516

The over 900-page document, commissioned by the people expected to run another Trump White House, is a laundry list of the far-right's most politically toxic ideas, from banning abortion nationwide to mass firing federal officials who believe in protecting public health and safety. One would think that Trump and his allies would try to keep their sinister plans out of public view. Instead, Team Trump published their fascistic blueprint on a website for anyone to read,. They even proudly display the menacing "Project 2025" label on the front page.

...

On Sunday, actress Taraji P. Henson took a break during the BET Awards, which she was hosting, to speak out about Project 2025. "The Project 2025 plan is not a game. Look it up!" she told viewers. "I’m talking to all the mad people that don’t want to vote. You’re going to be mad about a lot of things if you don’t vote."

The clip went viral, amplified by other celebrities like Mark Ruffalo. So the MAGA forces swung into action on social media, accusing Henson and Ruffalo and other progressives of making it all up. "Is Project 2025 in the room with you?" a blue-checked user sneered under Ruffalo's tweet. These efforts at gaslighting people run against a real problem, however: The drafters of Project 2025 seek to promote their authoritarian playbook. Thus, a simple Google search generates a slew of explainers from various news organizations, with even more coming out rapidly, as a response to the rising number of people asking, "What's Project 2025?"

"We received a flood of reader inquiries asking if Project 2025 was a real effort," the fact-checking team at Snopes wrote in their lengthy explainer published Tuesday. Google Trends confirms that the number of searches for "project 2025" has grown dramatically in recent days.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 209 points 4 months ago

Bull shit. The MAGAS are foaming at the mouth to have this authoritarian regime rise to power with bloodshed. Chomping at the bit to be able to kill for their god king. This is no joke, 2020 was a test run, to see what they could get away with. Now they are ready.

John Oliver did a good job explaining Project 2025 as well

[-] frickineh@lemmy.world 180 points 4 months ago

The backfiring isn't because Republicans are upset about it. It's because other people are finding out about it and are rightly horrified. It may (hopefully) convince more people to vote that might have stayed home otherwise.

[-] scops@reddthat.com 86 points 4 months ago

Exactly. It's all of the quiet parts, but out loud, typed out, indexed, and easily accessible.

[-] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 57 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Yeah, non-conservatives (mainly liberals) really need to get it into their heads that every single conservative either actively wants an authoritarian state that murders "woke" people and minorities, or if they're not outright for it they think that surely the leopards won't eat their face because they're on the right side.

Ultimately even a "moderate" conservative has fewer disagreements with literal neo-Nazis (oh wait, except the Nazis are leftists according to reich-wingers) than they do with anybody left of the fucking Strasserites. Even if a conservative is not calling for the extermination of {CURRENT_HATED_MINORITY}, they're still more than happy to support parties that either have fascist members or collaborate with fascists.

This is on clear display here in Europe; the "moderate" conservatives are lining up to kiss Meloni's ass, and they don't mind at all that FdI (Meloni's party) is a literal offshoot of the original Fascist Party and a huge percentage of their MPs and "lay members" have voiced their love of Mussolini.

[-] TheLowestStone@lemmy.world 28 points 4 months ago

The whole "Nazis are leftists" thing really blows my mind but I've seen people saying it unironically.

[-] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago

It's because in their mind Nazi = bad guy.

They cannot see themselves as "bad guys," so the association is immediately dismissed without further consideration. The leftists are the bad guys, so obviously Nazi maps onto those people.

But it's not really about truth, it's about "winning" the argument.

[-] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 17 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Also National Socialism means they were socialists, much like the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democratic republic.

It just shows a total lack of understanding of what the NSDAP platform was. Nazi Germany was a corporatist (in the political science sense) and authoritarian capitalist country, and they eg. specifically privatized a lot of functions that had been public before, absolutely loathed the idea of welfare or supporting "unworthy" people in any way, and were quite enthusiastically supported by business interests starting from their early years. Socialism, ie. social ownership of the means of production and strong public services, is about as opposite as can be to what the economics of fascism are, not to mention the social side. Fascists literally murdered sick or infirm people rather than support them, because weakness has to be weeded out of society.

