The Plot to Save America

Building a Parallel Society in the Face of Authoritarian Collapse

Leaders from five Iroquois nations (Cayuga, Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, and Seneca) assembled around Dekanawidah c. 1570, French engraving, early 18th century.

We need a plan to save America that doesn’t rely on waiting around for the Democratic Party to undergo a transformation. That may never happen or may not happen in time. A plan requires a final goal, a long-range strategy, and a short-term tactical roadmap. We have the basic plan but, as of now, we lack capital or manpower to execute on it. Feel free to comment, critique, and so on.

Let’s explore the basic gist of it here. In writing this, I seek help from readers with financial resources. Also, I don’t mind if this inspires others to undertake such an initiative without me, although I do think my input would be helpful. I built a prototype many years ago with The Evolver Network. At one point, we had sixty local community groups and a rudimentary media infrastructure, but we ran out of financial support before we could find a successful formula. I also spent ten years writing How Soon Is Now, which explores how to engineer a systemic transformation of post-industrial civilization, responding to the threat of ecological collapse, among other aspects of the metacrisis.

The lion’s share of the capital we need to execute our plan should come from the mid-tier of successful wealth-holders who have liberal sensibilities as well as empathy for poor people and those made to suffer needlessly. We can call these people the Managerial Professional Class (MPC), or the upper middle class — people with a net worth, roughly, of anywhere from $500,000 to $50 million. They are a group that the Right is explicitly targeting for demolition or at least demotion, although they don’t seem fully aware of this yet. We need to build class alliance between the PMC, knowledge workers or cognitive laborers, working class people and farmers, against the extractive vampires sitting at the top of the system and sucking the life-force out of it.

The PCM are still comfortably embedded in the institutional structures of the U.S., including academia, the cultural systems, medicine, establishment media, and the financial structure. They remain relatively insulated from the shockwaves of destruction that will soon impact the poor and vulnerable. They have lived through a long period of comfort and privilege where no sacrifice was asked of them. They have an entrenched mindset which is sluggish and not quick to shift into emergency or war-time mode. Because things have been good for them up to this point, they are biased to think this will continue to be the case.

The Right, on the other hand, has gone fully into war-time, emergency mode. After decades of preparation (see Jane Mayer’s Dark Money for details), the Right is executing upon long-term plans to transform the U.S. as quickly as possible, before the mass populace of the country catches up to what is happening or finds effective techniques to respond. As Heather Cox Richardson writes today:

The plan, as Vice President J.D. Vance explained in a 2021 interview, is to destroy the current government, business, educational, cultural, and scientific pillars of the United States in order to replace them with a new system, although there is tension between the Project 2025 wing of MAGA and the technocrats’ wing over whether that new system will be a theocracy or a technocracy. In either case, it will be an authoritarian government in which power and money concentrate in a very few hands.

The plan involves overwhelming the country with rapid, shocking actions while they subvert the election system to entrench permanent one-party rule. So far, the large majority of the people who do not want an authoritarian takeover lack effective means to respond to this vicious attack.

Anecdotally, among people I know, I find many if not most are simply dissociated. They don’t study the situation as it seems totally out of their control. Tragically, the U.S. populace has succumbed to an intensive “mind war” or media mind-control program over the last decades. As part of any plan to save America, we must consider how to break the grip of this indoctrination and rebuild our civic infrastructure.

Situational Awareness

We need to form a new social actor, a “third force” outside of the Democratic Party — in fact, operating outside of the political duopoly entirely. Before getting into that, I feel the need to point out a few relevant aspects of where we are now.

As Yannis Varoufakis states accurately, the Center Left or liberal parties in the West are directly responsible for the rise of the Far Right, authoritarian and Fascist movements, culminating with Trumpism in the US. “The center-left is responsible for the rise of fascism. It was the case in the 1920s and 30s. It is the case again today,” he says. Barack Obama bailed out the Wall Street bankers who caused the 2008 crash while allowing the masses to suffer the consequences. The Democrats abandoned the working class. Now the working class despises them.

Although Trump’s Project 2025 apparatchiks have removed not only climate protections but even the phrase “climate change” from government websites, that does not change the brutal reality of biospheric breakdown. As Bill McKibben notes in his latest essay, with American abandoning its climate commitments, we are now looking at an inescapable 2°C rise in temperature, shooting past the 1.5°C limit. This will have devastating impacts on the global economy in the next decades as climate disasters in one region cascade across supply chains and trade networks worldwide.

