Matt Blaze on Nostr: It would be a mistake to focus on the first interpretation, because it's easy to ...
It would be a mistake to focus on the first interpretation, because it's easy to refute or dismiss as hype.
He means the second. Project 2025, for example, doesn't talk about eliminating elections. It's a plan for making pervasive changes to the *details* of government under the existing constitutional structure, but that would be extremely difficult for subsequent administrations to undo for a generation or more.
He means the second. Project 2025, for example, doesn't talk about eliminating elections. It's a plan for making pervasive changes to the *details* of government under the existing constitutional structure, but that would be extremely difficult for subsequent administrations to undo for a generation or more.