#right wing foundations

[commiepinkofag]

The 'Kids Online Safety Act' [KOSA] continues to move forward

Microsoft now endorses this legislation, which will likely help garner political support. Help counter this bill!

HELP STOP KOSA

Contact your representatives

KOSA is a bipartisan bill introduced to censor content on the internet deemed 'inappropriate' for minors. This bill is intended to target the LGBTQIA+ community and otherwise cause harm to minors.

Access to any supportive resources like queer-youth support groups, suicide hotlines, and important health information can be targeted.

[ngdrb]

[alwaysbewoke]

x

[rueclfer]

well looks like im never leaving california! if any of u guys need reproductive healthcare i will house all of you im not even playing

[rebel-girl-queen-of-my-world]

Trump and the Heritage Foundation are trying to co-opt Judaism with their “Project Esther” to attack the Palestinian human rights movement in our name. Using Jewish culture and history as a facade for persecution of Palestinians and any who stand with them (including many thousands of Jews).

How disgustingly absurd - to frame anti-genocide activism as terrorism. How appropriately Trumpian.

Repost from @mondoweiss:

•

The right-wing plan to silence support for Palestine is here — and it’s using mafia-style tactics. Imagine if speaking out for Palestinian rights meant risking prosecution, deportation, or being labeled a national threat in the U.S. That’s exactly what Project Esther aims to do. 🚨

Backed by the conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, this plan frames pro-Palestine advocates as national security threats, tying them to a fabricated “Hamas Support Network.” Under the guise of “national security,” Project Esther seeks to crush dissent and label support for Palestine as anti-American extremism.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Peter Montgomery at RWW:

The Trump campaign’s desperate and dishonest attempts to distance itself from the MAGA movement’s wildly unpopular Project 2025 policy agenda are failing miserably. The Heritage Foundation, a central hub of the right-wing political infrastructure which moved aggressively into the MAGA camp under the leadership of its current president Kevin Roberts, launched Project 2025 in 2022. Right Wing Watch took notice, reporting on the project’s confident assertion that it was preparing the MAGA movement to “take the reins of government” after the 2024 election. As RWW noted, by that point the right-wing movement had achieved its long-sought goal of taking dominant control of the Supreme Court. Project 2025 is a game plan to do the same for the executive branch.

Heritage gathered dozens of former Trump administration officials and other MAGA movement leaders to produce a more than 900-page policy agenda detailing their plans. They created a blueprint to give the next conservative president virtually dictatorial powers to bend federal agencies to his will, turning them into weapons against his personal enemies and political opponents and an enforcement arm for the Christian nationalist worldview, while at the same time sabotaging agencies’ ability to carry out their mission to protect American workers, communities and the environment. Project 2025 began recruiting and training tens of thousands of ideological warriors to prepare them to fill the jobs of the federal government employees they plan to purge.

But the Heritage Foundation’s arrogance may have gotten the better of them. It turns out that most Americans do not want to gut environmental protections, public education, and civil rights enforcement. Most Americans don’t want federal power being used to intrude into families’ most intimate decisions—or to enforce the idea that there’s only one legitimate form of family. Public opposition to Project 2025 grew as more media outlets and policy experts dug into the policy agenda this year, and explained who would be hurt if these policies were implemented. Public awareness soared after John Oliver dedicated the June 16 episode of Last Week Tonight to exposing Project 2025, and again when actress Taraji P. Henson used her platform as host of the June 30 BET Awards to sound the alarm, telling people, “The Project 2025 plan is not a game. Look it up.”

[...] Trump’s attempts to distance himself from Project 2025 were ultimately doomed by his choice of MAGA hardliner J.D. Vance as his running mate. Vance has praised Project 2025’s authoritarian, anti-equality, anti-freedom policy agenda. Right Wing Watch reported during the RNC that Vance wrote the introduction to Roberts’ new book, “Dawn’s Early Light: Burning Down Washington to Save America.” As Right Wing Watch noted at the time, “Roberts’ book title is reminiscent of a joke told among Federalist Society operatives describing their long game to repeal the New Deal and reverse a century of precedent and progress: ‘Rome Wasn’t Burned in a Day.’”

Since then, the Trump camp has been flailing. At the end of July, Project 2025 director Paul Dans, championed as hero by MAGA leaders like Steve Bannon, was apparently forced to step down under pressure from the Trump campaign, which wanted some beneficial headlines suggesting that Project 2025 was shutting down. In reality, the policy agenda is in place, along with the secret 180-day game plan for pushing it forward, and Heritage continues to recruit potential foot soldiers. Roberts and his publisher toned down his book’s subtitle, removing the unlit match from the cover and changing “Burning Down Washington” to “Taking Back Washington.” Then they announced that the book’s release—which was scheduled for September—would be delayed until after the election. Unfortunately for Trump and Vance, some journalists got review copies of the book and have reported on Roberts’ ideology and Vance’s violent rhetoric.

