What happened is the state became it’s own thing, completely separated from people who (presumably) delegated their power to it, that is usually by design. Like in business, managing entity like CEO decides key questions while not directly affected by them. Then, there’s no reason to care about the interests of those governed, but there is to care about oneself, one’s power and profits. Then growing beaurocracy obfuscates every coming signal, detaches any responsibility, cements worst practices in a circularly self-defensive system, untouchable and independent from people.

The way to go is to scale up small/local union-like cooperative structures with equal participation, collecting them under bigger umbrella organizations, going from the bottom to the top. There’s hardly a way to totally work around chosen experts or representatives having power and representing their people on the bigger stage, but such roles should be collectively confirmed, given for a well-defined period of time, task to solve, like we do with contractors. It sounds almost like the idealistic defenition of existing political systems, right? And it is.

What it should have though is a system of check and balances (yesyesyes), but those invented with the current knowledge of how they were systematically ignored, overturned, just failed or were created faulty from the start.

The worst possible enemy to tackle not even on ideological lines or of economical nature, it’s alienation of politics from people and resulting apathy, misdirection. Like the whole state of things where people are told to vote for a random old dude they’ve never chosen (that’s on party management) that is better than other old dude is unbelievable, and that is done via electors from intentionally redrawn districts. There’s no direct democracy line A to B you can draw on a piece of paper, or even A to B to C.

That’s the result of decisions after decisions, trends after trends stacked on top of each other those created completely insane machine that, instead of serving it’s primal function - electing people for the job - artistically crafted to deny that power, to give them a placebo, and serving career politicians more than the voters.

And, well, what’s the job of a president? It seems almost like this post was made for a dictator, even before modern total abuse. Can you fire them, conduct an invistigation into their wrongdoings? Why they can install other people at a whim? What kind of qualification there is to hold a scope that big, to somehow decide things like a pandemic response, even if informed by experts, and the next day decides to go to war?

There are certain jobs and fields, like recently created ICE, whose whole mission is to parasitically eat tax money while serving no one. There are prisons whose whole premise is dubious to say the least, and succintly summarized in how redditors wish select inmates to be raped in custody. Many things exist just because, or because they were installed in the past, or whatever.

And another good general point to that, is that, besides holding responsibility, that system should be flexible. If you was born into it, you shouldn’t be given a fixed social contract with institutionalized power like it’s godgiven. There still should be a way you can affect it or refuse it, and this check is one of the primal ones, and unless it ticks, this system can be thrown off like garbage.

Writing that, I started to ramble rather than giving a direct answer, but that’s a given for a question this broad.

What I see as a working strategy not entirely a revolution (that I see as a gamble, with too much raw power on the side of the ruling class), but rather building alternative institutions based on such principles with direct power used mostly to deflect reactionary attack on them, these institutions based around long-unresolved issues. There is a coming, starting crisis in the US’s social systems like distributing food for empoverished. A well-connected grass-root alternative, that would cover that on the national level, would be a strong alternative to failed gvmnt services. It would appear and overtake existing subsystem with a fresh, more effective approach. The risks are, like in the case of a comparatively mild MLK, are obvious - win too much, put status quo and earnings under question and you’d eat lead. This though means it should have a shield, and not only in a form of armed people, legal teams, but universal support and popular education about the issue, everyone’s involvement in it, every Joe having a stake in it. One can always default to violence, and need to aknowledge that rotten path, but initial platform imho should lack it to have reach. Diverse, hybrid approach with partisan messaging on hostile platforms, on street corners, in a word of a mouth is a modern copycat of what gave american war machine hell in Vietnam. You build unkillable distributed network and grow it that much it kills the tired, useless, opressive regime’s mutant.

My pow would probably raise brows and questions, but with how uneducated I’m on the subjects, that’s probably the best I can write atm, as I’m still learning (yet speaking like I kbow shit).