The Scott Adams School - 06/24/26 The Home Team // Socialism

And we're live. Sorry for the 30-second delay, you guys. Good morning. Look who's back.

Good morning in capitalist America.

Good morning, you guys.

Let's see, Marcela, if anyone else notices. But look, Marcela's back, you guys. Aren't you excited? We missed you. How'd you do in court? Or trial?

I won the trial. There was no question I would win, but there was a— not because it's me, because it was like a very obvious case. It took 5 years.

So if it was so obvious, why did it take 5 years?

Because they only can decide it until you're actually at trial. So it's tribal issues, so you— the judge can't make a decision on it before that. And it takes a while to get to trial. Mm-hmm. And I think that's the issue in California, is that they have people pay litigation over time because they are so impacted by so many people suing. Their trial is like— I've had like trials, uh, now, uh, that are set for 2028, 2029.

Lord, it's not broken, you guys. It's not broken at all. Okay, so let's— I know you guys are thirsty. I know you're thirsty.

There's a cat behind me, you guys. It might attack.

Oh, we see the cat in the chair. Good. The more cats, the better. Okay, guys, are you ready? Are you ready? Are you ready? Let's go.

Before we get started, I think we need to do a little thing called the simultaneous sip, and all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or chalice or stein, a canteen, jug or flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes Everything better, including the coronavirus. It's called the simultaneous hip, and it happens now.

Go.

I did delete that. I did delete that, and it came back. Mamma mia, it's still a bonus, Erica. I know, I know. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Mamma mia. Okay, so listen, you guys. I was putting the show together and there's nothing to talk about today than socialism. Um, I'm sorry to say it to you. However, I did find an old clip of Scott Adams, 7 years old, that we're gonna play, um, to get his take on socialism. And I think it's going to be really interesting to see what it looks— what it looked like to us 7 years ago, or looked like to Scott Adams 7 years ago, and to where we are now. It's going to be pretty interesting to, um, juxtapose. So we're gonna play that clip first, and then I have all sorts of news about what happened yesterday. But you guys, I need to start the show off with just a tiny bit of— it's not actually FIFA news, but I was dying to play this clip. This is— have you guys ever seen Messi? Messi is a soccer player, in case you guys don't know. Probably The best. Him and Ronaldo, right? They're like the top. Um, his bodyguard sends me like through the moon. I love this man. So he's— he— I'm, I'm— first of all, hot.

You love the bodyguard, not Messi, right?

Correct.

Both, both.

He's totally hot. He's just as good of an athlete, and the man is on a mission. So let's just check out Messi's bodyguard. Oh, Travis!

Someone, someone noticed.

Travis, you're the winner. Travis just said, did Owen change his shirt? Yes, he did. All right, let's get back to the Tingle. Okay, and if anyone knows his bodyguard's name, you can drop it in the chat for me. But check out the athlete this guy is. Look at this, he gets over to Messi in no time. Look, nope, not going to touch him. Uh-oh, oh, oh, I see you, I'm going to beat you there. Look at this man, he's an animal. Boom, he is. Look, get your hand off him. Take a picture, no hands. Thank you, you too, don't touch him. Look at him running. Run, run, run, run! I am obsessed with this guy. I hope there's a—

I love how Messi doesn't react. Like, he just, just lets him do whatever he needs to do.

Obsessed.

I hope everybody's been watching the World Cup and enjoying it.

I won't run into the field anymore after watching this.

You better run fast. I love him, head on a swivel.

You know, I propose we have him during the games so when they try to block him, right, he can get unblocked by that guy.

I, I want someone walking around with me like that all day.

Can you train it? Can you train the Secret Service?

Exactly.

That's a good one.

President Trump, maybe you should hire him. President Trump, I'd be mouthing off to everybody if I had that guy. No, I wouldn't. No, I wouldn't. But anyway, good for you, Messi. You got a keeper there. Um, okay, you guys, so There was— there were elections last night. There is a lot to talk about, but let's take a trip down memory lane. Okay, 7 years ago. I can't do the math. You— someone else can drop in the chat what year that was. Uh, 19? No, 19. Did I do it, Owen?

Yeah, you did.

Okay. All right, so let's go.

And that took a minute for me to come up with, man.

I know right now, like, my family would be proud of me. They're like, oh, she knew a little math. Andy Wang, yay! Okay, so you guys, let's go. We're gonna go to the Wayback Machine and let's hear Scott Adams' take on capitalism versus socialism back then. We'll see you in about 15-16 minutes. Here we go.

Pre-COVID.

