America's government is part of and serves the other part of the corpocracy, corporate America, not the American people. America's "corpocracy power" is the greatest human-made and ruinous power on earth. The most deadly and monstrous part of that power is the war-national security, industrial, political triumvirate. Its war on terror is an excuse for continuing to terrorize and kill thousands of people in foreign lands solely for profit and power, and is spawning more terrorists. Its tyrannical rule has turned America into a police and terrorist state. It is draining America's budget, and depriving it of revenue for meeting critical domestic needs. If not stopped, it may eventually destroy America, possibly yet this century from nuclear, chemical or biological blow back by agents in America's terrorized foreign countries.
The first piece in this trilogy gave an overview of that triumvirate. The second summarized how the opposition to the triumvirate is so divided and weak that it is merely an irritant or safety valve tolerated or welcomed by the triumvirate. This third piece highlights the two stages of an intensive and extensive campaign proposed for "pacifying" the triumvirate by 1) mobilizing the triumvirate's opposition; and 2) developing and implementing a strategic plan of reforms.
First stage: Mobilizing the triumvirate's opposition.
The bromide, defeating the triumvirate "with a thousand cuts" is fanciful. A thousand cuts is nothing more than a divided and conquered opposition. The potential and actual opponents of the triumvirate must be mobilized into an organized form of democracy power that is well prepared, financially able, big enough, and strong enough to launch "hundreds of united, coordinated and strategic cuts" or what I called "waging war on war" in my book, The Devil's Marriage.
Identifying the opposition: The "27 percent".
According to a recent poll, only 27% of all Americans disapprove of our warrior-in-chief's drone strikes and killings, with America being the only country in which the majority of the populace approves of drone strikes. That is an appalling and sobering finding, but one that is not at all surprising. Americans over the years have had warrior presidents and been reared and shaped by the corporate state into a docile, jingoistic, materialistic, impressionable, fearful, and morally and intellectually impoverished society. America as a civilized and responsible society has all but vanished while its war making triumvirate is more omniscient and omnipresent than ever before. This is not an ironic coincidence. It's an "in-your face and pocket book" cause and effect fact of life.
So we are left with about six and one-third million truly patriotic ("my country, do right and no wrong"), critically thinking Americans as the recruiting pool for a mobilization drive. It is not as amorphous and unreachable a pool as it may seem. It consists of two bodies. One, the much smaller of the two comprises already identified Americans associated with purportedly antiwar and other social activist entities, and a smattering of loosely organized social activist movements. These Americans have already been mobilized to some extent, albeit narrowly within their own entities that are disconnected from each other. The second, larger body comprises millions of individual Americans mostly unaffiliated with any existing social activist entity, and not readily reached at the present time unless they use the Internet as bloggers, other of its forums, or self select.
Outside of this 27 percent "block" of opposition there is, or at least was in the late 1990s, a huge international movement that needs to be mentioned. It is/was the anti-globalization movement of "tens of thousands of well-organized militant protesters" of two of the prime drivers of globalization, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. They may just be a sleeping giant if it can be revived/steered toward America's corpocracy for an extended confrontation. Would that they could become a branch of a democracy power coalition of social activists, but I have not yet followed up on that possibility.
Another possible source of opposition, one totally outside the U.S. but one not outlandish might be those few countries that have not been bribed into submission by U.S. foreign aid, that are not members of NATO, and that might be willing to face the umbrage of the U.S. government. The embassies of those countries in the U.S. could be flooded with petitions seeking their support.
What is needed for this initial part of the first stage is the development and maintenance of directories of all potential and actual opposition groups and, to the extent possible, individual social activists. It is far more than a one-person task. I know. I gave up trying to pinpoint the opposition with the exception of having created incomplete lists of antiwar and other social activist NGOs; social activist, progressive media; and a few other relevant entities such as alliances of small businesses and cooperatives.
I also created recently a U.S. Democracy Corps. Its members are, figuratively speaking, ambassadors for democracy who have in their own ways been promoting peaceful and lawful means of reclaiming social and economic justice in America and establishing peaceful relations with other nations sharing this one earth, the home of humanity. There are some 500 members to date sorted into nine segments (e.g., bloggers and their sites). Anyone who considers themselves an advocate for democracy and the general welfare of all Americans is eligible to become a member of the Corps by e-mailing me their intent ( email@example.com ). The Corps is symbolic, not functional. Being a member does not require any commitment nor assume any responsibility for the website's content or activity. Nevertheless, members are not discouraged from becoming more active in supporting democracy and opposing the triumvirate and the corpocracy at large.
Unifying the opposition
The axiom, "in unity there is strength" is certainly a valid one. Corpocracy power has accumulated a time-tested mountain of evidence for its validity. A counterforce in the form of what I sometimes call "two-fisted democracy power" must absolutely be built, no ifs, ands, or buts if the counterforce is to have any chance of succeeding. One fist would be one or more virtual (i.e., online) or physical (i.e., brick and mortar) networks of local and national chambers of democracy. I give them that name in deliberate contrast to the corpocracy's staunchest ally by far, the well-endowed and powerful U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The other fist would be a coalition or fusion of the mobilized segments of the populace. I have sometimes called this coalition the "Democracy Coalition" but I now prefer to call it the "democracy power coalition," although having seen the Pew poll results I kind of like the idea of a "27 Percent Coalition." Whatever its name, its purpose would be to provide political pressure behind the strategic reform initiatives being carried out by one or more chambers of democracy.
Potential members of local and state chambers of democracy might include members of the U.S. Democracy Corps, local social activist groups, local unions, small businesses, cooperatives, local and state progressive parties/politicians, and defecting local Chambers of Commerce angry over the policies and actions of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Potential members of national chamber(s) of democracy might include local and state chambers of democracy and already existing NGOs.