Illustration of the U.S Capitol on the dollar note.
Photography: Karolina Kaboompics via Pexels // https://www.pexels.com/photo/image-of-old-building-on-american-banknote-4386157/
//

The Atlas Network, or the Alliance between the Bourgeoisie and the Radical Right to Win Cultural Hegemony

In several nations this network of think tanks and institutes provides arguments, tools, and maybe most importantly money and credibility.

2024 IS A PIVOTAL YEAR. Never before have so many elections taken place at the same time, especially in such a context of uncertainty and radicality. All over the world, tensions arise between countries that recover the idea of empire and hegemony to lead their policies, especially through the implementation of nationalist figures using a strong anti-establishment discourse. Politicians like Mr. Trump or Mr. Milei display the same strategy and rhetoric, often called populist, to build new cleavages and win power through a libertarian, radical nationalist framework in their policies. However, behind the appealing storytelling of such leaders, the strategies they built are also the result of a more discreet network of actors who have carefully read Antonio Gramsci’s work on how to master political hegemony. 

For decades, the Atlas Network had become one of the main actors of the ideological battle. Based in America, it spread globally as the intellectual and political weapon of the far right. In several nations, not only from the West, this private network of think tanks and institutes provides arguments, tools, and maybe most importantly money and credibility to help their members invade the public debate and fight for libertarian values worldwide. This refers to a society where the state is reduced to its military and justice powers, and that lets free initiatives and companies provide goods and services, and where inequalities are seen as natural and only private property of individuals and the means of production has to be protected.

Thus, the work of this political web shall be investigated because of its concrete consequences on elections, political campaigns, and how opinions and political competition are shaped. The story of this international, influential network has nothing to do with a hidden conspiracy from the global elites, the Illuminati, or whatever. It is simply a battle between economic interests that use politics, culture, and intellectuals to conquer global opinion through civil society. 

A Cold War legacy

The Atlas Network was born in the mind of Antony Fisher in 1981. The decade is often described as an era of neoliberalism and deregulation, whereas communist – as well as state-led macroeconomics and traditional socialist ideas – was falling into discrepancy with the collapse of the Berlin Wall. Indeed, the supporters of a market-led economy, especially the followers of the philosophy of Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek gathered in the Mont Pelerin Society since 1947, observed the victory of the capitalist camp over the Soviet world. Antony Fisher was one of them: instead of pursuing a political career to fight the powerful Labour Party in the UK, he chose to follow the advice of his master, Mr. Hayek, and founded the first Institute for Economic Affairs. The significance of this first think tank was so important in the political field that Margaret Thatcher herself acknowledged the debt she and her party owed to the cultural fight of Fisher in favor of neoliberalism. 

From the very beginning, and even before the Atlas Network, the main axiom of his action was to unite the economic actors, companies, academics, and the radical reactionary association and political camp. Indeed, a current partner as the American Heritage Foundation (AHF) illustrates this combination as their mission is to “formulate and promote public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.”

The defense of “traditional American values” consists here in a structured discourse advocating for the return to a glorious past largely based on religion, which led, for example, the president of AHF to meet and build links with the Hungarian head of state Mr. Orban in a similar fight for the “tradition and families”. For instance, the question of gender is understood very traditionally in the website of the think tank, which considers the following: “Neither federal lawmakers nor courts should have the power to redefine what it is to be a man or a woman for all Americans”. This standpoint against gender minority rights shows the hierarchy of values between what society, perceived as religious and traditional, believes and the decisions of politicized bureaucrats who are far removed from the people.

Following the money’s path

The influence of Fisher’s creation in global politics is still very strong: the network has spread around the world to guarantee the predominance of the libertarian alliance according to Hayek’s teaching. In 2023, the annual report of the organization gathered 589 partners across 103 countries, with a budget of 28 million dollars. Just as an intellectual transnational firm that would sell ideas and influence, its activity is flourishing, and achieving Friedrich Hayek’s dream, the network is reaching more and more targets. The Network’s action seems hybrid: while the most prominent members may openly take part in the political debate, the financial scheme might not be easily disclosed.