Hey everybody. This will be a short and very special whiteboard presentation in which I'm going to put socialism and the debate over socialism in the United States in context, probably for the first time you've ever seen it. Now, what inspired me to do this is that I've been watching the so-called debate over socialism, let's say, as expressed by Bernie Sanders and AOC and others. Versus the standard Trump Republican conservative view of capitalism. And it's making me crazy because I'm watching two people, two sides, who think they're in a conversation but are not. So there's an illusion of a debate, but it's an illusion because we're not even really talking about the same things. Somebody says, "Hehe." Hey, we took economics too. All right, here's what I'm watching. So if you got socialism in this bubble and capitalism on the other, we know that capitalism gives us great stuff like, you know, we associate it anyway with democracy, freedom, high standards of living. Of course, you can go too far with your capitalism into fascism, but nobody wants that. Literally nobody's in favor of that. Over here in socialism, we worry that Historically, it's been associated with dictators and economic collapse and Venezuela and genocide and Hitler and everything else. But in the middle here is where you've got a little bit of capitalism and a little bit of socialism, and that's where I would say that the UK with national health insurance, Canada with national health insurance, and then anything Bernie talks about. Bernie Sanders is talking about it, it's probably some version of socialism. And here's what I'm noticing. If you talk to the people who love capitalism and dislike socialism, tell me what's wrong with socialism. These people will say socialism's bad because dictators, economic collapse, genocide. And of course, a lot of that has to do with a lack of incentive, right? The big advantage of capitalism is incentive. If you have a capitalist system, people are incented to work hard. If you take away their incentive, things devolve fairly quickly into a bad situation. Not necessarily a dictator, but a bad situation. But here's the thing. Do the UK and Canada still have incentive? I think they do. I think if you grew up in Canada, you know, fact-check me on this if there are any Canadians out there. If you live in Canada, in Canada, if you live in Canada, do you feel you have an incentive to go to work? Well, of course you do, because if the only thing you have is free healthcare, or let's, let's, uh, sweeten the pot. If all you have is free healthcare and let's say you've got free college. I'm not suggesting these are good ideas right now. I'm just talking about the concepts. If you had those things, would you still have an incentive to go work? I think you would, as evidenced by the fact that Canada has a functional economy, as does the UK. So when I see the people over here saying, "No, Bernie, you can't have what you want," because we'll turn into this, that's not a sensible argument because we have examples of people who have what Bernie wants us to have and they're not falling apart. But here's the problem. Why is it that the UK and Canada can have those things and yet we seem to think we can't afford it here? Here's why. Because we have a huge military. If the United States did not have an enormous military, could the UK and Canada have what they have? Probably not, because if we didn't have a huge military, they would have to have one, or they may have already been conquered or in a war with somebody else. So because we've put a priority on military spending, I suspect that that allows some of the free riders to give free healthcare. So it's not really ever an apples and oranges conversation. The only reason that they can do what Bernie wants is because we spend so much on the military. Now, if they were to do what President Trump suggests, let's say the NATO folks, if they were to substantially increase their spending so that we could at least draw down our spending over time, their economies might suffer a little bit. Ours might be able to give us some of the things that they enjoy. Now, there's of course the issue of whether any of this is better than what we have. That's a separate issue. But in terms of why they can have these things and we can't, it's probably because of the military. And our military is so large that we can protect them, and they become a little bit of free riders. Now, I tweeted around a quote of mine from earlier, which is the belief that capitalism can get you what socialism wants faster than socialism can get it. So socialism, you know, the bad kind where you've just— you got rid of your capitalism and you've got a top-down centralized system. That's not going to get you what you want. Just wanting it isn't going to get you what you want either. You need to create a lot of money, and you need a lot of ingenuity, and you probably need something that's closer to— I'm going to call it a Mark Cuban way of approaching it, which is to look at it sort of like an engineer and to say, how can you have a capitalist system that can get you as close as possible to inexpensive universal healthcare? How can you get as close as possible to having some kind of low-cost or free college for people who want it without, without getting into this left area that you don't want to be? Of course, nobody wants to be over here in fascism. So all I wanted to add to this conversation is that when the people who are in favor of capitalism and are opposed to this, when I say, "Can you explain why you're opposed to it?" They can't. Now, they say things, and people will say a lot of different arguments, but there's always something missing. It's as if the people who are dead set on this side and dead set that this is all bad don't really know why. Now, it could be that I'm also leaving stuff out, And so I'm gonna put it to the public because I have no sense of embarrassment like normal people. I might be totally wrong about some major elements. I might be leaving some major thought out of this, but you'll tell me. I'm sure you'll tell me what I'm leaving out. The arguments that don't work are that if you give people universal healthcare and let's say free college, you turn into a dictatorship.

What?

That doesn't even make sense. Did Canada turn into a dictatorship? Did the UK turn into a dictatorship because they have universal healthcare? There's no connecting tissue there. The other argument I hear is it's going to be economic collapse and genocide, but we have plenty of examples where that's clearly not happening. So I'm not supporting socialism. I'm quite solidly a capitalist. Solidly a capitalist. Don't want my taxes to go up. Don't want to be transferring money. Don't want to be rewarding people for not working. I don't want any of that. But I also don't want to hear arguments that don't have any connecting tissue whatsoever. So if you can't explain to me why there are countries that are thriving with some of these socialist elements within a capitalist framework. If you can't explain it, you need to work harder. You need to go back and figure out what is my argument. And let me challenge you right now. In the comments, in the comments, tell me what is wrong with socialism. Slippery slope. In my new book coming up, I talk about the slippery slope being a more of a mental problem than a real, a real problem. That is, that we imagine that everything that's heading in some direction will keep going that direction forever. But in the real world, there are always counterforces. So anything that goes too far eventually causes a reaction and it stabilizes. So the slippery slope is not an actual argument. It's a fear But it's not a logical argument because just because you don't know what would stop a trend from happening doesn't suggest it will keep happening because there's always a counterforce that pops up. We defend Canada. That's true. So that was the argument that I just made, that because the US has a big military presence, countries that are— have a little bit of a socialist element to them within the capitalist context have an advantage and they don't have to have as big a military. It's based on force and coercion. Is it? So the people who are forced and coerced in Canada and England, are they complaining? You know, we don't have to wonder what happens. Can't we just look at the countries doing it? Somebody says, I'm losing confidence in you. All right, then I will ban you forever. You're blocked. I allow arguments. I allow facts and I allow any kind of disagreement. So any kind of disagreement you want to offer, I'm open to it if it comes with a reason. But if I hear— but for the— But what I see here, you say, here's another one that just says you're an idiot. If the best you can do is insult me personally, then you're banned forever.

All right.

