#foundation line

[mostlysignssomeportents]

The true, tactical significance of Project 2025

TODAY (July 14), I'm giving the closing keynote for the fifteenth HACKERS ON PLANET EARTH, in QUEENS, NY. Happy Bastille Day! NEXT SATURDAY (July 20), I'm appearing in CHICAGO at Exile in Bookville.

Like you, I have heard a lot about Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation's roadmap for the actions that Trump should take if he wins the presidency. Given the Heritage Foundation's centrality to the American authoritarian project, it's about as awful and frightening as you might expect:

https://www.project2025.org/

But (nearly) all the reporting and commentary on Project 2025 badly misses the point. I've only read a single writer who immediately grasped the true significance of Project 2025: The American Prospect's Rick Perlstein, which is unsurprising, given Perlstein's stature as one of the left's most important historians of right wing movements:

https://prospect.org/politics/2024-07-10-project-2025-republican-presidencies-tradition/

As Perlstein points out, Project 2025 isn't new. The Heritage Foundation and its allies have prepared documents like this, with many identical policy prescriptions, in the run-up to many presidential elections. Perlstein argues that Warren G Harding's 1921 inaugural address captures much of its spirit, as did the Nixon campaign's 1973 vow to "move the country so far to the right 'you won’t even recognize it.'"

The threats to democracy and its institutions aren't new. The right has been bent on their destruction for more than a century. As Perlstein says, the point of taking note of this isn't to minimize the danger, rather, it's to contextualize it. The American right has, since the founding of the Republic, been bent on creating a system of hereditary aristocrats, who govern without "interference" from democratic institutions, so that their power to extract wealth from First Nations, working people, and the land itself is checked only by rivalries with other aristocrats. The project of the right is grounded in a belief in Providence: that God's favor shines on His best creations and elevates them to wealth and power. Elite status is proof of merit, and merit is "that which leads to elite status."

When a wealthy person founds an intergenerational dynasty of wealth and power, this is merely a hereditary meritocracy: a bloodline infused with God's favor. Sometimes, this belief is dressed up in caliper-wielding pseudoscience, with the "good bloodline" reflecting superior genetics and not the favor of the Almighty. Of course, a true American aristocrat gussies up his "race realism" with mystical nonsense: "God favored me with superior genes." The corollary, of course, is that you are poor because God doesn't favor you, or because your genes are bad, or because God punished you with bad genes.

So we should be alarmed by the right's agenda. We should be alarmed at how much ground it has gained, and how the right has stolen elections and Supreme Court seats to enshrine antimajoritarianism as a seemingly permanent fact of life, giving extremist minorities the power to impose their will on the rest of us, dooming us to a roasting planet, forced births, racist immiseration, and most expensive, worst-performing health industry in the world.

But for all that the right has bombed so many of the roads to a prosperous, humane future, it's a huge mistake to think of the right as a stable, unified force, marching to victory after inevitable victory. The American right is a brittle coalition led by a handful of plutocrats who have convinced a large number of turkeys to vote for Christmas.

The right wing coalition needs to pander to forced-birth extremists, racist extremist, Christian Dominionist extremists (of several types), frothing anti-Communist cranks, vicious homophobes and transphobes, etc, etc. Pandering to all these groups isn't easy: for one thing, they often want opposite things – the post-Roe forced birth policies that followed the Dobbs decision are wildly unpopular among conservatives, with the exception of a clutch of totally unhinged maniacs that the party relies on as part of a much larger coalition. Even more unpopular are policies banning birth control, like the ones laid out in Project 2025. Less popular still: the proposed ban on no-fault divorce. Each of these policies have different constituencies to whom they are very popular, but when you put them together, you get Dan Savage's "Husbands you can't leave, pregnancies you can't prevent or terminate, politicians you can't vote out of office":

https://twitter.com/fakedansavage/status/1805680183065854083

The constituency for "husbands you can't leave, pregnancies you can't prevent or terminate, politicians you can't vote out of office" is very small. Almost no one in the GOP coalition is voting for all of this, they're voting for one or two of these things and holding their noses when it comes to the rest.

