this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
351 points (93.1% liked)

politics

18850 readers
5165 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
 

Some quotes:

“The Mandate for Leadership” is a 920-page document that details how the next Republican administration will implement radical and sweeping changes to the entirety of government. This blueprint assumes that the next president will be able to rule by fiat under the unitary executive theory (which posits that the president has the power to control the entire federal executive branch). It is also based on the premise that the next president will implement Schedule F, which allows the president to fire any federal employee who has policy-making authority, and replace them with a presidential appointee who is not voted on in the Senate.

So they're gonna take over the executive branch.

And businesses will support and fund this effort because:

The business wish list calls for eliminating federal agencies, stripping those that remain of regulatory power, and deregulating industries. The president would directly manage and influence Department of Justice and FBI cases, which would allow him to pursue criminal cases against political enemies. Environmental law would be gutted, and states would be prevented from enforcing their own environmental laws.

And what about the social wish list?

The social conservative wish list calls for ending abortion, diversity and inclusion efforts, protections for LGBTQ people, and most importantly, banning any and all LGBTQ content. In fact, “The Mandate for Leadership” makes eradicating LGBTQ people from public life its top priority. Its No. 1 promise is to “restore the family as the centerpiece of American life and protect our children.” They are explicit in how they plan to do so, as you’ll see in the paragraph below. They plan to proceed by declaring any and all LGBTQ content to be pornographic in nature.

“Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.”

When they talk about pornography, this includes any content discussing or portraying LGBTQ figures from the children’s books I Am Jazz and And Tango Makes Three to the Trevor Project’s suicide hotline. We know this by looking at how “don’t say gay” laws have been implemented in Florida: This is literally their model. It’s been tried in Virginia. It’s also arguable that LGBTQ parents would be subject to arrest, imprisonment, and being put on sex-offender registries for “exposing children to pornography” simply by being LGBTQ and having children.

It would also likely criminalize any therapist, doctor, or counselor who provided affirming therapy to trans youth. Indeed, the document makes it explicitly clear they want nationwide bans on abortion and access to affirming care for trans youth, while calling for conversion therapies to be the only available treatments. It could be argued as well that people who are visibly trans in public are pornographic or obscene, because they might be seen by a minor. This understanding of intent is in line with the call to “eradicate transgenderism from public life.”

There’s also the matter of the internet: Any Internet Service Provider (ISP) that transmits or receives data about transgender people could potentially be liable if conservatives have their way. When you read the final sentence of the excerpted paragraph, the clear intent is that the same would apply to any social media company that allows any (positive) discussion or depiction of transgender individuals, as it would be considered pornographic and contributing to harming a minor.

And how will they do this shit?

The organizations that drafted “The Mandate for Leadership” understand that blue states, which have sanctuary laws for transgender people, are unlikely to comply. It’s difficult to imagine California arresting and prosecuting teachers, librarians, doctors, therapists, bookstores (virtual or physical), LGBTQ parents, and especially LGBTQ people merely for existing in public. This is why they included the following paragraph:

“Where warranted and proper under federal law, initiate legal action against local officials—including District Attorneys—who deny American citizens the “equal protection of the laws” by refusing to prosecute criminal offenses in their jurisdictions. This holds true particularly for jurisdictions that refuse to enforce the law against criminals based on the Left’s favored defining characteristics of the would-be offender (race, so-called gender identity, sexual orientation, etc.) or other political considerations (e.g., immigration status).”

This is calling for the executive branch to use the Department of Justice to threaten prosecution of any local or state officials if they do not charge LGBTQ people and their allies with crimes under the pretense that they are breaking federal and state laws against exposing minors to pornography. If people at the Department of Justice refuse to go along with this, then they can simply be replaced under Schedule F. While the excerpted paragraph above includes references to immigration, the fact that it explicitly includes gender identity, and fits in with the previous calls to designate anything trans-related as pornographic, clearly telegraphs their intent.

The result of these actions will be perhaps the biggest power play against states rights in American history, and the threat is clear. If blue states refuse to turn on their own transgender citizens, then the federal government will do everything in its power to decapitate the leadership of those states using the Department of Justice. Conservatives are making the bet that individual district attorneys will not risk prosecution, and prison, on behalf of a tiny, despised minority. They’re betting that state governors will not be willing to risk both prosecution and a constitutional crisis over transgender people.

Well, fuck!

In addition to voting, what should we do about this?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 42 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Looks like a plan to start a civil war to me.

