9 ms·

destroying institutions is the plan. it's a cynical party. the only time "build" is mentioned is border walls. unfortunately "great" countries aren't BUILT on f

destroying institutions is the plan. it's a cynical party. the only time "build" is mentioned is border walls. unfortunately "great" countries aren't BUILT on fear and cynicism.

_heimdall 2y ago
I'm still not sold on this. I can't yet distinguish if the plan is to get rid of institutions or to gut what's their and rebuild it how the want it. We may not end up with a smaller government, just a different one.
- EasyMark 2y ago
  All you have to do is read project 2025 and you will know all their plans and reasoning for Stage 1 of fascism
- Master_Odin 2y ago
  The Republican plan for the federal government for decades has been to try to kneecap various agencies and departments so fully that they can't function well, go "look how poorly they operate! Time to close it down and let private sector handle it!"
  - chneu 2y ago
    It's called Starve The Beast
    - metadat 2y ago
      Lots of interesting reading linked from the wiki page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    That wouldn't be the goal though, just the means to their end. The goal would have to be shrinking the government, for example, or to move authority out to the private sector. The entire party is psychos wanting to kneecap departments just to watch them bleed.
- underseacables 2y ago
  I can't recall when government was so enthusiastic about rooting out fraud. I kind of like this, and I want the government to actively pursue fraud and mismanagement. Feels like it always gets buried in some bureaucratic report.
  - mcphage 2y ago
    > I can't recall when government was so enthusiastic about rooting out fraud. They’re very enthusiastic about rooting out. The fraud is still missing, however.
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      Do you expect that there isn't fraud in the $4.92T budget, or that it just hasn't been found or proven publicly yet?
      - acdha 2y ago
        There isn’t anything like the amount of it being promised, and gutting the auditing and staffing for programs is the last thing you’d do if that’s your concern. For example, Musk lied about social security but the records he mentioned were reported by the SSA IG years before. They concluded there wasn’t much fraud because over 98% of the old records weren’t receiving money (and hadn’t made contributions in over 50 years) and it was noted that cleaning them up would cost significantly more than it could possibly save.
      - mcphage 2y ago
        Oh, I’m certain there’s fraud. Now, is there a higher percentage of fraud in what he is cutting—or in what he is leaving behind? That is an open question.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    They aren't rooting out fraud. They have published their intentions over and over. "We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work" https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/11/books/review/administrative-state-trump-bannon.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/11/books/review/administrati...
- mlnj 2y ago
  It is not to have a larger/smaller government. The plan is to privatize as much as possible. I mentioned this in another comment: 'Elon has already tweeted "The safety of air travel is a non-partisan matter. SpaceX engineers will help make air travel safer"' I believe the number of air incidents has been 2 a week in the last month. Any time now the government just will be ready to declare FAA as a disaster of the previous regimes and that Tech industries will be better at running the admin for the aviation sector.
- relaxing 2y ago
  Their stated goals are lower taxes, less regulation, less government presence. What they want bigger is private riches through industry and church. They all believe this, voter and representative. What part do you think gets built back? Maybe the FBI, when they’re sure it can be weaponized against their enemies.
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    > Their stated goals are lower taxes, less regulation, less government presence. And if you believe Project 2025, which I do, however the Trump campaign tried to halfheartedly distance itself from them, lower education: Project 2025 talks of how children finishing school should be looking more to "buying a house and starting a family" than college. Of course, how the average 18 year old with a high school education and single income (because homeschooling is also a very big goal of Project 2025) is meant to buy this house is left as an exercise for the (uneducated) reader. The important thing is less education and more future "Warriors for Christ" (as someone I know on my FB feed calls their children).
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      I haven't read 2025 so I'm going only off what you have here. I think a strong argument could be made that an 18 year old with a strong work ethic should be able to get a job that allows them to afford a house in a reasonable timeline. I don't have any expectation that's actually what 2025 argues, but it would be a good ideal. Why shouldn't a kid out of high school willing to work hard be able to save up for a house and a family in a reasonable amount of time? Should we gate keep that behind college degrees or similar?
      - FireBeyond 2y ago
        I would agree. Just as I believe minimum wage isn't "only applicable to teenagers working part time after school". But yes, P2025's goal has nothing to do with the wellbeing of said school leaver. They specifically want people to be less educated (easier to manipulate and persuade), and are all about raising as many Christian children as possible to "stack the vote".
- nemo44x 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - DFHippie 2y ago
