The Slumming Socialists

'Tis a golden age to be a cosplay revolutionary!

After all, where else could you make $174,000 a year and that be a significant downgrade to your annual income? After Graham Platner's implosion this past week, we've finally gotten at least some national attention on the fact that the far left continues to elevate those who are least likely to benefit from any kind of socialist revolution. The central figures of the movement are not of the working class but are instead multimillionaires living the life of luxury while simultaneously railing against the evil capitalist system that allowed them to be so obscenely rich in the first place. Ironically, there exists a core group of leftists who, at least in theory, are for redistributing the wealth, yet they themselves seem perfectly content to be among the richest 1% of all Americans. The question now becomes, why do so many wealthy leftists attempt to campaign on behalf of the working class when they themselves have zero understanding of the struggles and difficulties that exist within that particular tax bracket?

Modern-day socialism has always been about appealing to the most downtrodden. It's about the haves and the have-nots. People out there are rich; you are not. Why is that? Why are you struggling when the wealthy capitalist has millions of dollars? Is it fair that the wealth gap continues to increase? Should billionaires even exist? When socialists pose these questions to working-class individuals, they get the responses they are seeking. "Of course, this is unfair! Of course, I should be paid more! Of course, billionaires shouldn't exist!" In terms of building any sort of political campaign, discussing wealth inequality is a critical place to start. Nothing gets people more fired up than talking about how unfair the system is against people like them. 

In this way, socialism has become an entry point for a brand new pool of candidates wanting to run for office. It's the lowest-hanging fruit for those wanting to create an active and engaged volunteer base. For these new candidates, they must seem relatable. That is why they'll often talk about their own story and try to highlight their own struggles. But becoming a political candidate costs money. Not everyone can afford to take a year off and run for office. Many candidates have to at least partially fund their own campaigns. It's a huge gamble, especially at a time when so many incumbents are reelected based on their existing relationships to the power players in the district. To run for Congress, you have to have accrued enough wealth to make campaigning your full-time job. And therein lies the hypocrisy that we're seeing among the far left and their candidates, time and time again.

Because the far left's aim is not to win in swing districts. It is to unseat members of the "Democratic establishment" in the country's bluest districts. These are gentrified urban areas where the cost of living has forced out many longstanding BIPOC communities. Living in one of these districts is pricey enough; to then mount a campaign for Congress requires extraordinary means. With every district targeted by DSA, there can be zero margin for error. They have to go all-in because they know they can't win in moderate or swing districts. To win in an urban district, or even attempt to win statewide, requires a massive amount of money. The kind of money that is unavailable to an average member of the working class. 

So DSA and those associated with DSA policies end up being among some of the wealthiest candidates in the country. Of course, we have to start with billionaire Tom Steyer, who spent a record $215 million of his own money to come in third in the race to become the next governor of California. Ro Khanna, seen as the poster child for socialist policies in Congress, is worth a staggering $340 million. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar recently had to refile her tax returns after she listed her multimillionaire husband's assets as her own. Zohran Mamdani comes from a long line of family money and multimillionaire parents. And, of course, Bernie Sanders, who never had a stable job until he entered politics just shy of his 40th birthday, now owns three homes and has a net worth of nearly $3 million. 

Which brings us to Michigan and Abdul El-Sayed, the next great socialist hope for the United States Senate. This past week, El-Sayed got slammed for a nonsensical answer in a debate with Rep. Haley Stephens as to why he had refused to release his tax returns. El-Sayed's word salad about his wife owning foreign property was widely circulated by the Stephens campaign and criticized for being very "Trumpian" about the way in which he was shielding his financial information. At a time when the public is becoming leery of these socialist working-class heroes, the idea that El-Sayed may be lying about his wealth could be a huge blow to his now floundering campaign. But like Graham Platner before him, it was only a matter of time before the truth came out about Abdul El-Sayed. It seems as if the Great Socialist Revolution can only succeed if the flag bearers are among the richest 1%. The movement as a whole simply cannot succeed without rich candidates and their family money being used to prop up these candidates. 

The truth is that DSA would much rather ride the coattails of its rich candidates than put in the work to actually build a movement. Because that requires real, honest-to-goodness effort, something that DSA is incapable of doing. They want to cut corners, and the easiest way to do that is to recruit financially stable candidates and have them run under the banner of socialism for all. But if you do that enough times, people start to notice. The Graham Platner debacle now has all DSA-aligned candidates under the microscope. Abdul El-Sayed isn't the first Democrat to hide his tax returns. But doing so, at a time when the public is growing more and more suspicious about DSA and far left candidates, could essentially be a death blow to his campaign. The public is beginning to understand what DSA is doing and how they're committed to undermining the Democratic Party. Michigan Democrats are seeing this play out in their own backyard. And Abdul El-Sayed remains the last great hope DSA has this cycle before the mayoral races in L.A. and D.C. take shape in November.

All this is why Haley Stephens has struck a nerve with her attack on El-Sayed's finances. Because you don't refuse to release your tax returns unless you've got something to hide. Bernie Sanders refused to release his full tax returns, and what little we saw showed him to be extremely stingy when it came to his charitable contributions. Donald Trump refused because he consistently paid zero in federal income taxes before being elected president. Although not legally required to do so, candidates have consistently released their tax returns as a show of good faith. Being transparent about one's finances shows that one won't be subject to any entity, foreign or domestic, when it comes to drafting and implementing legislation. While small in the grand scheme of things, a candidate releasing his or her taxes shows a basic level of respect for the voting public. Failure to do so can and should be seen as a huge red flag and a slap in the face to those whom you are asking for their vote, and should be disqualifying at every level. 

Inherently, Abdul El-Sayed knows all this. But he also knows that his LARPing as a socialist is too important to give up. El-Sayed would much rather hide his tax returns than be exposed as a multimillionaire government official. The socialist revolution needs common folk to win. But in the absence of that, they're more than happy to prop up cosplaying socialists to try and manipulate the voters. This effort ultimately failed in Maine because their chosen candidate was simply too much of a disaster to overcome. The tax return fiasco has been El-Sayed's first major hiccup, but it is a harbinger of things to come. Because of DSA's history of propping up unvetted candidates, we can only assume that there are additional red flags in El-Sayed's background. While these red flags might not be as pronounced as they were for Graham Platner, there can be no doubt that these flags are already being compiled by the Michigan GOP in hopes that El-Sayed is ultimately chosen. Michigan voters have a choice on August 4th: the tried and true Democrat or the DSA-aligned multimillionaire who guarantees a loss come November.

Let's hope they make the right decision.