I've seen zero effort from the anti-IP movement to go after politicians or even try to reach them, and I have seen a lot of FUD and propaganda against selected companies that are determined to somehow be "evil" while other, favored companies get a pass.

I don't understand their motivations, but I'm not convinced that actual change is one of them.

Further, I am not a fan of the current system, but I have yet to see a proposal for an alternative.

Finally, isn't it hypocritical to attack people for operating under the system as it is, when the people doing the attacking are not trying to change the system at all?

Do you see google giving up its patents in any area where it has a competitive advantage?

Of course not.

Do you not see the stories on HN about the EFF constantly doing exactly what you say no one is doing?

I don't see EFF attacking people for operating under the current system, so obviously I wasn't saying they aren't trying to change the system at all.

I also haven't seen a proposal from the EFF for a constitutional amendment of any stripe.

"The Congress shall have Power [...] to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries[....]"

It shouldn't require an amendment for the Congress to decide to exercise that power differently or not at all, especially if they realize what's happening now doesn't actually promote progress in new fields without a critical mass of open prior art.

Are either of those feasible? Are there other actions that are feasible, and is the EFF doing those?

Well, the EFF can't really step in to lawsuits between large companies, so it's a bit hard for them to get directly involved.

They've certainly challenged the status quo on copyright law, though.