    > repopulate with people loyal to you What happened to merit? competence? This is the recipe for corruption that was eliminated back in the progressive era of the early 20th century. It's what gave us Tammany Hall and Boss Tweed. Repopulating organizations with loyal stooges is not constructive.
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      > What happened to merit To be fair, that's a question driving much of the push back against DEI as well. Both parties in the US have selectively ignored or called for merit based systems, depending on what suited them for a particular topic.
      - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
        So fire the most competent people (people are placed on probation for 2 years when promoted in the Feds,people being promoted are normally ones you want to keep, and Trump/Elon are blanket firing everyone on probation) because DEI exists?
        _heimdall 2y ago
        That's not my argument at all. Firing probationary employees is really the only immediate lever they had, my understanding I'd that other employees are better protected. Is it the right approach? Definitely not, but that doesn't mean it can't be a step in a better direction. That all depends on your goals and what you want to happen, I couldn't answer that question no matter what.
        _DeadFred_ 2y ago
        Probationary employees can more easily be fired for cause. Thousands of employees, including some of the best who had recently been promoted, were given the reason 'poor performance'. So you are OK with firing the best because 'otherwise it's hard'. You are OK with breaking the law because 'otherwise it's hard'. You are OK with lying to people why they are fired because 'otherwise it's hard'. You just want action and don't care if it's smart action, legal, or fair. That is item 3 on the checklist of fascism. "The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation." https://www.openculture.com/2024/11/umberto-ecos-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html https://www.openculture.com/2024/11/umberto-ecos-list-of-the...
- ZeroGravitas 2y ago
  That's the Heritage Foundation christo-fascist plan. Unfortunately they've teamed up with the mad Libertarian wing of the Republicans who turn up in places like HN and complain that all taxation is theft and are ready to burn the country to the ground because they've been so well programmed by propaganda that originally just wanted to build support for a tax cut for the already rich but metastasized into a superpower destroying cult of insanity.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - ZeroGravitas 2y ago
      You do need to be mad, because you need the exact same system to protect your property rights or your entire philosophy falls apart. "You can't force anyone to do anything" and "This bit of property belongs to me, you need to pay me for access to it" are not logically compatible.
      - _heimdall 2y ago
        Libertarian isn't anarchist. I think most libertarians would agree with the idea that a government should be kept as small as possible while still being able to protect property rights. They're generally capitalists as well, and the primary drivers there are individual choice and property rights.
        ZeroGravitas 2y ago
        I know. That's why "taxes are theft" and "try not paying your taxes and see what happens" is sophomoric bullshit. It's a state enforcing something. Which you've just admitted is fine when it enforces something you like.
        _heimdall 2y ago
        I'm not quite sure what you're arguing here. For one, I never said I myself am libertarian or anarchist. Your logic here seems circular, but maybe I just misunderstood. It seems reasonable to me that someone who is libertarian and accepts the need for a state but wants it limited to only, or primarily, protecting property rights would admit that its fine to have a government enforce things they like. If someone takes issue with having a government at all they're left with anarchism as the only choice. That's all well and good, people can have the opinion that a state is never justified. That doesn't mean libertarians can't believe in a form of government with whatever limitations they deem reasonable or worth the risk, though.
jimmydoe 2y ago
The plan is not destroying, but taking over. Once the cut narrative is fulfilled, these institutions will regrow with Don King's own people. Despite DDoS on the wave length, DOGE will not really gain much in the end, the real matter to balance the sheet will come from selling Ukraine which obviously takes some time to materialize.
- squarefoot 2y ago
  You missed the part where they're deleting a ton of scientific papers from government sites.
  - mlnj 2y ago
    Just read that the Justice Department deleted the database tracking federal police misconduct. Good luck USA.
    - squarefoot 2y ago
      context: https://www.police1.com/federal-law-enforcement/national-law-enforcement-accountability-database-which-tracked-federal-officer-misconduct-deleted https://www.police1.com/federal-law-enforcement/national-law...
  - jimmydoe 2y ago
    it takes time and resources to review them one by one, so once the King restaffed these institutions, some of these papers will be back, as long as they are not inconvenient for the King.
  - belter 2y ago
    "U.S. Government Removing EV Chargers From All Federal Buildings Because They Are ‘Not Mission-Critical" - https://electrek.co/2025/02/21/trump-to-shut-down-all-8000-ev-charging-ports-at-federal-govt-buildings/ https://electrek.co/2025/02/21/trump-to-shut-down-all-8000-e...
    - 2y ago
throw_pm23 2y ago
If institutions can only be created and never destroyed, how many institutions per person would we end up with?
- TomK32 2y ago
  They can be dismantled. By Congress who created them in the first place and gave the president and his executive only a limited range of powers.

destroying institutions is the plan. it's a cynical party. the only time "build" is mentioned is border walls. unfortunately "great" countries aren't BUILT on fear and cynicism.

