By Michael Kelman Portney

To address systemic inequities through broad-based, universally appealing issues, we can draw on strategies from The Art of War by Sun Tzu, Foundations of Geopolitics by Alexander Dugin, and other sources of strategic thought. By leveraging principles from these works, we can mobilize a coalition focused on systemic issues without alienating potential allies through identity-focused rhetoric. Here’s how we might apply these strategies:

---

1. Using Sun Tzu’s Principle of Knowing the Terrain and Adapting to It

Sun Tzu emphasizes the importance of understanding one’s environment and adapting strategies to fit the “terrain.” In our case, this terrain is the polarized American political landscape, where appeals to racial identity can be divisive and counterproductive for building a majority coalition. The key here is to navigate this landscape with flexibility and an acute awareness of the audience.

A. Understand and Embrace Public Opinion

Surveying the Landscape: Just as Sun Tzu advises understanding the terrain, we can start by assessing the public’s values, concerns, and priorities. We should be aware that many Americans are more motivated by issues like economic security, privacy, and data rights than by explicit racial justice agendas.

Tailoring the Message to the Audience: By speaking to universal concerns like economic fairness, data privacy, and personal autonomy, we can build rapport with a broad audience. This allows us to sidestep polarizing rhetoric and instead present solutions that resonate widely.

B. Focus on Shared Values Over Divisive Identities

Emphasize Common Goals: By highlighting issues that everyone can agree on—like the importance of fair wages, access to healthcare, and digital privacy—we can appeal to people’s sense of shared purpose rather than their individual identities. Sun Tzu’s principle of leveraging commonalities can foster unity and reduce opposition.

Frame the Message as a Battle Against Systemic Oppression: Position the struggle as against “the system” rather than against individuals or groups. This approach can create a rallying point for people who feel marginalized by economic inequities, regardless of race or political background.

---

2. Building Influence Through Ideological and Cultural Narratives (Dugin’s Foundations of Geopolitics)

In Foundations of Geopolitics, Alexander Dugin emphasizes the power of ideology and cultural influence in shaping society. To build a coalition without relying on identity-based appeals, we can use cultural narratives and ideological influence to embed our values within society.

A. Construct an Ideological Core Centered on Autonomy and Fairness

Creating a Unifying Ideology: Dugin suggests that movements are strongest when they have a clear ideological core. We could build an ideology around the principles of autonomy, freedom from corporate surveillance, economic fairness, and the right to privacy. This ideology would appeal to people’s desire for control over their lives, resonating with Americans across the political spectrum.

Appealing to Core American Values: By aligning our message with values like freedom, opportunity, and fairness—concepts deeply embedded in American culture—we can create an ideology that feels familiar and patriotic. This approach would allow us to gain cultural traction without alienating those skeptical of identity politics.

B. Embed Values into Popular Culture and Media

Using Media to Amplify Core Values: Dugin stresses the importance of media in spreading ideology. We could leverage social media, blogs, podcasts, and video content to normalize discussions around data rights, autonomy, and economic reform. This could include highlighting stories of people impacted by economic inequality or corporate overreach, personalizing the systemic issues at hand.

Collaborating with Influencers and Thought Leaders: By working with public figures who can communicate our message in culturally relevant ways, we can extend our reach. Influencers who share values of autonomy and fairness, regardless of political alignment, could amplify our message to diverse audiences, further embedding these ideals in public discourse.

---

3. Using Asymmetrical Tactics and Psychological Maneuvering (Sun Tzu)

Sun Tzu advocates for asymmetrical tactics that capitalize on surprise, adaptation, and psychological advantage. To achieve our aims, we could use unconventional methods that disrupt typical expectations and appeal to a broad swath of people.

A. Frame Issues as Apolitical Necessities

Positioning Issues as Basic Rights: By presenting our goals—like data privacy and economic justice—as necessities rather than partisan issues, we can sidestep political divides. Framing these concerns as rights rather than as ideological demands can help them appear non-partisan and universally relevant.

Creating Psychological Distance from Divisive Rhetoric: By avoiding identity-based language, we create a psychological advantage, appearing pragmatic and inclusive. This can make our platform more appealing to those who feel alienated by identity politics.

