Red Caesar / Project 2025 / Agenda 47 / Oligarchy

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 94
  • Views: 2K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:

"... If Sen. JD Vance (Ohio), the Republican vice-presidential nominee, were to give Trump “one piece of advice,” he said in 2021, it would be “fire every single mid-level bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state. Replace them with our people.”

... “President Trump and Sen. JD Vance will take swift and unprecedented action to protect Americans from the out-of-control Deep State, fire rogue bureaucrats and career politicians, and return power back to the American people,” Karoline Leavitt, the Trump’s campaign national press secretary, said by email. She concluded with a Trump quote from a campaign video: “I will shatter the Deep State, and restore government that is controlled by the People.”

... Essentially calling federal employees swamp dwellers and deep state denizens defines Trump’s approach to the workforce. His Agenda47 outlines “my plan to dismantle the deep state and reclaim our democracy from Washington corruption once and for all. … I will immediately reissue my 2020 Executive Order restoring the President’s authority to remove rogue bureaucrats. And I will wield that power very aggressively.”

That controversial order, which was never fully implemented by the Trump administration and then was quickly revoked by President Biden, created “Schedule F,” a federal employment category with “an exception to the competitive hiring rules and examinations for career positions.” For workers in that category, the order also eliminated civil service protections, which allow feds due process procedures to appeal terminations and other disciplinary actions.

“The merit-based, civil service system appears not to align with the … loyalty viewed as necessary to fulfill a second Trump administration agenda,” Marcus L. Hill, president of the Senior Executives Association, said by email. ..."
Click to expand...
I understand why the whole "Deep State" thing gets traction with conservatives and even some far-left liberals (even though it's exasperating) but I really can't understand why people don't see how disastrous this would be. Whatever you think of "bureaucracy" in the abstract how can anyone think it's a good idea to staff the entire federal government, not just policymaking but also lower-level positions, with administration loyalists? I mean we literally have already seen the negative effects from doing that - we passed civil service reforms more than 100 years ago because of how stupid it was!

Like, it's one thing to want to shrink the bureaucracy. I completely disagree with that idea but understand the philosophy behind it. But this isn't shrinking the bureaucracy, it's replacing a professional bureaucracy with a political one. It's like people want the US government to be a worse version of everything they already dislike about it. (Which, of course, is exactly the goal of the Project 2025 types pushing this - they literally want to break the government and make it more distrusted/less effective).
 
nycfan said:

I don't disagree -- it would be unlike Trump to even skim something like a 900-page policy tome. But the danger is he doesn't really care what's in it so long as they support him and don't hurt his election chances; then, after he's elected, no doubt he'd give them wide ranging opportunities to implement it so long as they keep flattering him and spend big bucks at his properties.
Click to expand...
It's pretty easy to call B.S. on the idea that Trump might not know what is in Project 2025. Don't imagine that it was written by some secret cabal of Heritage Foundation freaks in a basement somewhere. The authors of the each section of the document are a Who's Who of Trumps former staff and appointees. See for yourself:

 


papa abuelo GIF
 
rodoheel said:
I understand why the whole "Deep State" thing gets traction with conservatives and even some far-left liberals (even though it's exasperating) but I really can't understand why people don't see how disastrous this would be. Whatever you think of "bureaucracy" in the abstract how can anyone think it's a good idea to staff the entire federal government, not just policymaking but also lower-level positions, with administration loyalists? I mean we literally have already seen the negative effects from doing that - we passed civil service reforms more than 100 years ago because of how stupid it was!

Like, it's one thing to want to shrink the bureaucracy. I completely disagree with that idea but understand the philosophy behind it. But this isn't shrinking the bureaucracy, it's replacing a professional bureaucracy with a political one. It's like people want the US government to be a worse version of everything they already dislike about it. (Which, of course, is exactly the goal of the Project 2025 types pushing this - they literally want to break the government and make it more distrusted/less effective).
Click to expand...
Many people are too stupid to look two steps down the line to understand the consequences.
 

"
Project 2025, a collaboration led by the Heritage Foundation among more than 110 conservative groups to develop a movement consensus blueprint for the next Republican administration, is winding down its policy operations, and its director, former Trump administration personnel official Paul Dans, is departing. The Heritage Foundation also recently distributed new talking points encouraging participants to emphasize that the project does not speak for Trump.

The former president has repeatedly distanced himself from Project 2025 after relentless attacks from Democrats using some of the 900-page playbook’s more aggressive proposals to impute Trump’s agenda since many of the proposals were written by alumni of Trump’s White House. While some participants in the project started avoiding interviews and public appearances, Trump advisers grew furious that Heritage leaders continued promoting the project and feeding critical news coverage. ..."
 
nycfan said:

"
Project 2025, a collaboration led by the Heritage Foundation among more than 110 conservative groups to develop a movement consensus blueprint for the next Republican administration, is winding down its policy operations, and its director, former Trump administration personnel official Paul Dans, is departing. The Heritage Foundation also recently distributed new talking points encouraging participants to emphasize that the project does not speak for Trump.

The former president has repeatedly distanced himself from Project 2025 after relentless attacks from Democrats using some of the 900-page playbook’s more aggressive proposals to impute Trump’s agenda since many of the proposals were written by alumni of Trump’s White House. While some participants in the project started avoiding interviews and public appearances, Trump advisers grew furious that Heritage leaders continued promoting the project and feeding critical news coverage. ..."
Click to expand...
Yup. Just reported, ceasing all policy operations (for the time being) on P2025.
Trump campaign simply trying to take away some cannon fodder being lobbed at him continually.
 
Trump can disclaim 2025 has nothing to do with his campaign but that doesn't mean disclaiming any of it in his possible administration.
 
At some point, perhaps at a debate if there ever is one, Trump needs to be asked about specific proposals addressed in Project 2025. The question isn’t whether he agrees or disagrees with Project 2025 in a general sense but, “Do you agree with X policy, yes or no? Do you agree with Y policy, yes or no?”
 


This, from the guy who gave us "the revolution will be bloodless if the Left allows it to be" and had JD Vance write the foreword to his new book...
 
What’s funny is that they made their own bed by publishing this in the open in front of God and everybody and now it’s the world’s biggest millstone on Donald and they have to backtrack so hard. If you didn’t know anything about Roberts you’d have to imagine it’s intentional sabotage.
 
ColdBlueSteel said:
Like, literally.
Wait, could you, like, lay it out? For the stupid people?
Click to expand...
The most obvious downstream consequences of replacing a professional bureaucracy with political loyalists can/will include:

--loss of institutional knowledge/capability as positions turn over constantly between administrations
--loss of institutional efficacy as people who know how to do their jobs are replaced with people who have little idea what to do (and in many cases may not actually care about doing the work)
--increased corruption as politicians implicitly or explicitly promise thousands of government jobs in exchange for funding and other favors

So in other words: government agencies get less effective and more corrupt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top