If you have a reason, I'm open to it because honestly, I think there's something missing in my analysis. It feels like it, but I'm open to finding out what that is. Trump as a counterforce? Well, there are plenty of counterforces. All right, so notice in the comments a complete lack of argument against socialism. There's an explanation why we don't have it, which has to do with our military protecting everybody else, but that's not an argument against socialism. That's just saying that there's a reason they can have it and we can't. Scott Adams, you need to read more history. Wrong. Absolutely wrong. I do not need to read more history because that comment suggests— and again, I won't read your mind, but it strongly suggests that you're going to say socialism devolves into these things. Nobody's making that argument. If the UK and Canada devolve into genocide and dictatorships, I'm gonna say to you, whoa, you're right. That universal healthcare turned Canada into some kind of a genocidal dictator situation. But as long as Canada's doing okay, that argument doesn't work. Where does universal basic income fall on the graph? Universal basic income would probably be just to the left of this line. And the reason it's not further into the line where you're just paying people for nothing is that the only people who are gonna want this universal basic income, should it ever become a law, are people who are not the kind you wanna hire anyway. They're the people who aren't gonna help your workplace. And you either let them die or you find some way to take care of them. And now many of them would have mental problems and physical problems and real reasons that they can't work. So I'm not recommending UBI. I'm not recommending socialism. I'm not recommending universal healthcare or free college. I'm just talking about the concepts here.

All right.

Canada and UK are going bankrupt. Now that would be a fact that could be checked. I don't know. Somebody says, why aren't the caravans headed to Venezuela? Because you're arguing this, which is not the conversation. So anybody who says socialism is bad because Venezuela, Venezuela is over here. Bernie is not suggesting let's have a dictatorship. It was the dictatorship and nationalizing the main sources of income that wrecked Venezuela, was it not? So it was corruption, dictatorship, and nationalizing businesses. There's nobody recommending any of that stuff. And if they do, that would be—

those would be bad ideas.

But if you're arguing Venezuela, you're not in the conversation. You're not part of the conversation because literally nobody in the United States is suggesting that we become a dictatorship and nationalize our biggest businesses and institute massive corruption. Nobody suggests that. Alright, the number one argument about— against socialism is freedom. Terrible argument. Terrible argument. Yeah, so the people over here who love capitalism will say, "Even if you get into this range, you've given up freedom because you're being taxed, you know, maybe involuntarily, and you're told you can't have the healthcare you want, and you're being forced to do stuff." Terrible argument because you already live in a country in which you are forced to do all manner of things. I mean, you have to drive a certain way. You got to get a license for this, a tax for that. You got to get approved for this. You got to get certified for that. We have very little real freedom. We have a very, very restricted freedom already. We're just used to it, right? I pretty much guarantee you that if we had universal healthcare, for a few years people would complain about how they're forced to have this and they'd rather have something else. 10 years later, it would just be what we do and we wouldn't even notice. So the freedom argument is very weak because it imagines that we're already free and we'll be giving something up. And the truth is, we're not even close to free. We have some freedoms, but we're not even close to free. You know, we're restricted in just about every field of human endeavor. Try parking wherever you want, see how that works out for you. Um, they argue no more health insurance companies. Now, you could argue there are dumb ways to do this and there are smart ways to do it, and that's a good argument. They parasite our tech development, that may be true. Sweden's another example, somebody's saying. Somebody says, "I don't think you know what socialism is." Really? I'm going to delete you for saying I don't know what socialism is because that is not a comment. That's a comment about me.

That's hilarious.

Driving is very different than freedom of health choice.

Well, duh.

I guess that's what makes it an analogy. In this case, it's an example. I wouldn't say it's an analogy. It's an example of our many limited freedoms. So I wouldn't call it an analogy per se. Yeah, nobody's arguing that healthcare is better in Canada. I would certainly not make that argument. All right, that's all I needed to add for today. I wanted to see what your responses were, and I will talk to you later.

Wow.

Wow.

First of all, whoo, what a difference 7 years makes. And that's fast. Let me tell you, 7 years is not the 7 years of, of, uh, you know, yesteryear, that is for sure. Okay, that was amazing. That was amazing. I love it. I love the interaction with the chat. And the same applies here. I will be, um, deleting a couple of people today after the show. Heads up. Um, okay, so Owen, I'm gonna come to you first. Like, imagine if Scott Adams—

I'm holding on, I'm holding on.

Oh my God, I mean, like, what— who knows what Scott would be saying now versus 7 years ago? Because holy shenike, we have really dipped a leg into the socialism pool now. So, oh my gosh, just give me your thoughts, whatever you're thinking.

Well, I mean, if I were talking with Scott or responding to that, I would say like, well, first of all, I am a little triggered too about this topic just because it's something that I care a lot about and, and I've thought a lot about and Um, I, I think for the most part I agree with most of Scott Adams' arguments in the sense of like, you know, it's not like black and white. You don't want to use black and white thinking and say the only options are total socialism and total capitalism. And we aren't a total capitalist society. And healthcare is a great example. We're very close to socialist healthcare already. We have the Affordable Care Act. Some people call it Obamacare. It forces all these health insurers to cover a whole bunch of stuff that instead of having freedom of what you want covered and what you don't, it gives subsidies to poor people and it takes more from the rich people. So it's redistributing wealth as part of that. And there's lots of rules that have been in place for a long time where if you go to an emergency room, they have to treat you even if you don't have insurance, even if you can't pay. And, um, you know, there, there's a lot of things in our system that are, are government-controlled and socialist. There's another part of it is the supply of doctors, that there's only a certain number of residencies and the government sets that number, and they have not changed it in many decades. So the number of doctors that are created every year, which is constrained by the number of residencies they can have to get trained, is artificially controlled by the government. And if you release that or increase that, you would have more doctors, and it would probably be cheaper because you would have more doctors. And they complain about having, you know, not enough doctors in rural areas and things like that. But they're creating that situation by having essentially a socialist element of that system. And, um, the same is true with all the other things that I think most of you probably know are somewhat socialist, like Social Security and Medicare. And I mean, it— there's just— the list goes on. And so I don't know how different we really are from some of the countries like UK and Canada. I know it is different in the sense they just say it's universal and it's paid for through taxes as opposed to being, you know, through buying health insurance. But, you know, that part probably isn't really that important or different. I think the— I do think that a lot of things about those systems are worse, one of which is there aren't as many incentives to do research and development because they can't make as much money when they develop those things. And so they do piggyback and free ride off of our research and development for a lot of the medical care that they use. And another thing that I've seen plenty of stories about is that under the UK and the Canada system, it's very hard to get healthcare. You have to wait a long time to see a specialist. You might wait 6 months to see a specialist to get your knee fixed or to have your procedure, whatever it is. And some people might even be offered, you know, medical assistance in dying in Canada, as opposed to waiting 6 months or a year to have their pain or their condition fixed. And some people— I've even seen stories where someone with cataracts who couldn't see was told, well, you, you're retired, you don't work, so you don't need to see.

