The Alt-Right Has More in Common With Economic Leftism Than Salon Wants You to Think

Journalist Donna Minkowitz of The Nation was brave enough to venture into an alt-right conference hosted by prominent white nationalist Richard Spencer a couple of months ago. Some of what she found was to be expected, such as how the individuals there were fueled by racism and hatred. Yet, when the conference’s attendees began to speak about economic issues, they started to sound a lot like leftists. Though some on the left have moved quickly to dismiss this as a cynical attempt to pick up recruits from the left, there is more to the commonality between the economic views of the left and the alt-right. Rather, the alt-right’s economic views jell so smoothly with those of the left because the ideological underpinning is so similar.

A few days after Minkowitz’s article came out, writer Conor Lynch wrote in Salon characterizing the alt-right’s economic leftism as “anti-Semitism wrapped up in an economic veil.” The alt-right, Lynch claims, is simply jumping on the anti-capitalist bandwagon to try to appeal to the left. Yet Lynch ignores the very real illiberal impulses at work behind anti-capitalism of all stripes.

To be clear, I do not mean to compare the left’s social views to those of the alt-right. However, in terms of economics, there is little to separate the underlying philosophy of the left from that of the alt-right. In fact, the alt-right’s economic philosophy looks a lot like leftism repackaged specifically for white males.

Once stripped of racial rhetoric, the underlying economic logic is hard to distinguish from leftist thought.

Take the thoughts of prominent alt-right thinkers on welfare. Spencer, alt-right media personality Mike Cernovich and others have expressed strong support for a universal basic income and single-payer healthcare system. Mike Enoch, host of the alt-right and virulently anti-Semitic podcast The Daily Shoah once said at a rally that “Jewish brainwashing” was encouraging Americans to be “useful idiots for the systems of international finance, capitalism and war.” In Europe, members of the far-right such as National Front party leader Marine Le Pen have embraced a generous social safety net --- albeit paired with restrictions on immigration. Once stripped of racial rhetoric, the underlying economic logic is hard to distinguish from leftist thought.

The alt-right is also strongly opposed to free trade. Steve Bannon, former head of alt-right “news” website Breitbart, has advocated for a trade war with China. This is just one portion of his agenda of “economic nationalism,” or scaling back of trade in order to protect domestic jobs. Uneconomic as these views may be, Bannon’s comments also expose a lack of belief in economic freedom. By wishing to restrict trade, Bannon argues for preventing Americans from buying cheaper or better-valued goods simply because of their origin.

Even Spencer’s critique of the Republican tax reform plan looks like it could have been lifted off of a Bernie Sanders Twitter screed. Spencer calls it “stupid...Reaganite nostalgia” and mocks it for benefiting large corporations (ignoring benefits to small businesses and individuals in the process). Substitute in “Jewish interests” for “the one percent,” and voila: easy-bake economic philosophy.

Fundamentally, the alt-right does not believe in the importance of the individual in economic relationships.

Fundamentally, the alt-right does not believe in the importance of the individual in economic relationships. Minkowitz writes how Spencer argues that “We need to be willing to take care of people and not simply think of ourselves as individuals who can acquire as much wealth as possible.” The most important form of economic organization to the alt-right is race, just as class is the most important form for the left. To those who defend economic freedom, it is the individual.

Proponents of economic freedom argue that the protection of the rights of the individual should be the foundation of a society. Individuals, unrestricted by excessive taxes or rules preventing them from engaging in mutually beneficial trade relationships, are best able to create economic prosperity. This fundamental principle is antithetical to alt-right beliefs.

Instead, the alt-right would find far more in common with the left’s view that a society should aim to maintain liberal thinker John Rawls’s goal of “distributive justice,” or just allocation of goods throughout society. A great deal of the anger and hatred that fuels the alt-right is the belief that goods are unjustly stolen from whites by an “other” --- be it immigrants or Jews. As Joe Carter of the Acton Institute points out, it’s not a coincidence that the term “alt-right” came into use in 2008 --- the phrase became more widespread as the alt-right attracted economically disaffected white males in the aftermath of the 2008 recession.

The alt-right is yet another unfortunate incarnation of socialist economic thinking.

Those on the left would do well to give the overlap between their economic views and those of the alt-right more consideration than Lynch does in Salon. It is not a simple matter of the alt-right cynically targeting lost and sometimes left people, there is genuine commonality between their economic views. This, in itself, does not repudiate leftist economic beliefs, but it illustrates how the alt-right is yet another unfortunate incarnation of socialist economic thinking. May it never reach the heights of Stalinism, Maoism or Chavismo.


Andrew Wilford is a Young Voices advocate and policy analyst residing in Maryland. He writes primarily on economic issues such as regulation, trade and tax policy. Follow him on Twitter @PolicyWilford. Opinions presented here belong solely to the author.

If your state isn’t on this list, it begs the question... why?

The 2020 election exposed a wide range of questionable practices, much of which Glenn covered in a recent TV special. A particularly sinister practice is the use of private money to fund the election. This money came from a slew of partisan private sources, including Mark Zuckerberg, entailed a host of caveats and conditions and were targeted at big city election offices— predominantly democratic areas. The intention is clear: this private money was being used to target Democrat voters and to facilitate their election process over their Republican counterparts.

The use of private funds poses a major flaw in the integrity of our election, one which many states recognized and corrected after the 2020 election. This begs the question: why haven't all states banned private funding in elections? Why do they need private funding? Why don't they care about the strings attached?

Below is the list of all 28 states that have banned private funding in elections. If you don't see your state on this list, it's time to call your state's election board and demand reform.


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

North Carolina

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

North Dakota

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

South Carolina

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

South Dakota

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images


Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

West Virginia

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images


Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

POLL: Was Malaysia Flight 370 taken by a WORMHOLE?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

It's hard to know what's real and what's fake anymore.

With the insanity that seems to grow every day, it is becoming more and more difficult to tell what's true and what's not, what to believe, and what to reject. Anything seems possible.

That's why Glenn had Ashton Forbes on his show, to explore the fringe what most people would consider impossible. Forbes brought Glenn a fascinating but far-out theory that explains the decade-old disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 along with riveting footage that supposedly corroborates his story. Like something out of a sci-fi novel, Forbes made the startling claim that Flight 370 was TELEPORTED via a U.S. military-made wormhole! As crazy as that sounds, the video footage along with Forbes' scientific research made an interesting, if not compelling case.

But what do you think? Do you believe that the U.S. Government can create wormholes? Did they use one to abduct Flight 370? Is the government hiding futuristic tech from the rest of the world? Let us know in the poll below:

Does the military have the capability to create wormholes?

Is the U.S. military somehow responsible for what happened to Malaysia Flight 370?

Is the military in possession of technology beyond what we believe to be possible?

Do you think American military tech is ahead of the other superpowers?

Do you think there would be negative consequences if secret government technology was leaked? 

School today is not like it used to be...

Glenn recently covered how our medical schools have been taken over by gender-affirming, anti-racist, woke garbage, and unfortunately, it doesn't stop there. Education at all levels has been compromised by progressive ideology. From high-level university academics to grade school, American children are constantly being bombarded by the latest backward propaganda from the left. Luckily, in the age of Zoom classes and smartphones, it's harder for teachers to get away their agenda in secret. Here are five videos that show just how corrupt schools really are:

Woke teacher vandalizes pro-life display

Professor Shellyne Rodriguez, an art professor at Hunter College in New York, was caught on camera having a violent argument with a group of pro-life students who were tabling on campus. Rodriguez was later fired from her position after threatening a reporter from the New York Post, who was looking into this incident, with a machete.

Woke professor argues with student after he called police heroes

An unnamed professor from Cypress College was captured having a heated discussion with a student over Zoom. The professor verbally attacked the student, who had given a presentation on "cancel culture" and his support of law enforcement. The university later confirmed that the professor was put on leave after the incident.

Professor goes on Anti-Trump rant 

Professor Olga Perez Stable Cox was filmed by a student going on an anti-Trump rant during her human-sexuality class at Orange Coast College. This rant included Professor Cox describing Trump's election as "an act of terrorism”. The student who filmed this outburst was suspended for an entire semester along with several other punishments, including a three-page apology essay to Professor Cox explaining his actions. Orange Coast College continues to defend Professor Cox, citing the student code of conduct.

Unhinged teacher caught on video going on left-wing political rant

Lehi High School teacher Leah Kinyon was filmed amid a wild, left-wing rant during a chemistry class. Kinyon made several politically charged remarks, which included encouraging students to get vaccinated and calling President Trump a "literal moron." Despite her claims that the school admins "don't give a crap" about her delusional ramblings, a statement from Lehi High School reveals that she "is no longer an employee of Alpine School District."

Far-left Berkeley law professor melts down when a Senator asks her if men can get pregnant

During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Berkeley Law Professor Khiara M. Bridges was asked by Missouri Senator Josh Hawley to clarify earlier statements involving "people with a capacity for pregnancy." The senator's line of questioning is met with a long-winded, frantic rant accusing the senator of being transphobic. When Sen. Hawley tries to clarify further, Professor Bridges makes the outrageous claim that such a line of questioning somehow leads to trans suicides.

Woke ideology trumps medicine in America's top 5 medical schools

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Progressive ideology has infected our most prestigious medical schools and is seeping into our medical system.

As Glenn covered in his latest TV special, "diversity, equity and inclusion" (DEI), and leftist rhetoric have overtaken science and medicine as the focus of medical schools across the nation. The next generation of doctors and nurses is being force-fed DEI and "anti-racist" nonsense at the expense of slipping standards. This has led to a decline in people's trust in the medical industry and for good reason. Woke ideology has already been the driving force behind at least one medical malpractice case, and more are undoubtedly on the way.

All of this is being spearheaded by universities, which have integrated DEI practices into the fabric of their programs. Our top medical schools now require students and staff to participate in mandatory DEI and "anti-racist" classes and training and are adjusting the standards to reflect this new shift in focus. Here are 5 statements from the top American medical schools that show that medicine is no longer their primary focus:

Harvard Medical School

Boston Globe / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Harvard University "Unconscious bias" resource page:

“As members of HMS, we each have a responsibility to create an inclusive community that values all individuals. Barriers to inclusion may include assumptions we make about others that guide our interactions. Recognizing our Unconscious Bias is a critical step in developing a culture of equity and inclusion within HMS and in our partnerships with other communities.”

The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

Rob Carr / Staff | Getty Images

Pulled from the JHM Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity blog:

“One-hour live, virtual unconscious bias training ... [w]ill be required at all Johns Hopkins Health System (JHHS) entities for managers and above; hospital nurse leaders; credentialed providers (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners); and for school of medicine faculty and trainees (including residents, fellows, medical and graduate students, and research postdocs), as well as those at a manager level or above.”

Stanford University School of Medicine

Philip Pacheco / Stringer | Getty Images

Found on the Stanford Medicine Commission on Justice and Equity page:

“The Commission on Justice and Equity—composed of external and internal leaders, experts, and advocates—represents an institution-wide, collaborative effort to dismantle systemic racism and discrimination within our own community and beyond.”

Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

Education Images / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Penn Medicine Commitment to Inclusion, Equity, and Antiracism site:

“We openly acknowledge the role of structural forces of oppression as primary drivers of the disparate health outcomes. We believe that working to reverse the underrepresentation of historically excluded groups is critical in achieving equitable health outcomes. While this is an ongoing journey for our program, here are some of the tangible steps we have taken to achieve an inclusive culture”

Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons

Jeenah Moon / Stringer | Getty Images

Pulled from the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity, Justice, and Anti-Racism page:

"Courses are being revised to be more inclusive and informed by the key principle of race as a social construct and a social determinant of health. We are training faculty that Anti-Racism is not an add-on to a course. Anti-Racism is a pedagogy - a manner of teaching, designing courses, and measuring learning outcomes. We make sure that the classroom environment is inclusive by holding space for respectful conversation and ensuring that we address any “classroom ruptures”– a disorienting dilemma or situation when a bias or microaggression that may occur, providing real time opportunities for professional development, learning, and growth. Racist actions and remarks are never tolerated at Columbia University and will be dealt with following established protocols."