“Future climate change will increase the risk of weather shocks occurring simultaneously across countries and more persistently over time,” McKibben writes. “This will disrupt the networks producing and delivering goods, compromise trade and limit the extent to which countries can help each other.” Even if we reach 3°C warmer by the end of this century, as now estimated, it will be hellish, but people and nations will, barring an extinction event, still be fighting to survive.

So what do we do?

Build the Alternative

In order to effectively counter the current authoritarian takeover, we must define a kind of martial arts approach that does not directly oppose the power structure, but works with the system to turn its own momentum against it. Trump and his minions seek direct confrontation — civil war — in order to impose martial law and imprison dissidents. General strikes could be an effective strategy at a large scale but, unfortunately, that level of oppositional awareness does not yet exist in the U.S.

The strategy proposed here combines elements of a large-scale membership program (such as AARP or National Geographic) that creates a new power base outside of the political system. The initiative organizes local face-to-face meet-ups across the U.S. while designing and building a decentralized social network and media infrastructure designed to replace Facebook, Amazon, and other tools controlled by NxReactionary tech billionaires. This membership organization will be for-profit (or “for-purpose”), headquartered outside of the U.S., and apply the “network state” model favored by libertarian tech visionaries like Balaji Svrinivasan as an instrument. This is not an “either or” proposition: People can participate in this initiative while still engaging in the political process.

Our plan repurposes the network state to build a progressive framework grounded in ecological principles of symbiosis and interdependence, experimenting with forms of local participatory governance such as liquid democracy. The libertarian ideal envisions the network state as digital tax havens and crypto-monarchies. Our initiative utilizes the network state to design a living, learning, continuously evolving laboratory for direct democracy, regenerative social practices, common trusts, and mutual aid.

One important piece is digital identity. The Internet was originally designed without establishing a secure container for user’s personal data and identity. This turned out to be a tragic flaw as it allowed for-profit companies to own user’s data and use it for their financial and political purposes. A secure protocol for digital identity and personal data will be a crucial element in any new digital infrastructure.

Ultimately, we intend to build a parallel social structure and governance system, integrating new methods of decision-making and value exchange, outside of the stagnant two-party duopoly. This network must prove its utility by providing immediate, tangible benefits to people’s lives (such as access to shared resources, whether tools or land or services). This may seem like an overly-ambitious goal, but it should be noted that projects able to galvanize the mass populace or, eventually, command billions of dollars of investment often propose wildly ambitious goals at the outset. One example is Elon Musk’s dream of settling people on Mars, despite the incredible cost and impracticality of such an enterprise.

What we’re envisioning is a decentralized, member-driven platform that builds over time:

• A governance system inspired by Audrey Tang’s work in Taiwan, enabling participatory decision-making at scale

• A self-sovereign identity layer, where members control their data and digital presence

• A media ecosystem that restores trust by linking all content—articles, podcasts, videos—to their verified sources

• A tokenized, regenerative economy, experimenting with tools like negative interest rates and peer-to-peer exchange systems

• A legal and advocacy arm to protect members’ rights and represent progressive values in policy arenas

Over time, the network may assimilate physical territory—forming an archipelago of autonomous zones to host events, research projects, and community living experiments.

Here are a few inspirations and models:

The Iroquois Confederacy

Established between 1142-1450 AD, the Iroquois Confederacy (Haudenosaunee) established one of history's oldest participatory democracies through its Great Law of Peace, which unified five (later six) nations—Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca, with the Tuscarora joining in the early 18th century. This constitutional framework created a governance structure with checks and balances while preserving each nation's internal sovereignty. The Grand Council comprised fifty chiefs (sachems) selected by clan mothers from specific lineages, who would deliberate on matters affecting the confederacy as a whole. Decisions required consensus rather than majority rule, with extensive deliberation continuing until agreement could be reached. The constitution carefully delineated powers between local communities, individual nations, and the confederacy, creating a political system where authority flowed from the people upward rather than from rulers downward.

