Project 2029 PGV is a Progressive vision for the future of our country, one that repairs the damage of the current administration and sets a course for a new American future.
The goal of the project is to collaboratively generate a response to 'Project 2025'. Project 2025 took decades; we do not have that time. But we have the means to create a community to 'crowdsource' the document. Ideally this would form a fulcrum for a broader Progressive movement in response to the extreme components of Project 2025 that have been revealed by the administration's actions. We need a new vision; we need new leaders; and we need them on a short time scale.
The project consists of:
Current chapters:
|
|
For details on editing the document, see this.
Why do we need this? We are in a tangle of political philosophies that grow from a variety of sources, a few well-intended, many misguided, and some very dark. An incredible amount of political creativity will be needed to find our way back.
Are we ignoring the 2026 elections? No. The 2026 elections will be critical to the overall goals of Project 2029. However, regaining control of the Executive cannot occur until 2029. By focusing on 2029, we encompass the process that will play out over the next three years, including the 2026 elections.
What parts of the document are open for more work? All of them, from the mechanics of layout and design through the order of sections to the content of chapters and text. Ideally the text would reflect specific policy implementations and cover the entire range of what is needed for the project to succeed. The current administration has used a 'flood the zone' strategy; we need to do the same.
Why use github, and not something like Google Docs? Github offers a different way to track versions, discuss specific changes, and move to finalizing text changes. A Google Doc (or Word doc) can become a tangle of versions, edits, 'track changes', and comments, which can be difficult to disentangle. Maybe github will work better? I think it's worth trying.
Does participation in assembling the document commit anyone to all of its contents? No. Disagreement should be expected, especially around contentious topics. The document can frame the arguments and provide alternatives, ideally creative and novel ones; this by itself would be a useful contribution to the discourse. But Progressive candidates can, of course, have their independent views. Local contexts matter (and national policy should encourage and support local implementations.) There should be a general unity of vision for the project that falls under the term 'Progressive', but that vision includes fostering robust debate.
Why does your website look like was made in 1997? Because I create all the code by hand, and I prefer to do it as simply as possible - no AI, no hard-to-maintain code, just straight HTML + simple CSS that has worked for three decades. Simpler is usually better. But I would love a team to do it in a modern, more compelling style.
Do you ever think it's silly to try to organize something like this, when it's very likely to fail? Every day. We have to try.