Peter Thiel has a plan to save the world, and it looks like a nightmare. He’s casting around for scapegoats, but perhaps Peter Thiel and the Antichrist are one and the same.
The PayPal co-founder, Facebook‘s first outside investor, and Silicon Valley‘s most influential political operator has spent years developing a political philosophy so strange that most people assume it can’t be serious. Democracy and freedom are incompatible, he says. Global cooperation is the Antichrist. The only hope for civilization is absolute monarchy modeled on tech startups. And he’s not just theorizing—he’s building it.
Thiel has poured millions into political campaigns, funded think tanks, mentored a generation of “New Right” intellectuals and alt-Right screeders, and cultivated politicians who share his vision. He’s amplified fringe thinkers like Curtis Yarvin (the blogger behind “Neoreaction” who openly advocates abolishing democracy), but Thiel’s worldview is uniquely his own—a bizarre synthesis of Christian eschatology, corporate governance theory, and techno-authoritarianism that’s far more sophisticated and disturbing than anything coming from the intellectual dark web.
This isn’t just eccentric billionaire philosophy. Thiel’s protégés include a sitting Vice President (J.D. Vance) and multiple Republican senators. His ideas circulate through conservative think tanks and Trump‘s inner circle. What sounds like science fiction is increasingly becoming Republican policy doctrine.
The media often portrays Thiel as an enigmatic libertarian or contrarian thinker. But that framing misses what’s actually happening. This is a systematic rejection of 250 years of democratic governance, wrapped in theological language and corporate efficiency rhetoric. And it’s weirder and more methodical than most people realize.
Peter Thiel and the Antichrist in 8 minutes (video)
This NotebookLM video does a great job explaining the background and impact of Thiel’s dangerously apocalyptic rhetoric inspired by a Nazi theorist — and below it you can find a deeper explanation of all major points:
Here are the five interlocking beliefs that form Thiel’s vision—and why each one should terrify you.
1. Democracy Is the Bug, Not the Feature—Replace It With a Tech Startup Dictatorship
Thiel doesn’t just critique democracy—he’s concluded it’s fundamentally incompatible with freedom. In a 2009 essay, he wrote: “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.” Not ideal partners; not in tension — but incompatible.
His alternative is coldly corporate: run countries like founders run startups. One CEO. One vision. Absolute authority. No consensus. No debate. No democracy.
The Founders knew acutely the pains of centuries of religious warfare in modern Europe and resoundingly did not want that for their new nation. Many of them moreover knew religious persecution intimately — some whose families fled the Church of England for fear of being imprisoned, burned at the stake, or worse. Is America a Christian nation? Although many Christians certainly have come here, in a legal and political sense the nation’s founders wanted precisely the opposite of the “Christian nation” they were breaking with by pursuing independence from the British.
Contrary to the disinformation spread by Christian nationalists today, the people who founded the United States explicitly saw religious zealotry as one of the primary dangers to a democratic republic. They feared demagoguery and the abuse of power that tilts public apparatus towards corrupt private interest. The Founders knew that religion could be a source of strife for the fledgling nation as easily as it could be a strength, and they took great pains to carefully balance the needs of religious expression and secular interests in architecting the country.
The main impetus for a large percentage of the early colonists who came to the Americas was the quest for a home where they could enjoy the free exercise of religion. The Protestant Reformation had begun in Europe about a century before the first American colonies were founded, and a number of new religious sects were straining at the bonds of the Catholic Church’s continued hegemony. Puritans, Mennonites, Quakers, Jesuits, Huguenots, Dunkers, Jews, Amish, Lutherans, Moravians, Schwenkfeldians, and more escaped the sometimes deadly persecutions of the churches of Europe to seek a place to worship God in their own chosen ways.
By the late 18th century when Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, many religious flowers were blooming within the 13 colonies. He had seen for himself the pitfalls of the experiments in which a unitary control of religion by one church or sect led to conflict, injustice, and violence. Jefferson and the nation’s other founders were staunchly against the idea of establishing a theocracy in America:
The founding fathers made a conscious break from the European tradition of a national state church.
The words Bible, Christianity, Jesus, and God do not appear in our founding documents.
The handful of states who who supported “established churches” abandoned the practice by the mid-19th century.
Thomas Jefferson wrote that his Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom was written on behalf of “the Jew and the gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindu and the infidel of every denomination.” In the text he responds negatively to VA’s harassment of Baptist preachers — one of many occasions on which he spoke out sharply against the encroachment of religion upon political power.
The Constitution explicitly forbids a religious test for holding foreign office.
The First Amendment in the Bill of Rights guarantees that “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
There is a right-wing conspiracy theory aiming to discredit the phrase “wall of separation between church and state” by claiming that those exact words aren’t found in the Constitution.
The phrase comes from Thomas Jefferson’s 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists, wherein he is describing the thinking of the Founders about the meaning of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which Jefferson contemplates “with sovereign reverence.”
The phrase is echoed by James Madison in an 1803 letter opposing the building of churches on government land: “The purpose of separation of Church and State is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”
The 1796 Treaty of Tripoli states in Article 11: “As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” — President George Washington first ordered the negotiation of a treaty in 1795, and President John Adams sent the treaty to the Senate for ratification in 1797, with this article widely interpreted to mean a reiteration of the purpose of the Establishment Clause to create a secular state, i.e. one that would not ever be going to holy war with Tripoli.
Critical Dates for Religious Freedom in America
From the very beginning the Founders made clear they did not want to repeat the mistakes of Old Europe. They established a secular government that offered religious freedom to many who had felt persecuted in their homelands — for generations to come.
Get a quick overview of some of the most important moments in American history and its founding documents with our interactive timeline below.
The Founders were deists
Moreover, the majority of the prominent Founders were deists — they recognized the long tradition of Judeo-Christian order in society, but consciously broke from it in their creation of the legal entity of the United States, via the Establishment Clause and numerous other devices. The founders were creatures of The Enlightenment, and were very much influenced by the latest developments of their day including statistics, empiricism, numerous scientific advancements, and the pursuit of knowledge and logical decision-making.
What Deism Actually Meant: Deism in the 18th century was a rationalist religious philosophy that accepted the existence of a creator God based on reason and observation of the natural world, but rejected supernatural revelation, miracles, and divine intervention in human affairs. Think of it as “God as clockmaker” — God designed the universe with rational laws, set it in motion, and then stepped back. This was a radical departure from traditional Christianity.
Empiricism over revelation — knowledge comes from observation and reason, not scripture
Natural rights derived from human nature and reason, not divine command
Social contract theory — government legitimacy comes from consent of the governed, not God’s anointing
Scientific method — Newton’s physics showed that the universe operated by discoverable natural laws
This was a revolutionary shift. They were designing a government based on Enlightenment principles in an era when most of the world still operated under divine-right monarchy.
The European Church-State Problem They Rejected:
The Founders had vivid historical examples of why mixing religion and state power was dangerous:
The Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648) killed roughly 8 million Europeans in religious conflict
The Spanish Inquisition showed what happens when church and state merge
Various European states still had official churches that persecuted religious minorities — prompting many of them to consider a new line in the American colonies
They saw how “established” (government-sponsored) religions inevitably led to:
Paine went even further than most Founders. In “The Age of Reason” (1794), he argued:
All national churches are “human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind”
Revelation is meaningless — “it is revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other”
True religion is simply “to do justice, love mercy, and endeavor to make our fellow-creatures happy”
He predicted that as education and reason spread, traditional organized religion would wither
This was considered extremely radical — even scandalous — at the time. Yet Paine was celebrated as a hero of the Revolution and widely read. He once lamented that “Persecution is not an original feature in any religion; but it is always the strongly marked feature of all religions established by law.”
The Structural Safeguards They Built:
This wasn’t just philosophy — they built specific mechanisms:
No religious test for office (Article VI)
Establishment Clause — no official national religion
Free Exercise Clause — no prohibition of religious practice
Disestablishment at state level — states gradually abandoned their established churches (Massachusetts was last in 1833)
The framers of our Constitution who established this nation distrusted the concept of divine right of kings that existed in Europe under its historical monarchies. We fought a revolution to leave all that behind for good reason. They were adamantly against the idea of a national church, and were clear and insistent about the necessity of keeping the realms of religion and politics independent of each other.
It is the Christian nationalists who have it backwards — America was never a Christian nation that lost its way. Rather, the United States was founded as a secular nation and has become truer to fulfilling that mission over the centuries. It is the Project 2025 folks who are engaging in revisionist history, inventing a mythical past for the country that simply didn’t exist.
Black and white thinking is the tendency to see things in extremes, viewing the world through a very polarized lens. Even complex moral issues are seen as clearcut, with simple right and wrong answers and no gray areas in between.
Also referred to as all-or-nothing thinking or dichotomous thinking, black and white thinking is a very rigid and binary way of looking at the world. Black and white thinkers tend to categorize things, events, people, and experiences as either completely good or completely bad, without acknowledging any nuance or shades of gray. This can manifest in various aspects of their lives including relationships, decision-making, and self-evaluation. Black and white thinking can be a defense mechanism, as it provides a sense of certainty and control in situations that are complex, uncertain, or anxiety-provoking.
For example, a person who engages in black and white thinking may view their work performance as either completely successful or a complete failure, without considering any middle ground. They may view themselves as either a “good” or “bad” person, based on a single action or mistake. This type of extreme thinking can lead to feelings of extreme anxiety, depression, and self-doubt, as well as difficulties in personal and professional relationships.
Black and white thinking in political psychology
Black and white thinking can also be seen in political or social contexts, where individuals categorize people or groups as either completely good or completely bad, without acknowledging any nuances or complexities. This type of thinking can lead to polarizing beliefs, rigid ideologies, and an unwillingness to engage in constructive dialogue or compromise.
The origins of black and white thinking are complex and multifaceted, but it can stem from a variety of factors, including childhood experiences, cultural and societal influences, and psychological disorders including personality disorder. For example, individuals who have experienced trauma or abuse may engage in black and white thinking as a way to cope with the complexity and ambiguity of their experiences. Similarly, cultural or societal influences that promote a strict adherence to binary categories can also contribute to black and white thinking.
Psychological disorders such as borderline personality disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and eating disorders are also associated with black and white thinking. For example, individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD) may see themselves or others as either completely good or completely bad, without any middle ground. This type of thinking can lead to unstable relationships, impulsive behavior, and emotional dysregulation.
Narcissists too, especially malignant narcissists, tend to exhibit black and white thinking, with the frequent framing of any narrative as being primarily about themselves (good/The Hero) and everyone else (bad/The Other).