B. Engage in “Invisible” Advocacy Through Everyday Issues

Focusing on Everyday Concerns: Sun Tzu emphasizes adapting to the opponent’s strengths. We could adopt a subtle, “invisible” approach by weaving our ideology into discussions about everyday issues. For instance, addressing the high cost of living, privacy concerns in the digital age, or the impacts of economic inequality could resonate with individuals without them realizing they are being drawn into a larger ideological movement.

Highlighting Personal Stories Over Abstract Ideas: Personal stories resonate more than abstract discussions, so we could showcase individuals’ experiences with economic or digital inequities. This “storytelling” approach builds emotional engagement and can make our broader systemic critique feel more immediate and personal.

---

4. Adopting a Gradual, Bottom-Up Approach (Dugin and Gramsci)

Dugin and Antonio Gramsci both emphasize the importance of building a movement from the ground up, with Gramsci focusing on cultural hegemony through grassroots engagement. We could gradually build our influence by creating local initiatives that address systemic issues in concrete, visible ways.

A. Establish Local Networks and Alliances

Building Community-Based Hubs: We could focus on creating local groups or community “hubs” that tackle issues like housing affordability, healthcare, and fair wages. These local groups could act as centers for advocacy, education, and support, showing people how systemic reform can benefit their daily lives.

Forming Alliances Across Diverse Groups: To avoid alienating potential allies, we could form alliances with organizations that already focus on issues like economic justice, digital rights, and personal autonomy, regardless of their political affiliation. By aligning with diverse groups, we can build a coalition that has broader appeal.

B. Creating a Grassroots Base that Expands Nationally

Focus on Tangible Impact and Real-Life Solutions: As Gramsci advises, cultural shifts occur when ideas are embedded within everyday life. By offering solutions to common problems, like rent control, healthcare access, or fair wages, we can generate grassroots momentum that gradually expands nationally.

Using Community Success Stories as Proof of Concept: Once small successes are achieved at the local level, we could use these as “proof of concept” to advocate for larger reforms. Success stories can act as persuasive tools to show that our approach to systemic inequities works and benefits everyone.

---

5. Sowing Doubt in Opposing Systems (Dugin and Sun Tzu)

Dugin and Sun Tzu both highlight the effectiveness of undermining an opponent by creating doubt and exposing weaknesses. We could strategically question the legitimacy of systems that promote inequality, using rhetoric that appeals to fairness and accountability.

A. Highlighting the Failures of Current Systems

Exposing Inequities in Economic and Corporate Structures: By spotlighting specific examples of corporate overreach or economic injustice, we can weaken public trust in these institutions. For instance, discussing how major corporations exploit personal data or monopolize certain markets would serve to highlight systemic inequities without framing them as identity-specific issues.

Creating an “Us vs. the System” Narrative: Rather than dividing people along racial or ideological lines, we could create a narrative of the people versus the system. By casting systemic inequities as the common enemy, we can unite people from all backgrounds in opposition to the status quo.

B. Using Humor and Satire to Undermine Opponents

Employing Satire to Disarm Opposition: Humor and satire can be effective in reducing opposition. We could employ a light-hearted, ironic tone when discussing corporate or governmental failings, making serious points without directly confronting or alienating potential allies.

Highlighting Absurdities in Opposing Arguments: By pointing out contradictions or absurdities within the arguments of opposition, we could subtly encourage people to question these structures. This method aligns with Sun Tzu’s advice to undermine opponents psychologically, weakening their credibility without direct confrontation.

---

Conclusion: A Pragmatic and Strategic Approach

By applying strategies from Sun Tzu, Dugin, and Gramsci, we can build a movement that addresses systemic inequities in ways that appeal to a broad, non-ideological coalition. Through understanding the “terrain” of public opinion, crafting a unifying ideology, and embedding values in culture and local action, we can avoid polarizing identity politics while still pursuing meaningful change.

This strategy reflects a sophisticated understanding of the American landscape, acknowledging that real systemic change requires engaging with people where they are, not where we wish them to be. By using a combination of psychological, cultural, and grassroots tactics, we can build a resilient movement aimed at addressing shared societal challenges in ways that resonate across ideological divides.