#491 — The Suicide of the Left

Sam Harris and James Kirchick critique the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for advancing an uncompromising and extreme agenda, warning that its influence on Democratic politicians presents serious political risks for the party.

Dsa Platform Promotes an Extreme Agenda Beyond Traditional Democratic Socialism

Dsa's Goals: Abolish Presidency, Supreme Court, Senate, Pentagon, Police, Prisons, Border Enforcement; Eliminate Capitalism and Private Property

Sam Harris outlines the DSA platform as calling for abolishing the presidency, the Supreme Court, the Senate, the Pentagon, the police, prisons, border enforcement, all debt, capitalism, and private property itself. He notes the DSA presents these positions unapologetically, amounting to what he characterizes as a "communist manifesto." Harris argues that the DSA’s vision goes far beyond the Western European welfare-state model that many people assume democratic socialists support. Instead, he says it seeks the outright eradication of capitalism and private property, and is not ambiguous about these intentions.

Dsa's Foreign Policy Shows Communist Sympathies, Endorsing Authoritarian Regimes Like North Korea and Cuba

James Kirchick highlights the DSA’s foreign policy as evidence of its radicalism, noting that the organization endorses and offers solidarity to authoritarian regimes such as North Korea and Cuba. He considers this support for what he calls the "most despicable communist dictatorships on earth" to be an indicator that the DSA fundamentally diverges from mainstream democratic values.

Dsa Leadership Claims Marxism, Aligning More With Communism Than Democratic Socialism

Kirchick further observes that the DSA’s leadership is openly composed of declared Marxists. He notes that this goes beyond mere red-baiting, as the organization's internal leadership structure (likened to a "Politburo") and self-identification with Marxism indicate a platform and power base more aligned with communism than with democratic socialism.

Dsa-affiliated Politicians Like Nyc Mayor Create Vulnerabilities in Democratic Positions

Dsa Mayor Introduces Government Grocery Stores to Challenge Capitalism

Harris and Kirchick discuss Ron Mamdani, the mayor of New York, as a prominent, charismatic figure in the Democratic Party who openly identifies as a "proud DSA member." Kirchick criticizes Mamdani's move to introduce government-sponsored grocery stores in New York, arguing that these efforts could undermine private grocery businesses and constitute an impractical "boondoggle." He suggests that taxpayers will ultimately subsidize failing private stores, turning the initiative into a long-term strategy that structurally challenges capitalism.

Democratic Leaders Fail to Oppose Dsa-affiliated Politicians, Endangering Electoral Prospects

Harris express ...

Liberal Intellectuals & Democratic Leaders Sympathize With Cold War-era Far-left Movements

James Kirchick draws a parallel between contemporary Democratic and liberal tendencies and those of the Cold War era. He recalls that many liberals and leftists in mid-20th-century America refused to see the dangers of communism, referencing the Progressive Party and its 1948 presidential candidate, Henry Wallace. While not openly pro-communist, the party was described as being controlled by the Communist Party and filled with “fellow travelers”—people ideologically sympathetic to communism, if not actual members.

This sympathy led to the popularization of phrases such as “liberals in a hurry,” implying that liberals and communists shared ultimate goals, though the far left was prepared to be more radical and aggressive in pursuit. Kirchick believes this residual sympathy persists today, asserting that many on the left still feel a sense of admiration for more radical figures, wishing they could be as outspoken or forceful as those on the far left even while engaging in pragmatic politics.

Kirchick also highlights a liberal admiration for the far left that pressures centrists not to criticize radicals. He describes the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) as occupying “the cool kids table,” making it difficult for center-left commentators and politicians to challenge their positions without risking ostracism or loss of credibility among peers. Intellectuals and journalists, he notes, often fear not being seen as "cool," which strengthens the pressure to avoid criticizing or even making fun of more radical left-wing groups.

Open-Mindedness vs. Moral Boundaries: Vulnerability on the Left

Kirchick suggests that liberal open-mindedness creates a particular vulnerability. He describes an “asymmetric obligation” in which those on the center-left feel compelled to be welcoming to anyone positioned to their left, no matter how extreme their views, while reserving harsh criticism for those on the right. This results in an inability to police boundaries within their own political coalition, even as Republicans and conservatives have publicly and fiercely debated and confronted the influence of Trump and the MAGA movement within their party.

This liberal tendency to tolerate a broader range of ideological allies leads to the reluctance to reject radicals outrigh ...

Sam Harris and James Kirchick discuss the increasing alliance between far-left movements and Islamist movements, particularly through the ideological framework known as "third-worldism."

Third-Worldism Links Post-Cold War Left With Islamist Movements Against the West

Post-Soviet Shift: Leftists Replace Proletariat With Ummah, Aligning With Islamists

James Kirchick explains that during the Cold War, communism maintained a strict hostility toward religion and specifically suppressed Islamic practices in places like Central Asia. With the Soviet Union's collapse, the left lost its global proletariat, the class they championed as the engine of revolution. In the absence of this group, left-wing intellectuals substituted the proletariat with the Ummah— the global Muslim community — particularly as a new representation of the oppressed. This realignment between the post-Cold War left and Islamists has been underway since the 1990s.