Yeah, you're fine.

We're not going to pay for your cataract surgery.

Now they're like, you don't need to see, and would you like to die?

Yeah. And, and so there are a lot of problems with those systems, and I don't know if they're completely bankrupt, but I would say that what— that's what happens under a socialist system in those countries, is that when you say you can basically use as much as you want and it doesn't cost you anything, well, of course people are going to use more of it. They're going to go to the doctor whenever they feel like it and for whatever condition, big or small. And they're not— they don't have any price sensitivity to say, what, should I do this or not? And, and so you end up just having this big spike of usage, and then they start saying, well, okay, now we can't cover these certain things. Like, okay, we're not going to cover anything we consider cosmetic, which, you know, that already happens here too. And but like, they're— they start taking things off the list or making conditions, like I said, where it's like certain people can't get certain procedures because they have to ration healthcare because that's the only way to control the cost. And so you end up rationing healthcare, and you say, now you got to wait a long time to see your doctor or get your thing fixed. And it just becomes like a, you know, much worse healthcare system. And then what happens is the rich people come to America or find their own private healthcare, and they get seen right away, and the poor people are stuck with the substandard healthcare. And so you're not even helping the poor people that you supposedly are trying to help by this system. You're, you're giving them worse healthcare but they would have otherwise.

Aside from the healthcare, I mean, look at how far we've gone into socialism now. Like, beside that, you know, like, he's like, as long as, you know, Canada's fine. Um, I see BJ in the chat. I think you'd agree Canada is not fine. Um, Gad Saab would agree. Montreal Galaxy, uh, Mike Burr. But You know, it was just interesting. Wait, let me, let me go to Marcela first and get her take, because if you guys could have seen us behind the scenes where Marcela's going like, like her head's exploding, I'm like laughing. I'm like, oh my God, it is so crazy different now. Let me, let me get Marcela and I'll come back to you, Ellen. Go ahead.

I think, you know, I, I'm surprised I didn't get banned by Scott Adams at that time. I probably was like, you're wrong, um, but I knew better not to say that because I get banned. But I want to say the Venn diagrams— Kamala Harris would be so happy that you showed a Venn diagram. I will not debate the ideas that the specific facts that Scott talks about, because to me, arguably he's wrong. And we can go into like the details. And but since facts don't matter, I won't go into that. As Scott Adams would have said, I think the idea of what he was talking about works out in regards to New York and what we're seeing in New York City happen, what I think he would say about New York City, kind of like he said about the UK and Canada, is that New York City is a free rider. They are able to do and vote and have the little coffee and take their little breaks, re— you know, read about socialism and what, you know, utopia would look like because they're able to afford it because everybody else is working hard for them. Kind of like the UK and Canada, he was saying about the US having a huge military, and then they're able to do this. I'm thinking it's the same, um, as New York City. You can extrapolate that idea from there of what that would look like. But in regards to where we are now as a nation, I don't see ourselves in the capitalist diagram side of— what was it, on the right side? Uh, I see ourselves more inside where he put the UK and Canada, and we're evolving towards, um, another side. And I think he's right about the title, Fake Debate. I don't think there's a debate. I think that— I think, you know, there's bubbles. There's like, this is the right thing, and they can't— people can't see the other way, the other way. But what I argue is reality. Reality is what equates who actually wins in the court of nature, or whatever you want to call it, the court of life. Um, if, if you look at Germany and what, you know, East and West, and if you look at Haiti and the Dominican Republic, very different type of outcomes. Anytime you have this type of, you know, when it devolves into social— however, he is right. Just because you have free healthcare doesn't mean that you are in a socialist dictatorship, right?

Right.

But, but it starts somewhere, and sometimes it doesn't start with a military coup. Sometimes it starts with an idea like Karl Marx had back in the day.

So, well, all right, so there's much more to say about this during this show, but I want to get to a couple of clips. So what, what we need to know is there were some elections yesterday, and, um, the, the New Democrats, which is the Democrat Socialists of America, the DSA you'll hear, uh, referenced, did very well. They did very well. And this means like the Chuck Schumer class, you know, who really got too woke, like they didn't stand up against the AOCs in the beginning, so they lost the plot. Um, they're doing very bad. So there's a big problem with the Democrats now because you're now, if you're like a moderate Democrat, which there aren't that many of, but if you're a moderate Democrat now, you have a decision to make. And you have to decide, like, do I want socialism and communism, or do I need to get off this bus? And I think you need to get off the bus. So here's someone Scott liked to hear from, Van Jones. I personally can't stand him, but let's have a Van Jones moment about what happened last night.