[–] TacoButtPlug@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Honestly... I would beat some conservative ass based on this document. Burn the Heritage Foundation down.

[–] Uranium3006@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago

We have to destroy these groups. They're too dangerous

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The country has been on that course for a while. I grew up in the south, in a super religious and conservative community. There is a not insignificant portion of that part of the population that will never accept the idea there that isn’t a single correct way to live life, which is conveniently the way they have live theirs, and blame all the ills of society on those who do not. And since the world is pretty shit in varying degrees for everyone but the wealthy they are determined to do so because they think they are saving the world

__

Edit: I’d like to add that i in no way mean it’s limited to the south, it’s all over the country, parts of the PNW are just as if not even more extreme

[–] SoylentBlake@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

These kind of people are professionally scared, simultaneously both afraid of any learned authority and scared so much, so often, they are the de facto pros at it.

You want to REALLY see the conservative right afraid?

Join, or if there aren't any around you, start a leftist for the 2nd Amendment group/militia.

The Black Panthers, who rose up to regulate their own neighborhoods to stop wanton police abuse, got Reagan so scared he enacted gun control in Cali. Remember HRC bemoaning congress about "super-predators"?

They want the left to be pacifist and push overs. The last thing they want is self sufficiency and independence. They're terrified of Antifa (which is entirely organic and unstructured) because that's the left disregarding and meeting the rights monopoly on violence.

Add structure to it, and the fascists will piss their pants.

No leaders tho, it's a guarantee the right will assassinate.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (15 children)

There is no such thing as "a good conservative". No. Such. Thing. They are posturing for genocide. Pacifism cannot stop them, as it has never stopped a plague of conservatism in the past.

Do your part. Train and prepare, physically and mentally. Teach your children why we don't do business or hold relationships with conservatives. Speak openly about the deadly threat of conservatism.

Exclude all members of the hate group to exclude the hate.

[–] ganove@feddit.de 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Funny how US conservatives sound like muslim fundamentalists.

[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Fundamentalism is merely a way to disclaim responsibility for the obviously terrible things that conservatives want to do.

See also: "originalism"

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

For anyone that wants to read the whole PDF, you can find it here:

https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/project2025/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf

The rhetoric just in the Forward is frightening, disgusting, and dangerous.

We MUST vote for the Democrats if we're going to maintain any semblance of real freedom for everyone and not just conservative white people.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

These people are terrorists.

[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

voting for Democrats is nowhere near enough to put a stop to these efforts

[–] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's literally the only thing we have right now. Organizing a protest (we need to eat the rich) the size we need is a pipe dream.

It's voting fascism or democracy. It shouldn't be a controversial choice.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] elouboub@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They were pretending to be afraid of the "gay agenda" when we had to be afraid of the conservative agenda. These guys are nuts.

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Oppression and genocide are the natural results of unchecked conservatism. Always have been.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I mean, this reads like backup plan to what they already tried under Trump. They already got caught doing most of this shit. This is just a more more fleshed out plan on paper.

[–] PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem is that conservatives are patient and persistent. They've captured the Supreme Court because they realized during the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that they could affect the entire country in profound ways with one ruling. And so Roe v. Wade was overturned with a stroke of a pen just like that.

Their failure in 2016 wasn't being more organized, and yet, they still succeeded in profound ways.

[–] FunderPants@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And despite the example the US gave the world in 2016 other countries, like Canada, are eyeing conservative candidates with an uncritical eye and a "it won't happen here" attitude.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

And in the process they managed to repeal Roe v Wade

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] regalia@literature.cafe 19 points 1 year ago

They are just objectively evil. This is so villain plotting to take over the world type shit. They are openly becoming more and more like Hitler.

[–] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

####What can you do about it besides voting?

  • Get the word out online and to friends and family about this & other unpopular con policies - federal abortion ban, KOSA

  • Get everyone registered to vote. Educate young / new voters. Use mail-in voting, early voting, help with voting for the disabled and elderly, and understand where your voting locations are.

  • Understand third party spoilers such as No Labels, which wants to take votes away from Biden.

  • Understand arguments against Biden that keep voters "Undecided"

  • Consider phone banking and other direct action campaigns for the Democratic Party or their PACs.

We can avoid an immediate plunge into Fascism in America by getting more people in key swing states / districts to vote for Biden.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Rashnet@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The problem is the GOP voters are idiots. Low - No information voters whose entire political education is based on cherry picked and planned sound bites. Most don't know they are voting for the end of the US or fascism but they sure as hell know they are voting to "insert fear mongering sound bite". They eat this stuff up since it hurts someone else. No other political party in the US capitalizes on keeping idiots entertained.

