Here we go again with the “S” word.
So, here we go. Four of the largest American cities have, or are about to have, open, avowed, loud & proud socialist mayors. Not long ago, those on the Left who harbored socialist predilections, like those who harbor indelicate sexual predilections, went to some trouble to hide them. (You’ll recall that the Grand Poobahs of the Democratic Party pushed Bernie Sanders off their presidential ticket in 2008 because he dared say the “S” word out loud.)
No longer.
In today’s ever-more-radical Democratic Party, being a socialist is a feature, not a bug.
Today, the leading lights of the Democratic Party are unapologetically socialist and the one-time “moderate” leaders of the party – think Pelosi and Schumer (and please note the air quotes around “moderate”) – increasingly find themselves on the outside looking in.
New York led the Dems’ leftward lurch in 2018 by electing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – a.k.a. AOC – to represent New York’s 14thCongressional District. But she now looks positively Churchillian compared to New York City’s new socialist mayor, Zohran Mamdani. Just this week, Democratic primary voters in New York nominated four more avowed socialists to represent the state in the U.S. Congress. There is little doubt that all four will win in the general election in November.
Moving across the country, Seattle mayor Katie Wilson is an avowed socialist. Los Angeles recently nominated avowed socialist Nithya Raman for mayor. She, too, is expected to win in the general.
The same for Washington, D.C.’s Janeese Lewis George, now the Democratic nominee for mayor, and also expected to easily win in November.
Those of us old enough to remember the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union are shaking our heads in dismay as we realize that we’ve learned nothing from the failures of prior attempts at socialism. The lessons that followed from the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991 apparently didn’t stick. Ditto the more recent story of Venezuela.
Socialism succeeds at little other than creating shared unhappiness. To the extent that China’s economy works, it’s because the 1978 reforms of Deng Xiaoping created a socialist/capitalist hybrid that made it possible – on a limited basis — for private citizens to own property (sort of) and accumulate personal wealth (sort of).
Socialists are misguided at best – believing that a small cabal of government “experts” can better direct the economy than millions of free individuals acting independently while risking their own capital.
They’re evil at worst because for socialism to work, it must steal the fruits of labor from the productive to give to the non-productive. That theft ultimately takes place at gunpoint.
But socialism’s dismal and bloody record notwithstanding, according to recent polls, as many as two thirds of Democrats now think it’s a good idea. They conveniently ignore socialism’s indisputable record of mass murder, mass misery and ultimate bankruptcy.
The lesson of 2026 is that the center of gravity in the Democratic Party is now socialist. We’re in uncharted waters. And I’d be a fool if I started predicting how it will all turn out.
I miss you sitting in for KTLY radio hosts from time to time. Guess I’ll have to start listening to KTBB instead!! Hope you are well and that your Fathers’ Day was all you had hoped it might be!!! God Bless you and yours!!
Can only pray that this will wake voters up and sensible minds will turn out in large numbers and vote Republican. After listening to comments by Talarico, I hope republicans show up in big numbers and vote for Paxton.
I’m voting for Paxton!!!
Ditto!
If allowed to continue, the fall into socialism will end like every other country before in history. The record is indisputable. A major difference between the new socialist movement and common sense is that they believe people are acting out in anger and protest because they are unhappy with life and frustrated by their leadership for not doing anything to help. If they just had what they needed they wouldn’t be committing all those crimes (murder, rape, domestic terrorism, DWI fatalities, etc.). Ask them to name a successful socialist country. They stand with their immigrant neighbors from Venezuela and Cuba. Would that be the ones I saw cheering when Maduro was captured?! Capitalism rewards innovation and success, socialism takes it from those who attain it. When Mamdani says he will pay for all your free stuff by taxing the rich, how rich is he going to allow YOU to get?
Very well said Mr. Durham!
Another outstanding column and one Democrat should read. But they won’t.
“You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink” is a saying as old as the hills. Likewise, “You can lead a Democrat donkey to logic but you can’t make him think.”
He is too eaten up by envy and a consequent lust for what other men have earned.
Envy leavened with ignorance is the driving force behind the attraction to socialism/communism.
Those of us who prefer to earn our way in life, rather than covet what others have, prefer the manifold benefits free markets yield.