Take the "libertarian" wing of the GOP: its members do favor personal liberty…it's just that they favor low taxes for them more than personal liberty for you. The kind of lunatic who'd vote for a dead gopher if it would knock a quarter off his tax bill will happily allow his coalition partners to rape pregnant women with unnecessary transvaginal ultrasounds and force them to carry unwanted fetuses to term if that's the price he has to pay to save a nickel in taxes:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/09/29/jubilance/#tolerable-racism

And, of course, the religious maniacs who profess a total commitment to Biblical virtue but worship Trump, Gaetz, Limbaugh, Gingrich, Reagan, and the whole panoply of cheating, lying, kid-fiddling, dope-addled refugees from a Jack Chick tract know that these men never gave a shit about Jesus, the Apostles or the Ten Commandments – but they'll vote for 'em because it will get them school prayer, total abortion bans, and unregulated "home schooling" so they can brainwash a generation of Biblical literalists who think the Earth is 5,000 years old and that Jesus was white and super into rich people.

Time and again, the leaders of the conservative movement prove themselves capable of acts of breathtaking cruelty, and undoubtedly many of them are depraved sadists who genuinely enjoy the suffering of their enemies (think of Trump lickspittle Steven Miller's undisguised glee at the thought of parents who would never be reunited with children after being separated at the border). But it's a mistake to think that "the cruelty is the point." The point of the cruelty is to assemble and maintain the coalition. Cruelty is the tactic. Power is the point:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/03/09/turkeys-voting-for-christmas/#culture-wars

The right has assembled a lot of power. They did so by maintaining unity among people who have irreconcilable ethics and goals. Think of the pro-genocide coalition that includes far-right Jewish ethno-nationalists, antisemitic apocalyptic Christians who believe they are hastening the end-times, and Islamophobes of every description, from War On Terror relics to Hindu nationalists.

This is quite an improbable coalition, and while I deplore its goals, I can't help but be impressed by its cohesion. Can you imagine the kind of behind-the-scenes work it takes to get antisemites who think Jews secretly control the world to lobby with Zionists? Or to get Zionists to work alongside of Holocaust-denying pencilneck Hitler wannabes whose biggest regret is not bringing their armbands to Charlottesville?

Which brings me back to Project 2025 and its true significance. As Perlstein writes, Project 2025 is a mess. Clocking in an 900 pages, large sections of Project 2025 flatly contradict each other, while other sections contain subtle contradictions that you wouldn't notice unless you were schooled in the specialized argot of the far right's jargon and history.

For example, Project 2025 calls for defunding government agencies and repurposing the same agencies to carry out various spectacular atrocities. Both actions are deplorable, but they're also mutually exclusive. Project 2025 demands four different, completely irreconcilable versions of US trade policy. But at least that's better than Project 2025's chapter on monetary policy, which simply lays out every right wing theory of money and then throws up its hands and recommends none of them.

Perlstein says that these conflicts, blank spots and contradictions are the most important parts of Project 2025. They are the fracture lines in the coalition: the conflicting ideas that have enough support that neither side can triumph over the other. These are the conflicts that are so central to the priorities of blocs that are so important to the coalition that they must be included, even though that inclusion constitutes a blinking "LOOK AT ME" sign telling us where the right is ready to split apart.

The right is really good at this. Perlstein points to Nixon's expansion of affirmative action, undertaken to sow division between Black and white workers. We need to get better at it.

So far, we've lavished attention on the clearest and most emphatic proposals in Project 2025 – for understandable reasons. These are the things they say they want to do. It would be reckless to ignore them. But they've been saying things like this for a century. These demands constitute a compelling argument for fighting them as a matter of urgency, with the intention of winning. And to win, we need to split apart their coalition.

