You clearly know almost nothing about the methods of career positioning available to someone in your position. You ask people for help--people who have positioned themselves well in their career, I might add. We directly spell out some methods available to you. You confidently explain to us why they are poor methods for someone in your position. The important part I don't want you to miss is this: we have careers and you do not, and we have successfully positioned ourselves and you have not. Thus, I urge you to consider that (while you surely have strengths), you suck at this particular thing. That, at least today, you are a methodological weakling, and that you are unlikely to get stronger at it until you start employing some of the strategies directly spelled out for you by people who are successful.
Enlightening little assignment for you:
Go through your posts in this thread and highlight all the times you used words like "how/strategy/position" (or, when referring to someone else's suggested strategy, you use the word, "that"). Then look at your explanation of what will come out of those strategies.
You confidently predict they will not be a successful method toward your defined goal. I predict you will not get there until you start questioning your read of the relationship between strategy and outcome. I think your problem is that you are confident you are reading this domain correctly. And that confidence is, at least at this point in your life, unfounded, baseless, and devoid of any evidence-based experience.
I'm saying other people have evidence behind their claims about what strategies you need to be using, and that the only evidence you have is that your strategies have failed you and left you without a job. So maybe meditate on the notion of evidence-based claims.