Just for fun, I tallied up the number of callouses in the pic of the rally above. I multiplied it by the number of biceps and came up with…none. Socialists talk ad nauseum about being the workers. Ain’t a one of those folks who’ve ever hit a lick in their LIVES.
Truer words were never spoken than “Socialism is the politics of theft.” The difference between the big socialists and the little one is just how far they’re in on the grift. The small ones think they just want Free Stuff. The bigger ones recognize it for the pyramid scheme that it is, and demand the cars and the mansions. They’re all just thieves of one stripe or another. I wonder what would happen if all Government Cheese programs were just suddenly and mysteriously turned off one night. It’ll never happen, but it’s fun to ponder.
You just described Bernie Sanders
A democratic socialist believes that both the economy and society should be run democratically to benefit everyone, not just the wealthy. They want to shift power and resources away from big corporations and into the hands of working people, using the democratic voting process rather than a violent revolution.
I believe it is intellectually dishonest to post this article, provoking fear in people whenever we hear the word “socialism”. Texas has voted for a Republican president since the 1980’s. CNBC poll cited Texas as 49th out of the 50 states in quality of life such as a dependable power grid. Last year, I moved from my native Oklahoma, another very red state. Oklahoma voters, especially rural Okies voted against a $15 minimum wage recently.
They believed the myth from corporations it would cause job losses. To Mr Saunder, I respectfully challenge your comment that no Democrat will not read this article. I read it and am a Democrat. I respectfully ask you when is the last time you read information from someone who doesn’t share your view. Lastly, to Mr Taylor’s comment about voting for Ken Paxton over Talarico. If you take an objective look at Mr Paxton’s record…..claiming multiple homestead exemptions on multiple homes. As an ordinary citizen, I am not allowed to claim multiple exemptions on my home….and I would bet you don’t either.
Yes, Cheryl, the misery brought down upon Texas by Republican governors and that terrible quality of life that you cite both help to explain why, since 2010, the state’s population has grown from 25.1 million residents to 31.3 million — a 25 percent increase — the result in overwhelming measure of in-migration from other states. In just 16 years, Texas has added the population equivalent of an entire state the size of Missouri. And as to your assertion regarding minimum wage and job losses: have you been to a McDonald’s lately? If not, go today and take note of the electronic kiosks that have replaced the young workers who used to be there to take your order. Those jobs got priced out at the expense of young people who at one time could count on a job at McDonald’s — or one like it — as a way to gain their initial entry into the workforce. Similar examples are everywhere you look — if you will only look.
If Texas is such a backward, ill educated, third world state as Cheryl W. would have us believe, then why do we see so much these days to indicate otherwise?
Firms like Apple, Chase, Tesla, Exxon, and many other’s are moving to places like Texas. This is also being demonstrated by individuals voting with their feet and leaving the left wing areas like California, Oregon, Washington state, Delaware, and Illinois for conservative states. So much so that many will be losing votes in the electoral college. Cheryl should ask herself why this is happening.
Her idea “to shift power and resources away from big corporations and into the hands of working people, using the democratic voting process rather than a violent revolution’ is crazy. It can also be described by using one other word; theft. Being the victim of theft would discourage entrepreneurs from starting businesses, thereby creating job’s for the “working class people” democrats say they care so much about. Why would anyone in their right mind risk their own hard earned capital to have it nationalized, or stolen, from them?
Even the Chicago Bears have announced they intend to leave Chicago. Chicago deserves this. It is also very fitting that Chicago will be keeping the eyesore known as the Obama Library. If I were to write a book on how to destroy a city, state, or nation, I would put a picture of the Obama Library on the cover.
Socialism is well into the process of destroying the democrat party, which I think is great. Schumer and Jefferies are polling in the 30’2 and lower, yet people keep leaving. Cheryl should not believe the talking points in the media and instead trust her own lying eyes!
Baroness Margret Thatcher was Prime Minister of England from 1979 to 1990 that had many harsh things said about socialism but the one that stuck with me was when she said, “Socialism is ok as long as you don’t run out of other people’s money!” That pretty well sums it up for me! People don’t stop to think WHERE does all the money come from to take care of all those that think oh it is all FREE! NOTHING is FREE in this life and the sooner you understand that, the better off you are! All these socialist free things talked about are nothing but SPIDERWEBS to entrap you. Why don’t you go and read the REAL socialist ideals …it is nothing new , in fact if you read your BIBLE, it is said THERE IS NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN! And that means socialism! In fact, the pilgrims embraced it until all of them nearly starved to death because some felt they didn’t HAVE to share the load!