Perlstein calls on us to dissect Project 2025, to cleave it at its joints. To do so, he says we need to understand its antecedents, like Nixon's "Malek Manual," a roadmap for destroying the lives of civil servants who failed to show sufficient loyalty to Nixon. For example, the Malek Manual lays out a "Traveling Salesman Technique" whereby a government employee would be given duties "criss-crossing him across the country to towns (hopefully with the worst accommodations possible) of a population of 20,000 or under. Until his wife threatens him with divorce unless he quits, you have him out of town and out of the way":

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Final_Report_on_Violations_and_Abuses_of/0dRLO9vzQF0C?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22organization+of+a+political+personnel+office+and+program%22&pg=PA161&printsec=frontcover

It's no coincidence that leftist historians of the right are getting a lot of attention. Trumpism didn't come out of nowhere – Trump is way too stupid and undisciplined to be a cause – he's an effect. In his excellent, bestselling new history of the right in the early 1990s, When the Clock Broke, Josh Ganz shows us the swamp that bred Trump, with such main characters as the fascist eugenicist Sam Francis:

https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374605445/whentheclockbroke

Ganz joins the likes of the Know Your Enemy podcast, an indispensable history of reactionary movements that does excellent work in tracing the fracture lines in the right coalition:

https://www.patreon.com/posts/when-clock-broke-106803105

Progressives are also an uneasy coalition that is easily splintered. As Naomi Klein argues in her essential Doppelganger, the liberal-left coalition is inherently unstable and contains the seeds of its own destruction:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/05/not-that-naomi/#if-the-naomi-be-klein-youre-doing-just-fine

Liberals have been the senior partner in that coalition, and their commitment to preserving institutions for their own sake (rather than because of what they can do to advance human thriving) has produced generations of weak and ineffectual responses to the crises of terminal-stage capitalism, like the idea that student-debt cancellation should be means-tested:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/05/03/utopia-of-rules/#in-triplicate

The last bid for an American aristocracy was repelled by rejecting institutions, not preserving them. When the Supreme Court thwarted the New Deal, FDR announced his intention to pack the court, and then began the process of doing so (which included no-holds-barred attacks on foot-draggers in his own party). Not for nothing, this is more-or-less what Lincoln did when SCOTUS blocked Reconstruction:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/09/20/judicial-equilibria/#pack-the-court

But the liberals who lead the progressive movement dismiss packing the court as unserious and impractical – notwithstanding the fact that they have no plan for rescuing America from the bribe-taking extremists, the credibly accused rapist, and the three who stole their robes. Ultimately, liberals defend SCOTUS because it is the Supreme Court. I defended SCOTUS, too – while it was still a vestigial organ of the rights revolution, which improved the lives of millions of Americans. Human rights are worth defending, SCOTUS isn't. If SCOTUS gets in the way of human rights, then screw SCOTUS. Sideline it. Pack it. Make it a joke.

Fuck it.

This isn't to argue for left seccession from the progressive coalition. As we just saw in France, splitting at this moment is an invitation to literal fascist takeover:

https://jacobin.com/2024/07/melenchon-macron-france-left-winner

But if there's one thing that the rise of Trumpism has proven, it's that parties are not immune to being wrestled away from their establishment leaderships by radical groups:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/06/16/that-boy-aint-right/#dinos-rinos-and-dunnos

What's more, there's a much stronger natural coalition that the left can mobilize: workers. Being a worker – that is, paying your bills from wages, instead of profits – isn't an ideology you can change, it's a fact. A Christian nationalist can change their beliefs and then they will no longer be a Christian nationalist. But no matter what a worker believes, they are still a worker – they still have a irreconcilable conflict with people whose money comes from profits, speculation, or rents. There is no objectively fair way to divide the profits a worker's labor generates – your boss will always pay you as little of that surplus as he can. The more wages you take home, the less profit there is for your boss, the fewer dividends there are for his shareholders, and the less there is to pay to rentiers:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/19/make-them-afraid/#fear-is-their-mind-killer

Reviving the role of workers in their unions, and of unions in the Democratic party, is the key to building the in-party power we need to drag the party to real solutions – strong antimonopoly action, urgent climate action, protections for gender, racial and sexual minorities, and decent housing, education and health care.