Well, New York City matters because the two most exciting left-wing candidates are here, AOC and Mondani, but also This is the stronghold for the establishment, Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries. This is a battle between the establishment and this insurgency, and the roof is collapsing on the Democratic Party establishment tonight. If Momdani gets a hat trick, 3 out of 3, this is a new era for the Democratic Party. And you can't write off New York City, because this is the place where both— it's a power center. For the establishment and the insurgency, and they're going head-to-head tonight. And right now, this is no longer a movement. This is a movement and a machine at the same time. And there's just no way to sugarcoat this. If Mamdani pulls off a hat trick, it is a new era in Democratic Party politics.

Well, and if you're a moderate Democrat who's on the election— who's on the ballot this November, Van, I mean, they're all going to get asked about the positions that we're hearing from these other fellow Democrats?

Well, look, I think, you know, from our frontline Democrats will be able to make their case for themselves. I think they'll be able to do OK. We got a lot of national security Democrats in other parts of the country. But this is a big deal tonight. And I think that— look, I don't know what you want me to say here. This is a straight-up battle between the establishment and the insurgency. And the establishment is getting its butt kicked tonight in New York City.

Yeah, that's pretty scary. So before we even get into that, did he get the hat trick? Let's hear from— this is from Harry Enten. Um, let's listen to Harry Enten. This is another good one, and then we'll, we'll come talk about it.

Well, among Democrats themselves, Dem— the Democratic Socialists of America have a higher net favorability than the Democratic Party does, at least those who are members of Congress. I mean, just take a look here. Dem Socialists of America, +17 points. Democrats in Congress, +4 points. No wonder that Dem Socialists are getting nominated across the political map in different primaries, because simply put, they are more popular than the Democrats currently in charge.

Okay, I'm just thinking back to when I was sitting here and Zohran Mamdani was sitting there when he was running, and I asked him about capitalism.

Yes.

And he had no problem saying that he had real issues with it. Okay, he wasn't afraid to say it. By the way, he ended up winning. It didn't hurt him. How do Democrats today view socialism compared to capitalism?

There's a reason why it didn't hurt him, and that is simply because this is one of the biggest political changes I've seen during my lifetime. Match up socialism, capitalism among Democrats. You go back 16 years ago, 2010, capitalism and socialism right there, favorable rating 51%, 50%. Look at it now. Socialism clearly in the lead among Democrats. 66% of them view socialism favorably. Just 42% view capitalism favorably. No wonder Mamdani had no problem blasting it.

Which is fascinating, because when you look at races coming up in New York, you've got a big one up in the Bronx, and you've got Zohran Mamdani endorsing a Democratic Socialist. Hakeem Jeffries not, going with the more traditional incumbent. So there are two big races involving Democratic Socialists coming up in New York. That Mondani's endorsed. Tell us something we don't know.

I'll tell you something you don't know, and that is that the Democrat socialists are likely to win one of those races. The one down in Brooklyn, going to beat the Bronx— the Brooklyn Borough President. You take a look there, look at that, an 81% chance to win in Brooklyn. And in Northern Manhattan, at this point, a 52% to knock off an incumbent, Espilot. Unbelievable.

Yes, Espilot, long time incumbent, with all of the incumbents endorsing him. All right, thank you, Harry.

All right, so you can see how it's shifting. And now people— I mean, I remember, uh, tongue twat— tongue twied, I said. Remember back in the day you would talk about socialism and it was kind of like almost under your breath because it was like, nobody's a socialist. Kind of like how you were like, oh, nobody would ever call somebody a Nazi and nobody would ever just accuse someone of being racist. And now it's like you know, pulled the tablecloth out. This is where we're at. Okay, so, um, Owen, I'm gonna come to you on this one. Pretty amazing on how far the pendulum has swung for the Democrats. Where, where do you see this going?

Well, I mean, I just put in Grok to just understand, like, what are the policies these people are actually pushing. I think the Medicare for All is part of it, so healthcare is a big piece of that, but they also want some sort of Green New Deal with public ownership. So they want, you know, to take over the energy industry. They wanted to have wealth taxes. Um, they want to of course push unions and labor rights and all those sorts of things. They want to consider housing as a right. Um, they want to have what they call criminal justice reform, which of course means, you know, defund the police and all that sort of thing.

They want— one woman wants all the jails closed and all the murderers released.

Yeah, and so it's pretty crazy, pretty radical positions, I would say. And of course, they're, you know, pro-Palestine, anti-Israel, you know, all these things. So it's, it's a crazy set of positions that is pushing the Democrats in a radical direction, I think. And my hope is that it just means they'll lose more elections. And, you know, they said in this particular case they might win some of them in New York, and I don't doubt that because I think they, you know, it's a Democrat state and they're going to elect whoever has a D next to their name, and they're not necessarily even going to know what policies they're pushing until it's too late, just like we've seen in California and Chicago and other places where they elect these people that are pretty radical and then they suffer. And, um, it unfortunately, it seems like even after they're suffering, they don't even really realize that that was because they elected a Democrat and they, you know, just blindly follow that sort of party thing. Of course, in some cases, maybe it's not even that they elected them, it's that you know, the votes were counted a certain way. But that's another issue. And, um, you know, I, I think it's a negative trend all around. I think we need to fight this every step of the way. And I think, um, I don't think we should just like cede ground and say, oh, let them suffer, because I don't think it's really going to fix anything. I think it's going to make things worse. And, um, so I think we should fight it every step of the way and, and try and defeat as many of these candidates as possible. And just point out the radical nature of what they're proposing, where they're basically saying we want to take away, you know, we want to be able to just take your money if you make money, and we want to be able to open the borders, and we want to have all these, you know, union and labor rights things that basically take all the profits away from companies. And it's going to make life worse for everyone. And I don't think it's a black and white thing. I'm not trying to say it's like, oh, we're all of a sudden going to have a dictator type of thing. I'm not making that case, like, like Scott Adams was pointing out. I'm just saying it's going to get worse. It's going to be worse than we are today.

