Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Just What Is a Socialist?

Opinion

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and US Senator Bernie Sanders standing at a podium together with a crowd of supporters behind them.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and US Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) speak to supporters during the Mayor's 100-day address on April 12, 2026 in New York City.

Ryan Murphy / Getty Images

Gertrude Stein famously wrote, "A rose is a rose is a rose is a rose," meaning everyone knows what a rose is. The same cannot be said of a Socialist.

There are many Democratic politicians who proudly call themselves Socialists or Democratic Socialists, and there are many adversaries who brand those individuals as Socialists. Both sides use the same word, but the word means very different things to the two sides.


First, the dictionary/political science definition of socialism is:

"1. any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods."

This does not define Bernie Sanders, Zohran Mamdani, or other Democrats who call themselves Socialists. This is despite the fact that the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has as a goal "to collectively own the key economic drivers that dominate our lives, such as energy production and transportation."

Even the DSA, saying that the end of capitalism is unlikely in the foreseeable future, instead focuses on increasing the power of the people within a democratic capitalist structure. "At the root of our socialism is a profound commitment to democracy, as means and end.... DSA fights for reforms today that will weaken the power of corporations and increase the power of working people. For example, we support reforms that: decrease the influence of money in politics, empower ordinary people in workplaces and the economy, and restructure gender and cultural relationships to be more equitable."

The DSA is thus, from a practical perspective, an organization fighting for a democracy as defined by the Declaration of Independence, a democracy that is all about securing the rights of all people and the equality of all people. Indeed, Thomas Jefferson, in his last letter, stated that the Declaration of Independence gave voice to the truth that the "mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God."

And that is what Bernie Sanders, Zohran Mamdani, and others are fighting for. They are not arguing for government or collective ownership of any means of production. And thus they are not Socialists—with a capital "S"—even though they are members of the DSA. They are socialists only in the sense that they believe that the government must be focused more on the rights of the people. Neither they nor the DSA present a threat to our capitalist structure—to some of its details, yes, but not the basic structure,

They are Democrats seeking a government that is focused on fulfilling the promises of our founding principles—the equality of all; the right of all to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and the role of government being to secure those rights—while recognizing that to do that, creating the conditions for a prosperous economy and industry is essential for government to secure these rights for all.

But Republicans sense the opportunity to create a bogeyman that scares off voters. And so Republicans brand members of the DSA as Socialists—with a capital 'S"—or even Communists—an accusation of being un-American—as Trump has recently done.

But there is nothing communistic about the DSA. As noted above, their commitment to democracy is central. What they are fighting for is a democracy—within our capitalist system—that is truer to the founding principles of our country.

Likewise, the Democratic centrists who recently published their new "Promise to America" and resorted to the trope of calling DSA members "Socialists" are also seeking to negatively brand them. They need to recognize the flaw in their approach, and if they truly want to accomplish what they state in their Promise, they will have to shift to the left and more forcefully support the rights of the people as promised in the Declaration of Independence, knowing that that will mean that they will oppose corporate interests with some regularity.

And I would respectfully suggest that Sanders, Mamdani, and others stop labelling themselves as Socialists because that label is not technically appropriate and gives Trump and his MAGA allies ammunition with which to rouse the very people who they are fighting for to vote against them. Their recent success in election primaries is not a function of this label but of the message that they are advocating.


Ronald L. Hirsch is a teacher, legal aid lawyer, survey researcher, nonprofit executive, consultant, composer, author, and volunteer. He is a graduate of Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School and the author of We Still Hold These Truths. Read more of his writing at www.PreservingAmericanValues.com


Read More

What the World Cup Teaches Us About Democracy

Charles De Ketelaere #17 of Belgium scores his team’s first goal past Unai Simon #23 of Spain during the FIFA World Cup 2026 Quarter Final match between Spain and Belgium at Los Angeles Stadium on July 10, 2026, in Inglewood, California.

(Photo by David Ramos/Getty Images)

What the World Cup Teaches Us About Democracy

As live sporting events go, nothing comes close to the World Cup. I was in the stands when South Africa, my birth country, hosted the event in 2010 after decades of exclusion from global athletics. In June of this year, I had a full-circle moment when South Africa played in the knockout rounds for the first time, and I stood with my two American sons, arms around them, singing South Africa's anthem — the only national anthem that weaves multiple languages into a single, unifying song. Later in the week, I was in the stands again, cheering Spain's win over Austria, a country to which my only connections are a brief holiday…and the fact that my mother's family fled from there during the Inquisition.

The magic of the World Cup is that everyone in the stands wears the flags and shirts of countries that are “theirs” in some way. For some, it’s where they were born; for others, where they live or where their ancestors hailed from. For some, it is simply a country they have adopted for the afternoon. It is impossible to know how deep a person’s connection runs simply by looking at them. And next to a person waving one team’s colors is a stranger, family member, or close friend supporting the opposing team—or wearing the jersey of a team that isn’t playing that day at all.

Keep Reading Show less
​Former President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, former President George W. Bush, and former President Bill Clinton pose together.

Former President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, former President George W. Bush, and former President Bill Clinton pose ahead of the dedication ceremony for the opening of the Barack Obama Presidential Center, in John Lewis Plaza, on June 18, 2026, in Chicago, Illinois.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais - Pool / Getty Images

America Shouldn't Need a Political Savior to Hold It Together

America is waiting for a political savior, but the problem is structural.

This dynamic was illustrated during two recent broadcast appearances by journalist Katy Tur. Discussing modern secessionist movements on June 15, 2026, Tur found optimism in a poll showing 54 percent of Americans still believe we share core values, and she later expressed hope that future leaders could reunite the country.

Keep Reading Show less
Constitution of the United State with the U.S. flag in the background.

The Framers designed a republic with the intention to manage factionalism through deliberate compromise and institutional guardrails, whereas 21st-century polarization often treats compromise as a moral failing.

Douglas Sacha, Getty Images

Our Framers on 21st Century Primaries and Polarization

The Framers would view 21st-century closed primaries and political polarization as the exact manifestation of "factionalism" they spent the 1787 Constitutional Convention trying to prevent. They would argue these systems force candidates to appeal to ideological extremes rather than the broad, moderate consensus required for stable governance.

The Danger of Factionalism: In Federalist No. 10, James Madison defined a "faction" as a group of citizens united by a passion or interest adverse to the rights of others. He argued that while factions are inevitable, their effects must be controlled. The Framers would recognize 21st-century hyper-polarization as the dominance of unyielding factions that prioritize absolute ideological purity over democratic compromise.

Keep Reading Show less