The alternative to a worker-led Democratic Party is a Democratic Party run by its elites, whose dictates and policies are inescapably illegitimate. As Hamilton Nolan writes, the completely reasonable (and extremely urgent) discussion about Biden's capacity to defeat Trump has been derailed by the Democrats' undemocratic structure. Ultimately, the decision to have an open convention or to double down on a candidate whose campaign has been marred by significant deficits is down to a clutch of party officials who operate without any formal limits or authority:

https://www.hamiltonnolan.com/p/the-hole-at-the-heart-of-the-democratic

Jettisoning Biden because George Clooney (or Nancy Pelosi) told us to is never going to feel legitimate to his supporters in the party. But if the movement for an open convention came from grassroots-dominated unions who themselves dominated the party – as was the case, until the Reagan revolution – then there'd be a sense that the party had constituents, and it was acting on its behalf.

Reviving the labor movement after 40 years of Reaganomic war on workers may sound like a tall order, but we are living through a labor renaissance, and the long-banked embers of labor radicalism are reigniting. What's more, repelling fascism is what workers' movements do. The business community will always sell you out to the Nazis in exchange for low taxes, cheap labor and loose regulation.

But workers, organized around their class interests, stand strong. Last week, we lost one of labor's brightest flames. Jane McAlevey, a virtuoso labor organizer and trainer of labor organizers, died of cancer at 57:

https://jacobin.com/2024/07/jane-mcalevey-strategy-organizing-obituary

McAlevey fought to win. She was skeptical of platitudes like "speaking truth to power," always demanding an explanation for how the speech would become action. In her classic book A Collective Bargain, she describes how she built worker power:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/23/a-collective-bargain/

McAlevey helped organize a string of successful strikes, including the 2019 LA teachers' strike. Her method was straightforward: all you have to do to win a strike or a union drive is figure out how to convince every single worker in the shop to back the union. That's all.

Of course, it's harder than it sounds. All the problems that plague every coalition – especially the progressive liberal/left coalition – are present on the shop floor. Some workers don't like each other. Some don't see their interests aligned with others. Some are ornery. Some are convinced that victory is impossible.

McAlevey laid out a program for organizing that involved figuring out how to reach every single worker, to converse with them, listen to them, understand them, and win them over. I've never read or heard anyone speak more clearly, practically and inspirationally about coalition building.

Biden was never my candidate. I supported three other candidates ahead of him in 2020. When he got into office and started doing a small number of things I really liked, it didn't make me like him. I knew who he was: the Senator from MBNA, whose long political career was full of bills, votes and speeches that proved that while we might have some common goals, we didn't want the same America or the same world.

My interest in Biden over the past four years has had two areas of focus: how can I get him to do more of the things that will make us all better off, and do less of the things that make the world worse. When I think about the next four years, I'm thinking about the same things. A Trump presidency will contain far more bad things and far fewer good ones.

Many people I like and trust have pointed out that they don't like Biden and think he will be a bad president, but they think Trump will be much worse. To limit Biden's harms, leftists have to take over the Democratic Party and the progressive movement, so that he's hemmed in by his power base. To limit Trump's harms, leftists have to identify the fracture lines in the right coalition and drive deep wedges into them, shattering his power base.

Support me this summer on the Clarion Write-A-Thon and help raise money for the Clarion Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers' Workshop!

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/07/14/fracture-lines/#disassembly-manual

[mychemicalraymance]

brattyyyyy

[arkfeather]

i found this weird book in my room this morning….i dont remember buying it…..every time i try to read it i get distracted and forget i have it…can someone help me identify this book?

happy halloween!! i wasnt actually planning on posting this today but i managed to finish it just before the hallows eve struck!

for anyone still wondering this is a handmade bookbind of There Is No Antimemetics Division by qntm! this is just a hardcover rebind made from a paperback i bought online so no fancy typesetting here unfortunately. BUT i am happy with the cover design at least

closeup pics and thoughts abt my process below!

