The classical liberal vision as exemplified by the U.S. Constitution is being rendered obsolete due to several factors, with the major historical change being the coalescence of the corporate state via the federal monetary system and the capitalist form of political economy. Innovations in information technology therefore secure the corporate form of political economy with the remnants of the classical liberal structure surviving as consultative processes. We may assert furthermore that the rhetorical character of discourse as modulated by the corporate state serves to filter information in such a way as to serve the technocratic methods of governance through which the interests of civilian categories ("workers" of various types, with their relative positions over time within the structurally defined categories of laboring and middle classes) are defined. This last point is one which has yet to be fully determined as the transcendental norm speaking in the context of the global state with its inter- and intra- dynamics of overlapping interests and conflict reinforcing the dominant trends seen at the national level where the neoliberal model has prevailed.
The success of capitalism has been to transcend the national dynamic and to defeat the "end of history" as envisioned by Marx through his analysis of the cycles of capitalism at the national level. No doubt this point has been made before but by whom I know not, that the "surplus value of labor" itself become defined in relation to ever increasing material wealth at all levels of society. ("A rising tide lifts all boats.";"Even homeless people have laptops.") Whether or not, then, the Marxist prediction of the "end of history" is necessary not due to forces understood through economic theory alone but ecological remains to be seen, as too will the form of this end, or rather transition, as the social classes cannot be defined in terms of nineteenth century Europe, if only because the functional structure of the modern economy forbids the utility of such categorization in that regard.
What has become clear at this juncture in world-history is that what was once an imperative of national elites has become that of the global elite. Nuclear and other forms of weaponry, technological innovation, energy, agriculture- anything which requires interdependence between nations must remain under the control of the elite class.
We may speculate as to the shifting allegiances of the various components of this class (Nigerian, Arab, Muslim, Christian, etc. etc.), but in the main what we see emerging is something like predicted by Orwell. The lack of critical analysis evident in political rhetoric which achieves an international normative standard indicates the possibility of even more complete control of mental and physical processes by the controlling classes. The differentiation of class identity thus ends in the lack of class consciousness on the part of the "working class" globally, indeed a lack of what we would call "self-awareness" at all, replaced by a sort of managed arena or staged form of life enacted for the benefit of the privileged classes in their awareness of the need to perpetuate a material condition which guarantees their benefit.
Faced with this possibility, the conscious civilian of the common sort must also confront the current impossibility of revolution. Every possible course of revolution, every form and strategy of revolution, revolt and defiance has been predicted and a counterstrategy prepared or enacted to prevent or contain any challenge to the elite. Strategically then, a civilian of conscience, if we may allow that term, resorts to an idea of uncertainty when refusing to renounce the eventual possibility of revolution- or, if you prefer, evolution. But whereas this possibility then implies logically the need for political action, this political action must be contextualized within what is primarilly a philosophical position which produces a perspective and attitude defined by social and cultural ideas.
Returning to Marx, we see the development of modern society as holding possibilities of personal action which recombines at the social level from the ground up- but only as long as necessary the farther "up" it goes. This anarchist tendency certainly deconstructs into many other possibilities not envisioned by the original anarchists; various forms of social democracy, libertarian communism, faith-based communities, overlapping each other at times. Even where something that can be called a "state" in some sense or another emerges from this process this result is hoped to be one where the major problems confronting civilization are obviated in some way, that is the problems of global scale disasters as a result of war, environmental damage, failure to produce or distribute sufficient wealth to meet the needs of a growing population, etc. Maybe even some of the minor problems can be solved as well.Be the change you want to see in the world, but recognize the fact that you cannot do it alone.