I think the most telling part is when Nathan says, look, you can and should "work with" Libertarians or even Le Pen nazis on very specific limited aims if there really is agreement but you should be excruciatingly careful about your concessions. Glenn immediately says "yeah, don't concede anything important!" And therein lies the crux: when Glenn says "work with", he doesn't think you'll have to make concessions, you can just pass these limited aims where everyone agrees. But all coalition building involves concession making! And that's why the right wing "populists" historically align with the capitalists... their identarian aims are more important to them than their economic ones (if they exist at all).
Yeah. It didn't really work in Italy, as far as I know. In France Le Pen has so few MPs they're not even a factor at the national level. Maybe in some city councils. Those hyper focused, circumstantial alliances to pass one initiative are more hypothetical than real, I feel. In most western countries, it's about building a coalition government and mandate-long stable majorities anyway and that involves some more intricate deals and concessions.
Israel and Belgium would perhaps be relevant here ? For all the horseshoe talk, examples of actual brown-red alliances in modern politics are pretty rare.