Roberts’ book and Vance’s enthusiastic endorsement of it are good examples of a phenomenon I identified in an article on Project 2025 for Political Research Associate’s Public Eye magazine earlier this year. I noted that Project 2025 reflects “a movement-level, ideological shift away from a libertarian mistrust of government power and toward an authoritarian view of government power being used ruthlessly—whether as a righteous force wielded to advance a ‘biblical worldview’ or turned against an ‘administrative state’ supposedly captured by a radical Marxist left.”

Peter Montgomery wrote in Right Wing Watch on Donald Trump’s dishonest bid to “divorce” himself from Project 2025 got blown up.

[willowcrowned]

seriously considering learning to gif just so I can find a single gifset of magneto’s god-fearing man speech from x men (2000)

[dykedvonte]

I really do like character design in mouthwashing

Anya is obvi inspired by Shelley Duval (who was also verbally abused by Cubric, if I recall correctly), the Shining protagonist. Curly is your typical captain America style charismatic leader, he is even canonically a gym bro (although I recall you mentioning that if Curly's pre-crash face wasn't revealed, you would've headcanoned him as black, so I am a bit curios, what his dynamic w/ Jimmy would've been. Like, I think this little piece of sht would be casually racist towards him, he is just that sort of asshole. If the story was set at our times he would've def vote for Trump and complain abt immigrants eating dogs or something equally rediculous lol. Also, his dynamic w/ Anya - being marginalised himself would've he been harder on Jimbo's bullshit? Or would that not matter at all in their particular situation? So many possibilities.)

Daisuke is a bright spot in an otherwise dull and grey space. Swansea is simply perfect, 10/10😁

-💀

I don’t think Jimmy would be racist towards Curly or anyone for that matter.

Like I don’t see Jimmy as a misanthrope. He’s not hateful just to be hateful, he’s spiteful. All of his envy and resentment of others comes from his own projection of shared aspects he feels inferior by. I think the biggest difference is it adds a little more ire to Jimmy’s sentiments as it takes away an easy aspect of Curly’s life. I assume Mouthwashing operates in a similar social history and structure as our world so Curly likely faced prejudices based on his race in this scenario. He had something extra outside of his control weighing him down and yet he still reached that highest rung.

For Jimmy it’s infuriating. It feeds that delusion that Curly has it so much easier, that he doesn’t have to do the real work to get to that space. He should’ve struggled more, he should be more bitter but he isn’t. He’s not like him still and he’s pissed about it. He still wouldn’t understand the underlying and systemic issues Curly would’ve faced cause he can’t. He wouldn’t try to because in doing that it’s an admission he’s just not trying like Curly is. Any comments that could be seen as racist are less targeted at Curly’s ethnicity but just at him. Jimmy’s issues are with Curly as a whole, being so idealic compared to him and everything around him. It’s not just one facet of him physically, mentally or emotionally that makes Jimmy so envious. It’s why he’s obsessed, it everything about him.

As for Anya, this is no anger toward you, but there’s this perception in fandom spaces with intersectionality that sharing a minority status creates an equal understanding of what exact struggles the others go through. You can understand the feeling of oppression but certain aspects of certain systems will still be misunderstood if they don’t apply to you. Curly is still a man and Anya a woman. Perhaps she is a woman of color, it think he may have been a bit harsher to Jimmy as he would be aware of the racial factors at play when it comes to the dehumanization and sexism perpetrated towards WOC but he still wouldn’t get it as a man.

It’s like apples and oranges to where they are both fruit but being categorically the same doesn’t make them identical. I can not describe to you the taste of an apple by using an orange. Anya would no more understand Curly’s struggles being black than he would her being the only woman on board. Of course they share the similarity of being the only one but even in this case we do work off the assumption everybody but Daisuke is white. He’d inherently have more solidarity with him on that aspect than her.

[adelphiaxo]

yall, we need to talk about the heritage foundation and its project 2025.

the heritage foundation is dangerous, and is going to have significant impact on the government. it's a long term initiative to make the us as conservative as possible, aka make america a fascist state. they have a policy agenda that would help their conservative beliefs.

what they are trying to do is simply minimizing the people in the government administration to mainly conservatives and right winged activists. this way, the people who are in power will enforce laws that reflect conservative principles, which include limited individual liberty, free markets, and a strong national defense. it also involves training and recruiting conservative activists to work in the government.

2025 is coming in two years, and it is already becoming a threat to basic human rights and the american government. the project is based on a narrow ideological view of the world, and it does not take into account the needs of all americans.

if you read till the end, please, reblog this post, like, and/or spread the word.

thank you all <3, adelphi signing out

here is the website linked to project 2025, and their 180 day playbook: https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/project-2025 https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/project2025/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf

[aunti-christ-ine]

Heil and jawohl, mein Hair von Drumpführer 卐.

[commiepinkofag]

Self-described “gay furry hackers,” SiegedSec said it released the data in response to Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a set of proposals that aim to give Donald Trump a set of ready-made policies to implement if he wins this fall’s election. Its authors describe it as an initiative “to lay the groundwork for a White House more friendly to the right.”

More! More gay furry hacking!

[ngdrb]

Evaluating the Concerns and Potential Extremism of Project 2025

This far-right, extremist agenda is a threat to a multiracial, diverse democracy

Introduction

Project 2025 has garnered significant attention and sparked debate among various stakeholders. This analysis aims to explore the reasons why some individuals and groups express apprehension about the project and to evaluate whether these concerns are deemed extreme. Additionally, this discourse will consider potential modifications to address these concerns  and Perceptions of Extremism

Scope and Ambition

 Project 2025 has been widely viewed as ambitiously forward-thinking. While some express concerns about its comprehensive scope possibly causing unforeseen disruptions to current systems, critics suggest these challenges are natural in pioneering endeavors. The project's magnitude naturally provokes apprehensions regarding its feasibility and long-term sustainability. However, such bold initiatives are essential to drive innovation and address pressing global challenges. By carefully navigating potential pitfalls and leveraging comprehensive planning, Project 2025 can emerge as a transformative force for progress, laying a robust foundation for a sustainable future.

Political and Social Implications

The project's political and social ramifications are pivotal concerns. Detractors argue it could bring about sweeping alterations to societal norms and governance, potentially marginalizing specific demographics. These transformative shifts are frequently perceived as revolutionary, thereby evoking apprehensions about its radical nature. Such apprehensions underscore the need for a careful examination of its potential impact on inclusivity and social cohesion. It is imperative to navigate these concerns with a balanced approach that ensures equitable outcomes and fosters constructive dialogue about the project's goals and implications for a harmonious society.

Economic Impact

Concerns abound regarding the economic repercussions of Project 2025. Critics contend that the necessary financial resources might overburden public finances, potentially necessitating higher taxes or diverting funds from essential sectors. Such economic uncertainties are seen as fueling perceptions of radicalism. It is crucial to address these apprehensions through careful planning and transparent communication about the project's long-term benefits. By emphasizing strategic economic growth and prudent resource management, we can mitigate fears and build consensus on the project's potential to foster sustainable development and economic stability. This approach ensures that Project 2025 is viewed not as a risk, but as a catalyst for positive change.

Technological and Ethical Concerns

The integration of advanced technologies in Project 2025 raises significant ethical and privacy concerns, making it a contentious initiative. The potential for surveillance, data misuse, and erosion of individual freedoms stokes widespread fears. As we embrace these technologies, we must address the ethical implications to safeguard privacy and uphold fundamental rights. Ensuring transparent and responsible use of data can alleviate concerns and foster trust. By prioritizing ethical considerations, Project 2025 can become a beacon of innovation that respects privacy and individual freedoms, turning a potential threat into an opportunity for responsible technological advancement.

Potential for Adaptation

To mitigate the perceived extremism of Project 2025 and address the apprehensions, the following adaptations could be considered:

Incremental Implementation

Adopting a phased approach to project implementation offers the opportunity for continuous assessment and refinement at each stage. This strategy not only facilitates better risk management but also mitigates concerns about abrupt changes. By breaking down the project into manageable phases, we can identify and address issues promptly, ensuring smoother transitions and more effective solutions. This method fosters a more controlled and adaptable environment, increasing the likelihood of success while minimizing disruption. Embracing this incremental approach will ultimately lead to more sustainable and positive outcomes for the entire team.

Transparent Communication

Improving transparency regarding the project’s objectives, procedures, and potential outcomes is crucial for fostering public trust. Engaging openly with stakeholders and employing effective communication strategies are essential steps in combating misinformation and alleviating concerns. By clearly articulating our goals and methods, we can establish credibility and reassure the community about the project’s positive impacts. Emphasizing these aspects not only enhances understanding but also cultivates a supportive environment where informed decisions can be made collaboratively. This approach ensures that all parties are well-informed and aligned, promoting a constructive dialogue that strengthens confidence and minimizes uncertainties.

Ethical Guidelines and Oversight

Implementing stringent ethical guidelines and independent oversight mechanisms effectively addresses worries regarding privacy and data security. Prioritizing ethical considerations not only safeguards sensitive information but also cultivates trust and support from the public. By adhering to these principles, we demonstrate our commitment to transparency and accountability, fostering a climate where individuals feel secure and valued. This approach not only mitigates risks but also enhances our credibility, ensuring that our practices align with the highest standards of integrity and responsibility. Ultimately, integrating robust ethical frameworks is pivotal in garnering widespread endorsement and maintaining ethical leadership in data management.

Economic Safeguards

Implementing economic safeguards is crucial to shield vulnerable groups and promote fair resource allocation, alleviating concerns about financial burdens. Transparent budgeting and stringent financial accountability are indispensable in fostering trust and ensuring equitable distribution of resources. By instituting these measures, we not only protect the most vulnerable but also uphold principles of fairness and responsibility. This proactive approach not only mitigates fears of economic strain but also lays the foundation for a sustainable and inclusive economic framework that benefits all segments of society.

Conclusion

Project 2025’s ambitious nature and potential for significant societal impact inevitably lead to concerns about its extremism. By understanding these apprehensions and considering adaptive strategies, it is possible to address the fears and work towards a more balanced and acceptable implementation. Engaging with stakeholders, ensuring transparency, and prioritizing ethical considerations are critical steps in this

[p-inkbrush]

...

[lenbryant]

Project 2025 in a nutshell.