Introduction to Section 2: The Common Defense
Day 10 of reading and sharing my notes on Project 2025 (the long title is Mandate for Leadership 2024: The Conservative Promise, in case you're searching for it). Here's my approach and why I’m doing this.
SUMMARY
We're starting with the introduction to Section Two: The Common Defense. There are no authors cited for the intro.
The section says the Department of Defense and the Department State aren't living up to historical standards and need to be "significantly improved in short order."
It says that a "profoundly unserious equity agenda and vaccine mandates" have taken a toll on the military.
MY OPINION
The author doesn't state why they believe equity and vaccines are causing recruitment issues in the military. Perhaps Chapter 4, which the author is quoting, will explain it.
SUMMARY
The author says requiring masks has created "a risk-averse culture." They say enlisted personnel and lower officers are patriotic, but Obama's general officer corps is prioritizing "social engineering and non-defense related matters, including climate change, critical race theory, manufactured extremism, and other polarizing policies that weaken our armed forces and discourage our nation's finest men and women from enlisting."
MY OPINION
A lot of statements there without any specific examples or data. There is a lot about race here and throughout the document, which makes me wonder if they want to segregate the military, or if they just don't want to be required to promote minorities.
SUMMARY
The author says China is a danger to the U.S., but in addressing it, "the United States must be able to do this at a level of cost and risk that Americans are willing to bear."
**-"The best gauge of such willingness is congressional approval. Accordingly, we must rediscover and adhere to the Founders' wise division of war powers, whereby Congress, the most representative and deliberative branch, decides whether to go to war; and the executive, the most energetic and decisive branch, decides how to carry it out once again. As the past 75 years have repeatedly demonstrated in different ways--from Korea, to Vietnam, to Iraq, to Afghanistan--we depart from our constitutional design at our peril."
MY OPINION
This is the second time in the document that it seems like they are advocating war with China. But it sounds like they're saying they need to convince Congress to do it.
SUMMARY
They argue for showing "peace through strength: and not being "drawn into conflicts that do not justify great loss of American treasure or significant shedding of American blood. At the same time, we must be prepared to defend our interests and meet challenges where and when they arise."
MY OPINION
So fighting is bad except when it's good?
SUMMARY
The author says that where the military has been forced to adopt "leftist priorities," "the problem at State comes largely from within."
The author says the State Department thinks of itself as independent and that it knows best doesn't need direction from the president. The author, summarizing a later part of the document, says the president should put people into acting roles because the Senate is lax about confirming appointees.
The author, again previewing, says Congress should encourage trade more trade with allies and less with adversaries, implement a "sovereign Mexico" policy, and focus on security and economic and human rights instead of abortion and LGBT initiatives in Africa. The author criticizes corporations who do business with China and say normalizing relations has failed.
In a preview of later chapters with different authors, one says that the U.S. Agency for Global Media should be patriotic instead of anti-American, and another says **- the Department of Homeland Security should be closed and "replaced with a new 'stand-alone border and immigration agency at the Cabinet level.'"
MY OPINION
Why a new border and immigration agency? We already have one. That's definitely not smaller government.
SUMMARY
There is criticism of the intelligence community for being overly cautious, and admonishment to reform the U.S. Agency for International Development, which they say Biden has treated "as a global platform to pursue overseas a divisive political and cultural agenda that promotes abortion, climate extremism, gender radicalism, and interventions against perceived systematic racism."
The section concludes: "The next conservative President has the opportunity to restructure the making and execution of U.S. defense and foreign policy and reset the nation's role in the world. The recommendations outlined in this section provide guidance on how the next President should use the federal government's vast resources to do just that."
That's it for today. Next up, Chapter 4: Department of Defense.