Black and White Thinking: Understanding binary cognition in the modern era
The Digital Amplification of Binary Thinking
The modern information ecosystem has created unprecedented conditions for black and white thinking to flourish. Social media algorithms, designed to maximize engagement, systematically promote content that evokes strong emotional responses—often content that presents complex issues in oversimplified, polarizing terms.
Algorithmic Reinforcement Mechanisms
Contemporary digital platforms operate on engagement metrics that inadvertently reward binary thinking:
Filter Bubble Formation: Recommendation algorithms create echo chambers where users primarily encounter information that confirms their existing beliefs
Engagement Optimization: Content that provokes outrage or strong agreement receives higher distribution (and ultimately, revenue), marginalizing nuanced perspectives
Attention Economy Dynamics: The competition for limited attention spans incentivizes simplified, emotionally charged messaging over complex analysis — going straight for the jugular of common mental heuristics works
Information Processing Under Cognitive Load
Research in cognitive psychology demonstrates that when individuals experience high cognitive load—a common state in our information-saturated environment—they default to simplified decision-making heuristics. This neurological tendency combines with digital information delivery systems to create systematic biases toward binary categorization.
Contemporary Political Manifestations
Black and white thinking has become increasingly prominent in political discourse, with profound implications for democratic institutions and social cohesion.
Legislative Dynamics: Congressional voting patterns show dramatic increases in party-line voting, with bipartisan legislation becoming increasingly rare. This reflects not just strategic positioning but fundamental shifts in how political actors conceptualize policy problems and solutions.
Media Ecosystem Fragmentation: The proliferation of ideologically aligned media sources enables individuals to construct information diets that reinforce binary worldviews. Traditional journalistic ethics of objectivity and balance in a fundamentally evidentiary role have been challenged by partisan media models that explicitly advocate for particular political perspectives.
Electoral Coalition Building: Political campaigns increasingly rely on mobilizing base supporters through appeals to fundamental differences with opponents, rather than building broad coalitions through compromise and incremental policy development.
Identity-Based Political Cognition
Modern political psychology research reveals how black and white thinking intersects with identity formation:
Social Identity Theory: Individuals derive significant psychological satisfaction from in-group membership and out-group differentiation
Motivated Reasoning: People process political information in ways that protect their group identities and existing belief systems
Moral Foundations: Different political coalitions emphasize different moral frameworks, creating seemingly irreconcilable worldview differences
Systemic Analysis: Institutional Impacts
Black and white thinking creates cascade effects across multiple institutional systems:
Democratic Governance Challenges
Compromise Mechanisms: Effective democratic governance requires negotiation and compromise between competing interests. Binary thinking undermines these processes by framing compromise as betrayal of fundamental principles.
Policy Implementation: Complex policy challenges—from healthcare to climate change to economic inequality—require nuanced, multifaceted solutions. Binary thinking promotes oversimplified policy approaches that often fail to address underlying systemic issues.
Constitutional Design: Democratic institutions assume citizens capable of evaluating competing claims and making informed choices. Black and white thinking can undermine these foundational assumptions necessary to making democracy work.
Economic System Implications
Market Dynamics: Binary thinking in economic contexts can create boom-bust cycles, as investors and consumers oscillate between extreme optimism and pessimism without recognizing gradual trends and mixed signals.
Innovation Ecosystems: Complex technological and business model innovation requires tolerance for ambiguity and iterative development. Binary thinking can stifle innovation by demanding immediate, clear success metrics. It turns out that diversity is good to the bottom line, actually.
Labor Relations: Effective workplace dynamics require ongoing negotiation between competing interests. Binary thinking can transform routine workplace disagreements into fundamental conflicts.
Mental Model Frameworks for Analysis
Understanding black and white thinking requires sophisticated analytical frameworks:
The Cognitive Bias Cascade Model
Black and white thinking rarely operates in isolation but typically forms part of broader cognitive bias patterns:
Confirmation Bias: Seeking information that confirms existing beliefs
Group Attribution Error: Assuming individual group members represent entire groups
Systems Thinking Applications
Effective analysis of black and white thinking requires systems-level perspective:
Feedback Loops: How binary thinking creates self-reinforcing cycles that become increasingly difficult to break
Emergence Properties: How individual cognitive patterns create collective social and political dynamics
Leverage Points: Identifying where interventions might most effectively disrupt binary thinking patterns
Historical Pattern Recognition
Historical analysis reveals recurring patterns in how societies navigate between binary and nuanced thinking:
Crisis Periods: Times of social stress typically increase binary thinking as individuals seek certainty and clear action frameworks
Institutional Adaptation: How democratic institutions evolve mechanisms to manage polarization and maintain governance capacity
Cultural Evolution: How societies develop norms and practices that promote or discourage binary thinking
Contemporary Case Studies
Social Media Discourse Patterns
Analysis of millions of social media posts reveals systematic patterns in how binary thinking spreads:
Viral Content Characteristics: Posts that go viral disproportionately feature binary framing of complex issues
Engagement Metrics: Binary content generates higher levels of shares, comments, and emotional reactions
Network Effects: Binary thinking spreads through social networks more rapidly than nuanced analysis
Political Movement Dynamics
Examination of contemporary political movements reveals how binary thinking shapes organizational development:
Movement Mobilization: Binary framing helps movements build initial coalition support by clarifying friend-enemy distinctions
Strategic Communication: Binary messaging dominates political advertising and fundraising appeals
Coalition Maintenance: Binary thinking can help maintain group cohesion but may limit strategic flexibility
Crisis Response Patterns
Analysis of responses to major crises—from pandemics to economic disruptions to international conflicts—demonstrates how binary thinking affects collective decision-making:
Policy Development: Crisis conditions often promote binary policy choices that may not address underlying complexity
Public Communication: Crisis communication frequently relies on binary framing to motivate public compliance with policy measures
International Relations: Crisis situations can push diplomatic relations toward binary alliance structures
Neurological and Psychological Foundations
Understanding black and white thinking requires examining its neurological and psychological foundations:
Cognitive Processing Systems
System 1 vs System 2 Thinking: Daniel Kahneman’s research demonstrates how automatic, intuitive thinking (System 1) tends toward binary categorization, while deliberative thinking (System 2) enables more nuanced analysis.
Threat Detection Mechanisms: Evolutionary psychology suggests that binary thinking may have adaptive advantages in environments requiring quick threat assessment, but becomes maladaptive in complex modern contexts.
Cognitive Load Theory: When individuals experience high cognitive load, they default to simplified decision-making processes that favor binary categorization.
Identity Formation: Erik Erikson’s work on identity development demonstrates how binary thinking can serve important functions during identity formation periods but may become problematic if it persists into adulthood.
Attachment Theory: Insecure attachment patterns can promote binary thinking about relationships and social situations as defensive mechanisms.
Organizational and Institutional Responses
Educational System Adaptations
Educational institutions increasingly recognize the need to develop students’ capacity for nuanced thinking:
Critical Thinking Curricula: Programs specifically designed to help students recognize and resist binary thinking patterns
Media Literacy: Training students to recognize how information systems promote simplified thinking
Interdisciplinary Approaches: Educational approaches that demonstrate how complex problems require multiple perspectives and methodological approaches
Democratic Institution Reforms
Various proposals aim to reduce the institutional incentives for binary thinking:
Electoral System Design: Ranked-choice voting and other electoral innovations that reward coalition-building over polarization
Deliberative Democracy: Institutional mechanisms that bring citizens together for structured discussion of complex policy issues
Legislative Process Reform: Procedural changes that incentivize negotiation and compromise over partisan positioning
Technology Platform Governance
Growing recognition of how digital platforms shape thinking patterns has led to various reform proposals:
Algorithm Transparency: Requiring platforms to disclose how their algorithms prioritize content
Digital Literacy: Public education initiatives to help users recognize and resist algorithmic manipulation
Constructive Frameworks for Addressing Binary Thinking
Individual-Level Interventions
Mindfulness Practices: Regular mindfulness meditation has been shown to increase tolerance for ambiguity and reduce automatic binary categorization.
Cognitive Behavioral Techniques: Specific therapeutic approaches for identifying and challenging binary thought patterns.
Exposure to Complexity: Deliberately seeking out information sources and experiences that present complex, nuanced perspectives on important issues.
Perspective-Taking Exercises: Structured practices for understanding how situations appear from multiple viewpoints.
Community-Level Initiatives
Dialogue and Deliberation Programs: Community-based initiatives that bring together people with different perspectives for structured conversation about local issues.
Collaborative Problem-Solving: Community projects that require cooperation across different groups and perspectives.
Civic Education: Educational programs that help citizens understand how democratic institutions work and why compromise is essential for effective governance.
Cross-Cutting Social Connections: Initiatives that help people form relationships across traditional dividing lines.
Institutional Design Principles
Procedural Safeguards: Institutional mechanisms that slow down decision-making processes to allow for more deliberative consideration of complex issues.
Stakeholder Inclusion: Decision-making processes that systematically include multiple perspectives and interests.
Transparency and Accountability: Mechanisms that make decision-making processes visible and subject to public scrutiny.
Adaptive Management: Institutional frameworks that allow for policy adjustment based on evidence and changing circumstances.
Implications for Democratic Resilience
The prevalence of black and white thinking poses significant challenges for democratic governance:
Representation and Legitimacy
Electoral Representation: Binary thinking can undermine representative democracy by making it difficult for elected officials to represent diverse constituencies with complex, sometimes conflicting interests.
Institutional Legitimacy: When citizens view political institutions through binary lenses, it becomes difficult to maintain the shared commitment to democratic norms necessary for effective governance.
Minority Rights: Binary thinking can threaten minority rights by reducing complex questions of individual liberty and collective welfare to simple majority-minority power dynamics.
Policy Development and Implementation
Evidence-Based Policy: Effective policy development requires careful consideration of evidence, trade-offs, and unintended consequences—all of which are undermined by binary thinking.
Policy Adaptation: Democratic institutions must be able to adapt policies based on new evidence and changing circumstances, which requires tolerance for complexity and ambiguity.
Cross-Sector Coordination: Modern policy challenges often require coordination across different levels of government and between public and private sectors, which is complicated by binary thinking.
Future Research Directions
Understanding and addressing black and white thinking requires ongoing research across multiple disciplines:
Technology and Cognition
AI and Decision-Making: How artificial intelligence systems might be designed to promote nuanced rather than binary thinking.
Digital Environment Design: Research on how different digital interface designs affect cognitive processing and decision-making.
Virtual Reality and Perspective-Taking: How immersive technologies might be used to help individuals understand complex situations from multiple perspectives.
Political Psychology and Behavior
Motivation and Binary Thinking: Research on what motivates individuals to adopt or resist binary thinking patterns in political contexts.
Group Dynamics: How binary thinking spreads through social networks and political organizations.
Leadership and Framing: How political leaders can effectively communicate about complex issues without resorting to binary framing.
Institutional Design and Reform
Comparative Democratic Systems: Analysis of how different democratic institutions manage polarization and promote constructive political discourse.
Experimental Governance: Small-scale experiments with different institutional designs that might reduce incentives for binary thinking.
Technology Governance: Research on how to regulate digital platforms in ways that promote constructive rather than polarizing discourse.
Toward cognitive complexity
Black and white thinking represents a fundamental challenge to effective individual decision-making, social cooperation, and democratic governance. While binary thinking may have served adaptive functions in simpler environments, the complexity of modern challenges requires more sophisticated cognitive frameworks.
Addressing this challenge requires coordinated efforts across multiple levels—from individual practices that promote cognitive flexibility to institutional reforms that reduce incentives for polarization. The stakes are particularly high for democratic societies, which depend on citizens’ capacity to engage constructively with complexity and difference.
The path forward requires neither naive optimism nor cynical resignation, but rather sustained commitment to developing our collective capacity for nuanced thinking about complex problems. This involves both protecting democratic institutions from the corrosive effects of extreme polarization and actively building new capabilities for constructive engagement across difference — knowing that some will disagree and continuously fight us on reforms.
Understanding black and white thinking is not merely an academic exercise but an urgent practical necessity for navigating the challenges of the 21st century. By developing more sophisticated analytical frameworks and practical interventions, we can work toward societies that are both more thoughtful and more effective at solving complex collective problems.
Related concepts and further reading
Cognitive Bias Research: Systematic exploration of how human thinking systematically deviates from logical reasoning
Political Psychology: Interdisciplinary field examining how psychological processes affect political behavior
Systems Thinking: Analytical approaches that focus on relationships and patterns rather than isolated events
Democratic Theory: Normative and empirical research on how democratic institutions work and how they might be improved
Media Ecology: Study of how communication technologies shape human consciousness and social organization
Conflict Resolution: Practical approaches for managing disagreement and building cooperation across difference
I was lucky enough to be one of the first professional tech bloggers, still work in digital media, and avidly keep up with the technology sector. Back in the proverbial day I covered the rise of social media from the launches and earliest days of Facebook (aka Meta), Twitter (aka X), YouTube, and a host of graveyard denizens from Friendster to MySpace (anyone remember tribe.net?!). I lived and worked in Silicon Valley for a time and became disillusioned with much of the ideology while remaining avidly interested in the pockets still driven by the idea of democratizing access to information.
Now I love tinkering with tools (especially AI, automation, and data analysis) as well as writing personal and experimental stuff on my blog(s). I’m also excited about the rise of decentralized social media projects like Bluesky, Mastodon, and other platforms meant to challenge surveillance capitalism and corporate dominance of the public square.
I’ve also been a political activist since my college years, and especially since 2015 have been pretty intensely into politics — which, among many other things, has led to an ongoing protracted “re-factoring” of what I thought I knew about American history.
An academic by temperament, I research various topics at depth as a “serious amateur.” For the past 9+ years I’ve been studying fascism, authoritarianism, narcissism, cults, disinformation, conspiracy theories, dark money, and Christian nationalism and their tributaries — many of which share intersection points. My love of information management keeps me juggling multiple projects and exploring the connections between topics worth taking a closer look at; I’m an incorrigible generalist in a specialists’ world, while craving meaningful depth into each subject.
Inspiration
I am motivated by some of the old school values of the internet — towards openness, democratization of information, shining light into dark spaces, giving a voice to the people beyond the gatekeepers of major media, and more. It’s lost a fair amount of that spirit now in the corporate scrum to own its vast landscapes, but it can still be found here and there — and I hope to offer another little output on the stormy seas for those who wander and wish to not feel lost.
I like to experiment and make new things as constantly as I can, which right now involves a lot of AI tools, including ChatGPT, Midjourney, Perplexity, NotebookLM, Leonardo.ai, Opus Clip, Descript, Replicate, Flux, Ideogram, RunwayML, Sora, minimax, Napkin AI, Suno V4, and others. It feels like the most exciting thing since the dawning of the internet age itself.
Ethics
I don’t take any sponsorship money for this site, because I’m not interested in tailoring my point of view towards whatever maximizes profit. In part because commerce content is my day job, I do monetize (for a pittance) through affiliate links to books — the kind of product I can get behind recommending strongly to people. It also helps me understand what my audience is most interested in, and allows me to track what people find compelling enough to take action on. If you click on my book links and end up ordering something from Amazon or bookshop, it helps me understand how better to interest and serve this audience. So please feel free to do so, but not obligated.
Kamala Harris should be proud of the race she ran, an almost flawless sprint through the tape at a scant 108 days’ worth of time to make her pitch to the American voters — many of whom complained that they did not know her very well as a candidate.
Disinformation continued relentlessly throughout the race — even doubling down when called out.
Not a Mandate
Trump’s lead keeps dropping as California and other western states finish counting their ballots after what seems like an eternity — mostly due to CA accepting ballots postmarked by election day, adding 7 days to the final count no matter what.
He dropped below 50% and never recovered — meaning that more people voted against him than voted for him.
As of the final count, his margin dropped below 1.5% — the 4th largest margin in any popular vote win in the past 100 years.
Vote Predictors
Education
Media Sources
Urban vs. Rural
I haven’t had the energy to give to this piece and I just learned about this feature of Google’s NotebookLM that can generate a podcast between 2 hosts, from your uploaded assets. I tested it out with a combined corpus of some of my own thoughts and some of the resources I found insightful.
What NotebookLM came up with was uncannily compelling. It would be something I would consider useful, particularly as a tool for initiating some of those folks less steeped in politics as I am. So I’m posting it here, in part as a signpost regarding where we’re heading — whether we like it or not.
What is a dictator, and what drives the allure of absolute power? How do dictators reshape the political and social landscapes they dominate? This post explores the intricate systems of control underpinning authoritarian governance, tracing its evolution from historical precedents to modern manifestations, and examining the far-reaching consequences for societies caught in its grip.
Dictators: Unraveling the Complexity of Authoritarian Governance
Political power represents a profound and intricate spectrum of human organizational capability, with dictatorships emerging as one of its most complex and destructive manifestations. The journey of understanding dictatorships requires a nuanced exploration that transcends simple categorizations, delving deep into the historical, sociological, and psychological landscapes that enable and sustain authoritarian control.
The Essence of Dictatorial Power
At its core, a dictator represents far more than a mere political leader. These individuals — often demagogues — are architects of comprehensive systems of control, systematically dismantling institutional safeguards and reconstructing societal frameworks to serve their singular vision of governance. Unlike democratically elected leaders constrained by robust institutional checks and balances, a dictatorship operates through a sophisticated network of power consolidation that penetrates every aspect of social and political life.
The hallmark of dictatorial governance lies not just in the concentration of power, but in the systematic elimination of alternative power structures. These leaders do not simply rule; they fundamentally reshape the entire landscape of political possibility, creating environments where opposition becomes not just difficult, but potentially life-threatening.
As the 2024 election season heats up, Kamala Harris’s policy platform has begun to shape a forward-thinking blueprint for what she calls an “Opportunity Economy” and a “New Way Forward.” With an approach that blends economic pragmatism and social investment, her policy outline aims to strengthen the middle class while addressing the core issues faced by millions of Americans today. Kamala Harris policies zero in on economic stability, healthcare affordability, and supporting American families through accessible resources, tax cuts, and an intentional focus on civil and reproductive rights.
Though some complain about not knowing what her policies are, she speaks of them in every speech, interview, or discussion and has them freely available on her website. Mainstream media in particular ought to be doing more of their own research vs. entertaining spurious claims that she has outlined no 2024 policy proposals. It’s also a quintessential example of the way women are forced to thread a needle in a way that men simply aren’t — I’m old enough to remember when Hillary Clinton was once famously derided for being too wonky and having too many policy proposals. You really can’t win.
Meanwhile, Harris has a robust economic plan for the middle class as well as fighting staunchly for civil rights, voting rights, reproductive freedom, and democracy in an increasingly multipolar world. Harris’s economic policy combines key strategies designed to lower costs for middle-class families—fighting inflation, tackling price gouging, and expanding Medicare to help the “Sandwich Generation” juggling care for both children and aging parents.
Her policies also encourage entrepreneurship through substantial tax deductions for small businesses and foster a fairer housing market by promoting affordable housing initiatives and cracking down on price fixing. Harris’s vision is one of a sustainable, inclusive future where both family support and economic growth converge to drive lasting change.
Beyond economic reform, her platform emphasizes national security, comprehensive immigration reform, civil rights protections, and an ambitious climate policy. Together, these components create a multifaceted approach intended to protect American values while boosting prosperity. Harris’s policy platform offers voters an actionable vision for a stronger, more equitable America built on accessible opportunities and resilient middle-class foundations.
Kamala Harris economic policy
Kamala Harris has been promoting her economic policy agenda since mid-August — which was a mere 2 weeks since becoming the new top of the ticket suddenly and unexpectedly when Joe Biden decided to withdraw from and race and pass the torch. Her “New Way Forward” for the economy is rooted in a central goal of strengthening the middle class through practical, targeted policies. Aiming to create an “Opportunity Economy,” her platform emphasizes lowering costs for families, capping drug prices, tackling price gouging, and expanding Medicare to better support those juggling elder and child care responsibilities (aka “the Sandwich Generation”).
The Former Guy has been continuously proclaiming to know nothing about Project 2025, the plan whose authors include 70% current and former Trump officials. In that he doth protest too much — does Trump support Project 2025? You bet your bippy he does!
What is Project 2025? Think of it as a vast plan, close to the former president, to feverishly establish Christofascism in America starting with Day 1 of a second Trump presidency. It is a 920-page document, and 1000-employee project, to “supercharge” another Trump term with an infusion of Christian nationalism.
More than 100 Christian nationalist organizations and groups are involved in drafting the blueprint for Trump’s next term, should that horrorscape come to pass. One core problem they have, however, is the extreme unpopularity of their ideas. Most Americans are recoiling from the draconian measures Project 2025 wishes to bestow upon the nation, unasked for and unwanted — including banning abortion nationwide, restricting IVF, defunding education, pulling out of NATO, etc.
Who is behind Project 2025?
Project 2025 is so toxic in fact that Donald Trump tried to disavow it on Truth Social:
But despite his pathetic attempt to disclaim knowledge about Project 2025, Trump’s current and former staff make up the majority of the group’s architects. Trump’s name appears 312 times in their document. It’s simply not credible that the GOP presumptive nominee is unaware of his loudest allies and advocates — and even if you take the known liar at his word, it constitutes malpractice for a political candidate to be so uninformed.
So allegedly, Donald Trump doesn’t know anyone behind Project 2025. Let’s have a look at the amazing Venn Diagram between Trump officials and Project 2025, shall we?
Kevin Roberts and Trump on a plane
Heritage Foundation president and leader of the organization behind Project 2025, Kevin Roberts, grins with Trump on a private plane in 2022, on the way to a Heritage conference in which Trump gave a keynote address about the project and its policy proposals.
In April 2024 Roberts told the Washington Post first hand that “I personally have talked to President Trump about Project 2025.” Apparently then, at least one of the two men is lying.
In an era marked by unprecedented political, social, and technological upheavals, understanding the forces shaping our world has never been more urgent. From the dark currents of authoritarianism, totalitarianism, and Christian nationalism to the shadowy influence of dark money and disinformation, we’re facing a web of interconnected threats that challenge the very foundations of democracy. To navigate this complex landscape, we need to rely on those trusted experts who have dedicated their lives to researching and exposing these dangers—experts whose work sheds light on the hidden mechanisms at play in global power struggles.
This post is a curated guide to some of the top thought leaders in areas critical to understanding today’s political battlegrounds. These experts, from historians to journalists to security analysts, are at the forefront of their fields, providing the insights we need to decode the chaos and develop informed strategies for resistance. Whether you’re a seasoned activist, a curious reader, or someone just trying to make sense of the headlines, these voices are essential listening if we’re to combat the disinformation and division threatening democratic norms.
In times like these, it’s easy to feel overwhelmed by the sheer scale of the challenges we face. But by turning to trusted experts, we can arm ourselves with knowledge—one of the most powerful tools we have in the fight for a more just and equitable future.
Authoritarianism
The rise of authoritarianism isn’t a distant threat relegated to history books—it’s a real, present danger, creeping into the cracks of democracy worldwide. Understanding its mechanisms, from centralized power grabs to the erosion of civil liberties, is crucial to resisting its spread. Below are some of the most insightful thinkers and researchers who are sounding the alarm, dissecting how authoritarian regimes function, and offering solutions to protect democratic institutions.
Anne Applebaum — Anne Applebaum is a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and journalist who specializes in authoritarianism, communism, and the resurgence of nationalism in Europe and the U.S. Her notable works include Gulag and Twilight of Democracy, exploring the rise of illiberal politics. (@anneapplebaum)
Ruth Ben-Ghiat — Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a historian and expert on authoritarianism, propaganda, and fascism, with a focus on the past and present dynamics of strongman rulers. She is the author of Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present and frequently writes about modern autocratic regimes. (@ruthbenghiat)
Natasha Bertrand — Natasha Bertrand is a journalist and national security correspondent, known for her work covering intelligence, foreign policy, and the investigation into Russian interference in U.S. elections. She has written for Politico, The Atlantic, and currently serves as a White House reporter for CNN. (@NatashaBertrand)
Joseph Fronczak — Joseph Fronczak is a historian who studies the history of global insurgencies, empire, and the politics of solidarity. His work explores the impact of colonialism and anti-colonial movements on modern international relations and transnational activism.
Masha Gessen — Masha Gessen is a Russian-American journalist and author who has written extensively on totalitarianism, Vladimir Putin‘s regime, and LGBTQ+ rights. Gessen’s book The Future Is History won the National Book Award for its profound exploration of Russia’s political culture. (@mashagessen)
Jason Stanley — Jason Stanley is a professor of philosophy at Yale University and the author of How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them. His research focuses on the intersections of propaganda, ideology, and authoritarianism, especially in contemporary contexts. (@jasonintrator)
Elizabeth Mika — Elizabeth Mika is a clinical psychologist and expert on authoritarianism and collective psychology, with a particular focus on the psychological mechanisms behind mass support for authoritarian leaders. She has contributed to anthologies and discussions on the psychology of totalitarianism and fascism. (@yourauntemma)
Timothy Snyder — Timothy Snyder is a historian specializing in Eastern European history and totalitarian regimes, best known for his books Bloodlands and On Tyranny, which explore the dangers of authoritarianism and the fragility of democracy. He is a professor at Yale University and a frequent commentator on modern political crises. (@TimothyDSnyder)
Christian nationalism
Christian Nationalism is more than just a fringe ideology—it’s a growing political force that merges religious fundamentalism with nationalist fervor, aiming to reshape American democracy into a theocratic state. This dangerous movement thrives on historical revisionism and a distorted version of Christian values. The experts listed here have been at the forefront of exposing and analyzing the real-world implications of Christian Nationalism, warning of its impact on policy, governance, and individual rights.
Tim Alberta — Tim Alberta is a journalist and political reporter, best known for his coverage of the Republican Party and conservative politics in the U.S. He is the author of American Carnage, which delves into the GOP’s transformation and the rise of Donald Trump. (@timalberta)
Anthea Butler — Anthea Butler is the Geraldine R. Segal Professor in American Social Thought and Chair of Religious Studies at the University of Pennsylvania, specializing in African American and American religion, race, politics, and evangelicalism. She is a prolific author and commentator, known for her work on religion and politics, including her recent book “White Evangelical Racism: The Politics of Morality in America” and her contributions to the 1619 Project (@AntheaButler)
Robert P. Jones — Robert P. Jones is the president and founder of Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) and a leading scholar on religion and politics in America. He is a New York Times bestselling author, known for his books on white supremacy and American Christianity, including “The Hidden Roots of White Supremacy and the Path to a Shared American Future” and “White Too Long: The Legacy of White Supremacy in American Christianity” (@robertpjones)
Kevin Kruse — Kevin M. Kruse is an American historian and professor of history at Princeton University, specializing in the political, social, and urban/suburban history of 20th-century America with a focus on modern conservatism. He has gained significant attention for his Twitter threads providing historical context for current political events and has authored several books, including “White Flight: Atlanta and the Making of Modern Conservatism (@kevinmkruse)
Sarah Posner — Sarah Posner is a Type Investigations reporting fellow who has spent years reporting on the increasing influence of the evangelical Christian right on mainstream politics. She is known for her in-depth analysis of Christian nationalism and its impact on various aspects of American society, including reproductive rights and LGBTQ issues (@sarahposner)
Katherine Stewart — Katherine Stewart is a journalist and author focusing on religious extremism and its influence on American politics. Her book The Power Worshippers examines the rise of Christian nationalism and its impact on the country’s political landscape. (@kathsstewart)
Dark Money
Dark money flows through the veins of modern politics, influencing elections, legislation, and public opinion in ways most people never see. These hidden streams of funding empower corporations, billionaires, and interest groups to manipulate the political landscape without accountability. The researchers and journalists below have dedicated themselves to pulling back the curtain on these shadowy networks, offering a clearer picture of how wealth and power are wielded behind closed doors.
David Farenthold — David Farenthold is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist who has covered political corruption and the misuse of funds, particularly in his investigative reporting on Donald Trump’s charitable foundation. He is known for his in-depth investigations and work with The Washington Post and The New York Times. (@Fahrenthold)
Judd Legum — Judd Legum is a journalist and the founder of Popular Information, a newsletter focused on accountability journalism, corporate influence, and politics. He previously served as the editor-in-chief of ThinkProgress and frequently covers disinformation and media dynamics in U.S. politics. (@JuddLegum)
Jane Mayer — Jane Mayer is a staff writer for The New Yorker and the author of Dark Money, which explores the influence of wealthy conservative donors on American politics. She is an acclaimed investigative journalist, specializing in political corruption, the Koch network, and the intersection of money and policy. (@JaneMayerNYer)
Anne Nelson — Anne Nelson is an American journalist, author, playwright, and professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, known for her diverse career spanning war correspondence, award-winning books, and plays. Her work includes “Shadow Network: Media, Money, and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right,” which examines the influence of conservative political groups, and she was inducted into the Oklahoma Journalism Hall of Fame in 2024 for her significant contributions to journalism. (@anelsona)
Disinformation
In an era of digital noise, disinformation is the poison that sows confusion, distrust, and division. From fake news and deepfakes to state-sponsored propaganda, the scale of disinformation campaigns is staggering, threatening not just elections but the very fabric of truth itself. The experts in this field are working to identify, expose, and counter the tactics used to manipulate public perception and undermine democracy.
Brooke Binkowski — Brooke Binkowski is a professional journalist whose career has taken her across the globe, covering stories in Mexico, Alaska, Europe, North Africa, and South America. She has worked for various news organizations including CNN, NPR, CBS, and the BBC, and currently serves as an interim news anchor at KPBS Public Media (@brooklynmarie)
Ben Collins — Ben Collins is an American businessman and journalist from Massachusetts who formerly worked as a reporter for NBC News, where he focused on disinformation and extremism. In 2024, he became the CEO of Global Tetrahedron, the media company that owns The Onion (@oneunderscore__)
Joan Donovan — Joan Donovan is an American social science researcher, sociologist, and academic renowned for her work on disinformation, online extremism, and media manipulation. She is the founder of The Critical Internet Studies Institute and currently serves as an assistant professor at Boston University’s College of Communication, following her tenure as a researcher at Harvard Kennedy School (@BostonJoan)
Karen Douglas — Karen Douglas is a Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Kent, specializing in the psychology of conspiracy theories. Her research examines why conspiracy theories appeal to people and their consequences for individuals, groups, and society. Douglas has been widely featured in media outlets like Time, The Guardian, and BBC, and is a co-editor of the textbook “Social Psychology” (@Karen_Douglas)
Kevin Roose — Kevin Roose is an American author, journalist, and technology columnist for The New York Times. He hosts the podcast “Rabbit Hole” and co-hosts “Hard Fork” for the Times. Roose has written three books, including “Futureproof: 9 Rules in the Age of Automation,” and gained attention for his early access to and reporting on Bing’s ChatGPT-based chatbot (@kevinroose)
Brandy Zadrozny — Brandy Zadrozny is an American investigative journalist and reporter for NBC News, focusing on political radicalization, extremism, and disinformation on the Internet. Before journalism, she worked as a librarian and researcher. Zadrozny has covered topics like QAnon, the Stop the Steal movement, and COVID-19 misinformation (@BrandyZadrozny)
Rebecca Lewis — Rebecca Lewis is a researcher and PhD candidate at Stanford University, studying online political subcultures and radicalization. Her work has focused on the alternative influence network on YouTube and the spread of far-right ideologies online. Lewis has published influential reports on these topics through the Data & Society Research Institute.
Alice Marwick — Alice E. Marwick is an Associate Professor in Communication and Principal Researcher at the Center for Information, Technology and Public Life at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her research focuses on the intersection of social media, politics, gender, and privacy. Marwick has authored books on social media culture and networked privacy, and has written for publications like the New York Times and The Guardian (@alicetiara)
Nina Jankowicz — Nina Jankowicz is a disinformation expert and author who has advised governments and organizations on countering information manipulation. She briefly served as executive director of the Department of Homeland Security’s Disinformation Governance Board before it was disbanded. Jankowicz has written two books, “How to Lose the Information War” and “How to Be a Woman Online,” and is a frequent commentator on disinformation-related issues. (@wiczipedia)
Intelligence and National Security
Behind the headlines of political scandals and geopolitical maneuvering lies the world of intelligence and national security—a complex and often hidden battleground where information is power. Understanding how states gather intelligence, conduct espionage, and protect national interests is key to grasping global power dynamics. The experts featured here have deep insight into the covert world of intelligence operations and its implications for global security.
Frank Figliuzzi — Frank Figliuzzi served as the FBI‘s Assistant Director for Counterintelligence and spent 25 years as a Special Agent, directing all espionage investigations across the U.S. government. He is now a national security contributor for NBC News and MSNBC, as well as the author of “The FBI Way: Inside the Bureau’s Code of Excellence,” leveraging his extensive experience to provide insights on intelligence and national security matters (@FrankFigliuzzi1)
Carol Leonnig — Carol Leonnig is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist for The Washington Post, known for her coverage of government accountability and national security. She has co-authored several books, including “Zero Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Secret Service” and “I Alone Can Fix It: Donald J. Trump’s Catastrophic Final Year,” providing in-depth reporting on the Trump administration and related political events. (@CarolLeonnig)
Asha Rangappa — Asha Rangappa is a lawyer, former FBI agent, and senior lecturer at Yale University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. She frequently appears as a legal and national security analyst on various news networks, offering insights on counterintelligence, constitutional law, and the intersection of national security and civil liberties. (@AshaRangappa_)
John Sipher — John Sipher is a former member of the CIA‘s Senior Intelligence Service who worked for the agency’s clandestine service for 28 years. He is now a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, co-founder of Spycraft Entertainment, and a frequent contributor to various media outlets on intelligence and national security matters (@john_sipher)
Sam Vinograd — Samantha Vinograd is a national security expert who has served in various roles within the U.S. government, including as Senior Advisor to the National Security Advisor during the Obama administration. She is currently the Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism and Threat Prevention at the Department of Homeland Security and provides regular commentary on national security issues. (@sam_vinograd)
Clint Watts — Clint Watts is a senior fellow at the Center for Cyber and Homeland Security at George Washington University and a Foreign Policy Research Institute fellow. He previously served as an infantry officer in the U.S. Army, an FBI special agent, and has provided expert testimony to Congress on topics including terrorism, Russian interference, and cybersecurity (@selectedwisdom)
Marcy Wheeler — Marcy Wheeler is an independent journalist and national security expert who runs the blog “emptywheel.” She is known for her in-depth analysis of legal documents related to national security, surveillance, and political scandals. Wheeler’s work has been instrumental in uncovering details about various high-profile investigations, including the Mueller probe and other national security matters. (@emptywheel)
Law, Legal, and SCOTUS
At the intersection of governance and justice lies the law—an evolving field that shapes the boundaries of individual rights, state power, and societal norms. Whether it’s landmark Supreme Court rulings or the legal frameworks used to regulate new technologies, understanding the law is essential to navigating the political and social landscape. The following legal scholars and practitioners have made significant contributions to dissecting the most pressing legal issues of our time.
George Conway — George Conway is an American lawyer and political activist known for his vocal criticism of former President Donald Trump, despite being the then-husband of Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway (he now helms PsychoPAC, a fundraising arm against a Trump second term). As a partner at the law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, he gained prominence for successfully arguing the Supreme Court case Morrison v. National Australia Bank in 2010 and has since become a prominent figure in conservative legal circles, contributing to discussions on the rule of law and constitutional issues. (@gtconway3d)
Quinta Jurecic — Quinta Jurecic is a fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution and a senior editor at Lawfare, as well as a contributing writer at The Atlantic. She co-hosts the “Arbiters of Truth” series on the Lawfare Podcast, focusing on misinformation and online information ecosystems, and her work has appeared in prominent publications such as the New York Times and the Washington Post. (@qjurecic)
Teri Kanefield — Teri Kanefield is an attorney, author, and legal analyst known for her clear explanations of complex legal and political issues. She has written numerous books for children and young adults on historical and legal topics, and regularly contributes analysis on current events, particularly related to constitutional law and democracy, through her blog and social media presence. (@Teri_Kanefield)
Dahlia Lithwick — Dahlia Lithwick is a Canadian-American lawyer, writer, and journalist who serves as a senior editor at Slate and contributing editor at Newsweek. She is known for her insightful legal commentary, particularly on Supreme Court issues, and hosts the award-winning podcast “Amicus” while also being a regular contributing analyst on MSNBC (@Dahlialithwick)
Joyce Vance — Joyce Vance is a Distinguished Professor from the Practice of Law at the University of Alabama School of Law and a legal analyst for NBC and MSNBC. She served as the United States Attorney in the Northern District of Alabama from 2009 to 2017, appointed by President Obama, and has focused her work on criminal justice reform, civil rights, and improving police-community relationships (@JoyceWhiteVance)
Maya Wiley — Maya Wiley is a nationally respected civil rights attorney and activist who has dedicated her life to fighting for justice, equality, and fairness. She has served in various roles, including as counsel to the mayor of New York City, chair of the New York City Civilian Complaint Review Board, and as a faculty member at the New School University, while also working as a legal analyst for NBC News and MSNBC (@mayawiley)
Politics
In an age of hyper-polarization, understanding the intricacies of politics—both domestic and global—is more crucial than ever. Whether it’s electoral strategies, policy debates, or the workings of political institutions, the experts in this field offer invaluable insights into the forces shaping our world. Below is a list of the most astute political analysts, reporters, and scholars whose work illuminates the evolving political landscape.
Yamiche Alcindor — Yamiche Alcindor is a prominent American journalist and political commentator. She currently serves as the Washington correspondent for NBC News and is a political contributor to NBC News and MSNBC. Previously, she was the White House correspondent for PBS NewsHour and has also worked for The New York Times and USA Today. (@Yamiche)
Rachel Maddow — Rachel Maddow is a political commentator, author, and television host. She is best known for hosting “The Rachel Maddow Show” on MSNBC, where she provides in-depth analysis of political news. Maddow has written several books, including “Blowout” and “Bag Man,” and is known for her liberal perspective and investigative reporting style. (@maddow)
Phil Rucker — Philip Rucker is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist who serves as the deputy national editor at The Washington Post. He previously worked as the White House Bureau Chief for the Post during the Trump administration. Rucker has co-authored two books about the Trump presidency with his colleague Carol Leonnig: “A Very Stable Genius” and “I Alone Can Fix It.” (@PhilipRucker)
Jared Yates Sexton — Jared Yates Sexton is an author, political commentator, and associate professor of creative writing at Georgia Southern University. He has written several books, including “The People Are Going to Rise Like the Waters Upon Your Shore” and “American Rule,” focusing on American politics, history, and culture. Sexton is known for his analysis of right-wing extremism and political movements. (@JYSexton)
A.B. Stoddard — A.B. Stoddard is a political analyst and associate editor and columnist for RealClearPolitics. She regularly appears on various news networks to provide commentary on American politics. Stoddard is known for her non-partisan approach to political analysis and her insights into congressional politics and national elections.
Nicolle Wallace — Nicolle Wallace is an American television host, author, and former political commentator. She currently hosts MSNBC’s “Deadline: White House” and serves as a political analyst for the network. Wallace previously worked in Republican politics, serving as White House Communications Director during the George W. Bush administration and as a senior advisor for John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. (@NicolleDWallace)
Right-Wing History
The resurgence of far-right movements across the globe has deep historical roots, with ideological threads that stretch back to fascism, white supremacy, and nativism. Understanding these origins is key to unpacking the modern political landscape, as many of today’s right-wing movements draw heavily on historical narratives. The scholars below are dedicated to tracing these threads, helping us see the connections between past and present in the evolution of right-wing ideologies.
Seth Cotlar — Seth Cotlar is a Professor of History at Willamette University, specializing in the history of the United States between the American Revolution and the Civil War. His first book, “Tom Paine’s America: The Rise and Fall of Trans-Atlantic Radicalism in the Early Republic,” won the Best First Book Prize from the Society for Historians of the Early American Republic, and he is currently working on a cultural history of nostalgia in modernizing America from 1776 to 1865 (@sethcotlar)
John Dean — John Dean is an American former attorney who served as White House Counsel for President Richard Nixon from 1970 to 1973. He became a key figure in the Watergate scandal, eventually testifying against Nixon and other administration officials. Since then, Dean has worked as an investment banker, author, and political commentator, often criticizing Republican administrations. (@JohnWDean)
Joanne Freeman — Joanne Freeman is a professor of History and American Studies at Yale University, specializing in early American politics and political culture. She has authored several books on the revolutionary and early national periods, including “Affairs of Honor: National Politics in the New Republic” and “The Field of Blood: Violence in Congress and the Road to Civil War.” (@jbf1755)
Nicole Hemmer — Nicole Hemmer is an associate professor of History at Vanderbilt University and director of the Carolyn T. and Robert M. Rogers Center for the American Presidency. She specializes in media, conservatism, and the presidency, and has authored books such as “Partisans: The Conservative Revolutionaries Who Remade American Politics in the 1990s” and “Messengers of the Right: Conservative Media and the Transformation of American Politics.” (@pastpunditry)
Heather Cox Richardson — Heather Cox Richardson is an American historian and professor of history at Boston College, known for her expertise in 19th-century American history, particularly the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the American West. She gained widespread recognition for her nightly newsletter “Letters from an American,” which contextualizes current events within American history, and has authored several books including “To Make Men Free: A History of the Republican Party” and “Democracy Awakening: Notes on the State of America” (@HC_Richardson)
Julian Zelizer — Julian Zelizer is a professor of History and Public Affairs at Princeton University and a CNN Political Analyst. He has authored and edited numerous books on American political history, including “Burning Down the House: Newt Gingrich, the Fall of a Speaker, and the Rise of the New Republican Party” and “The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: A First Historical Assessment.” (@julianzelizer)
Russia and Ukraine
The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine is far more than a regional dispute—it’s a flashpoint in global geopolitics, with ramifications for democracy, security, and international law. Understanding the complex history and political motivations driving this conflict requires deep expertise. The experts listed here provide crucial analysis on everything from Russia’s imperial ambitions to Ukraine’s struggle for sovereignty and the international community’s response.
