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?
And it won’t stop with the LGBTQ. They won’t stop until they’ve destroyed everything that doesn’t fit their specific version of religion.
I see it the same way I see the lead-up to the holocaust: an effort to scapegoat a minority group and divert the outrage of a downwardly mobile middle class away from wealthy capitalists
We have to destroy them first
Just remember, this shit started a year or 2 ago with “We must protect the children” (the current attacks, before I get well achkshuallay’d. yes I know this shit inherently goes back to Reagan, and more)
They got their foot in the door getting “controversial” stuff out of elementary schools, and immediately seized on that to get their undesirable content out of middle, and high school, and even colleges and public libraries.
“For the children” has always been, and will always be, nothing more than an authoritarian attempt to push through power grabs and democracy undermining legislation.
deleted by creator
I’ve wondered for awhile what it would look like if they managed to succeed in a religion-based takeover of the USA. I figure the dominant force in the world’s varieties of Christianity being Catholicism would have some influence (and since the Pope has more money than God) so it’s entirely possible that the “one true religion” ruling the country would end up being Catholicism and there would be a lot of really disappointed Protestant fascists.
EDIT: also I was thinking that’s the more likely result as the majority of SC justices are Catholic currently
Once they’re finished with a scapegoat, they have to start looking for the next one.
deleted by creator
This is why I get so mad when people act like political opponents “just disagree with each other”, and that we should all still be able to get along. These people won’t be happy and won’t stop until they’re allowed to murder people like me in the streets just for being gay.
They won’t be happy until cattle trains and gas chambers are included and even then …
If you’re part of the LGBTQ+ community, then be yourself and make lots of friends and allies. I grew up in a very anti-gay school and when I made friends that were out in college, I instantly knew that they were good people. How can you go after people that you know are good people? This is a distraction from them wanting to take over the government again.
This is the part funding them and the core of it all:
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.
This is good advice. But I also wouldn’t downplay the actual hatred of LGBTQ+ people either. For many conservatives, the identity politics are a distraction to mask their real goal of putting more money into wealthy pockets. But for a very large contingent of conservatives, it really is all about eradicating LGBTQ+ people.
It’s why this rhetoric works for much of their base. They wouldn’t be pushing this strategy if there wasn’t a voting block that fully wants it. As a gay person, this is also part of why I’m out and married. If the authoritarian state wants to prosecute me for being who I am, let them do so and show the entire world what they really are and what I really am.
The problem is you might die. You gotta take up arms and fight back
I can’t just kill a cop that tries to arrest me. It’s more complicated than that.
A visibly armed LGBTQ community is a good way to counter right wing intimidation.
Also, cops aren’t the only people to worry about. RIP Laura Carleton.
I mean, I’m talking strictly about the scenario implied in the material of the post. Also, not everyone can arm themselves for various reasons. I happen to be in this camp. If the shit went down, the best thing I could do is bug out with the people I can who are also under the threat of violence.
That’s a choice I hope you never have to face. Job one, let’s keep these turds out of office.
Yes you can
Really easy for you to say behind a keyboard on an anonymous platform. Shooting a cop is the easiest way for me to end my own life short of shooting myself.
What hatred from the LGBTQ+ people? We just want to live in peace, sure there are many that are angered by the right and their continued assault on our rights. However we aren’t working to constrict them.
Because for the people that truly hate us, the ones that truly just want us dead. LGBTQ people’s very existence is antithetical to their fundamentalist worldview. Us simply existing puts the lie to many of their so-called “natural” elements of society related to gender, sex, sexuality, and just love in general.
If trans people can exist, there can’t be anything inherent to the biological sex that puts men above women. If gay and lesbian couples can exist, then there can’t be anything inherent to relationships that says women have to be subservient to men and that these relationships only exist for procreation. They can’t just let us live in peace because our very existence proves that their entire worldview is a lie.
Oh! You meant conservative hatred for the LGBT people. When you said “hate of the LGBTQ+” it sounded like LGBTQ+ people were doing the hating. So I thought the first half of your comment was about LGBTQ+ hate and the second half about conservative hate in a both sides hate kinda fashion.
Also buy guns and ammo. LGBT should be the new militant stereotype taking it away from right wingers.
Every pride march should be a sea of open carry. Project fierce and intimidation. Live free or die. If the option is dying in a camp or dying while taking out fashies, I know what I would do.
Unfortunately a lot of people in our community are not fit to own a firearm because it could be a danger to themselves.
This is very true. Imagine that, social ostracism causes depression!
We need black block at pride
“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.”
The Alt-Right fetishizes LGBTQ+ lifestyles and can not fathom that it’s not something that the average person does… Also, every accusation is projection and a confession at this point.
deleted by creator
Conservative states consume more porn than liberal states, and thats according to a study on paid sites, so I bet the difference in consumption is even higher when you account for free sites.
I’d love to see how the gravy seals react when they can no longer beat their meat to their femboy porn.
That’s just so weird to me. But then you see all the racist and incest porn out there and you’re like, how is this the #1 content viewed in the US?!
God I wish the “opposition” party had a master plan to do literally anything besides fund the MIC and Israel.
Another quote from the article, emphasis mine:
Most people aren’t aware of Project 2025, or its playbook, “Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise”—but you need to be. In stark terms, Project 2025 reveals the conservatives’ plan to enact a sweeping “Don’t Say Gay” policy that will effectively blot out all LGBTQ content on the internet as well as any published material with LGBTQ content, no matter how benign.
Project 2025 is a coalition of prominent conservative organizations that includes the Claremont Institute, Alliance Defending Freedom, Family Research Council, Hillsdale College, Heritage Foundation, Freedom Works, American Legislative Exchange Council, American Principles Project, and dozens of others. The organization’s goal is to lay out a “first 180 days” agenda for the next administration, and to recruit conservatives to fill positions within the federal government appointed by the executive branch.
The Heritage Foundation alone is a massive, well-connected think tank with an annual budget of $38 million. Mike Pence joined in 2021. They were instrumental in staffing the Trump administration and directing his policies, with at least 66 Heritage Foundation employees and alumni given positions in the administration.
The Heritage Foundation is also what came up with “Obama Care.”
I’m surprised they didn’t just call this My Struggle… You sure you got the name right, OP?
For those of us not in the US, I think this also highlights the real need to loosen the US’s stranglehold on the Internet at large. The US has disproportionate power to control content on the Internet as a whole, because so many services and so much infrastructure resides there.
This highlights the importance of building redundant services elsewhere in the world, and moving content outside the US in general. So if the US tries to remove LGBTQ+ content in some cultural crusade, you laugh at them. Make them firewall it, like China, if they don’t like it.
As an American I couldn’t agree more. Since our government won’t and can’t (because courts keep siding with corporations) pursue any antitrust action or legislation; I beg other countries throughout the world to come up with alternatives and force competition into these market spaces.
I would love it if there were a social media platform that didn’t reside in the US, and possibly Europe so they have to follow GDPR regulations and the like.
At the same time it doesn’t seem likely because why build a platform that has to follow the regulations and cost more money when you can just build it in America instead? Sigh
So, basically, they plan to install a dictatorship in which separation of powers, states’ rights, and meaningful judicial review do not exist.
Sounds about right.
People getting aware of themselves, their oppression and connected in their communities are a huge threat, i guess. Combine that with the Internet as educational tool instead of a marketing machine and you get some desperate counter meassures, yay
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Good example of how liberal and ‘conservative’ political parties are NOT the same. Voting matters. VOTE.
Where’s the 920-page liberal plan to put a stop to this? I’m not convinced voting will be enough.
Of course voting is not enough alone – But, it is an integral part.
They’re still arguing over it on X.
You’re absolutely delusional if you think you can vote out fascism to this extent.
deleted by creator
Granted, the electoral college makes your vote not matter much.
Ah, the smell of the world’s “best” “democracy”!
Yes it does, but how long do you think you can stop a republican president from taking power? If they don’t get elected in the next 8 years they’ll put one in power, probably by use of the electoral college or depending on the civil unrest we might even see an insurrection. I think that second one is more unlikely, the tools are made to benefit the Republican Party anyways. The rules are all made up and playing by them won’t protect you, you can only buy time.
deleted by creator
Arm and demonstrate.
Also, for cisgender heterosexual people, talk to people in your life about such topics.
Don’t just just buy a gun, train and learn to understand how to use them effectively. And then keep that shit quiet.
I’m all for arming the resistance, but I feel it’s important to point out that if someone doesn’t feel able and/or safe handling a firearm that’s ok too, there are other ways to support those on the front lines and the rest of the community.
