Project 2025 is good, actually
The agenda items pursued by Project 2025 are the opposite of a dystopian nightmare. They're good for America.
Project 2025 has somehow become the great political football of our election cycle.
President Trump has distanced himself from it, while President Biden’s campaign team has used it as a means to forecast what would happen if Trump wins the November election.
Democrats are attempting to make the Project 2025 agenda analogous to the dystopia observed in The Haindmaid’s Tale (now the go-to book for liberal references. Their previous #1 in Harry Potter has been sidelined, given that J.K. Rowling has pushed back against the trans agenda), declaring that women, racial minorities, and the LGBT people will become second class citizens under the Project 2025 framework.
I highly recommend signing up for Techpresso, a free newsletter that covers the latest tech news, tools and insights. It now has over 100,000 readers, which includes many of America’s top tech leaders.
The Biden-Harris campaign team has moved forward with a full court press against Project 2025, seeking to fuse it with the Trump campaign. Vice President Kamala Harris is slamming them repeatedly on the campaign trail, while President Biden’s campaign team is posting cryptic social media posts telling readers to “Google Project 2025,” with a video attached declaring that “Project 2025 will destroy America.”
Last week, President Trump took to Truth Social to declare that Project 2025 has nothing to do with him, using aggressive language to distance himself from the operation. The former president has made it clear in the past that he doesn’t want outside entitites overstepping their role in his policy agenda. It seems that this is what motivated his decision to speak out, and not the idea that the initiative, which is staffed by many of his former White House personnel, is somehow at odds with his campaign policy framework.
Setting aside the noise, we will quickly find that the agenda items pursued by Project 2025 are the opposite of a dystopian nightmare, and largely provide a solid template for quality policy measures for the Trump Administration, which will need all the help it can get in finding suitable and moral leaders and staffers for term two.
Project 2025 is a project of the Heritage Foundation, which serves as the best right of center think tank and policy shop in Washington, D.C. Unlike, say, notably captured institutions like the CATO institute and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), Heritage has remained much more committed to its right of center, freedom-oriented principles than its peers.
If you want to get into the details of the Project 2025 policy agenda, here’s a hundreds of pages long document from Heritage that checks those boxes. Unsurprisingly, virtually everything you’re seeing in the corporate media is nonsenseical.
The Project 2025 initiative is broader than just a policy guidebook. It is based on four pillars:
the aforementioned document, which is called the Mandate for Leadership.
A personnel database to attract like-minded thinkers for jobs in the Trump Administration. (This is essential in a town like D.C. with so many hostile political animals seeking power.)
The Presidential Administration Academy, which serves as an online education tool
A "playbook" designed for a most effective transition from the time President Trump wins to the day he is inaugurated.
On the policy front, here’s a speed overview (and some commentary) of what Project 2025 stands for, from what I’ve gathered via some quick research.
Rejecting the climate narrative and embracing reliable forms of energy
Rolling back government interventions in the economy and lowering taxes
Mixed bag on tariffs policy. Heritage has historically been a pro free trade organization, but in the era of Trump, they’ve sought to take a more pragmatic approach to trade
Defunding leftist propaganda in academia
Minimizing the power of the administrative state and its bureaucrats, and bringing forward initiatives to make it easier to fire them
Mixed bag on foreign policy, rallying around the idea of maintaining American qualitiative military superiority. Some hybrid of a “peace through strength” Reaganesque approach while also taking into account the president’s non-interventionist instincts.
Reforming but not eliminating entitlement programs. This is the key area where Heritage has placed itself in a vulnerable position, given how deeply politically unpopular it is to even mention the entitlement behemoth, which consumes the majority of U.S. spending.
"Arresting, detaining, and removing immigration violators anywhere in the United States."
Taking on the DEI & ESG agenda in schools and the workplace.
Reforming, but not necessarily eliminating, several three letter agencies
"Enact the most robust protections for the unborn that Congress will support." This is a bit of a departure from President Trump’s position, which involves leaving abortion to the states.
Getting climate hoax policy out of transportation and infrastructure initiatives
As you can see above, there is nothing particularly radical or extremist about Heritage’s pro-human and pro-freedom proposals, despite the corporate media and Democrat politicians claiming otherwise. In fact, Project 2025’s policy action items serve as a quality guidebook for revitalizing America and holding the federal government accountable, and its personnel component will be essential to staffing the next administration with the most moral and competent individuals.
Project 2025 is good, actually.
FWIW, I'm reading through this in order to do an article very much like this one, and from what I've seen so far, I agree with you 100%. This is exactly what a 'small government' party should be focused on. No doubt that somewhere in the 900+ pages will be something I don't particularly care for, but I haven't seen anything incredibly egregious yet.
I've found it very interesting that the budget and deficit have taken such a backseat in politics over the last several years despite an accelerating spending crisis. Instead of any policy debate, we get the shutdown theater which acts as an excuse for both parties.
Frankly, I find this ominous. I think it means that the American government driven, debt fueled economic model is on its last legs and I think most of D.C. knows it thus there is no need for debate anymore. In the final stages of a massive ponzi scheme of this sort, I imagine that the insiders want to grab whatever assets and wealth are left. I think Ukraine is a black box to pass lots of money through in what amounts to looting. I would bet that huge amounts are flowing back out into assets like real estate.
Perhaps that is what all the war rhetoric is about. A people distracted by the spectacle of a major land war will be less able to mobilize to express their anger at their economic system and currency collapsing.
I don't think anyone in Washington wants any sort of reform ideas at all. They are advanced as a symbolic gesture. There is no cure for something this far gone. What we'll end up with is post-collapse austerity, which they already did trials runs on a decade ago in some European countries.