Like this contemporary caricature puts it, the NSDAP – the National Socialist German Workers' Party – presented itself as the "Socialist Workers' Party" when appealing to workers, and as the "National German Party" when appealing to "financially solvent circles".

All of this is just completely beyond many conservatives' capability to internalize – understanding any of that would mean they'd have to think some very uncomfortable thoughts about their own ideology, and the vast majority of them are fundamentally incapable of that sort of self-reflection.

[-] hypnoton@discuss.online 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Wait till you find out that the servatives rebrand/redefine all the leftie concepts. For example they have redefined what Critical Race Theory means.

It's not because they are stupid and can't understand the original meaning. It's because the servatives know that the true meaning of the concept they don't like will be popular and widely agreed with, so they deliberately butcher the original meaning on purpose. It's a war tactic.

Put another way, the servatives use words not for what those words mean, but for the effect they want those words to create inside the minds of their listeners.

So if the servative calls Biden a socialist they want Biden's latent fear of socialism to push him right. That Biden is not actually a socialist doesn't matter. What matters is that Biden is a self-professed capitalist who fears socialism, and the effect of being branded "socialist" on Biden's psyche is to create pressure inside his mind to move Biden's policy comfort zone to the right. And once this is aired on TV it doesn't just push Biden alone, but most of the viewers who even remotely see anything of themselves in Biden are also affected.

[-] Tujio@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

It doesn't help that Nazi is a truncation of National Socialist. Anybody with a lick of sense would know that they weren't socialists in any way, shape or form, but a lot of people don't have a lick of sense.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

Authoritarian leftists have a lot more in common with fascists than liberal leftists, that's for sure.

[-] lightnegative@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

If you go far enough right, you buffer overflow around to the left.

If you go far enough left, you buffer underflow around to the right

[-] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I really think The Reactionary Mind should be required reading by leftists. It really helps to understand why conservatism is actively opposed to individual liberty and how they sell these regressive ideas to a population primed for them:

Conservatism, then, is not a commitment to limited government and liberty- or a wariness of change, a belief in evolutionary reform, or a politics of virtue. These may be the byproducts of conservatism, one or more of its historically specific and ever-changing modes of expression. But they are not its animating purpose. Neither is conservatism a makeshift fusion of capitalists, Christians, and warriors, for that fusion is impelled by a more elemental force- the opposition to the liberation of men and women from the fetters of their superiors, particularly in the private sphere. Such a view might seem miles away from the libertarian defense of the free market, with its celebration of the atomistic and autonomous individual. But it is not. When the libertarian looks out upon society, he does not see isolated individuals; he sees private, often hierarchical, groups, where a father governs his family and an owner his employees.

No simple defense of one's own place and privileges- the conservative, as I've said, may or may not be directly involved in or benefit from the practices of rule he defends; many, as we'll see, are not. The conservative position stems from a genuine conviction that a world thus emancipated will be ugly, brutish, base, and dull. It will lack the excellence of a world where the better man commands the worse. When Burke adds, in the letter quoted above, that the "great object" of the Revolution is “to root out that thing called an Aristocrat or Nobleman and Gentleman," he is not simply referring to the power of the nobility; he is also referring to the distinction that power brings to the world, If the power goes, the distinction goes with it. This vision of the connection between excellence and rule is what brings together in postwar America that unlikely alliance of the libertarian, with his vision of the employer's untrammeled power in the workplace; the traditionalist, with his vision of the father's rule at home; and the statist, with his vision of a heroic leader pressing his hand upon the face of the earth. Each in his way subscribes to this typical statement, fromn the nineteenth century, of the conservative Creed: “To obey a real superior.. is one of the most important of all virtues- a virtue absolutely essential to the attainment of anything great and lasting."

[-] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 24 points 4 months ago

As stated in another comment, the vote is not what is foreboding about this. Enough crazy, radically charged, people believe and want Project 2025 and have been hearing calls to violence for years now, if the vote doesn’t go their way, not to sure they will be peaceful about it.

