This is a ridiculously bad summary. Bad bot!

Agreed on the basic appeal of core values, BUT there is another vector that the article sidesteps: unabashed tokenism. The extreme right knows it has a pretty nasty optics problem. Most of them try to avoid directly referencing white supremacists (even when their staff members give the game away). They all know that they walk in the shadow of a KKK costume. So, what’s a nice white politician to do? Get some Black people on stage who will blow right past the obvious racist motivations that has landed them in the limelight. Give them some cheap attention and some easy money. It’s a win-win for everyone on stage, that is until the token has worn out their usefulness.

Why? Assuming this is not a rhetorical question, it follows directly from the core authoritarian principle of Conservatism in the U.S.: Moral Hierarchy. That is to say, Those who rule are privileged above those who serve, and this is the basis of a ranked ever-swelling staircase of privilege.

Any action or policy that supports the hierarchy is divine, and whatever threatens the hierarchy is evil. Free food, or food as a right, is antithetical to Conservatism because it diminishes a key point of leverage held by rulers going up the chain. When a person is fed, they are less inclined to honor the privilege of their supposed rulers. When a person is truly hungry, they are highly motivated to submit, and even to support the hierarchy that provides them with any limited access to food.

In this philosophy, the ROI of free lunch is negative. The same argument applies to most forms of welfare.

The cruelty is the point.