Here here! Very good point here. A good alternative I’d say would be to get a more than basic first aid kit and take some first aid classes.
I would disagree. I say that everyone should take a first aid class, but to be useful in any real situation in general you need a shitton of training. Honestly, from experience, I want fewer people who think they are useful when being everything but useful in emergency situations. It leads to situations where I need to babysit them and work. At worst, they endanger themselves and/or others.
I know a lot of people who are not used to these situations feel like an extra pair of hands is always a plus but I have not met any first responders, health care workers, military or aid workers that agree with that statement. It is a common subject of discussion as it really is driving most of us up the wall.
I disagree - I have been involved in civilian emergency prep communities for a while now, and it is the formal, published stance of FEMA that having civilians who understand incident response logistics and advanced first aid is absolutely critical to managing the first hours of an incident. We teach advanced trauma first aid (wound packing, field dressing, tourniquets, chest wounds, triage etc), as well as field command hierarchy and management to be handled until professional help arrives.
Teaching civilians how to stabilize, log and report on incidents has a huge multiplier effect on the effectiveness of emergency services. The idea that people should not get involved because they are not professionals is very outdated. It takes about two weeks to go over the basics of incident management, S&R, and first aid/triage. Once you’ve done that and established a local CERT volunteer corps, FEMA will literally give you grants to hand out equipment, hold practice exercises and recruit more volunteers.
I am a humanitarian aid worker working in emergencies with a decade under my belt. I am not saying civilians are not useful if they are properly trained. First aid courses that are not advanced, often repeated can help but it really is nowhere near enough to think you are ready to even halfway towards the front lines. Often simple first aid courses can also make you think you know more than you do. That also commonly coincides with attitudes where people are not listening.
I just have absolutely too much experience with people making bad situations worse with their actions. And even some people causing emergency situations because of what they don’t know. But I do not disagree with you. I think we are talking about two different things. I am talking about normal first aid courses people take every couple of years what you are talking about is actual advanced first aid courses that properly teach emergencies, how they work and how you need to act.
Please tell me what I can do other than lay down and wait to die then.
See if you have a local CERT chapter. They will train you on incident response logistics, search and rescue, and advanced first aid. It will also connect you to a community of volunteers and professionals in the area.
Of course, don’t lay down. Really learn and train to become useful in those situations. You don’t need to be professional, just properly trained. There are multiple ways to do it but you need more than a couple of days a year to also keep that training up to date.
I just have a lot of experience with people making things worse because they think the basic to medium first aid courses will make you able to help properly. And then make things worse. So my comment might have come out too harshly. But advanced first aid with the psychology of emergencies and scene management with the right attitude (mostly listening to those more experienced) will actually be useful.
deleted by creator
Have they forgotten about external relations? If this happens, it wouldn’t be very hard to label the US a fascist state from an outsider’s pov.
Would they really care?
Lol, as if the rest of the world isn’t on the same race to the bottom… If anything, some of the current, never mind potential, leaders would probably try to join forces…
As always there’s gonna be an Axis and an Entente…
That didn’t stop the US from becoming a major superpower in the 58 years after WWII when policies like this were in place nationally. It’s the Lavender Scare all over again and the return of the anti-sodomy laws in different wrapping paper. Don’t forget those laws were enforced until they were overturned June 26, 2003.
I always found it extremely strange that a nation which enjoys true representative democracy has locked itself in a two-party system. And worse, they can’t even successfully launch a new, fiscally conservative party without all the batshit insanity and the prevalent bigotry associated with the GOP.
I always found it extremely strange that a nation which enjoys true representative democracy has locked itself in a two-party system.
That’s because the US doesn’t enjoy a true representative democracy at all. The US electoral system is awful.
First of all it’s a First-Past-The-Post plurality voting system. Widely regarded as pretty much the worst “reasonable” voting system around. It is not very representative, it makes voters vote strategically, and it is basically guaranteed that it will devolve into a two-party system.
Then on top of that they have the Electoral College, which takes an already non-representative system, and makes some people’s votes worth more than others.
And then on top of that they have legalised bribery in the form of “lobbying”.
The US doesn’t enjoy a true representative democracy at all
Pretty much. A 2014 study put it like this
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
and later, more bluntly,
In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule — at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.
Something like 70% of Americans want singlepayer healthcare, 75% want Citizen’s United repealed, and iirc 90% of Americans want universal background checks for firearm purchases.