this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
4 points (75.0% liked)

Politics

6008 readers
385 users here now

Discuss world politics here.

Rules

Community icon by Webalys, licensed under CC BY 3.0.

founded 4 years 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?

all 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rocketpoweredgorilla@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago (4 children)

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.

[–] Uranium3006@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago

We have to destroy them first

[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago

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

[–] Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 0 points 10 months ago

Once they're finished with a scapegoat, they have to start looking for the next one.

[–] darq@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] cobra89@beehaw.org 1 points 10 months ago

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

[–] Dick_Justice@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] SocialMediaSettler@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

They won't be happy until cattle trains and gas chambers are included and even then ...

[–] voodooattack@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

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.

[–] aggelalex@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

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.

[–] ravheim@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

“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.

[–] regalia@literature.cafe 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Why are the Democrat's not pushing to expose this? The GOP pushes culture wars with wanting to kill trans people. The Democrat's should be just as loud but with exposing the disgusting things that the GOP do on a regular basis that is straight up fucking evil. They have practically unlimited material to work with!

[–] booty@hexbear.net 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)
  1. Democrats don't want to win and don't have any true beliefs, they're controlled opposition

  2. No one cares what you "expose" about republicans anyway. People vote for who they're told to vote for no matter what. They were told to vote for trump, they voted for trump, despite the fact that he's a self-admitted sexual predator. They were told to vote for Biden so they voted for Biden, even though he is also a sexual predator, and a well-documented racist monster just like Trump of course.

  3. By consolidating behind Biden they kind of cut off their ability to criticize people for being like Biden. And Biden is basically a republican.

[–] michaelrose@lemmy.ml 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Can you not spread your conspiracy theories here. I swear I have no idea why EVERYTHING is about sex for Qanon

[–] booty@hexbear.net 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm literally the opposite of a qanon person

[–] michaelrose@lemmy.ml 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

They were told to vote for Biden so they voted for Biden, even though he is also a sexual predator, and a well-documented racist monster just like Trump of course.

Biden isn't a sexual predator that is literally a qanon conspiracy theory. He was racist in the 60s. When you know better you do better. People actually sometimes do progress over 50 odd years.

People don't vote for Biden because they are told to the functional design of our winner takes all voting system is that there will always be 2 major parties because any third party that gets a substantial chunk of the vote ends up splitting the vote with the party it is most like resulting in the opposite side winning. If you want something better there are about half a hundred better systems like ranked choice voting that would allow people to credibly vote for third parties without throwing away their vote.

Pretending we are just helpless because people are sheep just teaches people to be helpless instead of recognizing they are acting rationally given bad options.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 1 points 10 months ago

Biden isn't a sexual predator that is literally a qanon conspiracy theory

That he is not a sexual predator is a blue-MAGA conspiracy theory. It is very apparent to everyone who isn't on his team.

He was racist in the 60s.

The man eulogized Strom Thurmond, fuck off with this shit.

[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -2 points 10 months ago

The Heritage Foundation is also what came up with "Obama Care."

[–] cobra89@beehaw.org 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The whole problem with this playbook and why it won't happen is because if they succeed in doing this, they will have eroded any protections they can use to stymie a Democratic president and thus allow a D president to completely undo and then swing it all back the other way.

This is even if they can overcome the ridiculous legal challenges associated with this plan. They literally just ruled against Biden having the power to control the executive branch when it comes to loan forgiveness, federal vaccine mandates, control at the border, oil drilling, hell even cruise ships. Someone they're going to overturn all these precedents which will essentially give the executive branch unlimited power?

SCOTUS is definitely going to strike down anything that gives the executive branch more power and the risk of taking power away from the courts.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Why do you assume a Dem President would "strike down" anything? Who was president when Roe was overturned? Who controlled congress when Roe was overturned? Who immediately used the overturning of Roe to fund-raise even though they had majorities and more, 50 years after Roe was decided to ensure that it couldn't be overturned?

[–] cobra89@beehaw.org 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

This comment shows a distinct lack of knowledge of how the US government works or is disingenuous.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -2 points 10 months ago

The Dems had 50 years to use the government and codify Roe. They didn't. Are you saying they also don't understand how the government works, or do they always seem to have "other priorities?" If they always have "other priorities" what does that say about the purpose of their party?

[–] Antiwork@hexbear.net 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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

Don’t vote. Play baseball

[–] silent_water@hexbear.net 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

take me out at the baaaaaaaall gaaaaaaaame

[–] uralsolo@hexbear.net 1 points 10 months ago

Hey check out this really cool pitching machine I made the-doohickey

[–] pononimous@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

PROVE IT! If anyone's destroying anything, it's you! You all HATE straight people with a passion I find hard to believe but you do and you'll do everything you can to destroy everything straight and all things associated WITH straight. That's YOUR agenda and everyone knows it. That's why even the GAY COMMUNITY does NOT LIKE the TQ lunatics! Prove me wrong! Protip: you can't!

[–] BelieveRevolt@hexbear.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh look, the Zionist piece of shit is also a transphobe shocked-pikachu bridget-pride-stay-mad

[–] ashinadash@hexbear.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

Name a more iconic duo bridget-smug

[–] ashinadash@hexbear.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

even the GAY COMMUNITY does NOT LIKE the TQ

lol lmao. Kinda curious about your definition of "TQ" here.