i wanted to keep the covers pretty minimalistic to make the book seem more mysterious and to draw more attention to the square window i cut out of the cover boards. fun fact, that square is supposed to represent SCP-055! theres only so much i can do to represent something indescribable, but its not round, so at least i have that

originally i was planning on making the text along the spine white so it would have a sort of disappearing effect against the white fabric, but it didnt really work out so i printed just the shadow of the text instead for a there-not-there look

something i really wanted to try while making this was to paint the edges of the textblock black. i think it came out nicely! it looks neat contrasted to the white cover :p

now the ENDPAPERS!! i had actually imagined the design for these way before anything else. i tried to go for a sort of fractal pattern of fingers like the monster from Fresh Hell. i quite like it in combination with the window on the front cover :3

okay thats all thx for coming with me on my journey ^_^

[fishareglorious]

I wonder what exact chain of events happened to make Z have this mug. Did she buy it herself? Did she design it? Make it? Was it a gift from. Consantine? Also how and why does she keep bringing it around to places (see: first img is in a car in green lake campsite) is it her arcane skill😭

[on-this-day-mcr]

On this day, November 18

In 2022: My Chemical Romance performed their 61st show of the 2022-2023 Swarm tour (the last of the North America leg) at the Corona Capital festival in Mexico City, Mexico. At this show, Gerard Way wore a Joan of Arc inspired chain mail outfit, with a long red cape and a streak of fake blood painted on his chin and neck. "Muy feugo" [sic] was written on the drums. (🖤)

Watch the show here!

Lulu Urdapiletta

[brainrotcharacters]

whatever level of insanity odysseus was under when he spat "you don't think I know my own palace? I built it" I'm down

[rustyboltzz]

Quick study with Gears and Meri <3

[fia-bonkginya]

okay okay okay obviously this zerxus characterization (and a little bit of the story) doesn't FULLY line up with exu calamity but like. you can very much extrapolate and see how he could have gotten to this point!! he already sort of blamed laerryn for what happened to evandrin and to the city, and you can imagine that festering for a thousand years in a place like the hells.

and his line about how "there's no difference between the gods above and the ones below" perfectly mirrors his statements in the campaign- at one point he says something about how "once you bow to one you bow to them all," so that's always been something he's thought

plus, his fortress being called the brass skull- clearly some of his connection with his old friends is still there, even if he's trying to pretend it's not

i think it's a fun interpretation!!! and of course seeing the aspects of calamity depicted in stained glass like that (especially the ring of brass, evandrin, and elias) was. so so so good. what an excellent artistic choice. i cried

[sysig]

Wuh oh (Patreon)

Bonus:

The novel experience of being crushed by a giant rock, a visual metaphor

[comfybirdie]

5 REASONS WHY I REFUSE TO BELIEVE THIS IS JUST ABOUT A TOUR

I don't think I'm smart enough for plausible theories, so this is just a vent of a long time fan. I also have not read many posts, because I've been busy with life, so sorry if someone also said these points.

1. The concept.

I hope this is an album, but I wouldn't pledge my life on it. What I think, however, this is going to be something that brings all the storylines together from previous albums. At least from the Black Parade and Danger Days definitely, but I'm also thinking a bit about Conventional Weapons, too. This is because while yes, the tour does carry the Black Parade name and comes right after everybody spent time crying about not being in the select few to attend the WWWY Fest, the Secretary was not part of the Black Parade storyline. The closest thing we had eas the Director of BLI in Danger Days. And I think we all knew who this woman was the moment she popped up on the screen:

So what if Gerard's costume for the tour was the now undead Director, who became the Secretary of the Dictator?

2. The storyline itself.

I know every word to every album, from the singles to the B sides to leaked ones. But there may always be a chance that I misinterpreted the whole thing, maybe we all did, but the Black Parade is about the afterlife. Whether you got there because of illnes, war, it doesn't matter, you become part of the Black Parade when you die. I believe it to be a celebration of life, or carrying on even after the end.

What the Black Parade has never been, was a personal celebratory National Band, which is exactly what the post writes as the story. I'm going to insert a screenshot with the story.