Third-Worldism: Western Responsibility for Global Suffering and Revenge Politics by Oppressed Developing World

Kirchick defines third-worldism as the belief that the industrialized West is the root of global evil and suffering. According to this view, Western countries are to blame for most problems worldwide, and politics should then become a form of revenge for the oppressed of the developing world—especially Muslims in the Ummah, but also other marginalized groups seen as interconnected through intersectionality. Notably, Jews are excluded from this paradigm. This worldview motivates alliances that seek retribution or the reversal of Western hegemony.

"European Growth of Islamo-Communism; U.S. Limited by Demographics"

Kirchick observes that this alliance, or "Islamo-communism," has gained much more traction in Britain and mainland Europe than in the United States. He notes that France’s main left-wing party, La France Insoumise, is essentially an Islamo-communist party. The UK’s Labour Party showed similar tendencies, especially under Jeremy Corbyn. Kirchick expresses hope that the U.S. will avoid repeating this pattern due to its smaller populations of both Islamic extremists and radical left-wing intellectuals, making such alliances less likely to take root.

Elites Advance Islamo-Leftism Via Controlled Institutions and Obfuscation

Experts in Middle Eastern Studies and Qatari-Funded Institutes Obscure Their Positions' Implications

Kirchick attributes the advancement of Islamo-leftism in the West to academics and area experts, especially within Middle Eastern Studies departments and Qatari-funded institutes. He criticizes these professors for deliberately obscuring the implications of their positions, even as they are fully aware of the societies they study. He singles them out as the real drivers of Islamo-gauchisme—Islamo-leftism—either motivated by Islamist ideology or traditional leftist dogma.

Intellectuals Adopt Islamist or Leftist Causes, Representing "Islamo-Gauchisme" ...

Discussions within progressive spaces increasingly blur the lines between legitimate criticism of Israel and expressions of anti-Semitism. Participants like Sam Harris and James Kirchick highlight how certain forms of anti-imperialist and decolonization rhetoric serve as cover for anti-Jewish sentiments, while established coalitions at the international level foster Israel’s pariah status for reasons unconnected to genuine moral considerations.

Progressive Spaces Mask Anti-Semitism As Anti-Imperialism and Decolonization

Harris and Kirchick assert that contemporary progressive movements, including organizations like the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and allied groups, have become sources of anti-Semitism. Kirchick notes that intersectional progressive politics, which attempt to unite oppressed groups into a broader coalition against Western power, often exclude Jews from legitimate claims of oppression. He observes that Jewish suffering is rendered illegitimate within third-worldist paradigms, making Jewish concerns invisible or irrelevant to these movements.

Harris further explains that slogans such as "globalize the intifada" are deliberately ambiguous for public relations, but are well-understood by informed participants to mean internationalizing violent campaigns targeting Jews. Harris points out that academics like Mahmood Mamdani, with deep subject knowledge, choose their words carefully to evade direct accountability for fostering anti-Semitism while still signaling support for extremist goals.

Israel's Pariah Status Arises From Anti-Western Coalition-Building, Not Legitimate Moral Condemnation

Sam Harris highlights the unique and disproportionate status Israel holds at the United Nations, noting that "the UN has passed more resolutions against Israel than all other states combined, including Iran and Russia and China and No ...

The discussion addresses rising concerns about certain Democratic politicians who embody ideologies or take positions that pose risks both to their party's ethical foundations and to their prospects in future elections.

Eric Adams, Dsa-affiliated Nyc Mayor, Embodies a Sophisticated and Dangerous Third-Worldist Ideology Cloaked In Charisma and Incrementalism

Kirchick draws attention to politicians like Mamdani, who he describes as "the most sinister of the bunch" due to his charisma, charm, and agreeable demeanor. Unlike more radical activists who "scream and yell," Mamdani presents his beliefs in a moderate and affable way, making him much more palatable and, therefore, more dangerous in terms of influence. Kirchick emphasizes Mamdani's cleverness, explaining that as a DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) affiliate, he's committed to their entire platform but implements changes slowly and incrementally.

For instance, seven or eight months into office, Mamdani avoids drastic actions that could provoke backlash, like firing a well-regarded police commissioner, choosing instead to work gradually—adjusting property and tax laws, and introducing government-sponsored grocery stores—as part of a long-term strategy. Kirchick asserts that Mamdani's strategic and evasive approach reveals deeper ideological commitments, positing that, if unconstrained by American democratic norms, he would pursue revolutionary transformations similar to those seen with third-worldist political leaders elsewhere.

Islamist Ideology in Democratic Politics: Rana El-sayed and Similar Candidates

By contrast, Harris highlights Democratic candidates such as El-Sayed, whose positions and associations are more overtly problematic. El-Sayed, described as a "religious bully," makes little attempt to obscure his stances and maintains close ties to figures and organizations Harris deems concerning, such as Hassan Peiker and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which Harris labels as Islamist front groups. This reflects Harris’s broader anxieties about the normalization of Islamist-sympathetic politics within the Democratic Party.

A concrete example centers on El-Sayed's response to a foiled attack by a Hezbollah sympathizer w ...