Existential risks are defined as “risks that threaten the destruction of humanity’s long-term potential.” Over the long term, climate change is an existential threat, and it is younger generations and those still to come who will more fully bear the brunt of a warming planet. The precise method in which you deal with an existential threat depends entirely on its proximity and probability. Many “existential threats” are conspiracy theories, propaganda, or pseudoscience. Your first step should always be to make sure you’re not buying into one of those things. Once you have identified an existential threat, you must deal with it; such is their nature. Today, a truly existential threat to the United States would entail any combination of events orchestrated by individuals being able to permanently take away its freedoms and change its democratic form of government, regardless of the preference of the citizenry.
Donald Trump stunned the political world in 2016 when he became the first person without government or military experience ever to be elected president of the United States. Trump’s policy record included major changes at home and abroad. He achieved a string of long-sought conservative victories domestically, including the biggest corporate tax cuts on record, the elimination of scores of environmental regulations and a reshaping of the federal judiciary. Trump’s status as a political outsider, his outspoken nature and his willingness to upend past customs and expectations of presidential behavior made him a constant focus of public attention, as well as a source of deep partisan divisions. In addition to the intense divisions that emerged over Trump personally, his tenure saw a further widening of the gulf between Republicans and Democrats over core political values and issues, including in areas that weren’t especially partisan before his arrival.1
Donald Trump represents an existential threat to the current system. Trump won the nomination as the candidate who lied the most, won the presidency as someone known to lie; has an unshakable base despite ongoing lies. Underlying social issues made this possible. Enablers support the Trump’s behavior out of fear, love, or a misguided sense of loyalty. Autocrats, like Trump, surround themselves with their political cronies and lackies rather than competent people – have no way of eliciting, recognizing or assessing useful criticism. They are unwilling to hear anything negative – that leads to very bad decisions. There’s no doubt that Donald Trump was the instigator of the 2020 insurrection. But the former president’s schemes never would have gotten far (or even off the ground) without the participation of right-wing media executives, lawyers and pliant state officials. Without holding these enablers accountable, democracy and the rule of law will remain at risk.
New research suggests populism and conspiracy mentality are both rooted in a fundamental disposition of distrust. Populism is a political ideology that claims to represent the interests of the common people against those of the elite. Conspiracy theories, on the other hand, are beliefs that attribute secret or hidden forces, such as government agencies or powerful individuals, as the cause of significant events or outcomes. Both populists and conspiracy theorists tend to view the world in terms of a struggle between a malevolent elite and an oppressed common people. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, called for the president to clean out “leftists” from the State and Justice departments. Bannon has called not only for ridding the government of holdovers from past administrations, but for deconstructing the “administrative state.” It is no small wonder, with such advice, Trump doesn’t hesitate to sow distrust of the justice system.2
Trump draws fervent support from conservatives who believe the president is willing to restore the country to its moral and constitutional foundations. Conservatives accepted Trump because he appointed their judges, and rolled back regulations they hate. These conservatives claim liberals pose “an existential threat” to the country, and the response includes need to turn to Natural law which is the foundation upon which the spirit of the US Constitution is built. Today followers are reverse-engineering an intellectual doctrine to match Trump’s basic instincts. The movement has two disciples from California: Tucker Carlson advances a form of victim-politics populism and has learned to translate the New Right’s most interesting ideas into Fox-worthy bombast. Stephen Miller is credited with shaping the racist and draconian immigration policies of President Trump, which include the zero-tolerance policy, that includes family separation, the Muslim ban and ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Both support Trump’s politics of white fear.
The Heritage Foundation, founded in 1973, advocated for pro-business policies and anti-communism in its early years, but distinguished itself from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) by also advocating for cultural issues that were important to Christian conservatives. Among the 2,000 Heritage proposals, approximately 60% of them were implemented or initiated by the end of Reagan’s first year in office. Reagan later called the Heritage Foundation a “vital force” during his presidency. In 1986, in recognition of the Heritage Foundation’s fast-growing influence, Time magazine labeled the Heritage Foundation “the foremost of the new breed of advocacy tanks.” Following Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential election, the Heritage Foundation obtained influence in his presidential transition and administration. One reason for the Heritage Foundation’s disproportionate influence relative to other conservative think tanks, was that other conservative think tanks had “Never Trump” staff during the 2016 presidential election, while the Heritage Foundation ultimately signaled that it would be supportive of him.
Project 2025, The Heritage Foundation’s plan for how Trump, should he win the November election, can vastly remake the federal government. An existential threat, put simply, is a threat to society – a veritable threat to existence does not have to be present for someone to experience a sense of existential threat. Right-wing misinformation is a direct and immediate threat to the American public. Today established Republican proxies are using social media to spread disinformation, suppress political participation, and undermine oppositional parties. Conspiracy theories are captivating because they provide explanations for confusing, emotional and ambiguous events especially when official explanations seem inadequate. Although conspiracies are frequently outlandish and implausible assertions, their power lies in the fact that they confirm what people want to believe. Conspiracy theories may be construed as opportunistic attributions of power that allow (relatively powerful groups) to advance their interests.
Basically, Project 2025 is a roadmap to create a society where personal freedoms are subordinate to the interests of a select few. It would take a wreaking ball to US institutions that are in place and undermine democratic processes that ensure democracy for all. While Trump tries to distance himself from Project 2025, we must focus on Trump’s connections to Project 2025. It would give Trump limitless power over daily lives and let him use the presidency to enact ‘revenge’ on his enemies, ban abortion nationwide and punish women who have an abortion, and gut the checks and balances. Ronald Reagan noted: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.” This existential threat to democracy makes 2024 election the most important one in decades.
Friedrich Nietzsche observed, “Sometimes people don’t want to hear the truth because they don’t want their illusions destroyed.” Even what we believe we see with our own eyes is made up from memory. When referring to blind spots in our vision that we do not notice, much of what you see ‘out there’ is actually manufactured ‘in here’ by your brain. Malleable memory, the brain filling in gaps in vision, and the biggest culprit, defense mechanisms, as well as the desire to seek pleasure and avoid pain leading to an implicit preference toward a lie, should at least contribute to one realizing thinking cannot be trusted. People want to hear what they want to hear. When two candidates are running and one of them tells the truth and the other says what the public wants to hear (lies), regrettably, the one who says what the public wants to hear often wins the election.
When faced with an existential threat, what do you do? By working out what things we can control, let’s us make decisions about what everyone needs to know and how to act to meet those needs. Then by taking step-by-step action on those things identified, we can increase our sense of agency. We must become involved in the messages on social media. This requires balancing news on worst-case scenarios with other information and activities. Remember the damage already caused from involvement of the Heritage Foundation – the consequences of decisions around birth control and presidential immunity triggered by a conservative supreme court! It is necessary to identify the worst-case scenario, and get discussion of it in the general public, specifically, that Trump and Project 2025 are connected at the hip. These proposals threaten freedom from government interference should the Republican nominee win the 2024 presidential election. To counter this threat to democracy, everyone must show up at the ballot box to reject Trump and Project 2025.
1 https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/01/29/how-america-changed-during-donald-trumps-presidency/