Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
What Kind of Socialist is Bernie Sanders?
What Kind of Socialist is Bernie Sanders?
Jul 14, 2025 3:44 PM

While many politicians tend to avoid the labels “liberal” or “progressive,” Democratic presidential candidate and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders proudly self-identifies as a “socialist.”

While at the University of Chicago in the early 1960s, Sanders joined the Young People’s Socialist League, the youth affiliate of the Socialist Party of America, and has remained a outspoken advocate for socialism ever since.

But exactly what kind of socialist is Sanders?

Faced with the prospect, albeit unlikely, that an avowed socialist may actually e the Democrat’s nominee for president, I thought it would be helpful for Americans to understand the particular brand of socialism advocated by Sanders.

My intention is to summarize his views in a way that is not only fair, but that Sanders himself would agree with. In order to do that I’ve attempted to use his own words as much as possible and to avoid directly stating what I find objectionable about his views (I’ll save that for another day).

Here’s what you should know about the socialism of Bernie Sanders:

Sanders is a Democratic Socialist — Sanders does not identify with the Marxist-Leninist wing of socialism (and no, he’s not munist), but self-identifies as a “democratic socialist.” In Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey, Donald F. Busky explains the term this way:

Democratic socialism is the wing of the socialist movement bines a belief in a socially owned economy with that of political democracy. Sometimes simply called socialism, more often than not, the adjective democratic is added by democratic socialists to distinguish themselves from Communists who also call themselves socialists…democratic socialists wish to emphasize by their name that they disagree strongly with the Marxist-Leninist brand of socialism.

Sanders advocates for an American style of socialism — Although Sanders frequently points to Nordic countries when explaining how socialism can work, his desire is to expand and continue the American style of socialism advocated by Franklin Delano Roosevelt (whether FDR should be considered a socialist is debatable, but Sanders seems to think he was—at least to some extent—and finds mendable).

Sanders identifies FDR’s 1944 State of the Union speech as “one of the one of the most important speeches ever made by a president.” In that speech, FDR outlined what he called a “second Bill of Rights”:

We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

* The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;

* The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

* The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

* The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from petition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

* The right of every family to a decent home;

* The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

* The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

* The right to a good education.

This is the foundational basis for Sanders’s political views and policy objectives: “So let me define for you, simply and straightforwardly, what democratic socialism means to me. It builds on what Franklin Delano Roosevelt said when he fought for guaranteed economic rights for all Americans.”

Sanders is also something of a economic nativist, opposing most forms of globalization, including free trade and offshore production. Last September he wrote on Twitter: “I’ve got a message for corporate America: if you want us to buy your products, you better start producing them here in the United States.”

Sanders believes in social ownership of economic profits mon misunderstanding is that all socialists advocate for the state to own the means of economic production. In the twentieth century, nationalization of industries was certainly mon feature of socialism (such as in the Soviet Union). But that is not what Sanders is advocating (at least not on a broad national scale). As he has explained,

I don’t believe government should take over the grocery store down the street or own the means of production, but I do believe that the middle class and the working families who produce the wealth of America deserve a decent standard of living and that their es should go up, not down. I do believe in panies that thrive and invest and grow in panies that create jobs here, rather panies that are shutting down in America and increasing their profits by exploiting low-wage labor abroad.

While Sanders proposes to provide government assistance to “workers who want to purchase their own businesses by establishing worker-owned cooperatives,” he appears to mostly believe the best approach to social ownership is for government to regulate and redistribute economic profits both to workers and to society in a way that he deems to be “fair.”

Sanders advocates for a variety ofsingle-payer systems paid for by the government—While Sanders does not necessarily want the government to own the means of production, he does want the government to control the mean of paying for certain aspects of life, such as healthcare and education. For example, he advocates for a “Medicare-for-all single payer health care system” and “the right to go to a public colleges or university tuition free” (and by “free” he means “paid for by the taxpayers”).

Sanders believes in regulation and redistribution to achieve economic “fairness” —While allowing businesses to be privately owned, Sanders brand of socialism advocates the use of government regulation and mandatory wealth redistribution to achieve economic equity in society. On the regulation side, this would include determining the minimum level of worker’s pay and benefits (i.e., $15 a hour and mandatory family leave) as well as limits on how much panies can earn (“Democratic socialism means that we have government policy which does not allow the greed and profiteering of the fossil fuel industry…”). Additionally, Sanders proposes increasing taxes, both on individual and on corporations, so that the government has more money for the purposes of redistribution (e.g., he proposes a top rate on individual e of 52 percent).

