Steve Bannon debate at The Economist #OpenFutures festival

Immigration Philosophy and Economic Rationale

• Bannon argues that unrestricted legal and illegal immigration, alongside unfavorable trade deals, is a primary driver of suppressed wages for American workers across all races.
• He advocates for a shift in policy priority from "free trade" (ranked 100) to immigration and trade protectionism (ranked 1-3), positing they are "two sides of the same coin."
• Regarding the "Merit-Based Raise Act," Bannon supports restricting H-1B visas and excess legal immigration to prioritize American citizens (specifically African American and Hispanic communities) for high-tech jobs once full employment is achieved.
• He acknowledges that foreign entrepreneurs create 25% of new US companies and over 50% of big tech firms but maintains that a merit-based system must precede this to ensure growth benefits US citizens first.
• Bannon defines "economic nationalism" as colorblind and religion-blind, asserting it cares only for US citizenship, though he refuses to condemn specific European allies' statements regarding minority groups.

Relations with European Populist Leaders

• Bannon refuses to condemn statements by Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini and Hungarian President Viktor Orbán, stating, "I certainly do not condemn Viktor Orban and Salvini."
• He defends Orbán and Salvini as leaders "saving their countries" who enjoy support from two-thirds of their populations, rejecting the label that their movements are ethno-nationalist or racist.
• When pressed on whether these leaders are racist for calling refugees "Muslim invaders" or targeting Roma populations for census tracking, Bannon asserts they are addressing education and healthcare integration, not ethnic hatred.
• He characterizes the European right-wing movement as distinct from 1920s/30s fascism, framing their goal as the restoration of national sovereignty against a "liberal rules-based order" he views as detached from reality.

Trade Policy and Geopolitics

• Bannon views China not as a partner but as a "totalitarian mercantilist regime" and a "one-party dictatorship" comparable to 1930s fascist regimes, representing an "economic war."
• He asserts that tariffs are a necessary "means to an end" to reorder global supply chains away from China and bring manufacturing jobs back to the US, even if they raise consumer prices in the short term.
• He clarifies that while Trump has proposed "zero tariffs with China" if they stop non-trade barriers (like state-owned industry subsidies), ongoing tariffs are acceptable if they protect American workers rather than capitalists.
• Bannon dismisses high economist consensus on tariffs as irrelevant to his strategy, arguing that tax cuts, not tariffs, are the current primary driver of economic growth, while tariffs serve strategic sovereignty goals.

Views on Governance and the Administrative State

• He identifies three core pillars of the populist nationalist revolution: economic nationalism to protect workers, an "America First" foreign policy to end expeditionary wars, and the deconstruction of the administrative state.
• Bannon supports the appointment of conservative judges (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh) specifically for their focus on the Chevron exemption and reducing administrative overreach rather than social issues like abortion or gay marriage.
• He criticizes the "Party of Davos" and the permanent political class for capturing regulation-writing power, citing the Five Star Movement in Italy as a model for stopping crony capitalism.
• He argues that true power for workers comes from "deconstructing the administrative state" to foster entrepreneurship and access to capital, contrasting this with European tendencies to simply seize state control.

Climate Change and Future Threats

• Bannon characterizes the Paris Climate Agreement as a "debacle" that granted China a "free ride" to pollute while restricting the West.
• He contends the greatest 21st-century threat is not climate change but the "convergence" of automation, advanced chip design, robotics, and genetic engineering (the "singularity").
• He warns that unless workers take control of the political process from the "scientific engineering managerial class," the singularity will result in a total debacle for the working class.
• He opposes a "United States of Europe," favoring a union of 27-28 independent sovereign nation-states rather than the federalized vision promoted by Macron.

Social Movements and Historical Context

• Bannon compares the Time's Up/Me Too movement to the French Revolution, arguing it seeks to totally reorder society against 5,000-10,000 years of recorded history (including Judeo-Christian, Hindu, and Islamic traditions).
• He praises the movement's power but suggests it is distinct from the American Revolution, which he frames as a movement for sovereignty rather than social reordering.
• He identifies himself as a protector of the working class, having fought against the 1% and for higher corporate taxes, while attributing the 2016 Trump victory to the failure of the "Party of Davos" to address income inequality post-2008.
• Regarding the 2016 election demographics, he acknowledges only 35% of 18-24-year-olds voted for Trump but argues the movement's success is driven by actions and the preservation of jobs, contrasting the "serfdom" of millennials with the asset wealth of the elite.

Donald Trump and Movement Strategy

• Bannon confirms Donald Trump was the "perfect candidate" who finally articulated the radical ideas regarding trade and China that he and other figures (Jeff Sessions, Sarah Palin, Lou Dobbs) had promoted since 2013.
• He states that the primary goal of the movement was to break the "medieval theology" of free trade and deindustrialization, with Trump serving as the vehicle to achieve this.
• He rejects the premise that Trump was merely a "vehicle" with no personal knowledge, asserting Trump deeply understands the trade and China issues.
• The discussion concludes with Bannon maintaining that the US worldview based on protectionism and sovereignty will be proven correct through the eventual reordering of global supply chains, contrasting it with the historical "disaster" of 1930s protectionism cited by his interviewer.