Seems they really want to revert everything that made the US a world leader.
- Reduce science
- Reduce collected data
- Reduce immigration
- Reduce infrastructure
- Reduce adoption of EVs
- Reduce science
- Reduce collected data
- Reduce immigration
- Reduce infrastructure
- Reduce adoption of EVs
That might be the only difference, though.
At the core, it is Anti-Science.
Why Anti-Science?
Because the answers that come from science are independent of the authoritarian ruler's whims, and that cannot be tolerated, as key to authoritarian rule is that it must be entirely responsive to the whims of the regime.
It is the same reason that completely freaked me out when I read that Lenin and Stalin had directed their death squads to target their most loyal party members first. Why the hell would they do that? It turns out it is because the most loyal party members would object to the dictator's schemes on grounds of ideological principle, and such objections or principled people could not be tolerated. Pure evil, but genius in the context of a dictator's needs.
Thus, every authoritarian regime attacks the intelligent, academic, and scientific worlds. Both Mao and Pol Pot not only executed people with scientific and academic credentials, but merely for wearing glasses which signified people who likely read a lot.
Consistent Anti-Science actions are one of the key signs you are not dealing with a mere political party, but something far worse — a full-on authoritarian takeover.
Beware.
Conservatives takes different names in different places. Calling the spade a spade, a more truthful name is 'Reggressives', no matter what the colour on the banner is. The signatures of regressivism is , among others, the yearning for the past, to bring back the old ways of life, the predisposition for worship (idolatry)--be that of imaginary creatures or very wealthy people.
Some of us would find it really hard to imagine why some others would say, "yes please, more oil. I really would love to inhale more toxic fumes". Yet, such people exist. I can't explain why.
They’re radical reactionaries at best.
While many of their asks mirror traditional Republican social positions, they’re responsive to an economically disadvantaged class in the Republican Party that’s historically been ignored.
And while there’s certainly a lot of backroom dealing to favor business interests, I think it’d be hard to argue that the poor Republican voter has had this much power in the party… ever. (See things like immigration policy, which agribusiness is scared shitless of)
The previous Republican bargain was ‘We say we love god and guns, but let business get on with business, and we’re never going to harm the latter for the former.’
What if we want to be a world leader in satellite internet coverage? Is that a goal you support? Because that's part of what these changes are about.
Socialism with chinese characteristics/ Xi Jinpeng thought is the most successful ideology currently. Free speech/free markets power has decayed since people found ways to exploit them and more powerful people found ways to aid the exploiters.
The US is apparently powerless to exploit our own rare earth resources and fund/subsidize them or lithium production or photovoltaic production, nuclear reactors, or even semiconductor production.
By any measure that is weak.
The DOD took a direct stake in a US rare earth miner / refiner, in addition to a long term purchase agreement at set prices. Apple also piled on last week (no doubt after some backroom conversations).
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/10/pentagon-to-become-largest-s...
And China’s dominance in LFP is based on its acquisition of A123’s IP out of bankruptcy [1].
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20130131031501/http://www.reuter...