_heimdall 2y ago

I'm still not sold on this. I can't yet distinguish if the plan is to get rid of institutions or to gut what's their and rebuild it how the want it. We may not end up with a smaller government, just a different one.

EasyMark 2y ago
All you have to do is read project 2025 and you will know all their plans and reasoning for Stage 1 of fascism
Master_Odin 2y ago
The Republican plan for the federal government for decades has been to try to kneecap various agencies and departments so fully that they can't function well, go "look how poorly they operate! Time to close it down and let private sector handle it!"
- chneu 2y ago
  It's called Starve The Beast
  - metadat 2y ago
    Lots of interesting reading linked from the wiki page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast
- _heimdall 2y ago
  That wouldn't be the goal though, just the means to their end. The goal would have to be shrinking the government, for example, or to move authority out to the private sector. The entire party is psychos wanting to kneecap departments just to watch them bleed.
underseacables 2y ago
I can't recall when government was so enthusiastic about rooting out fraud. I kind of like this, and I want the government to actively pursue fraud and mismanagement. Feels like it always gets buried in some bureaucratic report.
- mcphage 2y ago
  > I can't recall when government was so enthusiastic about rooting out fraud. They’re very enthusiastic about rooting out. The fraud is still missing, however.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    Do you expect that there isn't fraud in the $4.92T budget, or that it just hasn't been found or proven publicly yet?
    - acdha 2y ago
      There isn’t anything like the amount of it being promised, and gutting the auditing and staffing for programs is the last thing you’d do if that’s your concern. For example, Musk lied about social security but the records he mentioned were reported by the SSA IG years before. They concluded there wasn’t much fraud because over 98% of the old records weren’t receiving money (and hadn’t made contributions in over 50 years) and it was noted that cleaning them up would cost significantly more than it could possibly save.
    - mcphage 2y ago
      Oh, I’m certain there’s fraud. Now, is there a higher percentage of fraud in what he is cutting—or in what he is leaving behind? That is an open question.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago
  They aren't rooting out fraud. They have published their intentions over and over. "We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work" https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/11/books/review/administrative-state-trump-bannon.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/11/books/review/administrati...
mlnj 2y ago
It is not to have a larger/smaller government. The plan is to privatize as much as possible. I mentioned this in another comment: 'Elon has already tweeted "The safety of air travel is a non-partisan matter. SpaceX engineers will help make air travel safer"' I believe the number of air incidents has been 2 a week in the last month. Any time now the government just will be ready to declare FAA as a disaster of the previous regimes and that Tech industries will be better at running the admin for the aviation sector.
relaxing 2y ago
Their stated goals are lower taxes, less regulation, less government presence. What they want bigger is private riches through industry and church. They all believe this, voter and representative. What part do you think gets built back? Maybe the FBI, when they’re sure it can be weaponized against their enemies.
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  > Their stated goals are lower taxes, less regulation, less government presence. And if you believe Project 2025, which I do, however the Trump campaign tried to halfheartedly distance itself from them, lower education: Project 2025 talks of how children finishing school should be looking more to "buying a house and starting a family" than college. Of course, how the average 18 year old with a high school education and single income (because homeschooling is also a very big goal of Project 2025) is meant to buy this house is left as an exercise for the (uneducated) reader. The important thing is less education and more future "Warriors for Christ" (as someone I know on my FB feed calls their children).
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    I haven't read 2025 so I'm going only off what you have here. I think a strong argument could be made that an 18 year old with a strong work ethic should be able to get a job that allows them to afford a house in a reasonable timeline. I don't have any expectation that's actually what 2025 argues, but it would be a good ideal. Why shouldn't a kid out of high school willing to work hard be able to save up for a house and a family in a reasonable amount of time? Should we gate keep that behind college degrees or similar?
    - FireBeyond 2y ago
      I would agree. Just as I believe minimum wage isn't "only applicable to teenagers working part time after school". But yes, P2025's goal has nothing to do with the wellbeing of said school leaver. They specifically want people to be less educated (easier to manipulate and persuade), and are all about raising as many Christian children as possible to "stack the vote".
nemo44x 2y ago
[flagged]
- DFHippie 2y ago
  > repopulate with people loyal to you What happened to merit? competence? This is the recipe for corruption that was eliminated back in the progressive era of the early 20th century. It's what gave us Tammany Hall and Boss Tweed. Repopulating organizations with loyal stooges is not constructive.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    > What happened to merit To be fair, that's a question driving much of the push back against DEI as well. Both parties in the US have selectively ignored or called for merit based systems, depending on what suited them for a particular topic.
    - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
      So fire the most competent people (people are placed on probation for 2 years when promoted in the Feds,people being promoted are normally ones you want to keep, and Trump/Elon are blanket firing everyone on probation) because DEI exists?
      - _heimdall 2y ago
        That's not my argument at all. Firing probationary employees is really the only immediate lever they had, my understanding I'd that other employees are better protected. Is it the right approach? Definitely not, but that doesn't mean it can't be a step in a better direction. That all depends on your goals and what you want to happen, I couldn't answer that question no matter what.
        _DeadFred_ 2y ago
        Probationary employees can more easily be fired for cause. Thousands of employees, including some of the best who had recently been promoted, were given the reason 'poor performance'. So you are OK with firing the best because 'otherwise it's hard'. You are OK with breaking the law because 'otherwise it's hard'. You are OK with lying to people why they are fired because 'otherwise it's hard'. You just want action and don't care if it's smart action, legal, or fair. That is item 3 on the checklist of fascism. "The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation." https://www.openculture.com/2024/11/umberto-ecos-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html https://www.openculture.com/2024/11/umberto-ecos-list-of-the...
ZeroGravitas 2y ago
That's the Heritage Foundation christo-fascist plan. Unfortunately they've teamed up with the mad Libertarian wing of the Republicans who turn up in places like HN and complain that all taxation is theft and are ready to burn the country to the ground because they've been so well programmed by propaganda that originally just wanted to build support for a tax cut for the already rich but metastasized into a superpower destroying cult of insanity.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - ZeroGravitas 2y ago
    You do need to be mad, because you need the exact same system to protect your property rights or your entire philosophy falls apart. "You can't force anyone to do anything" and "This bit of property belongs to me, you need to pay me for access to it" are not logically compatible.
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      Libertarian isn't anarchist. I think most libertarians would agree with the idea that a government should be kept as small as possible while still being able to protect property rights. They're generally capitalists as well, and the primary drivers there are individual choice and property rights.
      - ZeroGravitas 2y ago
        I know. That's why "taxes are theft" and "try not paying your taxes and see what happens" is sophomoric bullshit. It's a state enforcing something. Which you've just admitted is fine when it enforces something you like.
        _heimdall 2y ago
        I'm not quite sure what you're arguing here. For one, I never said I myself am libertarian or anarchist. Your logic here seems circular, but maybe I just misunderstood. It seems reasonable to me that someone who is libertarian and accepts the need for a state but wants it limited to only, or primarily, protecting property rights would admit that its fine to have a government enforce things they like. If someone takes issue with having a government at all they're left with anarchism as the only choice. That's all well and good, people can have the opinion that a state is never justified. That doesn't mean libertarians can't believe in a form of government with whatever limitations they deem reasonable or worth the risk, though.

