Project 2025 and American Democracy

Project 2025 has controversially taken over the political discourse in the United States as the Biden administration and left-wing commentators claim it is an extremist document that will guide the next Trump administration to authoritarianism. Former President Trump disavowed Project 2025 as he has his own “Agenda 47.” However, many contributors to Project 2025 have worked for President Trump, and they are likely to promote the ideas in his next administration (should he win). More importantly, though, security professionals and analysts should take this work seriously because it shows how Trumpism will work beyond Trump and the ideological and policy framework for the political right in America. The political right is no longer conservative (rightly understood). Rather, it adheres to right-wing (nationalist) populism, and Project 2025 brings back a lost part of American politics from the 19th century – Jacksonian democracy. Therefore, understanding the animating concepts of Project 2025 is essential to analyzing and forecasting American politics today.

Jacksonian Politics and Democracy

Andrew Jackson became president in 1829, and he fundamentally changed American politics by introducing a populist understanding of governance and policy. Prior to his presidency, the executive was directed by “natural aristocrats” attached to certain elitist ideas, but Jacksonians would introduce an expanded idea of participation in democracy (universal white male suffrage) so that the common man’s interests were represented, not just the elites'. There are several other important aspects of Jacksonian ideas that are now returning to American politics, and Project 2025 demonstrates these well.

First, the idea that the president has greatly expanded powers because he is the only true representative of the people, a kind of modern plebeian tribune. Presidents are the only position elected by all of the people across the country. This mean that he viewed the presidency as having expanded powers that previous iterations did not, for example dominating his cabinet by removing anyone he did not think was doing a sufficient job (sound familiar?). Project 2025 essentially argues for similar expansions of executive power for similar reasons, i.e., the tribune of the people is the only one capable of standing up to special interests. The modern version of this concept is the unitary executive theory, holding that because Article II of the Constitution states that executive power is vested in the president and as such controls the executive branch in totality.

The true bane for Jacksonians and Project 2025 is the administrative state, which they believe usurps the will of the president (via the “deep state”) as unelected bureaucrats with ideological interests get to make decisions about public policy. These bureaucrats also undermine the powers intended only for Congress (passing legislation), and they are allegedly hostile to the interests of the people. The recent Supreme Court decision overturning the Chevron deference exemplifies the conservative critique of the administrative state. In that case, National Marine Fisheries Service had required the herring industry to pay about $700 per day to cover the cost of a rule the agency implemented without statutory authority. Chevron allowed regulatory agencies to declare their own rules because they were the ones to “interpret” the law.

As Russ Vought, Trump’s former OMB director, writes in Project 2025, “President[s] today assumes office to find a sprawling federal bureaucracy that all too often is carrying out its own policy plans and preferences…The modern conservative President’s task is to limit, control, and direct the executive branch on behalf of the American people” (p. 43). That is why Project 2025 is attempting to bring back the Jacksonian view of the executive.

Another mechanism to overcome the administrative state that carries out its own policy plans and preferences is by essentially bringing back the spoils system. Jackson used the spoils system to appoint politically loyal people into government to administer the executive branch. Project 2025 controversially calls for fundamentally changing the civil service that would allow the president to appoint and remove significantly larger portions of the government, and this would allow the president to bring the administrative state under his control. Such a reform would undo the principles of the Pendleton Act of 1883 that began the modern administrative state by ending the spoils system. What is important is that Project 2025 seeks to bring back the spoils system to break the administrative state by allowing the president greater control over the executive branch.

Note: For those who don't know, the Pendleton Act came about because President James Garfield was assassinated in 1881 by a man who believed he deserved a job in government that he did not receive.

