGO, the Center for Progressive Leadership ( www.centerforprogressiveleaders.org ).
The obvious drawback to this objective is that achieving it will take a long time and thus allows in the meantime many more killings by the military and the CIA. Nevertheless, it needs to be achieved eventually and it is more realistically achievable than the other two objectives.
2. No more imperialistic militarism. The most urgent need is to stop current drone strikes and ban future ones, other deadly military interventions, and strangulating economic sanctions. They are continuing to send people to their graves and causing a variety of hardships with little or no evidence that any of these people were plotting a terror attack on America or one that would succeed. The drone strikes will continue with fervor if the president's chief anti-terrorism adviser is confirmed as the next CIA director. This is a man who seems to have no moral compunction whatsoever about loosely defining drone targets in foreign lands and putting them on the president's kill list.
Achieving this objective would surely be hailed by all peace loving peoples everywhere. Attempting to achieve it and possibly getting closer to achieving will be fought by the triumvirate as if it were fighting a real war. We are dealing with a monster and it will use every legal and illegal means it can muster and/or create to prevent this objective's achievement, including I would imagine assassination attempts such as the one that succeeded in killing the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. according to a civil court verdict in 1999. Determined peace seekers who would progress too far toward achieving this second objective would probably be risking their lives I should think so I have qualms about it. But accountability can take different forms and degrees all the way up to capital punishment, so let's consider some gradually escalating initiatives aimed at holding U.S. officials accountable.