Project 2025: The Retribution for Progress
The Threat is Real and So Must Be The Push-Back. Arm Yourself with Knowledge.
“I am your warrior. I am your justice.
For those who have been wronged and betrayed,
I am your retribution.”
Donald J. Trump
The Nationalization of the Southern Strategy
If your algorithms have even the tiniest whiff that you are even remotely interested in Election Day 2024, the Googler machine has probably been sending you posts about Project 2025. And, if you’re anything like most people, you have only vaguely paid attention because - like the 2016 notion that Donald Trump could ever become President - Project 2025 seems to nuts for even the Heritage Foundation crowd.
But on June 22, 2024, the President of the Heritage Foundation, Kevin Roberts, appeared on MSNBC to lay it all out. He said about Project 2025, “it really is for the first in the history of the conservative movement, the apparatus for policy and personnel.” So, outside of the un-Democratic idea that a privately funded organization is driving the “apparatus for (American) policy and (government) personnel,” what does that mean?
Even Republicans like the former GOP Chair, Michael Steele was horrified at Roberts’ assertions.
Let’s dig in.
Project 2025 boasts a “broad coalition of over 100 conservative organizations” that have come together to create this manifesto. And, man, they aren’t kidding. There’s a bunch of organizations listed that you’ve probably never heard of - shit like this thrives in the dark, after all. There are, however, some well known and (in Democratic circles) infamous names like Hillsdale, Moms for Liberty, ALEC, The Claremont Institute, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council, Herzog Foundation, Dr. James Dobson Family Institute, Liberty University, Tea Party Patriots, and Turning Point.
The section entitled “Policy” is broken up into five categories. First up is “Taking the Reigns of Government.” It reads like a more articulate version of Ron DeSantis’ first book, “Dreams from our Founding Fathers.” If you think that Abraham Lincoln was referring to vaccine mandates, a recognition of systemic racism, COVID mitigation, gas stoves, electric vehicles, books, and human biology when he warned that the greatest threat to America “would not come from without, but from within,” this section might be for you. Of course, you’d also be ascribing to fiction, because Lincoln, the most written about President in American history, did not utter those words or anything similar to those words and if he had, they would have arguably been targeted directly at Confederates.
The self-described “mandate” then moves onto “The Common Defense,” which calls China, by far, the biggest threat to America. To prepare for the mounting threat, the mandate requires a rigorous “review all general and flag officer promotions to prioritize the core roles and responsibilities of the military over social engineering and non-defense related matters, including climate change, critical race theory, manufactured extremism, and other polarizing policies that weaken our armed forces and discourage our nation’s finest men and women from enlisting.”
This is Barack Obama’s General Officer Corps.
Project 2025
The authors argue that the Department of Defense “is a deeply troubled institution,” which has “emphasized leftist politics over military readiness.” They claim that “the Biden Administration’s profoundly unserious equity agenda and vaccine mandates have taken a serious toll.” Claiming that our “military has adopted a risk-averse culture—think of masked soldiers, sailors, and airmen—rather than instilling and rewarding courage in thought and action,” the authors wrap with what they see as “good news.”
The good news is that most enlisted personnel, and most officers, especially below the rank of general or admiral, continue to be patriotic defenders of liberty.
Project 2025
There is zero valid research to suggest teenagers are making career decisions on politics, “social engineering,” or too much equity in the ranks. In fact, if you have ever known a teenager, that simply isn’t where their brain is developmentally. Well into our twenties, we are still developing the parts of our brain that controls external focus and executive control. Every Veteran I have ever spoken to points to the desire to strengthen those abilities as a prime driving factor for rolling up to the recruiters office in the first place. Service is a great way to build sacrifice over service and greater good muscles and at every turn, when confronted with inequality, the military has always chosen advancement. That would not be true under Project 2025.
So, why do only about 1% of Americans join the military? Well, legit, serious, and on-going research from a broad spectrum of disciplines tells us; serving isn’t for everyone. A lesson we learned from Vietnam. Moreover, the majority of current and former servicemembers I have met along the way reject universal service. It’s simply too dangerous to have people who don’t want to be there and/or who aren’t prepared for the job.
We’ve become accustom to the “othering” of people in the recycled and repurpose culture wars of Joe McCarthy, George Wallace, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and Donald Trump. However, this desire to return to a segregated, or worse yet, homogenous military will only serve to attract more white Nationalists to service in some diabolical self-fulfilling prophecy.
Sowing discord between the American people and our most trusted institutions is straight out of the playbook of Nixon sycophant Kevin Phillips and Republican demi-God, Lee Atwater; both of whom admitted that the success of their strategy hinged on appealing to white voters who feared any kind of legal recognition of African Americans and women. Some attacks, like desegregation, made an obvious play for the racists among us. While others - “states rights” and “local control” - gave low key coverage to people who would never consider themselves racists. In polite company, anyway.
According to the Othering & Belonging Institute at the University of California-Berkeley, “The Southern Strategy married the conservative politics antipathy to marginal tax rates and civil rights, labor, and environmental regulations of corporate elites with culturally conservative antipathy towards civil rights, women’s rights, and gay rights.” And no where does that statement ring more true than in Project 2025’s third mandate.