Poor Man’s Realism

Jacksonian ideas further permeate Project 2025 through their version of the “national interest” in which the United States will more aggressively thwart enemies like China, stop funding/supporting liberal, left-wing, and humanitarian causes, and imposing order in Latin America. Former Director of Policy Planning Dr. Kiron Skinner’s chapter deals with many of these issues and offers the best insight into this poor man’s realism. For example, Skinner rejects the notion of any cooperation with China, and she criticizes corporations for overtly working with the totalitarian regime. Project 2025 also wants to eliminate the support of agencies like USAID that they do not believe serve American interests. Furthermore, the use of force that violates sovereignty in places like Mexico is based on the idea that our foreign policy “simultaneously allows the U.S. to re-posture in its best interests and helps regional partners enter a new century of growth and opportunity.”

While Jackson did not focus on foreign policy during his presidency, there were two major concerns with which he dealt. One problem was America receiving spoliation (compensation) for the capture of ships during the Napoleonic wars. Denmark, Portugal, and Spain paid their compensation, but France refused to do so. In response, Jackson sought congressional authorization for reprisals (the issue was eventually settled without force). The other major issue was settlers to the Texas territory, and Jackson surreptitiously supported the settlers by allowing weapons and funds to be obtained. He would go on to recognize Texas the last day of presidency in 1837. Notice Jackson’s behavior: he threated force or covertly allowed it when America’s interests were challenged, but he did not promote a broader adherence to values or the international order. Project 2025 promotes similar ideas that Jackson did during his presidency, though obviously facing new challenges. Realism, more properly realpolitik, adheres to certain principles that are absent from Project 2025. These include legitimacy of the international order, a balance of power, and respect for sovereignty. Jacksonian foreign policy is only realist in that it places the national interest at the center of international affairs, but it does not follow the other precepts.

A Cultural Battle

The other major political shift in Project 2025 is about the culture war in which direct opposition to both a liberal and left-wing agenda is paramount. Project 2025 is inherently an illiberal document. Illiberal does not mean authoritarian, but it means the rejection of the non-interference view of liberty, i.e., people can do whatever they want as long as it does not harm others. Instead, Project 2025 adheres to the view that policies should also promote the moral good for the community. Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, writes in the forward, "When the Founders spoke of ‘pursuit of Happiness,’ what they meant might be understood today as in essence ‘pursuit of Blessedness.’ That is, an individual must be free to live as his Creator ordained—to flourish” (p. 13). This reinterpretation of America’s foundational document demonstrates their fundamentally different view of social and cultural policies, one that seeks to apply classical republicanism rather than utilitarian liberalism.

In addition, Project 2025 opposes “radical gender ideology,” DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion), critical race theory, preferred pronouns, etc. Cultural issues like these are incorporated into chapters ranging from the State Department to the Education Department. The project views woke beliefs as having permeated the entire government and all major institutions. There are two important points about this cultural battle. First, conservative leaders consistently failed for decades to challenge left-wing values that conservative voters opposed, and this is why groups behind Project 2025 support a significantly more aggressive approach. Second, these cultural battles are between left-wing elites and the middle/working classes; it is not a promotion of historical conservatism based on hierarchy and tradition. The middle/working classes are tired of left-wing elites’ values being imposed upon their children and families, such as teachers preaching gender transition for children and affirmative action that makes it hard for the white working class to get jobs (or at least perceived to be). Culture wars will get far more belligerent, and Project 2025 demonstrates these objectives. ?

Political Risk Analysis

Security professionals and intelligence analysts have a lot to gain by studying Project 2025, especially as it offers insight into medium-to-long-term forecasts. These insights include:

• The shift on the political right from fusionist conservatism to right-wing/nationalist populism.
• A return of Jacksonian politics that will alter the government and policy-making landscape.
• A framework of analysis by which to understand politicians and political decision-making in the Trump administration and Congress.
• Policies related to each department that the next Republican government will seek, which gives time to assess the benefits and costs of those policies for one’s principals or clients.

Rarely are party agendas so neatly laid out in 900 pages, allowing analysts to better understanding the perspective and goals of a party and wider political movement. Analysts should take the time to study Project 2025 to better inform their analysis of the upcoming election, and if Trump should win, the policies that his administration will seek.

Post Script: If you're interested in my geopolitical risk and security consulting services, see here. If you're an NGO seeking specialized insights and analysis, see here.