jimmydoe 2y ago

The plan is not destroying, but taking over. Once the cut narrative is fulfilled, these institutions will regrow with Don King's own people. Despite DDoS on the wave length, DOGE will not really gain much in the end, the real matter to balance the sheet will come from selling Ukraine which obviously takes some time to materialize.

squarefoot 2y ago
You missed the part where they're deleting a ton of scientific papers from government sites.
- mlnj 2y ago
  Just read that the Justice Department deleted the database tracking federal police misconduct. Good luck USA.
  - squarefoot 2y ago
    context: https://www.police1.com/federal-law-enforcement/national-law-enforcement-accountability-database-which-tracked-federal-officer-misconduct-deleted https://www.police1.com/federal-law-enforcement/national-law...
- jimmydoe 2y ago
  it takes time and resources to review them one by one, so once the King restaffed these institutions, some of these papers will be back, as long as they are not inconvenient for the King.
- belter 2y ago
  "U.S. Government Removing EV Chargers From All Federal Buildings Because They Are ‘Not Mission-Critical" - https://electrek.co/2025/02/21/trump-to-shut-down-all-8000-ev-charging-ports-at-federal-govt-buildings/ https://electrek.co/2025/02/21/trump-to-shut-down-all-8000-e...
  - 2y ago

throw_pm23 2y ago

If institutions can only be created and never destroyed, how many institutions per person would we end up with?

TomK32 2y ago
They can be dismantled. By Congress who created them in the first place and gave the president and his executive only a limited range of powers.