Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 1411 | Socialism Is Coming for America. What Christians Need to Know

Episode Date: October 21, 2026

With midterm elections just around the corner, it’s critical to understand a dangerous ideology gaining ground among young people. In this episode, Allie clearly explains what socialism actually is — and how figures like Zohran Mamdani and AOC package it to sound appealing. She contrasts their rhetoric with the historical record in places like the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, and Zimbabwe. Allie also addresses the claim that “Jesus would be a socialist,” showing from Scripture why that idea is false and how socialism stands in direct opposition to biblical Christianity.Do you have a question for Allie? Leave a voicemail at 844-755-5252. ana kate is available to download in the app store today: https://www.anakate.com/get-the-appThe ana kate app is coming soon for Android users, join the waitlist here: https://www.anakate.com/android-waitlistAre you a doula, OB/GYN, midwife, or other women’s health-related practitioner? Join the ana kate practitioner network: https://www.anakate.com/practitioners–Time Codes00:00 Intro1:16 The Popularity of Socialism7:16 What is Socialism?13:26 Socialism and Communism20:44 Socialism Doesn’t Work36:26 Devaluing Property Rights46:15 Rising Socialists58:21 The Biblical Response–Today's Sponsors:Seven Weeks Coffee | Go to sevenweekscoffee.com to save 15% on your first subscription, and claim your FREE starter kit! Use code ALLIE for an extra 10% off your first order.A’Del Cosmetics | Visit AdelNaturalCosmetics.com and enter the promo code ALLIE for 25% off your first time purchase. Range Leather | Go to rangeleather.com/allie to receive 10% off all Range Leather products.Patriot Mobile | Go to PatriotMobile.com/ALLIE. Use promo code ALLIE for your first month free.World Watchers | Visit worldwatch.news/allie to get your first month completely free.Episodes You May Like:Socialism is Not the Future | Ep 135 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vW2cXGJ3fPQ How Christian Women Got Played by Progressivism | Guest: Chris Rufo | Ep 839 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyF7h6hdax8 How Christians Survived Communism in Europe | Guest: Rod Dreher | Ep 321 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKN-dO1otR4  ---► Buy Allie's book "Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion": ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.toxicempathy.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠► Buy Allie's book "You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love": https://alliebethstuckey.com/book► Subscribe to the podcast:iTunes: https://apple.co/2UVssnPSpotify: https://spoti.fi/2FwkXxj► Connect with Allie on social media: https://twitter.com/conservmillenhttps://www.instagram.com/alliebstuckey/https://facebook.com/allieBlazeTV/► "Relatable" merchandise — use promo code ALLIE10 for a discount: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Socialism and progressivism in general has this misunderstanding of human nature. Actually, they don't really believe in human nature. They believe in nurture. They believe that we are basically a blank slate, not hardwired toward anything, that we can be nurtured and educated and pressured toward a particular worldview or particular state of being, and eventually we'll get used to it, and it'll be fine. That is why I say that socialism is really a theology, and it is a competing theology with the Christian worldview. It denies the creator who knows us better than anyone and it gets the human

nature that he created wrong. Hey, y'all, welcome to Relatable. Hope everyone is having a wonderful day, a wonderful week so far. So right now, I am officially on a maternity break, but we pre-recorded lots of episodes for you guys. In this particular episode, we very recently recorded. So this is still going to be very newsy, very timely, especially in light of the midterms. We wanted to make sure that I recorded this right before I left for maternity leave so that we could give you the most pertinent information possible about what is coming down the pipeline when it comes to Democrats and who they are running for office, the ideology of socialism and why it is still so popular rearing its ugly head yet again.

And then, of course, give you the theology of socialism and what the Bible actually has to say about the entire worldview of the socialist mindset. So let's go ahead and get into it. So the most famous Democratic socialist right now is arguably the mayor of New York City, Zoran Mamdani. Maybe you've heard his name. He was in office. He got in office in January of 26.