Sanders wants to put (by force if necessary) the “democratic” in Democratic Socialism — “Democratic socialism, to me, does not just mean that we must create a nation of economic and social justice,” says Sanders, “It also means that we must create a vibrant democracy based on the principle of one person one vote.” To achieve this goal he would put restrictions on free speech related to elections (e.g., by overturning Citizens United), have publicly funded elections, and “demand that everyone 18 years of age is registered to vote – end of discussion.”

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The Economics Nobel
My response to the awarding of the Nobel Prize in Economics to Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson was published on National Review Online: Unlike a certain other Nobel Prize, the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel actually requires evidence of substantial achievement. Mere aspirations and lofty rhetoric count for nothing. This year’s Nobel Prize in Economics has been given to two economists, Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson, who have deepened our understanding of economic governance....
Healthcare and Catholics: True and False Arguments
This week’s Acton Commentary: Healthcare reform – it’s one of those causes almost everyone favors, but which almost automatically produces sharp arguments when we ask what it means and how it might be realized. You would have had to be living in a cave for the past eight months to be unaware that Americans are deeply divided on this matter, and that the division runs clean through the middle of munities. That includes Catholic America. Of course, there are a...
Kling on Conservatism and Authority
Arnold Kling continued last week’s conversation about the relationship between conservatism and libertarianism over at EconLog. Kling’s analysis is worth reading, and he concludes that the divide between conservatives and libertarians has to do with respect (or lack thereof) for hierarchical authority. Kling does allow for the possibility of a “secular conservative…someone who respects the learning embodied in traditional values and beliefs, without assigning them a divine origin.” I’m certainly inclined to agree, and I think there are plenty of...
Review: Billy Graham and the Rise of the Republican South
Explaining the realignment of American Southern politics is often a favorite area of study among historians and scholars. A region that was once dominated by yellow dog Democrats, has for the most part continued to expand as a loyal region for the Grand Old Party. Among the earliest and mon narrative among liberal historians and writers is the belief that the realignment in the South had to do with a backlash against desegregation. Steven P. Miller in his new book...
Capitalism is Not Based on Greed
In a new essay at The American, Jay Richards explains why capitalism isn’t based on greed. In Acton’s first documentary, The Call of the Entrepreneur, Richards along Rev. Robert Sirico, Sam Gregg, Michael Novak and others touch on this matter in making the moral case for the free economy. ...
What hath Vienna to do with Colorado Springs?
Working as we do here at the intersection between economics and theology, the relationship between various kinds of classically liberal, libertarian, Austrian, and other economic modifiers and religion in general and Christianity in particular is in constant view. Sometimes the conversation is friendly, sometimes not so much. Sometimes the differences are less apparent, sometimes more. Once in awhile a piece will appear on the Acton site or from an Acton writer that brings this discussion to the fore. Last mentary...
Catholics and Health Care
The Detroit News published mentary on Catholics and health care reform in today’s newspaper. A slightly longer version of the article will appear in tomorrow’s Acton News & Commentary: Catholic America is about as divided about health care reform as the rest of the country. But there are a small number of non-negotiables for Catholics that principally concern any provisions that facilitate or encourage the intentional termination of innocent human life or diminish existing conscience exemptions. These issues dwarf everything...
Journal of Markets & Morality, Spring 2009
We’re happy to announce that the latest print issue of the Journal of Markets & Morality is available online. The Spring 2009 issue includes a noteworthy study by Alan T. Y. Chan and Shu-kam Lee. In “Christ and Business Culture: Another Classification of Christians in Workplaces According to an Empirical Study in Hong Kong,” Chan and Lee outline four types of Christians at work: Christian soldiers, panic followers, strugglers, and Sunday Christians. Following the classification, Chan and Lee “develop a...
Potential and the Peace Prize
In his book Elements of Justice (reviewed in the Journal of Markets & Morality here), University of Arizona philosophy and economics professor David Schmidtz introduces the idea of desert not simply as pensatory notion, but also as including a promissory aspect. That is, what we deserve isn’t always about only what we have done. There might be a real sense in which what we do after an opportunity provides a kind of retroactive justification for having been given a chance....
America’s Uncontrolled Debt and Spending is the Real ‘Waterloo’
In mentary this week, “America’s Uncontrolled Debt and Spending is the Real ‘Waterloo,’” I offer the well known point that debt and spending threatens our liberty and prosperity. It is ing very evident that it will be up to citizens to demand accountability from their lawmakers, as I mentioned. What has been tried before has not worked. In terms of liberty, Thomas Jefferson declared, “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.” What...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved