To simply blame your failures on a small faction of trouble makers, or on some particular ideology and demand that the populace stop being rediculous and recognize the effectiveness of their governance and be happy is the kind of stereotype that we Americans laugh at in stories about the American Revolution. Now that it is happening to us, it appears we are just as blind as our British cousins were. Ironic, yes. Tragically avoidable? Equally yes, I say.
First, I think there are many cases where a handful of trouble makers did mobilize the population. The government may or may not have set conditions where the populace is susceptable to being mobilized. Your argument remains valid, because it is still a contest for winning over the population, but don't forget that many insurgents initially rely on coercion to mobilize support or neutrality. To counter that coercion requires something of a TCE to eliminate that threat.

As for American ideas, your article was full of them. You did mention that the population has a duty to raise up against their government if it is seen as unworthy. Tell me how that fits the situation in the UK, where a internal and external actors are attempting to mobilize/radicalize the Muslim population to conduct terrorist attacks if the UK doesn't allow them to practice Sharia Law. Based on your argument, the Muslims have an obligation to raise up and fight the government, and we as Americans have an obligation to provide moral support.

I assume this is not your intention, but simply reading your article would indicate you may recommend supporting these radical groups if the government can't respond to their call for change. What they're advocating is a far cry from a Civil Rights Bill. The government could meet them half way, and compromise and perhaps develop one government with two laws, but I just don't think that will work.

My example is harsh, and perhaps even unfair, but I think it demands an answer. It may go a long ways to clarify what your intended strategy is.

I could take it further, and argue we should have supported Castro (actually I think we should have, they would no longer be communist if we did), Idi Amin, etc.