The human race has now acknowledged that with their current technological means, it's absolutely impossible to remove the nail. But the good news is that the Mars people weren't just born ready to immediately replace the human upper echelon; their growth takes a certain amount of time.
Although the Martians didn't mention whether their growth and development speed is the same as humans, considering that Mars and Earth have similar conditions, it's reasonable to assume their growth cycle wouldn't be short either, possibly even longer due to their extended lifespan, with a prolonged childhood.
In other words, there's some leeway with this issue. As long as the nail can be removed before a generation matures, human civilization won't be entirely hopeless.
Currently, everyone is trying to remove the nail in their own home, still dealing with this matter on a national basis. After all, there's no way yet; uniting would only increase disputes, so it's better to separate and study individually, exchanging ideas and hopefully finding a successful path.
Since there's a shift from short-term work to long-term work, organizers are needed to coordinate efforts. As everyone knows, the most efficient regime in human history is actually the monarchal system. Ideally, a philosopher king, but in the face of a great enemy, it doesn't have to be ultra-philosophical; the key is to have capability.
Because Congress has held more than 70 meetings in a week, they also realized: the current system isn't working; it can dawdle with things ordinarily, letting things slide and achieving common prosperity. But now it doesn't work; the Sword of Damocles hangs over their heads, with only a generation's time to solve this problem. If they don't want to become slaves to the Mars people, they must find the most efficient method.
So what was the most efficient period in American history?
The young ones were bewildered, while certain gray-haired old politicians perked up; they know this process well, isn't this the classic Cold War version revisited?
Although they now need to outpace the growing Mars people, there's actually not much difference because that Red Giant truly would hang them by a lamppost, and the Mars people would truly trample them. As long as the consequences are severe enough, even if their legs get worn down, they must take small steps, big leaps, and jog into the new era.
Moreover, based on the research of many scientists, three solutions for removing the nail have been proposed: it's no more than diving to excavate, cutting off in the middle, and suspension from space.
That means the technology they need to develop must include underground excavation technology capable of operating in the deep sea and penetrating the Earth's crust, weapon technology capable of cutting through materials of such high strength, and suspension technology that can work in space. The direction of this competition is not very different from the Cold War, you could say it's exactly the same.
Moreover, these three approaches basically need to be parallel. Since the nail can't be pulled out by brute force, they certainly have to excavate what's underneath; but to maintain balance, it's best to hang it in space; if they can cut it, all the better, as it would greatly reduce its weight, making extraction more convenient.
In fact, in the ideal scenario, if they could indeed cut it, direct cutting seems to be the fastest way, because as long as it's damaged, it won't function. But the technology of this thing is too advanced, nobody knows where its operational center truly lies. Even if they slice it up like a radish, perhaps the part truly functioning is still the part embedded deep into the Earth's crust. So just cutting it isn't enough, it still needs to be fully extracted. Humans won't allow any part of this thing to remain on Earth, it's best to completely eradicate it.
Since we've returned to the rhythm of the Cold War, naturally, a leader comparable to Roosevelt is needed. Back then, Little Roosevelt led them from the lamppost; today, who can lead them to escape from the Mars people?
In reality, their pool of candidates isn't extensive, because compared to the Cold War era, the leaders chosen in today's era need a most essential trait, which is that they must be inherently strong.
After all, Mars people aren't fools; they've infiltrated Earth to this extent, will they just watch as you remove the nail? Throughout the entire plan, they will certainly create a hundred kinds of chaos, obstruct in myriad ways, and matters like sabotaging production are minor issues; the key is they will inevitably attack the core leader, which is the most fatal for humans.
One comes up, one gets killed; another comes up, another gets killed; it won't be long before humans sink into despair. Ironically, their success rate in doing this is quite high because the physical prowess of the Mars people exceeds that of humans, as evidenced from the murder case at Luthor Manor: they can kill in a split second, without leaving any evidence.
Perhaps adding more security could have some effect, but essentially, no human can perfectly protect humans from the Mars people. It's not a matter of willingness, but a matter of capability; it's not solved by finding enough warriors willing to sacrifice themselves.
Not to mention, nobody knows when a Mars person might sneak in, and once they do, it's game over.