You Either Belong or Your Don’t
Number three, “General Welfare,” drags us down the rabbit hole of reckless spending on healthcare, a weaponized Department of Justice including a “arrogant and bloated FBI,” and the Jimmy Carter “creation” known as the US Department of Education. I’ve already addressed countless myths pushed by the Republican party as it relates to the American education system. Check out.
Education is the Weapon of the Privileged
If Your Child has a Disability it’s Time to get Loud
What the Hell is Gross Immorality?
In case you don’t want to deep dive into the history of education in America, here’s a quick fact check straight from the Department itself.
“Although the Department is a relative newcomer among Cabinet-level agencies, its origins goes back to 1867, when President Andrew Johnson signed legislation creating the first Department of Education.” Full stop.
In 1868, when fanatics raised hell, about the overly broad powers the Department - with its four employees and $15,000 budget - could wield, the Department was demoted to an Office, which was embedded within other Departments. American life began changing in the 1950s. “The successful launch of the Soviet Union's Sputnik in 1957 spurred nationwide concern that led to increased aid for science education programs.” In the 1960’s politicians began grappling with civil rights and court-ordered equality and, subsequently, equity of educational services.
Remember, the government isn’t Constitutionally mandated to provide education to Americans but if it chooses to do so, it must do so equitably.
In 1953, Congress established the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and, in 1979, Congress recognized education as a cabinet-level function. The bill was sponsored by Democratic Senator Abraham Ribicoff of Connecticut with 47 cosponsors — 33 Democrats, 14 Republicans. The following November twelve Democratic Senators lost to Republicans (including George McGovern) in what became known as the Reagan Wave. One of the many consequences of that election was the purposefully fabricated report - A Nation At-Risk - that, despite admittedly using false data to sow racial division, has driven our educational policy for forty years.
Part three of the Project 2025 manifesto houses, essentially, the important domestic policies that touch our every day lives from Agriculture to Veterans. Including what Georgetown University called “Draconian Cuts to Medicaid.”
We will explore the eleven sub-sections of “General Welfare” next time but, for now, let’s move on to part four. Generically entitled “The Economy,” part four covers a wide and complex system designed to govern the movement of money. Essentially, this mandate covers business regulations, entrepreneurship, taxes, banking, trade, the Federal Reserve.
Project 2025, as Republicans tend to be, is critical of the Federal Reserve. The mandate predictably blames the Feds for the ebb and flow of the economy (AKA the business cycle). There’s the fairly predictable language around free-banking, gold standard, full-employment, and inflation critique of the Feds.
Project authors also argue for an extension and expansion of the cleverly named Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The expansion part comes in through a debunked - and regressive - version of the Flat Tax with two tax brackets (15% and 30%). And then the report moves into what Republican mega-donors really want to hear; an 18% corporate tax rate and 15% for capital gains and dividends.
It’s a long way from the Grover Norquist “No New Taxes Pledge.”
After, Republicans are victorious in achieving the above, the report advocates for votes seeking an increase of income or corporate tax to require three-fifths of members to vote “Aye.” No exception for costs associated with war. However, there’s a wee little problem with binding future Congressional bodies; its unconstitutional.
Project 2025 wants to abolish the part of the Department of Commerce that focuses on helping communities develop equitable business environments including transitioning from dying fossil fuel industries, like old coal mining towns, into new cleaner industries. They argue that focus should be replaced with a focus on “domestic energy production,” by which they mean drilling, fracking, and nuclear energy.
In a rare nod to overtime pay, Project 2025 declares that “God ordained the Sabbath as a day of rest.” Companies that remain open on Sunday do so at time and half. Plan ahead folks, Blue Laws are making a come back.
Foreign trade also makes an appearance, albeit a fuzzy one. “Higher tariffs = Balanced Trade,” shout the Protectionists (read Trump). While more moderate Project 2025 contributors argue for free trade and lower tariffs. Both agree on trade policies designed to aggressively limit China’s game.
Oh, hello, there part five, my old friend. Pull up a seat let’s talk “Regulatory Affairs,” shall we?
In what some scientists are calling “Game Over for Climate Progress,” Project 2025, according to the Sierra Club, “is essentially a death sentence for federal climate and environmental protections” by attacking “everything from rules to curb hazardous air pollutants to programs that help make cleaner and more energy-efficient purchases affordable would be on the chopping block.”
Agencies like the EPA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) could be gutted. Peer-reviewed science would be sidelined, and polluters’ economic interests would be prioritized in government decision-making. The federal government would focus on authorizing fossil fuel production and projects while eliminating funding and programs supporting renewables like wind and solar.
The Sierra Club
Don’t Sleep On Project 2025
If you care about civil rights, healthcare, education, poverty, the environment, taxes, immigration reform, or your money; it is time to reject soundbites in favor of substance.
Don’t let vague phrasing and vague promises based on lies, half-truths and bad math ear worm you.
If you do not earn over $500,000 per year, if you do not own a mega-corporation Project 2025 is not for you. And if you do earn a half million bucks flaunting your importance in the halls of some mega-corporation but are not a white, male, heterosexual, Christian, able-bodied American citizen; Project 2025 is a direct, incoming threat to you.
And if you are a white, male, heterosexual, Christian, able-bodied American citizen, please consider voting for those of us who aren’t.