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.

  • hypnoton@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I am worried about this entire dynamic.

    So from now until infinity the Dems will (rightly) say Repubs are an existential threat, and that’s all the reason you need to vote D. Then the Dems no longer need to aspire to anything for their voters, promise anything to their voters, and as long as the Dem voting base remains scared shitless, the Dems are no longer accountable.

    The world that this creates is unappealing to say the least.

    Anyone saying I just need to wait is going to be ignored.

    Also I don’t want to protest in sweltering climate changed heat while my foes fuck me over from their comfortably air-conditioned rooms.

    I need strategies where my foes suffer more than I.

    • evatronic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      You may have heard of Thomas Jefferson?

      “…the price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.”

    • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yes, we can’t be complacent and let Dems, or whoever is opposing the Right, sit comfortably on their stacks of cash. This country needs real change or it will fall.

      • hypnoton@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        That’s exactly what I fear. The strategy to vote D solely to stop the existentially threatening R will in my opinion at best work for two more cycles. Then the public face of the Democratic Party will be ruined beyond repair. Not only that, but the public face of our electoral system itself will be ruined beyond repair.

        This only postpones fascism for two cycles, but at an insanely high cost to the public institutions.

        If the DNC decides to cancel all the primaries, then there are NO polite and civil methods left to get any accountability from the system.

        We are NOT solving our fascism problem by simply voting D. We’re rolling out red carpet for fascism in two cycles.

        • Sanctus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          The only way I see that changing is voting locally and supporting new candidates with good ideas trying to hurdle the obstacles of entry. Its hard, and there’s definitely no immediate solution. I think thats partly by design in a democracy.

          • hypnoton@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            A better democracy would not have privately controlled ballot access by a duopoly of RNC and DNC.

            And a better democracy would not rely almost exclusively on billionaire-owned media, owned by 6 giant corps.

            The founders loathed the idea of political parties.

            I’m not going to say we don’t have a democracy, because I do appreciate what little of it we do have. But we must do better and soon. If there is no civil way forward we will have to be impolite.

    • niucllos@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      If the Dems no longer have to compete with Republicans during generals, the focus needs to be on primarying bad candidates with better Dems too, we shouldn’t just be pushing generals every four years. We need to be getting out the vote for primaries and midterms as well

      • hypnoton@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        And if the DNC decides to cancel the primaries?

        I vote in every election. Where I live some positions just have an uncontested ® running.