Hillary Clinton: The Rise of Socialism Is Healthy

It probably won’t surprise you to learn that Hillary Clinton and I have very different definitions of “healthy” political behavior. 

And it should surprise you only a little that Clinton, who was always the more ideological and radical of the power couple, is pretty comfortable with the rise of communists cosplaying as socialists. Not that she is uncomfortable with her own wealth and power, but because she sees the radicalization of the youth as a sure way to lock in young people as Democrats. 

Hillary Clinton on the RISE of SOCIALISM: “The Democratic Party right now is, I think, going through an experiment. Like who can actually respond particularly to young people’s very real concerns about where they are at this point in their lives and what kind of future do they…

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) August 25, 2026

Hillary Clinton on the RISE of SOCIALISM: “The Democratic Party right now is, I think, going through an experiment. Like who can actually respond particularly to young people’s very real concerns about where they are at this point in their lives and what kind of future do they have for themselves, and I think that’s healthy.” https://x.com/RNCResearch/status/2092065080179331159/video/1

I’m not so sure she is right about that for a few reasons, not the least of which is that a lot of people who say they are socialists are actually communists who see “socialism” as just another version of communism, and who use the term as a softer way of selling a concept that is, in itself, extremely unpopular at the moment. 

Actually, in reality, socialism really is just proto-communism. Or, to put it another way, no country that has ever called itself communist has come close to fully implementing it in the sense that all private property became state property, so the distinction really represents little difference. The Soviet Union itself referred to its ruling ideology as “Scientific Socialism,” and its formal name was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. 

“Communist” countries never attained full communism for a reason: full communism is impossible to attain, and socialism is so destructive that these countries collapse well before they can attain their goal of eliminating markets and private property entirely. Even countries that have tried a socialist “middle way,” such as the Nordics, abandoned socialism and transformed into capitalist regimes with generous social insurance plans, which are not remotely socialist. 

As a matter of fact, these countries are now listed as more economically free than the United States by the Heritage Foundation, which is not exactly a left-wing outfit. 

The Democrats have a problem that Clinton and most Democrats are trying to address, and it is a huge one: they are losing their working-class base due to their adoption of luxury beliefs and dependence on college-educated elites, and their rising acceptance of socialism is just an extension of their adjustment to that reality. Socialists are typically downwardly mobile elites and elite aspirants, who ought to be in the sweet spot for Democrat Party recruitment, but they are also highly disaffected with the establishment as a whole and committed to destroying it. 

So, contra Clinton, the rise of socialism among the young is neither healthy for the country nor for the Democrat Party itself. The Democrat Party has been, for decades, the home of the Organized Crime Democrats who use political power to skim an ever larger percentage of the economic output of the United States into their own pockets, and the Bolshevik Democrats are hostile to that type of politics. Not because they don’t want more stuff for themselves, but because the organized crime structure of the Democratic Party shunts most of the resources they skim toward the upwardly mobile elites, not the downwardly mobile ones. 

The DSA is all about “free stuff” and tearing down the system; the OCDs are more about extracting resources for the elites, which explains the recent drift of capital- or legal-related industries such as Wall Street investment bankers toward the Democrats. The more establishment the industry, the more Democrat it tends to be. 

It’s why Washington, D.C. is 93 percent Democratic. 

Democrats need the system to work in order to skim off of it, while socialists see themselves as victims of the system and want it gone. These are incompatible goals. 

It’s not even clear that a short-term alliance between the DSA and the Democrats is good for the Democrats, even though luminaries like Chuck Schumer and the leadership are trying to make it work. The DSA has made clear that they want the current leadership gone, and a few of the smarter Democrats, like Van Jones, see the danger they pose, both to the few ideological commitments older Democrats actually have and to the electoral prospects of the party. 

Trying to sweet talk the radicals into playing nice is stupid, but stupid people like Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris play stupid games. 

Editor’s Note: The Democrat Party has been infected by socialism, and it’s spreading FAST. Democrats are claiming there’s nothing to worry about, but we know the truth.

Help us continue to shine a light on the socialist takeover by joining HotAir VIP.  Use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.