Um, Marcella, just because I want to get through these clips, I would like to play the next clip and then have you react to it. And this will give you a little bit more of an explanation about the Democrat Socialists of America. Um, let's just take a look, and then Marcella, I'll come to you right after.

After Mom Donny's win, DSA is moving to expand its political influence across America.

We knew that they were not just victories for one elected office. They were victories of a movement.

10 politicians are now running for office in New York on the Democratic Socialists of America slate, including 2 candidates for Congress.

We're gonna make sure that we are undeniable as a force in not only New York politics, but politics across the entire country.

All DSA candidates follow the same pipeline. They start with campus radicalism, then move to street organizing, then they run for office backed by the DSA machine.

New York City DSA built from the ground up. They built a whole political machine.

We need to turn DSA into a factory.

Moving from outside agitators to people with real power.

Step 1: Campus radicalism. Like Mamdani, several candidates began their radicalization through campus activism groups like Students for Justice in Palestine, or SJP, founded around the idea of inciting a violent uprising in America.

Antifa!

Antifa!

Antifa!

Step 2: Street organizing. After college, these candidates took to the streets organizing protests connected to the Black Lives Matter riots, pro-Hamas rallies, and extremist labor unions. Many DSA prospects have been repeatedly arrested arrested for trespassing on private property and traffic blockades staged for arrest.

We're getting arrested organizing with people I've organized with for over a decade. We just occupied Hochul's office.

Radical activism is the gateway to DSA backing.

And now we're coming into power, we're coming into politics.

Once identified, radical organizers are recruited by DSA, where they are groomed, trained, endorsed, and handed the resources they need to enter politics.

A friend of mine who I had grown close to over the course of our organizing asked me to run for State Assembly. It was at a Queens DSA electoral working group meeting.

Julia was recruited.

I had the pleasure of being recruited to run for office.

So I joined DSA actually because I was recruited to run for this position.

I like got recruited by DSA.

The Democratic Socialist machine comes at a price. Once a candidate earns DSA's endorsement, their loyalty is not to the voters or the Democratic Party, only to DSA.

Every component of our campaign is being run as a shared project of our Broward DSA and of the larger Democratic Socialists of America. This is who I'm accountable to, to our members, not just here in South Florida, but 100,000 members-plus nationwide. We must make sure that they remember they are a member of this organization, and this organization stands with them.

We made you happen, and we can, you know, if you do break with us enough, we can withhold that.

This is the pipeline. DSA handpicks street agitators, turns them into political candidates, and backs them into office where they can be controlled to push DSA's extremist agenda.

As an organizer, I tell people to organize me. We bring in a movement with us.

This is about a movement.

DSA politicians are not Democrats. They are part of a machine built to subvert American democracy. Learn more about DSA's plans to overthrow America at canarymission.org.

Pretty frightening. Like I've been telling you, it's all organized, systematic, planned, and they are here for the, the long game. Um, I do want you to know that two of the people featured, Samantha Katen and Eber Cowas both won yesterday in their Democrat primaries. Um, and Samantha Katen in Queens, uh, she got 66.8%, and Eber in the New York State Senate District 12 in Queens, 60%. Um, so, and, and these are all anti-Semitic people. Islam, the whole kit and caboodle. So again, um, it all kind of just intertwines about this takeover. Okay, Marcela, that was pretty horrifying, wasn't it?

Yeah, but I wanted to talk about, um, the fact that they are doing this, the fact that they're growing this much. When I see it, and I, I actually know people that are part of DSA Um, and it's brainwashing, but it's so, it's so well done. Yeah, it's very persuasive. Um, and I have to say that they make these individuals who are usually very young, college, either in college or right after, mostly right after college, where, you know, their degree in are— their art degree is not panning out, they're not getting any jobs, they have to pay their loans whatsoever. Then they come into this point in their life that it's like, oh, nothing turned out, I'm nothing, you know. And then there's this organization telling you, hey, you're one of us, you can become something, we'll recruit you, we'll put you in office, and, and, you know, you'll do it, you make difference. When, when you are part of these groups, they're not saying we're going to take over the means of production like a Karl Marx would say. They're trying— they're telling them we're fighting the rich, we're fighting for fairness, we're fighting for equality and justice, and all the emotional branding stuff that you would get. And it is appealing. When you have nothing in your life going on for you. You remember, we're in a, we're in a world now where post-COVID, we're in a world where people are the most lonely they've ever been. They are most, most of them are not in a relationship, they're not in, um, they don't have children, they don't have a significant other. So they see this as a family, as kind of like where they go to, to feel like, you know, so it's, it's like a gang culture. Yes, but, but, but it's even worse than that because they, they, they, they think they're doing good for the world, you know. So they have this idea, but what I, what I would suggest is who is behind DSA? Because it When I looked at what you showed me right now, it reminded me— it didn't come to me until you showed this video, Erica— is that you reminded me of Latin America whenever El Salvador was having the civil war with the guerrillas in— and the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. And then you have, uh, Chile where Allende took over and then Pinochet came in. But it reminded me of what the CIA did or may have done, allegedly, in these countries in order to destabilize the country. So this is kind of— I'm not saying is the CIA doing this, but it seems like it's the same play being done to the United States.

