Project 2025 — Might Makes Right

Ritchie Calvin
7 min readJul 31, 2024

--

2025 by Ritch Calvin

Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it.”
(Abraham Lincoln, 1860)

In the consequential and fateful speech that Lincoln deliver in February 1860 at Cooper Union in New York City, he set out the case against slavery. He argued that opposing slavery was the truly conservative stance since the Founding Fathers were opposed to slavery. He knew that Southerners could not be convinced that slavery was wrong, and he was opposed to the expansion of slavery into the West. He argues above that being in the right, agreeing that slavery is wrong, will make them, all of us, stronger.

The authors of The Conservative Promise seem to turn that sentiment on its head.

Chapter 4, Department of Defense, is penned by Christopher Miller (with significant help from Sergio de la Peña and Chuck DeVore). Early in his career, Miller served as a Green Beret, and he did tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Later, he served in the Trump administration, as Acting U.S. Secretary of Defense and as the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center (among other roles). He also worked as a defense contractor.

Miller was appointed (not confirmed) as Secretary of Defense in 2020 after Trump fired Mark Esper. Trump let Esper go just days after the 2020 election. Miller served during the lame duck period leading up to Biden’s inauguration. The incoming Biden administration accused Miller of hampering the transition of power. Miller denied it. Miller was also criticized for his role in January 6, 2021. Miller ordered several state national Guard troops to reinforce the DC National Guard, though not until hours later.

In this chapter, Miller runs through the various elements of the U.S. military, including all the branches of the armed services.

Several things stand out:

1) He declares China as the #1 threat to the U.S., ignoring that he oversaw an internal insurrection that posed a grave threat to U.S. security.

2) He advocates for growth in defense spending, despite noting that it already comprises over 50% of all discretionary funding. Defense contractors like that sort of thing.

3) He calls for the reinstatement — with back pay — of all service members who refused COVID vaccines.

4) He wants all queer and trans people out of the armed forces. Insurrection is OK; insubordination is OK; being queer is not OK.

1) China. Well, look, China is a potential threat. Anyone who says otherwise is naive, jaded, or both. China has a huge population. China has a huge military (with a huge budget). China has a huge economy (though it is not quite as lustrous as it was a few years ago). China is developing nuclear capabilities. All of those are true.

Is China the #1 threat to the US? China is unlikely to mount a direct assault on U.S. soil. It IS more likely to take on allies, such as Taiwan. The balance of influence and power in the Asia/Southeast Asia region is delicate. Alliances with Japan and Taiwan help balance the influence that China has in the region. China is more likely to take (or attempt to take) Taiwan to alter the balance of power than to attack us directly. Even so, that’s not nothing.

According the FBI, China does pose a huge risk to the U.S. However, the FBI does not name the military but rather counterintelligence and economic espionage. Director Christopher Wray has said:

“The greatest long-term threat to our nation’s information and intellectual property, and to our economic vitality, is the counterintelligence and economic espionage threat from China.”

While Miller does suggest we need a robust counterintelligence, he seems primarily concerned with military might. He concludes by detailing how we need to ramp up Special Forces, Nuclear capabilities, and Missile capabilities. None of those are particularly useful in the above scenarios.

But what about the threat from Russia? Miller lists Russia as the second gravest threat to the U.S. He acknowledges that Russia bid to take over Ukraine is a problem and threatens to destabilize Western democracies. (Whether or not Miller is in favor of continued economic and military support of Ukraine is les clear here.)

But what about INTERNAL threats?

In 2024, the Council on Foreign Relations conducted its annual Preventative Priorities Study (PPS). He survey questions top security experts about threats to the U.S. The survey asks foreign policy experts to evaluate 30 ongoing conflicts and assess their potential as threat. In 2024, for the first time, the survey “found that the leading concern for foreign policy experts is not a foreign threat to U.S. interests, but the possibility of domestic terrorism and acts of political violence in the United States, particularly around the 2024 presidential election.” In fact, the PPS ranks the three likeliest and three highest impact situations as: domestic terrorism; Israel/Hamas conflict; Central America/Mexico.

China is fifth on the ranking of likelihood and impact.

2) Spending. In the year 2000, the U.S. spent $1136 per capita on all military expenses. It was the second largest per capita expenditure in the world on military (United Arab Emirates was first). Others trailed well behind: Saudi Arabia $966/capita; Norway $650/capita; France $481/capita, and China at $17/capita. Etc.

In 2020, the U.S. expenditure at $2351/capita, with Saudi Arabia at $1652, Norway at $1312, Australia at $1080, China at $175. So, U.S. expenditure doubled in 20 years; Chinese spending increased tenfold, but is still at a small fraction of U.S. expenses.

Even so, Miller wants U.S. expenditure on military to increase, and he wants the spending of all allies to increase, as well. In other words, he wants every allied country to also be a military power.

3) COVID. The situation got quite a lot of press as it happened. The U.S. military required soldiers and staff to get COVID vaccines. Not much of a surprise. The military has required MANY vaccines for all soldiers and staff for decades. Not a new mandate. When some people refused to get a COVID vaccine, they were terminated. The Conservative Promise mentions vaccines and vaccine mandates 45 times. For Project 2025, vaccine mandates are a symbol of government overreach and “woke” science.

It’s not a new policy; they have gotten many other vaccines; the science supported using the vaccines; the military is charged with ensuring the safety of the civilian population. Failing to get a vaccine jeopardized that mission.

It seems entirely inconsistent for an ex-military officer (her retired as a colonel) to reward such insubordination. They were given an order by their commanders, and they refused. That’s kind of how the military works. And, yet, Miller and Project 2025 bemoan the “woke” policies of the Biden administration but accept rank insubordination because it stems from a shared ideology.

4) Queer folx in the military. Miller does not spend a lot of time on the issue of queer and trans service members. He addresses the issue under the category of “loss of trust” by the public in the military. Miller argues — without any evidence — that part of the reason people trust the military less in because they do not trust a military with gay, lesbian, and trans soldiers.

He notes that recruitment is down. He does not explore the possibility that recruitment might be down because the population has become aware of overreach by the U.S. military. He does explore the possibility that recruitment is down because the Commander in Chief calls soldiers “suckers” and “losers.”

No, it must be the gays and lesbians. He believes that compelling the military to accept gay, lesbian, and trans recruits is an “experiment” perpetrated on the troops, and is a case of “social engineering” (103).

“Gender dysphoria is incompatible with the demands of military service, and the use of public monies for transgender surgeries or to facilitate abortion for service members should be ended.” (104).

Severe asthma might well by a physical reason to keep someone from discharging their military duties. Apparently “bone spurs” is another reason to not serve in the military. Having HIV (103) does not mean you cannot fulfill your duties. Having “gender dysphoria” (103, 104) does not preclude you fulfilling your duties.

Indeed, Miller says:

“Physical fitness requirements should be based on the occupational field without consideration of gender, race, ethnicity, or orientation.” (emphasis added) (103)

Let’s take him at his word. If the person with HIV can meet physical fitness requirements and perform their duties, then they are qualified, whether they are queer, or not. If the person with gender dysphoria can meet the physical requirements and fulfill their duties, then they should be allowed to serve.

It seems as though Miller is contradicting himself and dismissing these soldiers solely on consideration of their “orientation.”

Miller’s vision for the Department of Defense is characterized by warmongering, inflated budgets, and discrimination. We can do better.

Ritch Calvin is an Associate Professor of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at SUNY Stony Brook. He is the author of Queering SF: Readings (Aqueduct Press), Feminist Epistemology and Feminist Science Fiction (Palgrave McMillan) and edited a collection of essays on Gilmore Girls (McFarland). His most recent book (2024) is Queering SF Comics: Readings (Aqueduct Press).

--

--

No responses yet