He is a millennial Muslim immigrant from Uganda. Now you might say this guy doesn't really look like he's from Uganda. Well, he is in the upper cast, you might say, of Uganda. His parents, very, very wealthy professors, they immigrated here. And so that is one of the reasons why he was able to work him his way up, himself up so quickly. So he won his election last year, has been trying to run the city of New York for a few months now. And after his win, there were at least eight congressional primary wins for candidates backed by the Democratic Socialists of America. This is a national grassroots organization

of socialists. It was only 10 years ago. Only 10 years ago, already 10 years ago. It just depends on how you see the time warp that has been the last decade when Bernie Sanders was running for office and the DSA hovered around 5,000 members. You'll remember the rise of the squad, AOC, Rashida Talib. Let me tell you, I still get asked. I was. just asked by a journalist the other day about my satirical interview with AOC in 2018. That was just as an aside, like one of the craziest media moments. My first crazy media moment, I did like a silly satirical sit down with AOC. It wasn't really her.

I took an interview that she did with PBS and I sat on the other side and I did like fake questions and cut up her answers. That is not a format that I came up with by the way. I thought that it was going to be obvious to everyone and it was to 95% of people that I was doing what Stephen Colbert had done, what Jay Leno had done, just this kind of comical thing to show this person doesn't know what they're talking about. It was written about by the mainstream media. It is still on my Wikipedia page that I did this video and that it went viral.

But that was at the peak of AOC's popularity and everyone was talking about, oh my goodness, these young socialists, they don't know what they're talking about. And yet they're super popular among young people. This is really troubling. You've got Rashida Talib. You've got Ilhan Omar. the DSA has now grown to more than 120,000 members. Yikes, okay?

It did seem like after Bernie Sanders lost that we kind of stopped talking about socialism. Those of us who were in conservative media around 2017, 2018, that was a drum that we were beating consistently to talk to people in our generation about the effects of socialist policy, that they're not good.

We can look throughout history. We can look at the facts. no form of truth lines up with socialism being good, as we'll talk about more today. But then we kind of stop talking about it because after Trump won in 2016 and then after Joe Biden, who is not a socialist one in 2020, and it seemed like Democrats kind of backs off there. And then of course, Trump went again in 2024. It was like, okay, we've defeated that. People realize that was too far. Democrats are going to back off the whole socialist thing, or at least they won't say overtly that they're socialist. But then here comes Zoron,

mom, Donnie. Here come all of these other congressional candidates that have their election days coming up very soon. And it seems like socialism has not died. The popularity of socialism among a certain demographic in America has not waned. If these socialists win these midterm elections coming up, like what is that, what does that mean? What does that mean for the future of our country? The truth is, I'm not going to hide the ball here. You guys know how I feel about this. The idea is that socialist's spouse, they seem attractive. They seem easy. It's not hard to hear something like,

we should just give people more money. We should just give people food and think that that sounds compassionate. Does it require any critical thinking? It doesn't require any understanding of facts or study to hear something emotional like that and say, yes, that sounds moral. But they're not good. They actually end up hurting the very people that they promise to protect, that they promise to help.

Socialism leads to the, exact opposite results that socialist promise. It leads to poverty, it leads to scarcity, it leads to restriction of individual freedoms. It has led throughout history to death. That's not an exaggeration. I'm talking mass, mass, mass death, as we'll get into today. So today we will make the case that democratic socialism is really just socialism and it's really dangerous. It is something that we want to avoid at all costs. It is not Christian. It is not loving, it is not compassionate, it is not neutral, it's not innocuous. There is nothing good about what these Democrats are espousing and we need to understand why. So first, as I always like to do,

let's define our terms. What is socialism? You'll probably get a variety of definitions depending on whom you ask. I'm going to give the most charitable definition that I can while still being accurate, trying to give a definition of socialism that a socialist, probably agree with, but also explains to you what is actually meant by these things. It's an economic system in which the government controls industries. The government owns and controls the major businesses, land, factories, et cetera, rather than individuals and businesses owning them. This contrast with capitalism in which people and businesses control industries and decide pricing, the materials used, how their products are distributed.