It reminds me of how Obama got recruited. And just, I don't want to divert onto this, but did— I didn't know this till yesterday, that at his presidential library opening, in the third row was Bill Ayers and Dorn, terrorists from the, um, what are they called, the Weather Underground. They were in the third row sitting behind him, um, literal terrorists who are his best friends. Um, so that's what it reminds me of, and especially when they use the So many of them said, I was recruited, I was recruited. Owen, again, because of clips, I just want to— I want you to hear what a moderate Democrat sounds like talking to— this is Tyler Cohen. He's a progressive YouTuber sitting with Bill Maher at Club Random. Just really quick. And then, Owen, if you could react to this.

New York is New York. It's definitely the— it's the media capital, the financial capital. It is a bellwether like no other city is in this country. So don't tell me that who the mayor of New York is doesn't matter.

Let me, let me, let me play devil's advocate for a second.

Do you think, let's say, you know, on the seize the means of production, do you think the mayor, that one person, if he is a Democratic socialist, do you think that he would have the power and influence to be able to like usher in socialism?

Definitely has the power and influence to elect J.D. Vance or whoever is the Republican candidate next It is a walking commercial for the Republican Party nationally.

The Republicans are going to—

When you let the Democrat socialists— and now they're actually calling themselves socialists— when you let them take over a major American city, this is what you get. The state-run grocery stores, which work so well in Cuba and the Soviet Union and Venezuela. Just bad ideas. And again, this ugly streak.

Well, you look—

ugly streak of antisemitism.

Who's the most popular politician on the left?

AOC? I don't know.

One of, but who's, you know, Bernie? Bernie is Bernie. Bernie is, I mean, he's not, he's not a capitalist, you know.

No, he's not. And he's also not president.

He's not. He's, but, but never would be. But neither is Mamdani.

No, no. But he will, trust me, he will be featured in the campaign commercials.

They boogeyman everybody.

Yeah, but you don't have to boogeyman him. He does it to himself.

But, but they'll do— but they'll do it regardless. Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Gavin Newsom. Yeah, but they, they make anybody— I think it was just have more weight when it's real.

I mean, when you can really show it.

All right, Owen, your reaction?

Well, again, I, I think, um, my hope is that it would keep some of these people out of power in higher offices, and I hope that part comes true. Um, I, I would rather just see them get defeated locally as well, because I think, again, the people that are going to be under their control in whatever power and influence they have will be suffering because of it. They will think they're getting something better and they'll end up getting something worse. And that's been a pattern that I think is true pretty universally, in my opinion, where people will say, oh, I'm going to help you with housing costs, and it doesn't really help with housing costs. And if anything, it makes it harder to get affordable housing. And The grocery stores is another obvious example where it's like, this is an industry that has very thin profit margins as it is. And so for a government to think that somehow they're just raking in the profits, it just shows that they have no understanding of how these businesses work. And, you know, they, they are going after some of these more radical things like we want to have wealth taxes and we want to, you know, basically redistribute wealth from whoever has the money to whoever doesn't. And They're trying to, you know, support things like open borders and illegal immigrants, and they don't care about the citizens of where they are, you know, supposedly representing those people. And, uh, you know, they just have their own agenda and they're trying to push that agenda, and it is not in concert with what most people really want. But they try and make it sound like they're going to help you just to get elected. And again, we've seen some of the more radical Democrats like Spanberger and the other ones where they get elected and then they do something completely different than what they promised. And they don't mind lying, you know. I don't know if it is tequila or whatever, but you know, they don't— they certainly don't mind saying, I'm going to do all these things to help you, and then they turn around and do something completely different after they get in office. And I'm sure we would see the same thing here where they would suddenly, you know, say, well, I'm running to help you get affordable housing and better healthcare and all these other things. And then what actually happens is they want to open the borders, they want to take away all the police, they want to release all the criminals, and You know, it has nothing to do with whatever they promised to begin with, and they don't care.

And now you have people like Plantner in Maine, and you've got Talarico in Texas. I mean, these aren't even really people. Like, who— like, who— what are these people? Um, you know, we're just— we're just gonna flood in all of these— I don't even know what to call them— puppets, um, that are not worthy of being representatives. Of we the people. Um, and we see that slipping more and more, that anyone's representing America and our Constitution. It's like, it, it's like, you know, I just feel like our fingernails are grasping on, and like, how long can we keep holding on? I mean, hopefully forever, and that we can pull ourselves back up. I just— oh, you know what, Marcel, we're like, so we're running out of time, you guys. There was so much to talk about today.

We need another hour.

I know, we really do. And I, I hope you guys were enjoying the show today, just to, um, get heavy on the topic of socialism. And if you are enjoying the show, please give us a thumbs up, a like, share the show, tell your friends. Um, but you know, it, it's like I need to see more action. I feel like I want to see more action against what's happening to our country. It's not fast enough for me. It's not plain in plain sight enough for me. But I know there was a ruling and I don't want to put you on the spot, and I can't remember exactly what it was, but it was about deporting, um, oh, you know what, we're going to do it tomorrow.

It was about deporting asylum seekers. Um, there was a stay, a block on it from, um, 2025 on deporting asylum seekers, uh, deporting them, um within— you had to do it within 100, um, something close to the border. You couldn't do it anywhere else in the last 2 years of their stay. And there was a decision by the DC Circuit, uh, that allowed the— that allowed the— basically unblocked the block and now allows DHS to deport anybody in anywhere in the nation who has lived, uh, in the last 2 years here who, who does not— who should be deported.

