Project 2025 Leader Promises 'Second American Revolution' | Hacker News Reader

Project 2025 Leader Promises 'Second American Revolution'

newsweek.com

15 pointsarchagon14 comments

Are there any other social or societal initiatives in the US that are better organized/well funded as Christian Fascism?

This is a serious question.

Maybe the movement for accessibility? Businesses and institutions are quite accessible for people in wheelchairs.

Another thing that is hard to see is the LGBTQ movement in that it took decades of hard work to get to the progress that we have now and while it is not perfect, the movement continues to work towards improvement.

Christian nationalism sticks out because they’re loud, dress like a militia and carry guns around, but true power is quiet and backed by the police.

A lot of things are so established you don’t even notice them, like fish in water. The military industrial complex, trickle down economics, realtors (until recently), privatized health insurance, and surveillance capitalism all come to mind.

(And tech)

If you assume Christian nationalism doesn't intersect with the military industrial complex and the very core of America's centers of power, you would be mistaken.

It intersects at the 'nationalism' portion, but not quite the 'christian' portion. For example, you want soldiers that are nationalistic and willing to follow orders, that much is a given for any military.

But the last thing you want in a soldier is one that's doing things like refusing vaccines or chasing off other soldiers.

In a sense, the divide can be thought of as christian Nationalists, or Christian nationalists. The military has a lot of the former, and the latter is trying to seize control of the government. But right now I don't think there's a strong unifying factor between the two, because the latter gaining control threatens everyone else.

There is an intersection, and Christian nationalism is certainly influential in some ways, but if the question is what is more well-organized and well-funded, the DoD is the single largest employer in the world, and the US defense budget is on the order of a trillion dollars annually.

Currently? No. They're funded by some of the richest individuals in the world, have a large network of connections and have been consolidating power in key areas in local, state and federal government.

However they are a very loud subset of Americans. It doesn't set them up well for a true revolution because in a scenario where they have to bring in the military, the odds are that we'll see a military coup before they start shooting.

There's been a growing problem of Christian Nationalism within the military but the problem is that they typically prove to be poor soldiers. The US military still relies on the 'classical' understanding of US democracy in order to exert soft power across the world and if a president sought to consolidate power and completely control the government there'd be problems. But the far-right increasingly believes in a reckoning/uprising that would be in their favor.

Newsweek: A yellow journalistic rag corporation that was bought for exactly $1.00 by a billionaire car radio magnate as a gift for his wife [2], a radical Democrat ex-Congresswoman so she can prop her party up. [1]

1. https://www.businessinsider.com/its-official-newsweek-will-b... be-bid-1-in-excha-2010-8?op=1

2. https://www.whomarried.com/sidney-harman-469735

OK. Are you saying Kevin Roberts never said these things?

Flynn Nicholls, you meant? The author of the many non-stellar articles and IMDB.com author; his strength lies more in his work as cartoonist, animator and illustrator.

It is easy to cherry-pick out a seemingly salacious quip out of context from a large document and expansively narrate and skimp on its overall goal with an intent of "poo-pooing" its document.

Probably should have started with one of its goal and drill down in a critique manner, rather than go from within outward.

But hey, this is a sensationalist way to go.

No surprise that Newsweek selected him.

No, Kevin Roberts. Did he say this?

> "In spite of all this nonsense from the left, we are going to win. We're in the process of taking this country back," Roberts said. "We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless, if the left allows it to be."

The quote speaks for itself (and for the Republican party) regardless of who has the byline.

A lot of good authorly quotes can speak for themselves. But this isn't one. It is missing context.

another source for these quotes, which have paragraphs of speech between the first and second parts, https://www.mediamatters.org/project-2025/heritage-foundatio...

So it should be "In spite of all this nonsense from the left, we are going to win. We're in the process of taking this country back...."

[stuff about the recent Supreme Court decision, and how "...the [radical] left has taken over our institutions..."]

"We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless, if the left allows it to be."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com