To Mr. Gleiser’s reply to my comments. More than one thing can be true at the same time. I will take your word regarding the growth of Texas, I am example of that growth. It can also be true that quality of life factors for everyone in Texas can improve. Do you agree?
To Mr. Paschall comments regarding my post. I didn’t say Texas was a third world country in my comments. I moved here last year! My comments were meant to add another idea to the discussion. I didn’t say socialism was a good method of governing. Allowing big corporations to have so much power tilts the influence away from ordinary people. I don’t believe most big corporations have ordinary people’s quality of life in their mission. Yes, they are an integral part of our economy. I agree. I also think big corporations have been given a lot of power/influence that is not always considering the common person. That is my way of saying more than one thing can be true at the same time .
I believe I’ve posted this before but again I say it because it’s true.
Capitalism is the uneven distribution of wealth, and socialism is the even distribution of misery. A quote from Sir Winston Churchill. It’s as simple as that.
I hear Mamdani say he will refuse to cooperate with Trump and the Supreme Court on such and such, and how people deserve a government that works for the common man. Examples of that working are in Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, Somalia, Nicaragua, I could go on. I think Mamdani needs to study the hierarchy of our system of government. MAYOR is WAY down the list of powerful elected officials, even though the city houses <8 million people. Talk about socialism! One person can declare a law invalid and unenforceable!?
Hello, Paul! I agree that we need to be cautious when implementing new economic systems, and The Soviet Union, China, and Venezuela all provide genuine examples of governments with too much economic and political power. I also agree that markets are very effective at coordinating economic decisions, and history gives us good reason to be skeptical of governments trying to centrally plan entire economies. However, I think your article combines several different meanings of socialism under one label.
I think your argument often treats democratic socialism as though it were the same as authoritarian state-socialist systems of the twentieth century. Many modern democratic socialists (like Mamdani) advocate working within a capitalist economy while expanding social programs and worker protections. Whether those ideas are good or bad is certainly up for debate, but they are far different from the centrally planned, authoritarian systems associated with Stalin and the Soviet Union, which relied on one-party rule and state control of the economy. Many modern democratic socialists, on the other hand, advocate pursuing reforms through democratic institutions within a largely market-based economy.
I also think it’s worth mentioning that every successful modern economy is a mixed economy. The United States is capitalist, but also has public schools, Medicare, and publicly funded emergency services. Likewise, countries often described as “socialist” (like the Nordic countries – Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Finland), still heavily rely on private business, entrepreneurship, and market competition.
Regarding your comment of “shared unhappiness”, I think it’s worth noting 4 of the 5 Nordic countries just mentioned are the top 4 happiest countries, as ranked by the World Happiness Report in 2025. (In contrast, the United States is 27th.) I understand that this point isn’t the strongest, as general happiness of citizens is affected by a variety of factors, but it is notable that countries often referred to in discussions of democratic socialism consistently rank among the happiest in the world – while maintaining market economies alongside social programs.
I think modern American democratic socialists should be evaluated based on the policies they actually advocate, rather than assumed to support Soviet-style central planning. I don’t believe most people who identify as democratic socialists are motivated to eliminate freedom or punish success. They generally believe they’re proposing policies that will improve economic opportunity and security. We may disagree about whether those policies would succeed, but I think it’s important to evaluate them on their merits rather than assume malicious intent. The label “socialist” isn’t enough to judge a politician. We should evaluate the actual policies they’re proposing.
I don’t think the real debate here should be “capitalism or socialism”, but rather where the balance between markets and government should be.
Please forgive the wall of text! I just wanted to communicate my point as clearly as possible, and it ended up being pretty wordy. I hope it succeeds in helping you see democratic socialism in a slightly different context.
Conrad, what you’ve written is excellent, providing plenty of room for thought. Additional words are always welcome whenever they enhance clarity.
Conrad, but after all things are considered, it remains that you cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. The enduring problem with socialism, no matter how well intended in the beginning, is that it always metastasizes into the cancer of communism.