I saw a theory that the entire concept is going to be revamped, which it might as well be, but even it doesn't make sense.

3. Because that's not what My Chemical Romance is.

And right now I'm thinking about the captions under the pictures.

After seeing the Secretary, my first thought about these captions was that we - The Black Parade - originally must have answered by wanting to be killjoys, the rebellious ones, but eventually we broke and stood in line, becoming the Dictator's beloved National Band, to which the Secretary replied: "Good boy."

However, My Chemical Romance never stood for that. They would never reward us with a tour for standing in line and shutting our mouth. They would never become the corporate machine they stood against since the very beginning. They would never lead the Black Parade in this manner and for this purpose.

And maybe it's just my naivety, the long lost teenager somewhere deep in me saying this, but I still believe they would never do that.

4. Foundations of Decay.

Has it been 2 years since this song came out? Yes. Am I going to bring it up? Absolutely.

(This is definitely overthinking on my part, but I was a history major and with the current events, the parallels are unmatched.) So the thing about wars is, you need people to fight it for you. You need soldiers and military leaders and all of them have to be loyal and obey the orders. The easiest way to achieve that, is by building an ideological foundation you can use to sway their judgement and decision making. The mustache man started with the theory of the back stabbing of the nation. During the middle ages, Christianity provided this foundation for the crusades in the middle east. If you give people something to fear or you give them something to idolise, they will be willing to fight against or for what you want.

And this is the Foundation of Decay.

"you must build an altar where it wells"

"Take his body as a relic to be canonised"

"You stumble through your last crusade"

And is you ask me, this is why this one song came out so much earlier than the rest of the project. Because they lay the ideological foundation first, and you need people to absorb it and truly believe before you can lead them with it. So you tell them again and again and again. Play it at every show on a tour. And so that reunion tour is when the Black Parade became the National Band, instead of the Killjoys. Because we sang along to every word, we absorbed it and not just believed it, but lived it as we attended the tour and sang when they told us to, cheered if they just came on the screen. We became conditioned to follow Gerard's orders as he walked on the stage, just as we will follow the order to play for the Dictator, instead of standing against him.

5. But empires and dictatorships never last, do they?

Rome fell apart. There is a reason there was a Third Reich, because the first 2 also fell. The Ottoman Empire also eventually weakened and fell apart. And just because the Communist Party always said that life is great and everyone is happy "In the Concrete Age", everyone who has lived in a ex-soviet occupied country (hello to my fellow Eastern and Central European MCR fans), we can all tell you, it was everything but true.

And so it is only a matter of time before Dictator's reign has to see its end? Perhaps maybe even bought on by his beloved band, put together from the misfits who the Secretary had to break to stay in line.

But, this is all just my theory. Thank you for clowning with me and my tinfoil hat if you read it this far.

[emblemxeno]

Every time I see someone repeat some form of "Xander is two different characters in Fates" it's like a mosquito bite to the brain

Faerghast you will pay for your crimes someday /s

[peanutbutterandbananasandwichs]

Extremely relevant that in "In My Time of Dying" the thing that Tessa frightens Dean into almost accepting his death with is the threat of becoming "the same thing you hunt" (becoming an angry spirit).

And particularly I think the reminder that the line between human and "monster" is not rigid - the human spirit can become "monstrous". And that fluidity disrupts the place of the Hunter Dean needs to maintain - that they are the arbiters and executioners of monstrosity. That there is a clear "us" and "them".

[gaal-dornick]

an infinite number of ways to arrive at the inevitable.

[afrouniverse]

A suggestion from a previous post: The Hanged King

I mostly based this off already existing fanarts because I don't know alot about this particular SCP, I hope I did him justice

[evanwevand]

SCP Doctors bracelets yipeee (I'd been yesterday's whole afternoon doing them and my bestie wants to steal the Iceberg one please help)

[brotherconstant]

FOUNDATION | 2.02 | A Glimpse Of Darkness [Venting all oxygen.] “What are you doing?” “She needs to drown, Salvor.”