Women held significant political power within this system. Clan mothers were responsible for appointing, advising, and if necessary removing sachems, giving them control over those holding leadership positions. The Confederacy's economic system emphasized sustainable resource management and collective welfare, with the concept of "seven generations" guiding decision-making—leaders were obligated to consider how their actions would affect descendants seven generations into the future (what an idea!). This governance model influenced early American democratic thinking, with scholars noting parallels between the Iroquois Great Law and elements of the U.S. Constitution, though the Iroquois system maintained a more direct form of citizen participation and emphasized consensus rather than representative democracy. The Confederacy's cooperative governance approach enabled the Haudenosaunee to maintain relative peace among member nations for centuries.

Democratic Confederalism in Rojova

The autonomous region of Rojava — a break-away Kurdish republic in northeastern Syria — has implemented the ideas of the political philosopher Abdullah Öcalan. Rejecting both state capitalism and authoritarian socialism, Öcalan's model of democratic confederalism builds upon a foundation of direct democracy, decentralized governance, gender equality, and ecological consciousness. Since 2012, amid the chaos of the Syrian civil war, Rojava has implemented a system of nested councils and communes where decisions flow from the bottom up rather than top down. Women’s equal participation is mandated through co-leadership positions at every level. The social contract explicitly recognizes cultural and religious pluralism, with Kurdish, Arab, Assyrian, and other communities participating in governance structures that emphasize collaboration over ethnic dominance.

Democratic Confederalism as implemented in Rojava centers on several key principles:

1. Decentralized governance: Rojava operates through a system of local communes and councils that make decisions at the neighborhood and village level, with representatives sent to higher councils. This bottom-up approach aims to distribute power rather than concentrate it in a central state.

2. Direct democracy: The system emphasizes face-to-face democracy with citizens directly participating in decision-making through local assemblies.

3. Ecological sustainability: Öcalan's theory includes environmental consciousness as a core principle, with efforts in Rojava to develop sustainable agriculture and energy systems despite war conditions.

4. Women's liberation: Perhaps the most distinctive aspect of Rojava's implementation is the commitment to women's equality. This includes co-presidency (one male, one female leader) at all levels of governance, women's assemblies with veto power over decisions affecting women, and all-female military units.

5. Multi-ethnic cooperation: Rojava explicitly rejects ethnic nationalism in favor of cultural pluralism, with Kurdish, Arab, Assyrian, and other communities participating in governance structures. Official documents are published in multiple languages.

6. Cooperative economy: While not fully implemented due to wartime conditions, the economic vision includes a mixed economy with an emphasis on cooperatives and communal ownership alongside private property.

Öcalan developed these ideas while imprisoned in Turkey, evolving from earlier Kurdish nationalist positions to a more libertarian socialist philosophy influenced by Murray Bookchin's social ecology and communalism. The theory rejects both state capitalism and state socialism in favor of what Öcalan calls "democratic modernity."

Digital Democracy in Taiwan

In 2014, public trust in Taiwan's government was alarmingly low, with approval ratings dipping below 10%. By 2020, this figure had risen to over 70%. The government rebuilt trust in Taiwan’s democracy by leveraging digital technology to promote openness, collaboration, and citizen empowerment. Audrey Tang, Taiwan's Digital Minister during this period, attributes this dramatic increase to the government's consistent efforts to involve citizens in policymaking through digital platforms.

As Taiwan’s Digital Minister and later head of the newly created Ministry of Digital Affairs, Tang integrated innovations—like open data platforms and participatory tools—into official government functions. They designed one platform, vTaiwan, for structured deliberation on complex policy issues. They also built Join, a more accessible tool for public feedback. Both made government more responsive and transparent. Tang’s belief in “radical transparency” and “crowd-sourced governance” helped transform Taiwan into a model for digital democracy, one where technology actively supports and enhances civic trust.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, civic hackers collaborated with the government to build the Mask App, enabled by open data policies Tang championed. Similarly, initiatives like Cofacts, a collaborative fact-checking platform, helped curb misinformation with what Tang called a “fast, fair, and fun” ethos—preferring “humor over rumor.” These efforts inspired public confidence in a democratic system that responded to people’s creativity and input.

Basically, we desperately need these digital tools to rebuild trust and establish a more participatory form of democracy here in the U.S. Our Right Wing government is, obviously, not going to implement any of this. A large-scale membership program — a private, for-profit initiative — could rebuild this suite of tools for Americans, launch and then iterate on them. With sufficient capital, we can build media campaigns around them and interact directly with our membership base on the trajectory for further development and implementation.

Please reach out to me (Daniel.pinchbeck@gmail.com) if you have resources or applicable skills and want to make this happen.