[–] watson387@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

To be fair, they also capitalize on dumbing down the populace with school funding cuts.

They have to keep people stupid in order to get votes.

[–] PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

54% of Americans can’t read above a 6th grade level, according to the US DoE.

[–] watson387@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 year ago

Don’t ever forget that that’s by-design.

[–] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago

Billions are spent on putting the exact perfect buffet of bullshit in front of them, dumb or not, it's their location in key districts that makes them valuable to PACs.

[–] LoveSausage@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Stinkywinks@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago
[–] falsem@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

This sounds borderline conspiracy theory. What's the source?

Seems to be coming from The Heritage Foundation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heritage_Foundation

The Heritage Foundation (abbreviated to Heritage)[1][2] is an American conservative think tank based in Washington, D.C. The foundation took a leading role in the conservative movement during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, whose policies were taken from Heritage's policy study Mandate for Leadership.[4]

They've also had varying degrees of influence on the Republican party, though VERY strong influence on Trump.

[–] darq@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

I mean it is literally a theory about a conspiracy, yes.

At the same time the Heritage Foundation is powerful and well connected to Republican politicians in power.

So at this point there are a lot of conspiracy facts in the theory.

[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

the source of what, the article or the master plan?

The Heritage Foundation is one of the think tanks involved in writing the 920-page master plan discussed in the article.

[–] jandar_fett@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Welp. Looks like I'm going to jail in the not too distant future I guess.

[–] Stoneblackdog@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

What the fuck.

[–] MyFairJulia@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Oh look, it's the machtergreifungsplan of the nazis!

[–] Melpomene@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

Cool, I see we're approaching the find out phase of the resistance to this bullshit. Do continue, wee little men. See what happens when you push things far enough to get people off their asses.

Edit: These evil fucks need to yeet themselves into a black hole.

[–] Telorand@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Reminder that this isn't a GOP document, it's a Heritage Foundation document (right wing extremists).

They could try to follow it, but the Heritage Foundation ≠ GOP. If anything, the Federalist Society is a far greater threat, since they have tactfully and successfully infected the judiciary, and they don't even have a public manifesto of this nature.

This is certainly concerning, but it's far from guaranteed to be utilized.

[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  1. The Heritage Foundation was one dozens of right wing think tanks involved in writing this.
  2. The Heritage Foundation is extremely influential and well-connected in the American right wing political sphere. They wrote hundreds of Trump's policies, picked a lot of his cabinet, and had 66 staffers in his administration. Pence joined in 2021.
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] TwoGems@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Are you kidding? The heritage foundation is the GOP. They work so in tandem that they even write bills for the GOP. And we even have federalist society judges now on benches that rule in favor of the GOP. It was the end goal.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The only way I would even be remotely worried about this is if Trump wins the election, gains control of both houses of Congress with at least 60 senators, and retains a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court (Thomas and Alito could easily die of old age or poor health in the next 18 months). And if we're at that point, Project 2025 will be the least of our concerns.

This entire spiel assumes that Congress is just going to by and do nothing. It assumes that there wouldn't be thousands of legal filings across the country tying this shit up in courts for years filed before the ink on the EO is even dry. It assumes that at least some in the MAGA crowd won't realize that the leopard will eventually look at them as a meal instead of an ally. Yes, our country is in rough shape right now, but not that rough. There really does come a point where the saying of "you've made your decision, now let's see you enforce it" comes into play, and as traditionally conservative as the military is, I can't see them being in favor of that.

Project 2025 is a right-wing fever dream and nothing more. It's scary to think if it were actually put in place, but the entire manifesto assumes that opposition is going to just roll over and die en masse at every step of the way, when recent history has shown that even some of the Trump devotees have a line in the sand that is too far even for them, and this would go way beyond that.

[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

you're "not even remotely worried" about the fact that one of the two parties that rules the country just wrote a 920-page plan to "eradicate LGBTQ people from public life"? Whether or not they manage to actually do it — and I don't find it as far-fetched as you do — they want to do it. They wrote a serious plan to do it. Maybe it won't be you getting criminalized, but it will be someone. Florida already passed a bill allowed the state to seize trans children from their parents. You're not even remotely worried?

load more comments (5 replies)

You appear to be underestimating Democratic politicians' willingness to roll ovei and play dead. The last 40 years or so of their past performance don't make this a very promising argument for not worrying.

load more comments
view more: next ›