It can be said that these days the Congress folks have truly worried themselves gray: someone suggests an idea, someone else debunks it, but you don't even know if the one suggesting or opposing the idea is a Mars person, nobody can tell, so the arguments go in circles without resolution.
In the end, it's not just Congress arguing; nearly all who can be considered upper-class people and those who've had dealings with the government and military have been dragged into it. It seems like exchanging ideas, but in fact, it's about creating chaos to lower the probability of Mars people's manipulation results.
In this broad discussion, useful ideas were few, and useless nonsense plentiful, and they still achieved the accomplishment of arguing without any solution. Yet when many were losing hope, a groundbreaking thought emerged.
"What did you say?!" The host in the center of Capitol Building stared blankly at one of the seats.
"I said, let's elect Superman," Shiller said calmly.
As expected, nearly everyone had question marks appearing over their heads: "You mean we should elect a Mars person to lead the resistance against the Mars people? Are you a Mars person sent here?!"
However, those qualified to be here are mostly smart; you can call them bad, but you can't call them stupid. Especially those old cunning Cold War era politicians who immediately realized there's some truth in this.
Of course, they didn't know that Superman is actually a Kryptonian, but even if he were a Mars person, it doesn't mean he can't be used, maybe he's even more useful than a non-Mars person.
The logic goes like this: if he disagrees to become a leader on the human side, then it proves he's a purely Mars person; but if he agrees, then it proves he's not part of the other Mars people.
The option of pretending to agree and then causing trouble doesn't exist, because the damage he could cause by disagreeing would be far greater than if he agreed and pretended. If he disagrees, humans have no recourse at all, the situation has reached its worst state, all elected leaders could be assassinated, the plan to remove the nail completely obstructed, Mars people will occupy Earth, and humans will become slaves.
In this case, there's no need for any pretense, he only needs to do nothing, waiting for humanity to self-destruct.
Conversely, if he becomes a leader, even if he truly intends to create chaos, just agreeing would make him a spiritual pillar for some people, since everyone knows how strong he is, people would hold fantasies about him, which instead would give humans hope, leading to responses.
That is, if Superman sides with Mars people, the best choice for his benefits is to disagree; conversely, if he agrees, he's actually undermining Mars people's interests, proving he's not aligned with them.
The politicians' thought process is, they don't believe all Mars people are in cahoots, just as humans can never all be on the same side, even if most are united, surely, some hold opposing views.
Among humans, there are good and bad people, those who slaughter without qualms, and those resolutely against genocide; thus, we can assume there are Mars people opposed to genocide too, and only this group could help humans win.
Since they don't know more Mars people, Superman appears to be the most friendly, at least he genuinely saved many humans; moreover, he seems to harbor genuine disdain for politicians' disregard for human life.
In this respect, the politicians have experience: those protesters who make it before them, they are clear about who seeks mere fame and who truly opposes them out of justice. Superman is evidently the latter.
If he is kind, just, and compassionate, then even if he is a Mars person, he wouldn't agree with his compatriots on breeding practices based on genocide. Then, he can be humanity's leader, or say, he's the best choice.
Assuming he is a Mars person, then he wouldn't be so easily killed by Mars people, not needing human protection, possessing the strength to safeguard himself; he's very famous, with great influence, and if he stands with humans, many would surely rekindle hope; although lacking political experience, politics isn't the focus now; though he hasn't been a leader before, past and present demands from leaders differ, now a leader must dare to act tough.
And speaking of which, Superman dislikes these politicians, but he doesn't detest them personally, rather the most unreasonable part of the system: bullying the weak, exploiting citizens, disregarding human rights. The more he detests it, the more forcefully he'd attack these aspects as a leader.
So on whom does this fist land?
Actually, it's not really on the politicians; frankly speaking, politicians and the military are performing work, akin to ministers in the court; it's work time now, and their survival has certain guarantees.
The key is to allocate resources to the lower class, but societal resources are limited, to enrich the poor, the rich must be made poor. That is to say, to solve these problems, a heavy hand must be applied to the wealthy.
Indeed, once the system evolves to the current stage, everyone would make the same choice as Little Roosevelt, squeezing the means of production from society like water from a sponge, reinvesting it into production, to most effectively develop productivity and face the pressure from competition.