Socialists believe that capitalism, in which some people are able to make more and more money, buy more and more, while others don't make more money and aren't able to buy more and more is unjust because it has created economic inequality. So you have people who are really rich and really poor. They see the huge gap between someone like Elon Musk and the homeless guy on the streets of San Francisco as an inherent evil that is largely caused by the injustices and the oppression of capitalism. So the solution they believe would be for the government to run, say, SpaceX or any other major company to control food distribution. So grocery stores, the companies that own these major grocery stores, property distribution, money distribution,

so that everyone has an equal amount of stuff, everyone they would say is cared for equally, as is decided by the state. Now, a democratic socialist would say, well, you're still electing your leaders. You are deciding who are going to be the people that run the government, that then decide all of the distribution of these resources. So they would say that it's okay. If we vote for this kind of government control of all of these industries and distributions, then it is still a form of freedom. But of course, as you know, there are lots and lots of bureaucrats in the government today that we did not vote for. And that would be the case, of course, when it comes to democratic socialism as well. So how much say are you really having? Just because you put

Democratic in front of socialism doesn't mean that it's essentially different. So they would say, though, that socialism would eliminate economic inequality, which would also solve problems of, say, racial inequality, because, for example, there would be no all-white or all-black neighborhoods. There would be no, oh, that's a super nice neighborhood. Oh, that's a bad neighborhood. It would all be state housing. The government would come in and ensure by controlling housing that no neighborhood is better

off than the other. The government would also run our health care. Our health care would be free. You remember this with Bernie Sanders. This was his big thing. free healthcare, Medicare for all. And we wouldn't have to pay extra for it. It doesn't actually mean that it is cost free. Our taxes would pay for it. And then we wouldn't have additional out-of-pocket costs. They have this in Europe. They have this in Canada. The government would

dictate hospital policy. They would dictate doctor policy. There would be one standard of care and what they would call access for everyone. I'm not getting into all of the downsides of this yet. I'm just trying to lay out what their proposals are. And a truly socialist is, society, everyone also receives the same education. No school choice, no private school options. Typically, like if you look at the countries with a big social safety net, I don't know if I could say they're 100% socialist, but certainly have a big government presence and the distribution of economic resources by taking in a ton of taxes, there's no homeschool option either. There's just not a lot of choice when it comes to how to educate our kids in a socialist society

because in order to create the cohesion and compliance that socialism requires, every young person needs to be educated with the same values in the same way. The stated goal of socialism is focusing on needs over profit. That's what they would say. So everyone gets a shirt, for example. It's just that. In socialism, the government determines what kind of shirt, how much it's going to cost instead of private businesses being able to innovate

and set prices in order to make a profit, be able to pay their employees to do all kinds of things. The same thing that you as an individual would do with profit. Businesses function in generally the same way. Socialism says, no, you don't need the freedom to do that. We're just going to take care of it. We're going to take it over. We're going to make sure that everyone has a t-shirt. We would rather have everyone have one t-shirt than this person over here be able to afford 10 t-shirts and this person only be able to afford one. Even if this person only wants one t-shirt and this person has earned enough money to buy 10 T-shirts that is still inherently unjust and unequal. And so the government is going to prevent

that kind of so-called inequality from happening. If you are looking to get your child more in the know, especially your preteen and teenager about what's going on in the world, but you're afraid to just unleash the internet on them. And you don't even want to give them a newspaper. You can't even do that anymore because you don't know what kind of worldview is going to be put forth. they're the sensationalism, the click bay and all of that, if you want them to be more knowledgeable and more biblically wise about what is going on in our country, what's going on in the world, I could not recommend World Watch more. World Watch gives you a bite-sized but thorough explanation of the news from a biblical perspective. It's just 10 minutes today.

