A lot of talk right now about Heritage President Kevin Roberts - who lusts for a radical rightwing revolution that would punish those he deems enemies of his “real America” so bad that he must talk about it all the time.
I dove deep into the extremist worldview of that guy a while ago:
0 replies
26 reposts
62 likes
A lot of talk right now about Heritage President Kevin Roberts - who lusts for a radical rightwing revolution that would punish those he deems enemies of his “real America” so bad that he must talk about it all the time.
I dove deep into the extremist worldview of that guy a while ago:
0 replies
26 reposts
62 likes
Unfortunately, this is not just the abstract manifesto of a feverish mind. It comes with concrete plans and a detailed strategy of how to take over and transform government into an autocratic revenge machine that can impose a reactionary vision against the will of the majority. /end
5 replies
39 reposts
73 likes
A deep dive into the extremist worldview of Heritage president Kevin Roberts, as it manifests in his foreword to the “Project 2025” policy report:
His grievance-driven lust for revenge and desire to dominate his “Un-American” enemies doesn’t allow for restraint or compromise.
1 replies
4 reposts
22 likes
Kevin Roberts believes he’s a noble defender of “real America” against a totalitarian “woke,” “globalist” assault from without and within.
“Project 2025” is his declaration of war on multiracial pluralism.
I wrote about his extremist worldview here:
1/
thomaszimmer.substack.com/p/project-20...
8 replies
146 reposts
288 likes
Unfortunately, this is not just the abstract manifesto of a feverish mind. It comes with concrete plans and a detailed strategy of how to take over and transform government into an autocratic revenge machine that can impose a reactionary vision against the will of the majority. /end
5 replies
39 reposts
73 likes
Much of this sounds like Marjorie Taylor Greene might have said it to rile up the base. “This is Heritage, you know, not some fringe group on the right,” Roberts said in a New York Times interview. He is correct: This is what defines the center of conservative politics today. 11/
1 replies
5 reposts
44 likes
It is difficult to convey to people who don’t pay much attention to politics how much the power centers of conservative politics have been taken over by anti-democratic extremism. Meanwhile, rightwing leaders are maximally clear about the reactionary vision they want to impose on the country. 10/
1 replies
13 reposts
52 likes
Analytically, this is complete nonsense. But such an understanding of the enemy is pervasive on the Right. It provides the basis on which Republican Party, conservative establishment, and reactionary intellectual sphere have all given themselves permission to radicalize. 9/
1 replies
5 reposts
43 likes
There is, in Kevin Roberts’ view of the world, really only one enemy, one devil, that seeks to destroy America, this once great nation of freedom and virtue: Communism, fascism, progressivism, “wokeism,” it is all just the same, all just different disguises of socialism. 8/
1 replies
4 reposts
35 likes
According to Roberts, the domestic “woke” agenda is connected to America’s foreign enemies. He sees only two underlying dangers that are constantly colluding and conspiring to bring America down: Totalitarian China abroad and totalitarian “woke” elites at home, working together. 7/
1 replies
5 reposts
35 likes
There is, in this view of the world, no room for compromise, no justification for restraint: “Time is running short. If we fail, the fight for the very idea of America may be lost.” 2024, according to Roberts, is the “last opportunity to save our republic.” And destroy the “woke” Left. 6/
1 replies
6 reposts
43 likes
The Right’s plans for a return to power are driven by a desperate sense that nothing short of a reactionary counter-revolution will suffice to save nation from the onslaught of fundamentally anti-American woke,” “globalist” forces - and that there is very little time left to pull it off. 5/
1 replies
6 reposts
43 likes
“Project 2025” isn’t just about power in Washington. The Reactionary Right’s goal is to re-establish political, societal, and cultural dominance in all spheres of life and turn the clock back to before what Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts calls “the Great Awokening.” 4/
2 replies
15 reposts
60 likes
Kevin Roberts is not some moderate imposter who pretends to be hardcore so that he can blend in with the MAGAs because that is the direction the wind is blowing. He is a reactionary Catholic and part of the Religious Right – a true believer in the reactionary political project. 3/
1 replies
8 reposts
57 likes
I took a deep dive into the “Promise to America” Heritage president Kevin Roberts has offered in his foreword to the "Project 2025" report: It perfectly captures the siege mentality, self-victimization, and grievance-driven lust for revenge that are fueling the Right's plans. 2/
1 replies
10 reposts
65 likes
Kevin Roberts believes he’s a noble defender of “real America” against a totalitarian “woke,” “globalist” assault from without and within.
