The United States is not suffering from a crisis of information, expression, or awareness. In fact, there is more protest, alternative media, online discourse, and critical journalism than ever before. Yet, the lived reality of most Americans — especially the working class — continues to deteriorate. At a time of unprecedented national wealth and productivity, wages stagnate, inequality widens, housing becomes unaffordable, and the political class remains unresponsive to the will of the people. If protests and media exposure alone were sufficient to create change, we would be living in a radically different society. But we are not.
Why? Because we have confused awareness and protest with power.
We have mistaken critique for construction. The uncomfortable truth is that no amount of shaming elites, pleading for reform, or flooding the internet with exposés will move the needle — not unless and until such hard work is tied to a deliberate, organized, and architected effort to build power and change the political structure itself. Anything short of that, no matter how righteous or popular, risks becoming either irrelevant or co-opted — or worse, becomes a stepping-stone for catastrophic changes orchestrated by those with oligarchic or authoritarian designs. History is a reliable, cold witness on this score.
The Consensus Is Already Here — But It Is Powerless
Contrary to what cable news and political punditry would have us believe, Americans are not as divided as they appear. In fact, across partisan lines, large majorities of both Democrats and Republicans agree on a host of policy issues — from banning stock trading by elected officials, to expanding Medicare, increasing taxes on millionaires, capping rent in subsidized housing, and protecting voting rights. This is not a speculative hope; it is a fact backed by polling across dozens of issues.
This level of bipartisan agreement reveals that our fundamental problem is not ideological division. The problem is that our political system — calcified and corrupted — is utterly unresponsive to public will. Institutions that once served the public have evolved into self-preserving ecosystems. Political parties have become blunt, molar instruments incapable of translating nuanced public will into effective governance. And the working class — despite being the majority — remains minoritarian and at the margin of power, watching as decisions are made on their behalf but rarely in their interest.
Performance Activism and Media Noise: The New Opium
In an age of social media, protest can become a performance, not a movement. The visibility of discontent becomes mistaken for impact. A viral video is not a law. A million views are not a policy. Even when protest is genuine and courageous, if it is not tethered to a strategy for institutional change, it risks being cathartic but ineffective. Worse still, it can inadvertently empower the status quo, which has perfected the art of absorbing dissent or worse, instrumentalizing it to orchestrate system-serving backlashes, without making any substantive concessions.
Similarly, alternative media — while essential for breaking the monopoly of mainstream narratives — cannot in and of itself transform the machinery of governance. Shouting “truth to power” and delving deep into analysis are futile unless one has a way to replace power. Information, however accurate or damning, does not lead to justice unless it is coupled with organizing, institution-building, and concrete steps to take over and re-engineer the levers of authority.
The Dark Enlightenment and the Authoritarian Threat
Into this vacuum of unfulfilled hope and institutional decay steps a new breed of reactionary visionaries — techno-libertarians, Silicon Valley oligarchs, and “Dark Enlightenment” ideologues. These are not cartoon villains; they are deadly serious, and they understand power far better than most activists do. They see the same decay and disconnect that we see, but their solution is not to democratize society — it is to replace democracy altogether with elite technocracy or neo-feudal order.
They thrive in moments of mass disillusionment. They count on performative protests and fragmented resistance, knowing that such disorganized fury will not coalesce into anything potent enough to threaten their project. If change is inevitable, they would rather that change be theirs — top-down, anti-human, and irreversible. That is why every time we squander the public’s energy on symbolic acts instead of building real political alternatives, we edge closer to a future authored by those who believe that consent is a weakness and the crowd is a threat.
The Failure of Pleading, the Urgency of Building
The most dangerous illusion in our political culture is the belief that if we could just make the powerful see how wrong they are, they would change. But the powerful already know. They are not uninformed — they are insulated. They are not misguided — they are incentivized. No tweet, open letter, or documentary will change the calculus of a system built precisely to ignore the very demands we keep shouting.
It is therefore not enough to describe a better world. It is not enough to denounce corruption. It is not enough to write manifestos or hold forums. What is required is the painstaking, unglamorous work of building an alternative — a parallel political infrastructure that not only reflects the will of the people but is capable of taking and exercising power. This means organization. It means fielding candidates. It means creating mechanisms for direct democratic input that bypass the traditional filters of party machines and corporate media.
Most importantly, it means rooting this work in the daily experience and wisdom of the working class — not as a rhetorical gesture, but as a strategic necessity. The working class, by virtue of its marginalization, is the least corrupted by power and the most immediately aware of what policies would make a meaningful difference. Real change will only come when we enable this class to lead — not by protesting in the streets, but by sitting at the very table where laws are written and budgets are passed.
What Kind of Movement Do We Need?
A movement that works must be grounded in three principles:
Specificity and Doability: Abstract demands like “end capitalism” or “abolish racism” are morally righteous but strategically empty. We need demands that are actionable, measurable, and winnable. Focus on building victories, however small, that can snowball into systemic transformation.
Constituent Power, Not Charisma: Avoid movements that depend on charismatic leaders or theatrical displays. Deliberation and distributed intelligence must replace spectacle. Performance is manipulative, and charisma rarely correlates with wisdom or good governance.
Protected Participation: Movements must lower the cost of engagement. Not everyone can march. Not everyone can take time off work or face arrest. Design systems that enable participation without exposure — digitally, locally, and safely — so that resistance cannot be crushed by brute force.
The Clock Is Ticking
We are past the point where righteous indignation is enough. The foundations of representative democracy are cracking, and people across the political spectrum know it and are living the dire consequences. The question is not whether change will come but who will shape it? If we fail to build an organized, pragmatic, and rooted movement that can seize the machinery of governance and put it under the control of the people, others will step into the void — and they will not be interested in justice.
It is time to stop shouting at the gates and start building the house. Not someday. Not when we “raise awareness.” But now – and tangibly and relentlessly, and with the quiet, patient determination of those who know that democracy will not survive unless we remake it from the ground up.
Ahmed Bouzid is the co-founder of The True Representation Movement.
For a quick podcast introduction to TRM (21 mins), please go here and listen.