The Atlas Network is a ​​private foundation with lobbying purposes, provided with funds from major industrial companies such as Chevron, Shell, and Texavro. Although not all the financial data is published, so that the players remain discreet, oil companies such as Exxon and tobacco industry leaders are present to finance the network and its ideologies. The strong links between Atlas and these companies show again how the industrial bourgeoisie chose to make alliances with the most conservative organizations, in order to preserve their economic capacities. These lobbying activities on behalf of neo-conservatives and financial interests can be seen in various examples of political battles. Five Supreme Court judges who rejected the validity of the Roe versus Wade amendment on abortion rights came from the Federalist Society, a member of the network. Lobbying is equally important through members of parliaments as in the US where the American Heritage Society – only one example among many others – organized in one year 47 candidate briefings, more than 400 meetings with congressional staff, and 168 working group events on Capitol Hill.

“These lobbying activities on behalf of neo-conservatives and financial interests can be seen in various examples of political battles.”

Mainstream media are also used as echo chambers, where experts of the network flood newspapers and TV channels to enact the frame of acceptable opinions and create a better atmosphere for the political discourse they support. Indeed, Jeff Stier from the Heartland Institute is often invited to speak or write about health issues on the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Fox News… This army of experts is sent to pass their opinion and spread the “Overton’s window”: a social science concept that refers to Joseph Overton’s theory (he worked for a partner of the Atlas Network) of spreading the boundaries of the public debate by more and more radical view to let former extreme opinions (e.g. about the respect of the Constitution, or of institutional processes) become more acceptable in comparison. The emergence of a figure like Mr. Trump in the American political arena refocused the balance of acceptable ideological positions towards the far right, through massive communications via social networks (Twitter) or television channels (Fox News). This rebalancing subsequently opened up the field of political protest to even more radical elements, as the Capitol riots later showed. In comparison, Mr Trump’s speech was seen as less radical, in terms of methods, and of references than his supporters.

“By their fruits, you will know them.” Matthew 7:15-20

Beyond the financial battlefield and the weight of companies in the spread of libertarian values, the network aims at changing the shape of politics, and history. We have seen that from the beginning, the goal of the institutes and think tanks was not to be only a place for academics and start-uppers to meet and share drinks and food at fancy events. In several cases, their tenet “Coach, compete, and celebrate” inspired leaders in building campaign strategies, i.e. constructing meticulous methods for libertarianism to rise into elections. One of the most interesting cases to examine is the election of Mr. Milei in Argentina. 

Back in November 2023, most of the observers wrote the chronicle of Milei’s emergence as a strange character in the political field, probably a late, but not surprising echo of world populisms, or even the shadow of Mr. Trump’s presidency. It is a simplistic, teleological way to approach politics: we would rather assert that this was the result of an intellectual battle led by members of the Atlas Network in Argentina at several levels of decision-making processes. There are at least ten partners of the foundation in the country that benefited from the 12 million dollars given to the Latino American partners of Atlas. Javier Milei was a fellow disciple of the Fundación Libre and of the Fundación Federalismo y Libertad where his mentor Alberto Benegas Lynch used to lead the academic council. The influence of the network in Milei’s program can be found in the advisers who built his proposals as Filgueira Lima for the health concerns, who was part of the think tank Libertad y Progreso, sponsored of course by Atlas. The result of this work is a political program that largely cuts into the public expenditure and the social budget of several ministries, especially on gender and social topics… From this perspective, Javier Milei does not seem like a strange and fanciful character in politics. He is a careful libertarian student still surrounded by a strong team that protects the interests of dominants and spreads their ideology on economics and moral values.  

“I am a pessimist because of intelligence, but an optimist because of will” A. Gramsci

The most ironic but also interesting thing about the Atlas Network’s methods and agency is how it resembles Marxist strategies, and more notably the analysis of Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci. He explained in his Prison Notebooks that a political party has to fight for civil society to win the political battle as ideas, values, and beliefs can also have material consequences. Materialism, from this perspective, has to be an organized strategy that would use all spheres of social life, even intellectual, to win through media, universities, books, movies, etc. Ideas are the framework in which collective action can take departure to be relevant and reach the majority. However, even if Gramsci’s ideas have known an important revival after the fall of the Soviet Union with thinkers such as Chantal Mouffe or Ernesto Laclau, the lessons of the Atlas Network seem to demonstrate that the conservative camp had integrated these principles from a long time – and the result of this hidden work just begins to unveil.