The Two-Track Plan: How Tariffs, Resource Control, and Consumerism Are Being Used to Consolidate Power

America’s greatest remaining global advantage isn’t our military or our political alliances — it’s our consumer base. The fact that over 330 million people habitually buy more goods and services than any other population in the world gives the United States a unique form of leverage. Nations compete for access to our market because it keeps their economies alive. This buying power has historically been the quiet engine behind our global influence. But instead of using it to strengthen our own sovereignty, elites are increasingly weaponizing it — not to protect the public, but to enforce a global order that keeps decision-making in the hands of a few. The moves being made right now aren’t random policy choices; they are coordinated steps in a two-track plan to ensure that whether foreign nations comply or resist, the same small circle of power remains in control.

On the surface, tariffs are presented as a way to protect American jobs, level the playing field, and defend national security. This is the story we are sold — that raising prices on imported goods will encourage people to “buy American” and bring manufacturing home. But in reality, tariffs have become a public demonstration of power aimed not at the average American, but at foreign governments. The hidden message is clear: “We control the gateway to the most lucrative consumer market in the world. Align with our vision, or we will close that gate and make it painful for your economy.” This turns the American consumer into a geopolitical weapon — their spending used as leverage to shape other nations’ policies. It’s a powerful tactic in the short term, but dangerously short-sighted. Over time, it encourages countries to find ways to bypass U.S. markets entirely, eroding the very advantage we are using as leverage.

This is Track One — External Control — where the U.S. uses access to its consumers as a bargaining chip. If foreign governments consent to the terms, resources, trade flows, and strategic influence are locked into elite-controlled systems. The “victory” is sold to the public as a win for America, but the real beneficiaries are private interests who secure global supply chains, resource contracts, and political dominance. The public sees headlines about “protecting jobs” but rarely benefits in any measurable way. Yet there’s also Track Two — Internal Capture — the contingency plan if foreign governments refuse to comply. If the external play fails, the backup is to turn inward and break the financial stability of the American consumer themselves. This means higher prices through tariffs, inflated costs via corporate consolidation, and debt cycles that keep households dependent on the very system draining them. Whether the world plays along or not, the American public is either leveraged against others or subjugated at home.

The truly alarming part is that these two tracks aren’t mutually exclusive. They can — and do — run simultaneously. While tariffs are pressuring foreign economies to bend toward U.S.-aligned strategies, domestic economic pressure keeps Americans too financially strained to resist. Debt dependency, wage suppression, and rising essential costs work hand-in-hand with global resource deals to create a closed loop of control. And make no mistake — these resource deals are central to the plan. Our natural resources, from oil and gas to rare earth minerals, have been effectively captured by private markets. They are extracted and sold in ways that prioritize corporate shareholders and foreign investors, not the American people. Royalties are set far below global standards, and the profits are rarely reinvested into public benefit. The public’s birthright has been sold off piece by piece, and in doing so, our last tangible bargaining chip beyond consumerism has been locked behind corporate gates.

Recapturing these resources is not only possible — it’s essential. Other nations have done it without collapsing their economies, by framing it as a matter of national sovereignty and economic patriotism rather than ideology. Imagine a model where U.S. resources operate under a public trust framework: extraction royalties tied to market value, profits invested into infrastructure, debt reduction, and lowering costs for American households. Domestic needs would take priority before export, and the people themselves would hold an ownership stake in the wealth pulled from their own land. This would create a dual-leverage model — consumerism plus resource control — that could transform our negotiating position globally. Instead of being forced to play defense with tariffs and debt traps, the U.S. could set terms that benefit both our people and our long-term stability.

Of course, those holding power today don’t want that to happen. They benefit from the current structure — a status quo where global resource flows and domestic spending channels are already under elite control. And they believe they own us already. From their perspective, if foreign nations refuse to comply, it’s no problem — they’ll simply tighten the screws at home, knowing that most Americans are too economically dependent to mount serious resistance. This belief is dangerous, not because it’s true, but because it’s self-reinforcing: every policy that increases our dependency makes it harder to fight back, and every missed opportunity to reclaim control signals that the public has accepted their role as mere consumers, not sovereign stakeholders.

But here’s the truth — it is not too late. The very fact that these strategies are visible now is proof that the control structure is not unbreakable. Their reliance on our compliance is their biggest weakness. Tariffs, debt, and resource capture only work if we continue to buy through their channels, vote for their candidates, and accept their framing of the world. And for the first time in modern history, tools like AI give the public a way to connect the dots in real time, bypass official narratives, and expose the two-track plan before it’s complete. The speed at which patterns can now be identified has shortened their window of secrecy. What once took years of investigative journalism can now be mapped in days, and that awareness can be turned into coordinated pressure faster than the status quo can adapt.

Pushing harder means more than just protesting or posting on social media. It means building economic alternatives outside the consolidation network. It means demanding public benefit from every resource pulled from U.S. soil. It means targeting boycotts where they hurt the most, and refusing to allow tariffs and trade policy to be wielded as tools of domestic economic punishment. And above all, it means refusing to accept the false choice between foreign compliance and domestic subjugation. We can break the two-track plan — but only if we recognize it for what it is and act accordingly.

The consolidation of power through tariffs, consumer leverage, and resource capture is not inevitable. The cracks are already showing, both abroad and at home. Alliances are shifting, public trust in institutions is crumbling, and the machinery that once operated in the shadows is now visible to anyone willing to look. The challenge now is to make sure that visibility leads to action — coordinated, sustained, and focused on reclaiming control. Because the only thing more dangerous than a population that’s been captured is a population that realizes it hasn’t been fully subdued. And we are not subdued. Not yet.

Every generation is given a choice, whether they recognize it or not, to either inherit a structure built for them or build a structure that serves them. We are living through such a moment now. The American consumer has become the ultimate prize — a resource exploited not for our collective good, but for the profit and leverage of those who have captured the channels through which we spend. Our buying power is wielded as a weapon abroad and a chain at home. If we fail to reclaim it, we cement a future where our children’s role in the world is not as citizens with sovereignty, but as consumers feeding someone else’s empire.

So the question before us is not abstract, nor is it one that can be put off for another decade. It is immediate and personal: Are we going to remain a nation of consumerism for others to benefit, or are we going to build — like our lives depend on it — for our own benefit and for the generations yet to come?

That means owning our resources ourselves, not ceding them to private equity or anything hidden behind the word “private.”