“Project 2025” is his declaration of war on multiracial pluralism.
I wrote about his extremist worldview here:
1/
thomaszimmer.substack.com/p/project-20...
8 replies
146 reposts
288 likes
I’ve had this discussion many times with students who are active military: They were, across the board, horrified and disgusted by Trump’s desire to use troops against protesters - but also, and rightfully, quick to add that democracy is in great peril if it has to rely on soldiers defying orders.
6 replies
29 reposts
114 likes
What an utterly bizarre, acutely dangerous, and downright terrifying place this country is in.
Because six unelected rightwing operatives said so. And because the Republican Party is united behind the worst person in America to hold this kind of power.
2 replies
14 reposts
78 likes
That’s, ultimately, what worries me most about all of this - what I’ve been trying to emphasize in my writing about “Project 2025”: Too many people think a second Trump term would “just” be more of the same. They haven’t been paying attention.
It would be something very different.
1 replies
18 reposts
67 likes
The Right was hampered by a few factors during Trump’s first term: Public protest, the courts, vestiges of opposition in the GOP, the “deep state” consisting of professional civil servants, experts, lawyers… All of those sources of resistance have been drastically weakened.
1 replies
11 reposts
39 likes
An argument I’ve been trying to make about “Project 2025”:
A second Trump term would be worse not only because the radical Right would be better prepared, but also because they would be operating under much more favorable circumstances.
With a much more extreme Supreme Court, for instance. 1/
2 replies
39 reposts
128 likes
That’s, ultimately, what worries me most about all of this - what I’ve been trying to emphasize in my writing about “Project 2025”: Too many people think a second Trump term would “just” be more of the same. They haven’t been paying attention.
It would be something very different.
1 replies
18 reposts
67 likes
The Right was hampered by a few factors during Trump’s first term: Public protest, the courts, vestiges of opposition in the GOP, the “deep state” consisting of professional civil servants, experts, lawyers… All of those sources of resistance have been drastically weakened. 6/
1 replies
5 reposts
21 likes
Finally, resistance to the rightwing regime – not just coming from the Left, but also potentially fueled by whatever skepticism still remains among Republicans – would face a level of violent threat far beyond anything the country experienced during the first Trump presidency. 5/
1 replies
2 reposts
18 likes
Beyond Trump, the Right more generally has significantly radicalized. This radicalization has found its manifestation in a fully Trumpified GOP. Prominent Republicans like Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney who publicly objected to violent insurrection have been ostracized. 4/
1 replies
2 reposts
24 likes
Additionally, this would not be the same Right that came to power in 2017. That starts with Trump himself. The idea that he has always been the same, just Trump being Trump, is massively misleading and obscures the rather drastic radicalization of the Right’s undisputed leader. 3/
1 replies
2 reposts
24 likes
Back in power, the radical Right could count on a reactionary supermajority on the Supreme Court - something they didn’t have during Trump’s first term.
Today’s disastrous, truly extreme immunity ruling should be an urgent reminder of what an absolute game-changer that is. 2/
1 replies
5 reposts
46 likes
An argument I’ve been trying to make about “Project 2025”:
A second Trump term would be worse not only because the radical Right would be better prepared, but also because they would be operating under much more favorable circumstances.
With a much more extreme Supreme Court, for instance. 1/
2 replies
39 reposts
128 likes
The Court is spearheading the attempts by a radicalizing minority to install ever more authoritarian forms of minoritarianism in order to secure their status against the will of the majority.
And as of right now, these radicalizing reactionaries are succeeding.
1 replies
21 reposts
74 likes
We need to see the Supreme Court’s disastrous rulings in the context of the Right’s larger project to uphold traditional hierarchies of race, wealth/class, gender, and religion - all part of the attempt to halt the drive towards egalitarian, multiracial, pluralistic democracy.
8 replies
83 reposts
322 likes
America can accept this Supreme Court as legitimate and its rulings as the final word - or it can have true democracy and a functioning state. But not both.
Wrote this a year ago - and things have only gotten worse: The Rogue Court vs Modern Democracy
1/
thomaszimmer.substack.com/p/the-rogue-...
2 replies
82 reposts
289 likes
There is no consistent logic or principle beyond ideologically-driven power politics. Yes, the constitution insulates the Court from direct democratic control – but that doesn’t mean we should allow it to simply turn against democracy itself.
1 replies
7 reposts
40 likes
Nah, I meant: In a functioning democratic system, people shouldn’t need to know these people and shouldn’t have to keep up with this shit.
Obviously, that is not the situation in which we find ourselves.
1 replies
0 reposts
11 likes
The way it should be!
2 replies
0 reposts
8 likes
The Court is spearheading the attempts by a radicalizing minority to install ever more authoritarian forms of minoritarianism in order to secure their status against the will of the majority.
And as of right now, these radicalizing reactionaries are succeeding.
1 replies
21 reposts
74 likes
The idea that those who founded the United States envisioned a super-body composed of unaccountable, all-powerful rulers clad in robes, free to reign entirely outside the structure of institutions that make up the political system, is preposterous. 5/
2 replies
15 reposts
62 likes
There is no consistent logic or principle beyond ideologically-driven power politics. Yes, the constitution insulates the Court from direct democratic control – but that doesn’t mean we should allow it to simply turn against democracy itself. 4/
3 replies
10 reposts
60 likes
The reactionary majority has gone rogue, occasional tactical restraint notwithstanding. The main reason why this Court has lost its legitimacy is not even how this majority came to be, but the way it has been asserting judicial supremacy in service of an extremist cause. 3/
1 replies
5 reposts
52 likes
We need to see the Supreme Court’s disastrous rulings in the context of the Right’s larger project to uphold traditional hierarchies of race, wealth/class, gender, and religion - all part of the attempt to halt the drive towards egalitarian, multiracial, pluralistic democracy. 2/
1 replies
22 reposts
79 likes
America can accept this Supreme Court as legitimate and its rulings as the final word - or it can have true democracy and a functioning state. But not both.
Wrote this a year ago - and things have only gotten worse: The Rogue Court vs Modern Democracy
1/
thomaszimmer.substack.com/p/the-rogue-...
2 replies
82 reposts
289 likes
Two immediate thoughts:
- Presidents have been able to get away with *a lot*, so to some extent, this codifies the (very, very bad!) status quo
- BUT ALSO: To officially codify presidential immunity in this way, with reference to this specific situation (an attempted coup!) is utterly terrifying
4 replies
24 reposts
125 likes
From April. Spot on.
1 replies
14 reposts
57 likes
I apologize!
0 replies
0 reposts
9 likes
Nah, no worries - I meant it as: You’re right, this is what’s going on here, and I’m dissecting this stuff in the piece.
0 replies
0 reposts
21 likes
I talk about this at length in my piece.
1 replies
0 reposts
24 likes
To be very clear: I am not criticizing “the Left,” which doesn’t exist as a monolithic bloc. My issue is with this specific camp, and as much as they like to pretend they do, they really don’t represent “the Left.” In fact, they hate lefties who disagree with them at least as much as “the Libs.”
6 replies
7 reposts
128 likes
The problem is that their devotion to this anti-liberal struggle has led them to propagating positions that are completely untethered from what is happening on the Right – sophistry in defense of a premise that is utterly at odds with empirical evidence.
thomaszimmer.substack.com/p/the-anti-l...
3 replies
10 reposts
119 likes
To them, the fascism talk is intended to make people flock to the liberal cause; to expand power by using tyrannophobia as a way of entrenching liberal rule. It’s all just liberal dishonesty, self-exculpation, and self-aggrandizement that needs to be opposed aggressively.
4 replies
5 reposts
98 likes
In their view, Liberals are using the “fascism” bogeyman as a way to distract from their own culpability; to discipline the Left into accepting a popular front under liberal leadership; to reinvigorate the (neo-) liberal project by conjuring fears of the ultimate evil.
3 replies
6 reposts
103 likes