[-] frickineh@lemmy.world 40 points 4 months ago

Oh I have no doubt there will be violence if Biden wins, but they've already said there will be violence against opponents if Trump wins, so I think all anyone can do is be prepared.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Irrelevant fearmongering. Seriously, what's your purpose in making that comment? To discourage opposing them? To capitulate without a fight?

Fuck that! I say, "let them come," and then they can get what they deserve just like the Confederates and NAZIs did.

[-] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

More to get people riled up and ready for the fight that will most likely be coming. These stories about how the right is losing steam are puff pieces meant to make non voters complacent. People need to be angry and ready, not being placated and lazy.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Okay, I'll trust that you're being sincere. In that case, though, I think your tone/messaging could use some tweaking because (as you could probably tell) I did not read it that way initially.

[-] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Yes, it was a bit over the top. It was early in the morning and I hadn’t had my coffee yet. Brain wasn’t working lol

[-] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 3 points 4 months ago

Hey at least your brain starts working eventually, some of us aren't that lucky 😅

[-] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 39 points 4 months ago

That’s true, but there aren’t enough of them to carry the election by themselves. They need enough moderates/swinging voters who will back them because they feel meh and it’s time for a change, and for this they need to avoid spooking them.

[-] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

It’s not the election I’m worried about. It’s afterwards. The republicans have been charging their base up with a culture war, calls to violence are larger and louder. Even if Project 2025 pisses 80% of the population off to vote, there will still be those people charged and ready to go… I hope I am wrong, and they all pussy out and it’s a big nothing burger, but I can’t expect that in this crazy, fucked up timeline.

[-] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The republicans have been charging their base up with a culture war, calls to violence are larger and louder.

You are absolutely correct and it is fully intentional. The Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, the authors of Project 2025, said in an interview a few days ago, “We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless ― if the left allows it to be.”

This is a thinly veiled threat. Let us have out way, or there will be blood. All the alt-Reich and MAGAts know exactly what he's telling them and they will not hesitate to bloody up anyone who gets in their way.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 14 points 4 months ago
[-] MorrisonMotel6@lemm.ee 11 points 4 months ago

Not a bit. I took it as a direct threat

[-] Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works 11 points 4 months ago

The heritage foundation is an anti-american cancer that definitely needs to be cut out.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

The good news is that none of those CHUDs are immune to bullets. They can be stopped by exploiting that vulnerability. The best time to be prepared was already, but there's still time left to become prepared.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago

Yeah the MAGAs are a lost cause.

2020 was not a test run. It was a run. They failed, barely.

Even then, they had the 1776 Plan, a precursor to Project 2025, which called for violently seized in control of the state department and Supreme Court, in addition to the Capitol building. January 6th was an intentional, violent coup attempt that barely failed. And it failed for stupid things like, that one cop that led the mob away from the chamber, Mike Pence refusing to get into the car with secret service agents loyal to Trump, Andy Capitol Police refusal to remove the metal detectors from the mall. The 1776 Plan called for and had on hand multiple caches of weapons stashed in hotel rooms around the mall. Trump screamed at the secret service to the crowd to let the crowd bring their guns on that day.

It would have been interesting to see if the vote was not certified on January 6th. Whether the joint Chiefs letter from a few days later would have been sent. If you recall, The joint Chiefs letter made clear that on the constitutional end of term, Joe Biden would be the new president and Trump would be leaving the White House, one way or another.

Project 2025 is it attempt to make sure the sort of things that thwarted the coup attempt on January 6th cannot happen again. For example, Trump intends to fire anyone in the secret service or national security apparatus that is not a drooling Trump loyalist. Maybe next time the vice president's secret service will force him into the car. Maybe the next time the president won't have to tell Capitol Police not to take the metal detectors out of the mall because some stoogy will have already made sure they weren't there.

I mean the kind of dumbass fucking conspiracy theories that conservatives believe about Walmart being part of a federal government plan to round people up, and here you have it written out on paper that they plan to gut the public health apparatus to literally let millions of people die from diseases, because if we are all sick and dying, we will be much easier to subjugate.

We need to be better at getting the word out, but that costs money. The far right has unlimited money.

this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024
516 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19089 readers
1829 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS