Prominent right-wing influencers think they know the best way to save America: Unite with the left on shared interests. It’s a sentiment shared by Marjorie Taylor Greene, Shawn Ryan, Candace Owens, Ian Carroll, and numerous others.

On what grounds would the left and right unite? As Candace Owens argues, it would be a common front “against the warmongers and the Epstein class.”

This is a delusional opinion that ignores both the left’s unwillingness to make such an alliance and its priorities that are antithetical to conservatism. It’s an idea guaranteed to get engagement, but one that will never be put into effect—unless rightists decide to give up on their principles to help their new allies.

The modern left’s two primary priorities are continuing the demographic replacement of Middle Americans and redistributing the wealth of Middle Americans to its own constituents. Anti-whiteness is fundamental to their agenda and is far more important than any foreign policy platform. To be in the good graces of the left, one must agree to these core priorities. There is no indication the left wants to adopt sensible immigration policies protecting American workers or forego socialist policies that punish productive citizens.

Democrats’ midterm strategy focuses more on abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) than on ending the Iran War. The opposition party held Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding hostage for months over this matter. There hasn’t been any serious attempt on the part of Democrats to end funding for Trump’s intervention against the Islamic Republic. Many Democrats remain quiet about Iran, but nearly every one of them rails against Trump’s “racist” immigration policies.

The few Democrats who share some of the foreign policy interests of paleoconservatives are also those most committed to the left’s antiwhite prerogatives. One such example Graham Platner, a candidate for the U.S. Senate in Maine, who is a rare example of a white Democrat with blue-collar machismo. His populism and avowed criticism of Israel have won him praise from some right-wingers. He’s also been called a Nazi because of a Totenkopf tattoo he acquired while serving overseas in the Marines in 2007.

Platner became the frontrunner in the Democratic primary by being a vocal advocate of abolishing ICE. This view, once an embarrassment for Democrats, was revived in the wake of immigration raids and ICE shootings in Minneapolis earlier this year. Platner argues that eliminating immigration enforcement is the “moderate position” and that we will probably need trials to punish those who enforced federal law against illegal aliens.

Tucker Carlson, who would like to interview Platner, acknowledges this problem with the “populist” Democrat. “Anybody who’s for diluting our labor pool with foreign labor is clearly not acting in the interest of the country,” Tucker said in response to a New York Times question about Platner. “And I couldn’t support anyone like that.”

Immigration isn’t the only area where Platner finds himself opposed to Middle Americans. He also believes their land should be returned to the Indians. “I, for one, am a firm supporter in any legislation that increases tribal sovereignty for the indigenous population in Maine,” he said at a town hall last year. “I also am a firm supporter of any legislation on the federal level that begins to give more, frankly, land back to the indigenous peoples that was taken from them, and there are a few mechanisms of doing this.” He added that tribal sovereignty is a “foundation of my politics.”

The antiwhiteness is more apparent among other antiwar Democrats. Zohran Mamdani is a firm opponent of the Iran War and Israel’s war in Gaza. He’s also a supporter of open borders and other antiwhite policies. Besides calling to abolish ICE, reaffirm sanctuary policies, and encourage more immigration to the U.S., Mamdani advocates for explicit racial wealth redistribution. He argues that white neighborhoods should be taxed more due to their racial composition. He wants to end gifted programs in schools because they favor white and Asian students. His Racial Equity Plan imagines critical race theory as the driver for New York City’s hiring practices and other policies.

Mamdani will also blame whites when Muslim terrorists throw bombs. When an ISIS sympathizer threw an explosive at an anti-Islam protest, Mamdani made sure to direct his ire at the protesters, claiming they were “rooted in white supremacy.”

Even the leftists who entertain outreach to disaffected right-wingers refuse to abandon their antiwhite priors. Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar wants Democrats to embrace Greene and other MAGA dissidents, claiming they can work together to bring down Trump. Omar, however, offers no concessions to these conservatives who now wish to ally with the left. She still defends open borders, abolishing ICE, Somali fraudsters, and thinks we should be “more fearful of the white man.” The only common ground she offers is anti-Trumpism.

The Young Turks are among the most prominent left-wing commentators to engage with right-wing voices. Cenk Uygur, in fact, convinced Shawn Ryan that conservatives should work with leftists on allegedly shared interests. But the Young Turks still celebrate the demographic replacement of white America.

And these are just the leftists who are open to such an alliance.

The reality is that most will never accept such an arrangement, or at least one that requires them to moderate their views in any way. Mehdi Hasan and Naomi Klein, two leading left-wing voices, discussed such an alliance in a recent podcast. While both appreciated the anti-Trump remarks and war opposition from Greene and others, they likewise admitted they could not accept these figures’ views on immigration, ICE, COVID, and Jan. 6. They also both agreed that Candace Owens is an anti-Semite and should not be welcomed at all. They believe the only kind of relationship should be along the lines of the “Mamdani playbook,” which means playing nice with some Republicans while pursuing a far-left agenda.

Hasan and Klein reveal what such an alliance would be, if ever put into practice. Rightists would put aside all of their priorities that do not support the left’s core objectives, namely the replacement of the historic American nation and the redistribution of its resources. Both commentators make it clear that they will not tolerate any hint of “bigotry” or even a desire to shrink the size of government.

The left sees the right as not merely wrong, but evil. These partisans don’t care that much if a right-winger occasionally agrees with them on foreign policy. Pat Buchanan remained a bad person in the eyes of the left despite his courageous stand against the Iraq War. When he wrote a book warning about the demographic replacement of white America, MSNBC dropped him. His criticism of George W. Bush and neoconservatism was forgotten when he committed the grave error of violating the left’s core principles. As Hasan and Klein indicate that same standard applies today. So long as Greene shuts up about immigration, liberals will tolerate her criticism of Trump. But as soon as she talks about immigration, the left will trash her again.

It’s idiotic to think leftists will make any concessions to the right in some grand coalition against the “Epstein class.” They will continue to advocate for open borders, DEI, and redistributing the wealth of Middle Americans. They’re just smart enough to welcome dimwitted right-wingers who are too angry at Trump to recognize the real enemy.