It—

they don't have to find them near the border, basically. Um, now the next thing that could occur in this case is that under the DC Circuit panel, uh, usually a panel, uh, has 3 judges And so what these, uh, because it's one of those, um, ACLU kind of, uh, was, was, uh, doing the, the litigation, but it's, it's called Make the Road New York. Again, New York, um, was going against DHS, and they can ask the Make the Road New York, the plaintiffs can ask the DC Circuit to hear the case in bank, which means that they are asking all the judges to hear it all at once and see if they agree. Now they can do that. And then the other thing would go and ask for the Supreme Court, Citiora, and ask them whether they can get an emergency stay on this or redo the stay, redo the block. But because we know that there's that 6 to 3, you Supreme Court kind of leans to, thank goodness, it leans to the right. I'm guessing they're gonna ask for an en banc decision, uh, to look at it again. But anyways, um, the 2 years, the question was also that was given to me in regards to this question is, okay, in 2025 this judge blocked, uh, the Trump administration, um, from doing this. Um, so that, can we go back to that year for the 2-year start time for how long they can be here? Um, and the answer is no. So the 2-year clock would be counted from yesterday to 2 years.

Okay.

In the— because it, it become— it gets triggered once the law is enforced, and it became enforced yesterday.

Got it. Thanks, Marcella.

Sorry, and I'll explain further. Uh, maybe I should— we should do a separate video on this.

I know, right? So it's, it's a lot. But thanks, Sandy Candy, for bringing that to my attention. Um, tomorrow, you guys, we have Brandon Darby on, and this whole week kind of has an unintentional theme. You're going to learn all about him tomorrow. It's going to be another very interesting conversation here at the Scott Adams cool. Um, I'm gonna go over just to play this one little clip from Elon because I feel like we need like a little moment. So let's just listen to this quickly. It's an oldie but a goodie.

Yeah, sure. Um, there are a lot of negative things in the world. There's a lot of terrible things that are happening all over the world all the time. Uh, there are lots of problems that need to get solved. There's lots of things that are, yeah, that are miserable and kind of get you down, but that life cannot just be about solving one miserable problem after another.

Can't—

that can't be the only thing. There need to be— need to be things that inspire you, that make you glad to be— to wake up in the morning and be part of humanity. That's why we did this. This guy called Tsiolkovsky, one of the early Russian rocket scientists, the great saying: Earth is the cradle of humanity, but you cannot stay in the cradle forever. It is time to go forth, become a starfaring civilization, be out there among the stars, expand the scope and scale of human consciousness. I find that incredibly exciting. That makes me glad to be alive. I hope you feel the same way.

Ah, I couldn't leave you guys on anything negative, and Elon makes me glad to be alive too, and so do all of you. So you guys, let's do a, um, a closing sip and a final, uh, goodbye for the day. We'll be back tomorrow with Brandon Darby, Owen, and Marcella. Thank you so much for a great show today and for everybody who showed up. We'd like to thank Shelley and Scott Adams for allowing the show to continue. I think, I think the show is great. I really do. Like, I look forward to it every day. I'm so happy to have my two co-hosts with me today. We're all reunited. And let's have a closing sip to Scott Adams. And if anyone wants to stay for a little Akira tune, we'll do it. Owen had a meeting.

Okay.

To Scott Adams, guys. Stay for a cure if you want.

Stay positive.

Stay positive, you guys. We're going to do this narcissism thing.

Ready? Ready.

Little extra.

Two epidemics that are interacting with each other. Each other. One is the loneliness, and the other is narcissism. I believe narcissism has gone from something that people had and you could stay away from them to something closer to an epidemic. And I think social media has done that. What I've learned about this narcissism thing is I used to think it was people who thought they were great. Thought they were great. Thought they were great. I used to think it was people who thought they were great. This narcissism thing. It's not about people thinking they're great. Thinking they're great. It's about people who have broken self-esteem.

Just completely broken.

And the way that they deal with their broken self-esteem is by belittling other people, one-upping them, bragging, putting them down, shutting them down, thwarting them in any way you can. Any way you can.

Any way you can.

I used to look at those people because they're everywhere, but man, are there more of them. There are, right? And I think it's because people who might have been sort of on the border of being that way just got pushed over the edge by social media. I used to think it was people who thought they were great, thought they were great, thought they were great. I used to think it was people who thought they were great, this narcissistic thing. It's not about people thinking they're great. The kids are great. It's about people who have broken self-esteem, just completely broken. Imagine living in a world where everybody is criticizing everybody for everything. That's our world. We live in a world where everybody's criticizing everybody, everybody, everybody for everything. Imagine that. How would you like to be a teenager and be criticized on everything. The shirt you wore that one day, the embarrassing thing you did just once, but somebody saw it. You're not as pretty or as handsome or strong or good at sports as this other person. It's gotta be devastating.

Devastating.

Devastating.

And there's just more of it because it's in your face. You're seeing the impossible images, the people who you want to be like, but you're not, etc. I used to think it was people who thought they were great. I used to think it was people who thought they were great. This narcissism it's not about people thinking they're great— thinkin' their grade! It's about people who have broken self-esteem just completely broke it I used to think there was people that thought were very good but we work right? But he would break you use this thing because if his ego will stop They Were Great This narcissism things... Is NOT ABOUT PEOPLE THINKING THEY'RE GREAT BUT FEELIN THEIR GRADE!!! IT'S ABOUT PEOPLE WHO HAVE BROKEN SELF-ESTEEM JUST COMPLETELY BROKE IT!!!!

Yes, that was awesome. I wanted that one to keep going. Uh, all right, well, you guys, it's time to get going with our day. Um, do all the things, remember what Elon said, and, um, let's, let's see what we can do to save our country. I think we can do it. I think we can do it. All right, you guys, say your goodbyes. Marcella, thank you for being back. Looking forward to tomorrow. Bye guys, have a great day. FIFA US wins. Has the client paid? Okay, I can't start reading you guys. You know I'll never leave if I start reading your chats. Okay, bye guys.

Bye, Samar.

Thanks. Thanks, you guys. Thanks, you guys. See you soon. See you in the morning.