Allison Gill — Dr. Allison Gill is a multifaceted talent who transitioned from a federal government executive to a comedian, author, and podcast host. She is best known as the executive producer and host of the popular podcast “Mueller, She Wrote,” which provides in-depth analysis of the Trump-Russia investigation (@muellershewrote)
Fiona Hill — Dr. Fiona Hill is an acclaimed foreign affairs specialist, author, and former presidential advisor who served on the US National Security Council from 2017 to 2019. Born in County Durham, England, she is now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and is widely recognized as an authority on Russian and European geopolitics.
Gary Kasparov — Garry Kasparov is a former World Chess Champion who held the title from 1985 to 2000 and is widely considered one of the greatest chess players of all time. After retiring from professional chess in 2005, he became a prominent political activist and critic of Vladimir Putin, eventually leaving Russia in 2013 and settling in New York City (@Kasparov63)
Michael McFaul — Michael McFaul is the Ken Olivier and Angela Nomellini Professor of International Studies at Stanford University and a former U.S. Ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014. He has authored several books on democracy and Russian politics, and currently serves as an analyst for NBC News and a contributing columnist to The Washington Post (@McFaul)
Molly McKew — Molly McKew is an American journalist and strategic consultant specializing in foreign policy and information warfare. She has worked as an adviser to foreign governments, including Georgia and Moldova, and has written extensively on Russian information operations and geopolitics for publications such as WIRED and Politico. (@MollyMcKew)
White Nationalism
White nationalism is not just an extremist ideology—it’s a persistent and growing threat, gaining new life through online platforms, political rhetoric, and violent movements. From Charlottesville to Christchurch, the ideology has fueled domestic terrorism, hate crimes, and political insurgencies. The researchers below have been instrumental in tracking the rise of white nationalism, unpacking its myths, and revealing its insidious presence in mainstream discourse.
Carol Anderson — Carol Anderson is the Charles Howard Candler Professor of African American Studies at Emory University and a historian known for her work on public policy and how it intersects with race, justice, and equality. She is the author of several acclaimed books, including “White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide” and “One Person, No Vote: How Voter Suppression Is Destroying Our Democracy.”
Kathleen Belew — Kathleen Belew is an associate professor of History at Northwestern University and an expert on the white power movement in the United States. She is the author of “Bring the War Home: The White Power Movement and Paramilitary America” and has testified before Congress on issues related to white nationalism and domestic terrorism. (@kathleen_belew)
Talia Lavin — Talia Lavin is an American journalist and author known for her investigative work on far-right extremism and white supremacist movements. She wrote the book “Culture Warlords: My Journey Into the Dark Web of White Supremacy” and has contributed to publications such as The New Yorker, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. (@mobydickenergy)
Cynthia Miller-Idriss — Cynthia Miller-Idriss is a professor of education and sociology at American University, where she leads the Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab (PERIL). She is an expert on far-right extremism and radicalization, having authored several books on the subject, including “Hate in the Homeland: The New Global Far Right.” (@milleridriss)
Vegas Tenold — Vegas Tenold is a Norwegian journalist and author who has extensively covered white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups in the United States. His book “Everything You Love Will Burn: Inside the Rebirth of White Nationalism in America” provides an in-depth look at various far-right organizations based on his years of firsthand reporting. (@Vegastenold)
The divine right of kings is one of history’s most audacious power plays—a political theory that essentially says, “I’m in charge because God said so.” Monarchs throughout Europe wielded this doctrine like a holy scepter, justifying their absolute rule by claiming they were directly appointed by the Almighty. Forget elections, parliaments, or even the will of the people; in this worldview, earthly rulers were accountable to no one but God. To challenge a king’s authority was not just treason—it was blasphemy.
Core Principles of the Divine Right of Kings
At its heart, the divine right of kings boiled down to a few central tenets, all of which worked to reinforce the unassailable power of monarchs:
Divine Authority: Monarchs didn’t just claim political power—they asserted that their right to rule came straight from God. No earthly institution could grant or revoke this authority. In the grand cosmic hierarchy, the king was just one step below God Himself.
Absolute Power: Under this system, the monarch had total, unquestionable power. Whether dealing with rebellious nobles, restless clergy, or the murmurs of an unhappy populace, the king was above it all. No parliament, no council, and certainly no commoner had any right to challenge royal decrees.
Accountability to God Alone: This was the ultimate trump card. If a king was unjust, cruel, or tyrannical, only God could judge them. The people were meant to suffer in silence, trusting that divine justice would eventually come—likely in the afterlife, but certainly not on the earthly plane.
Sacrosanct Rule: Any attempt to restrict or overthrow the monarch wasn’t just an act of political rebellion; it was an affront to God’s will. Deposing a king was painted as sacrilege, a sin of the highest order.
Justifications and Interpretations
Monarchs and their theologians weren’t content with just making grand claims; they sought to root their power in religious texts and metaphors that reinforced their divine legitimacy.
Biblical Backing: Monarchs often cited verses like Romans 13:1 (“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers…”) to suggest that their rule was divinely sanctioned. The Bible became a political tool, shaping earthly governance with the weight of holy writ.
Metaphorical Comparisons: Kings weren’t just leaders—they were God’s lieutenants on Earth, strict father figures to their subjects (parens patriae), and the heads of the body politic. This imagery elevated their role from mere mortal ruler to something quasi-divine, making any opposition seem unnatural.
Pre-selection by God: Some went even further, claiming that kings were chosen by God and predestined to rule others before they were born. This preordained selection made their authority seem as inevitable as the rising sun.
Historical Context and Evolution
The divine right of kings didn’t just spring out of nowhere—it was the product of centuries of theological and political evolution.
Medieval Roots: The seeds of the doctrine were planted in the medieval period when rulers were seen as having been granted power by God to maintain order on Earth. But it wasn’t until later that the idea was fully weaponized by monarchs to cement their grip on power.
Reformation Impact: The Protestant Reformation inadvertently turbocharged the doctrine. As monarchs in Protestant countries broke away from the Catholic Church, they claimed not only political but also religious authority. The king was no longer just a ruler but also the defender of the faith—a potent combination.
Peak Influence: The divine right of kings reached its zenith in the 16th to 18th centuries, particularly under figures like James I of England and Louis XIV of France. These monarchs were its fiercest proponents, with Louis famously declaring, “L’état, c’est moi”—“I am the state.”
Implications of the Divine Right
This doctrine wasn’t just abstract theology—it had real-world consequences that shaped politics, religion, and society.
Absolutism: The divine right of kings was often used to justify absolute monarchy, where the king held total control over the state. It concentrated power in the hands of one individual, with no checks or balances to limit their rule.
Religious Authority: Monarchs also claimed the right to enforce religious uniformity. In Protestant nations, kings became heads of the church, dictating what their subjects could believe and how they could worship. This fusion of political and religious power only made them harder to challenge.
Resistance to Reform: The doctrine was a powerful bulwark against efforts to limit royal authority. Calls for more representative government or constitutional limits on monarchical power were met with accusations of heresy or treason.
Decline and Legacy
As potent as the divine right of kings was, it eventually met its match. The Enlightenment, with its emphasis on reason, individual rights, and the social contract, dealt a fatal blow to the idea that kings ruled by divine mandate. The English Civil War, the Glorious Revolution, and the French Revolution all demonstrated that the people—and their representatives—were no longer willing to accept unchecked royal power.
But even as the doctrine waned, its echoes can still be felt. The idea that rulers are chosen by a higher power hasn’t entirely disappeared—it just takes on new forms. From autocratic strongmen who claim destiny to religious leaders with political power, the shadow of the divine right lingers on, reminding us of the dangerous allure of absolute authority cloaked in divine justification.
In the end, the divine right of kings was a masterful fusion of theology and politics, granting monarchs an iron grip on power that was, for centuries, unassailable. But as history shows, even claims to divine authority can’t stand forever against the rising tide of human agency and the demand for justice.
The Echo Chamber of Deceit: Right-Wing Media Outlets, Disinformation, and the Conspiracy Industrial Complex
In an era where truth is increasingly under siege, disinformation has become a weapon of mass confusion—and no faction wields it with more fervor than the vast right-wing media machine. From fringe conspiracy theorists lurking in dark corners of the internet to mainstream outlets that once feigned journalistic credibility, these media entities have mastered the art of crafting narratives that distort, divide, and deceive.
But the effects of this disinformation aren’t limited to a few misguided souls. These conspiracy-laden outlets drive real-world consequences, spreading chaos and undermining democratic institutions with each clickbait headline and manufactured outrage. Whether fueling distrust in elections, amplifying extremist ideologies, or fostering a sense of victimhood among their audiences, these outlets play a pivotal role in shaping the political landscape—and not for the better.
In this post, we’ll dive into some of the most notorious right-wing media outlets pushing disinformation and conspiracy theories, exploring how they have built empires of falsehoods and what it means for a society increasingly untethered from reality (for the antidote to this list, please see our set of curated trusted expert sources on political and historical topics).
Building Empires of Falsehoods
These right-wing media outlets have built empires of falsehoods by capitalizing on two critical factors: the erosion of trust in traditional media and the increasing polarization of political discourse. As public faith in mainstream journalism wanes, largely due to relentless attacks branding them as “fake news” or “liberal bias,” alternative outlets step into the vacuum. They promise their audiences “unfiltered truth” but deliver carefully curated content designed to inflame rather than inform. The business model thrives on sensationalism—conspiracy theories and emotionally charged stories that draw clicks, shares, and ad revenue. Whether it’s the undermining of election results, promoting COVID-19 misinformation, or fostering anti-government sentiment, these outlets operate in an ecosystem where outrage is profitable, and facts are malleable.
For a society increasingly untethered from reality, the implications are grave. When large swaths of the public are consistently exposed to a parallel universe of disinformation, the ability to engage in reasoned discourse or even agree on basic facts erodes. This creates a fertile ground for extremism, where misinformation is weaponized to radicalize, isolate, and enrage. Civic institutions that rely on trust and shared reality—elections, the judiciary, and public health—are undermined, weakening the very foundation of democracy. In a world where conspiracy theories and falsehoods become the currency of political influence, society drifts ever closer to a reality in which truth is irrelevant, and power is achieved through manipulation and division.
Let’s take a look at some of the most egregious offenders on the right, who routinely eschew any interest in journalistic integrity or independent verification of facts or sources and instead have a tendency to, well, make shit up (or enable bad shit to happen on their platforms).
Right-Wing Media Outlets
Outlet or Individual
Description
4chan
Since its launch in 2003, 4chan has become a key platform in shaping internet subculture, particularly through its creation and dissemination of memes. The site operates as an anonymous imageboard, with users posting on a wide range of topics, from anime to politics. With over 22 million unique monthly visitors, 4chan remains one of the most influential and controversial online communities, often cited for both its creative output and its association with extremist content.
8chan
Known for its alt-right extremism and ties to mass shootings, 8chan was crucial in spreading conspiracy theories like QAnon. Banned and later rebranded as 8kun, the platform gained notoriety during the Gamergate controversy, attracting users banned from other platforms.
Founder of InfoWars, a prominent conspiracy theorist known for promoting various false claims and conspiracy theories.
Alexander Marlow
Editor-in-chief of Breitbart News, known for maintaining the site’s far-right editorial stance.
American News
American News is a conservative news outlet that focuses on pro-Republican content. With a significant online presence, it engages a large conservative audience, contributing to the polarization of political discourse in the U.S. through its right-leaning coverage.
Online news site known for its right-wing perspectives. Former chairman Steve Bannon; funded by Robert Mercer.
Cassandra Fairbanks
Cassandra Fairbanks is a political activist and journalist best known for her support of Donald Trump. Previously a Bernie Sanders supporter, she has worked for outlets like the Russian Sputnik News and The Gateway Pundit.
Chanel Rion
Chief White House correspondent for OANN, known for her conservative reporting and support of Trump.
Charles Hurt
Opinion editor of The Washington Times, known for his conservative political commentary.
Christopher Ruddy
CEO of Newsmax and significant figure in operational and editorial direction.
Daily Stormer
White supremacist, neo-Nazi website founded by Andrew Anglin in reaction to Obama’s election.
Dan Bongino
Dan Bongino is a prominent American conservative commentator, radio host, and author. His background includes serving as an NYPD officer from 1995 to 1999, followed by a distinguished career as a US Secret Service agent, where he worked on the Presidential Protective Division under both the Bush and Obama administrations. Bongino is highly educated, with a BS and MS from Queens College and an MBA from Penn State. His popular show, “The Dan Bongino Show,” attracted about 8.5 million listeners as of October 2021, ranking second among those vying to succeed Rush Limbaugh. He has authored several New York Times bestsellers, including Spygate: The Attempted Sabotage of Donald J. Trump, and hosted “Unfiltered with Dan Bongino” on Fox News until April 2023
Drudge Report
The Drudge Report is a U.S.-based news aggregation website founded by Matt Drudge, known for breaking the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal. The site consists primarily of links to stories from other news outlets and was once considered conservative, though its political leanings have been questioned since 2019.
EndingtheFed
Popularized by Ron Paul, Ending the Fed advocates for eliminating the Federal Reserve, criticizing it for contributing to inflation and financial crises. The platform is closely aligned with Tea Party movements from 2008 to 2012.
Epoch Times
A multi-language outlet founded by Chinese Americans associated with Falun Gong, known for its critical stance on the Chinese Communist Party, staunch support for Trump, and echoing of the Big Lie about Election 2020.
Fox News
Major cable news network known for its right-wing slant and influential conservative commentary. Fox News was found liable in a defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems, resulting in a settlement of nearly $1 billion after the network repeatedly aired false claims that Dominion’s voting machines were used to rig the 2020 presidential election.
Free Beacon
Founded in 2012, The Washington Free Beacon is a conservative news website known for its investigative reporting. Although aligned with conservative viewpoints, it has been criticized for publishing potentially misleading content.
Gateway Pundit
The Gateway Pundit is a far-right website founded in 2004, notorious for publishing falsehoods and hoaxes. In 2021, it was demonetized by Google. The site expanded significantly during the 2016 election and has faced multiple defamation lawsuits, leading to a Chapter 11 filing.
Gavin McInnes
Co-founder of Vice Media in 1994 and the Proud Boys in 2016
Greg Kelly
Notable host on Newsmax, known for his conservative views and support of Donald Trump.
InfoWars
Founded in 1999 by Alex Jones, InfoWars is notorious for promoting conspiracy theories like the New World Order and the Sandy Hook shooting “hoax,” for which it was ordered to pay $1.5 billion in damages. In 2024, InfoWars is scheduled to auction its assets as part of bankruptcy proceedings.
Jared Taylor
Jared Taylor is an American white supremacist and the editor of American Renaissance magazine. He founded the New Century Foundation to promote racial advocacy and hosts the annual American Renaissance Conference. Taylor has been widely accused of promoting racist ideologies.
Jordan Peterson
Jordan Peterson is a Canadian clinical psychologist, professor emeritus at the University of Toronto, and bestselling author who has gained widespread recognition for both his work in psychology and his often controversial views on cultural and political issues. His book 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos became an international bestseller, selling over 5 million copies and being translated into more than 45 languages, propelling him to global fame as a public intellectual. Peterson has built a substantial online following, with over 7 million subscribers on his YouTube channel, where he shares lectures and discussions on psychology, philosophy, and culture. He gained notoriety for his opposition to Canada’s Bill C-16, which added gender identity and expression as protected categories, a stance that sparked both support and criticism.
Judicial Watch
A conservative watchdog group founded in 1994, Judicial Watch is known for its FOIA lawsuits targeting Democratic administrations. Under president Tom Fitton, it has been labeled by the SPLC as an anti-government extremist group, despite its significant influence in conservative circles.
Kathryn Limbaugh
Kathryn over some responsibilities for managing his media empire following her husband Rush Limbaugh’s death.
Larry Beasley
President and CEO of The Washington Times, overseeing the newspaper’s conservative editorial direction.
Laura Ingraham
Prime-time opinion host on Fox News, known for her conservative viewpoints and outspoken criticism of liberal policies.
Mike Cernovich
Mike Cernovich is an American right-wing social media personality and conspiracy theorist known for his involvement in #Gamergate and his segments on ‘The Alex Jones Show.’ He initially associated with the alt-right but now identifies with the new right, frequently promoting controversial views on free speech and engaging in inflammatory rhetoric.
Neil Patel
Co-founder and publisher of The Daily Caller, focusing on conservative news and commentary.
Newsmax
Newsmax is a conservative news and opinion media company founded in 1998. In 2014, it launched a cable television channel that reaches approximately 75 million households. The network is known for its right-wing and far-right leanings as well as its staunch pro-Trump coverage.
One America News Network (OANN)
OANN (One America News Network) is a far-right, pro-Trump cable news channel founded on July 4, 2013. Based in San Diego, it reaches an audience of 150,000 to 500,000 viewers and heavily relies on AT&T networks for revenue. The channel is known for promoting conspiracy theories and misinformation.
Parler
Parler, launched in 2018, is a social media platform promoting free speech, attracting predominantly right-wing users and Trump supporters. It saw a user surge during and after the 2020 U.S. presidential election amid accusations of censorship by mainstream platforms. The platform was removed from app stores following its role in organizing the January 6th Capitol riot but plans a relaunch in 2024.
RedState
RedState, founded in 2004 and owned by Salem Media Group, is a leading conservative blog known for its political activism and organizing events. The site has undergone staffing changes, notably during Trump’s presidency when critics of Trump were dismissed.
RedState Watcher
Founded in 2004, RedState Watcher is a conservative blog operated by Townhall Media, known for its right-wing bias and opinion pieces. It has a strong alignment with the Salem Media Group’s conservative perspectives.
Richard Spencer
Former Editor of the racist rag Taki’s Magazine and an early figure in the alt-right.
Right Wing Tribune
Right Wing Tribune is known for its right-wing propaganda and election season misinformation. It has been criticized for amplifying conspiracy theories and sensationalist stories that align with extreme conservative narratives.
Robert Herring, Sr.
Founder and CEO of One America News Network (OANN), known for its conservative, pro-Trump coverage.
Rumble
Rumble is a video-sharing platform launched in 2013 that positions itself as an alternative to YouTube, particularly for creators who feel they are censored or deplatformed by mainstream platforms. Rumble gained popularity among conservative, right-leaning, and libertarian creators, though it markets itself as a platform that champions “free speech” and content that may not fit with the guidelines of other social media giants.
Rupert Murdoch
Australian media mogul and founder of Fox and key influencer in the Fox News network’s overall direction.
Rush Limbaugh (deceased)
Original host and pioneering figure in conservative talk radio, known for his influential and controversial views. One of the first in a wave of political right-wing “shock jocks.”
Sean Hannity
Fox News host known for his strong conservative viewpoints, significant influence in right-wing media, and close relationship with Trump.
Steve Bannon
Former executive chairman of Brietbart News and a key figure in shaping the outlet’s editorial stance.
Stormfront
Founded by former KKK leader Don Black in 1996, Stormfront was the first major online hate site, centered on white nationalism. It has attracted over 300,000 registered users, with the site repeatedly taken down for violating hate speech policies.
Suzanne Scott
CEO of Fox News Media, overseeing all aspects of the network’s operations and editorial direction.
Taki’s Magazine
Taki’s Magazine, founded on February 5, 2007 by Taki Theodoracopulos, is known for its extreme right-wing political stance. The publication has drawn criticism for its racially controversial content and its backing of individuals associated with white nationalism, while continuing to publish provocative material critical of political correctness.
Tenet Media
Tenet Media is a far-right media organization implicated in Russian influence campaigns in the United States. It has been linked to the promotion of disinformation, especially around political elections and controversial social issues. The platform is currently under investigation by the DOJ for its involvement in spreading foreign-backed propaganda. Operating primarily through social media and online outlets, Tenet Media targets conservative audiences with sensationalized content that aligns with extreme right-wing views.
The Babylon Bee
The Babylon Bee is a conservative Christian satirical website that publishes parody news stories with a right-wing perspective, often targeting liberal politics, secular culture, and progressive social movements. While its content is intentionally fictional, it has frequently been mistaken for real news due to its style and tone (not unlike a The Onion for the right-wing).
The Daily Caller
The Daily Caller, founded in 2010 by Tucker Carlson and Neil Patel with funding from conservative businessman Foster Friess, was launched as a right-leaning alternative to The Huffington Post. It aims to provide news and opinion content from a conservative perspective. Alongside its for-profit media site, The Daily Caller also operates a non-profit arm, The Daily Caller News Foundation, which has raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest and tax issues. Despite early claims of ideological independence, the outlet has been criticized for publishing misleading stories and engaging in partisan reporting. In 2020, Tucker Carlson sold his ownership stake, leaving Neil Patel as the majority owner.
The Daily Wire
The Daily Wire, an American conservative media company founded in 2015 by Ben Shapiro and Jeremy Boreing, has rapidly grown into a major player in digital media. By 2019, it ranked as the sixth-leading English-language publisher on Facebook, drawing massive engagement. The company surpassed $100 million in annual revenue in early 2022 and employed 150 people. Expanding its reach, The Daily Wire launched DailyWire+ in June 2022, offering video on demand for its popular content, including podcasts and video productions. Notably, “The Ben Shapiro Show” became the second most listened-to podcast in the U.S. by March 2019.
The Right Stuff
Largest white nationalist podcast network in the US.
The Rush Limbaugh Show
Long considered a staple of conservative talk radio, influential in shaping right-wing discourse.
The Sean Hannity Show
Radio show mixing news and conservative commentary, hosted by Sean Hannity.
The Washington Examiner
A conservative news outlet founded in Washington, D.C., the Washington Examiner transitioned from a daily newspaper to a weekly magazine in 2013. Owned by oil magnate Philip Anschutz, it is known for its right-leaning coverage and is often rated as having a “Lean Right” bias.
The Washington Times
Newspaper known for its conservative editorial content and often conspiratorial perspectives.
Tim Pool
Tim Pool is an independent journalist and political commentator who gained initial fame for his on-the-ground reporting during the Occupy Wall Street protests in 2011. Over time, Pool has shifted to a right-leaning stance, often criticized for promoting conspiracy theories and misinformation, particularly surrounding elections and COVID-19. He runs a popular YouTube channel where he discusses current events, frequently framing issues in a way that appeals to conservative and libertarian audiences. Though he claims to be politically independent, his content often aligns with right-wing perspectives, leading to accusations of bias.
True Pundit
True Pundit is a far-right fake news website known for promoting baseless conspiracy theories, especially regarding mass shootings and political figures. Operating with a “well-known modus operandi” of publishing unverified stories, the site ceased publishing new content in 2021.
Truthfeed
Truthfeed is a far-right news outlet notorious for publishing conspiracy theories and misinformation. Known for its strong right-wing bias, the platform has been criticized for aligning with conservative political agendas and contributing to a controversial media landscape dominated by conspiracy-driven narratives.
Truth Social
Truth Social is a social media platform launched by President Donald Trump as an alternative to mainstream networks, positioning itself as a “free speech” haven for conservatives. It has become a hub for right-wing users, featuring political content that often echoes Trump’s messaging and grievances against perceived censorship.
Co-founder of The Daily Caller, no longer actively involved but was instrumental in the site’s creation. Went on to have a career as a Fox pundit before being abruptly terminated following the January 6 coup attempt and Dominion lawsuit.
VDARE
Founded in 1999 by Peter Brimelow, VDARE is a far-right website that advocates for strict immigration policies and is widely associated with white nationalism and white supremacy. The site has long been a platform for anti-immigration rhetoric, often intertwined with racist ideologies. Despite its influence in far-right circles, VDARE announced a suspension of its operations in July 2024, marking a potential end to its two-decade presence in the online white nationalist movement.
WikiLeaks
Launched by Julian Assange in 2006, WikiLeaks is renowned for leaking classified documents, including U.S. diplomatic cables and military logs, sparking debates on government transparency. It gained prominence for releasing DNC emails obtained from Russian hackers during the 2016 election, with Assange expressing a controversial preference for a GOP victory over Hillary Clinton.
YourNewsWire
Founded in 2014, YourNewsWire is a clickbait website infamous for promoting conspiracy theories and fake news, including some of the most shared hoaxes on social media. Despite being debunked over 80 times, the site remains a significant source of misinformation.
Zero Hedge
Zero Hedge is a far-right libertarian financial blog known for its bearish investment outlook and promotion of Austrian School economics. In addition to financial news, the site expanded into political content, often promoting conspiracy theories. Zero Hedge has been accused of spreading Russian propaganda and misinformation, especially regarding the coronavirus pandemic. It was banned from Google Ads in 2020 but was later reinstated.
It’s Donald Trump‘s campaign promise to end democracy. “You won’t have to vote anymore! We’ll have it fixed so good.” This is why there is no “both sides” equivalency between one party — that openly promises to destroy our Constitutional republic — and the other, that strives authentically if sometimes naively towards a more perfect union.
Full quote
“If you want to save America get your friends, get your family, get everyone you know and vote. Vote early, vote absentee, vote on Election Day, I don’t care how — but you have to get out and vote. And again, Christians, get out and vote just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore! Four more years you know what — it’ll be fixed. It’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians — I love you, Christians. I’m a Christian. I love you. Get out — you got to get out and vote. In 4 years you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not going to have to vote.” — Donald J. Trump, the Republican candidate for president.
Sarah Cooper wore it best
The original receipts
And here’s footage of the actual speech:
Trump: You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again. pic.twitter.com/DBGcBr3Wht
Right wing groups in America have long wielded disproportionate influence over political discourse, policy-making, and the judiciary — quietly but effectively steering the country toward a more authoritarian, corporate-driven agenda. Groups like the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation operate as power brokers in the conservative ecosystem, funneling money and influence to shape not just elections, but the ideological future of the nation.
The Federalist Society, for example, has become a judicial kingmaker, successfully installing justices on the Supreme Court who subscribe to its narrow view of constitutional “originalism”—leading to landmark decisions like Dobbs v. Jackson, which rolled back reproductive rights in America. Meanwhile, Heritage’s Project 2025 serves as a blueprint for a far-right authoritarian takeover of federal agencies, ready to gut progressive reforms and install Christian nationalist ideology in their place.
But these are just a few key players in an ever-expanding web of right-wing groups. The National Rifle Association (NRA) remains a force in stoking fears around gun rights to mobilize voters, while Fox News continues to manipulate public discourse with fear-mongering and disinformation to drive its viewers further into a reactionary worldview. Behind the scenes, the Council for National Policy (CNP) operates as a shadowy network of conservative elites pulling the strings, and groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and Turning Point USA drive extremist policies at the state and grassroots levels.
Add to that the influence of organizations like the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, and PragerU, and it becomes clear that right-wing power in America is deeply entrenched, feeding off the fear and division these groups systematically create. The stakes for democracy and the future of civil liberties couldn’t be higher.
One way to address the threat is to become familiar with it. Here is a cheatsheet to some of the most influential and notable right wing groups in operation today.
The Federalist Society
The Federalist Society is a powerful, right-wing legal organization that seeks to reshape the U.S. judiciary by advocating for originalism and textualism—the interpretation of the Constitution based on its supposedly “original” meaning (as interpreted by conservative judges, of course). Founded in 1982, this group has steadily gained influence by grooming conservative legal talent, promoting judges who share their philosophy, and challenging progressive legislation, with many of its members appointed to federal courts, including the Supreme Court.
Their ultimate goal is to roll back decades of civil rights protections, environmental regulations, and reproductive freedoms in favor of limited government (even ultra-limited government) and deregulated markets. Now led by conservative activist Leonard Leo, The Federalist Society’s growing clout can be seen in the success of getting their chosen justices onto the Supreme Court, paving the way for decisions like Dobbs v. Jackson, which overturned Roe v. Wade and set back reproductive rights in America by half a century. The organization’s influence has been particularly notable during Republican administrations, especially under former President Donald Trump, who appointed 3 of the Court’s 9 straight from the Federalist list.
A full two thirds of the current U.S. Supreme Court justices have been affiliated with or supported by The Federalist Society. These justices share the Society’s commitment to originalism and textualism, and many were recommended or championed by the organization during the judicial nomination process. The following 6 justices have ties to The Federalist Society:
John Roberts (Chief Justice) – Although not a formal member, Roberts has participated in Federalist Society events and has been described as ideologically aligned with the group’s principles.
Clarence Thomas – An advocate of originalism, Thomas has long been associated with the judicial philosophy promoted by The Federalist Society. He has spoken at their events and is widely seen as one of their intellectual leaders on the bench.
Samuel Alito – Like Roberts, Alito is not a formal member but has participated in Federalist Society activities and shares their conservative judicial outlook.
Neil Gorsuch – A formal member of The Federalist Society before his nomination, Gorsuch was strongly backed by the organization when he was selected to replace Antonin Scalia in 2017.
Brett Kavanaugh – Kavanaugh was supported by The Federalist Society throughout his career, and his nomination to the Supreme Court in 2018 was actively promoted by the group.
Amy Coney Barrett – A former member of The Federalist Society, Barrett was a professor at Notre Dame Law School, where she worked closely with the organization. She was nominated to the Supreme Court in 2020 to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The Heritage Foundation
The Heritage Foundation, founded in 1973, has long been a key architect of conservative policy in the United States. The Foundation’s efforts consistently push for policies that prioritize corporate interests, deregulation, and concentrated executive power, even at the expense of democratic institutions and processes.
Over the decades, The Heritage Foundation has become a significant force in shaping Republican legislative agendas, providing policy proposals to GOP lawmakers and conservative administrations since Ronald Reagan. However, this institutional influence has often facilitated the entrenchment of an authoritarian strain of right-wing ideology that has now metasticized into the body politic.
Christian nationalism, a belief system that intertwines national identity with Christian faith, has been a significant force in American history — and the Christian nationalism timeline may go back further than you think. It erroneously asserts that the United States is fundamentally a Christian nation and should be governed by biblical principles.
This flawed ideology has influenced various aspects of American life, from politics to education, and continues to shape the discourse around national identity and public policy. Understanding the evolution of Christian nationalism provides critical insights into its current manifestations and implications for the future.
In recent years, the resurgence of Christian nationalism has become more visible and influential in American politics. The events of January 6, 2021, and the Big Lie rhetoric surrounding the 2020 presidential election highlighted the power and reach of this movement. With key figures like Russell Vought and organizations like Project 2025 advocating for policies that align with their interpretation of Christian values, it is essential to examine the timeline of Christian nationalism to grasp its roots, growth, and contemporary relevance.
Vote them out, while we still can
Then, get to the polls and take everyone you know with you. Do not allow the right-wing to establish a theocracy in this country — no matter what your faith (or lack thereof), we have common interest in preventing any one faith from informing the US government.
Just because they say the words “Christian nation” does not alter the actual history in which the founders were deists who were adamant about keeping the political and religious spheres separate — having seen the ills it can cause to entwine them. Is America a Christian nation? No. We rejected the divine right of kings, very consciously and loudly so at the time. It is easy to pick up this sentiment in the writings of the founders both inside and outside of the founding documents.
Christian nationalism timeline
1607 — The Jamestown Colony is established in Virginia. Early settlers bring a mix of Christian beliefs that will influence American culture.
1620 — The Pilgrims arrive on the Mayflower, establishing the Plymouth Colony. They seek religious freedom after being persecuted for their lack of conformity to the Anglican church in England, and establish a community based on their Puritan beliefs.
1630 — John Winthrop delivers his sermon “A Model of Christian Charity,” articulating the vision of America as a “city upon a hill,” influencing the concept of a Christian nation.
1730-1740s — The First Great Awakening, a series of religious revivals, sweeps through the American colonies, strengthening evangelicalism.
1776 — The Declaration of Independence is signed. The Founding Fathers, while influenced primarily by Enlightenment ideas, also incorporate some Christian principles.
