Reading the World and Project 2025 Beyond the Second Degree
China's form of capitalism and the form espoused by Project 2025 have significant differences, and I in no way support the idea that Project 2025 is a communist or even socialist plot, but there are broad similarities between the Chinese central government and the government Republican conservatives would like to see Donald Trump bring to the White House.
First, the system in play in China is administered with a clenched fist by the Communist Party; the system envisioned by Project 25 would be administered by the Republic Party with a Republican Supreme Court and a Chief Executive Officer in the Bully Pulpit immune from prosecution. Donald Trump has assured voters that they will never be troubled by voting again if they vote for him. He will “fix it.” Fact Check: Trump has disavowed Project 2025.
Second, the Chinese central government at work today and the Republican form of government to be reshaped in the mold of Project 2025 are alike skeptical of the value of international institutions: China and Project 2025 both express wariness of global governance structures that could limit national autonomy.
Note: The theme of “one world governance” has for years been the fear of the working class in the United States, in large part because of their underdeveloped consciousness of history. “Big Brother” may be the most substantive literary reference in the American memory second only to “Uncle Tom” from “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.”
Passing into the Third Degree, centralized economic planning, Chinese central headquarters is the top shelf of top-down economic planning rather than relying on pure free-market principles. China doesn’t need Jerome Powell. Trump would be Jerome Powell. It that’s not a scary thought…
Project 25 weirdly enough plans to locate economic management in the Office of the President. Trump’s request for a quid pro quo in return for military weapons for Ukraine would not have been impeachable; it would have been “a perfect call…a perfect call…I don’t know what else to tell you.” The nations checkbook would be in his pocket and render his signature critical before any U.S. Treasury check could be cashed.
Fourth—this is where we fall into deep space, the Fourth degree—the Chinese central government and the proposed Project 2025 model are alike politically radical and anti-democratic in their approach to economic inequality. Though they differ in what they do, they both seem to despise moderation as a way to ameliorate economic inequality—or just to get along with one another.
China takes a more interventionist approach, with the government playing a strong role in directing economic activity and addressing inequality. The Chinese system has proposed guidelines like the "five harmonies" to promote balanced development between urban and rural areas.
Project 2025 washes its hands of the problem. Government policies aimed at reducing inequality often have unintended negative consequences, they believe; the best course of action is to do nothing—a radical position in a world writhing from the pain of injustice. Could this be why Trump has no plans for the economy?
China sees rising inequality as a major challenge that needs to be addressed through government action. The "Common Prosperity" initiative aims to tackle inequality, though implementation has been inconsistent.
Project 2025 does not view income inequality itself as inherently problematic. They argue that focusing on inequality is counterproductive and that consumption is a better measure of well-being than income. Here I’ll let Project 2025 advocates speak for themselves:
But efforts to address poverty in America are frequently derailed by misguided ideology — in particular, by the notion that poverty is best understood through the lens of inequality. Far too often, policymakers succumb to the argument that a widening gap between the richest and poorest Americans is the fundamental problem to be solved…
China has implemented some redistributive policies to address the urban-rural divide and regional inequalities. The Republican Party, which aspires to become the partial analogue of the Communist Party in China, opposes redistributive policies, arguing they destroy jobs and reduce opportunities, especially for the poor. Trickle down theory trumps any effort to perfect ethical and empathetic human self-regulation through collective action. Conservatives don’t like unions.
There you have it. A vote for Donald Trump is a vote for transformation of the Oval Office into a modification of Chinese government principles with one huge difference. Project 25 doesn’t believe inequality is a problem. Tell everyone you know.
https://www.heritage.org/commentary/justice-inequality-and-the-poor
https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/project-2025
https://spectrejournal.com/why-china-is-capitalist/
https://academic.oup.com/joeg/article-abstract/13/3/357/943187
https://www.nids.mod.go.jp/english/event/symposium/pdf/2006/e2006_06.pdf?
https://www.afscme93.org/system/files/project_2025_summary_final.pdf?