Every episode covers current events, global headlines, human interest stories, fun explainers that help kids understand what is happening in the world. this is so great for even your relationship with your kids to have conversation starters. You can talk to them about very substantive things from a biblical perspective because now they'll be equipped with knowledge. Go to worldwatch.coma. Or you can use promo code Alley and you will get a one month free trial. Check it out. See if you like it, Worldwatch.com slash Alley. Code Alley. Now, where did this idea come from? A lot of people think that it's inherently Christian to say

that inequality or some people having more, some people having less is unjust, that that is oppressive. Well, that idea doesn't come from the Bible, and we will get more into that at the end of this episode. It actually comes from essentially, or at least most famously, someone named Karl Marx, a German philosopher from the 19th century. He's known for his significant role in shaping the modern ideas of socialism and communism. Now, we're not going to get too far into communism and the comparisons between communism and socialism, but it's accurate enough to say that communism is the end goal of socialism. They're not exactly the same, but they almost always go together. In socialism, the government owns and controls most things. In communism, the government owns and controls everything.

So not just major industries, not just huge businesses, but all of them. Socialists and communists wouldn't call that government ownership. They call it collective ownership or collectivism. and they would argue that everyone is sharing an ownership together. It's just that the government is ensuring that we are sharing. They're ensuring that collective ownership. But, of course, if the government has to ensure something happens, then it's not voluntary. It's not sharing and it's not our ownership.

Karl Marx writes in the Communist Manifesto that all of recorded history could be explained as class struggles, the oppressed versus the oppressor. This is from his book, the Communist Manifesto, written in 1848. Now, that could ring some bells for you because we have heard this language many times before since I started this podcast, before I started this podcast, but you and I have been talking about it since at least 2018, this idea that there is this fixed group of people who are the oppressed, this fixed group of people who are the oppressors. And we have to eliminate those

distinctions by the government coming in and forcing the elimination of those distinctions by making sure everyone has the same thing. Now, Karl Marx, would, say that the oppressor versus the oppressed essentially comes down to rich and poor. But you have seen the outworking of this kind of idea when it comes to our conversation about race, comes to our conversation about gender, when it comes to immigrant versus citizen, this idea of oppressor versus oppressed, this hierarchy of oppression called intersectionality, that if you have an identity or multiple identities that are not the white cisgender heteromail, then you are somewhere on the side of the oppressed.

And you deserve more. You're entitled to more. So we can see how that idea has played out in so many different ways. But his thought at the time in the 19th century was mostly about economics. He talked about a transition of a society and his dream world. Now, remember, Karl Marx, huge loser, big, big, big loser. okay. His dad was super disappointed in him. He was a smart guy. He could have done a lot of different things. He had the means to be able to be successful and work hard himself, but he was lazy.

It was a lazy bones. And his dad actually wrote letters to him about this. Like, dude, we didn't raise you this way. Like stop being so envious and covetous and stop making money off of covetousness. Like actually do something with your life. But Carl Marx was like the OG lazy loser. And he sold this idea to so many people in the name of compassion, but really it was just a lot of jealousy and laziness in his own heart and life. So he talked in his book about a transition of a society from capitalism to communism. Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin would later identify this transition as socialism. Lenin said in March of 1918, in commencing socialist transformations, we must clearly have in mind the aim towards which these transformations are in the long run directed, namely the aim of

creating a communist society to the realization of the principle from each according to his ability to each according to his needs. Sounds really nice. Marks argued that the worker-controlled state would eventually fade away, revealing a stateless, classless communist society where government is no longer needed as the people work cooperatively for the good of everyone else. Wow, that sounds wonderful. So this is why they would say it's not government. It's not state run. all of these conservatives and capitalists over there, they don't want to be disempowered because they don't want everyone to be equal. Everyone would be equal and everyone would come to see the beauty and the virtue of communism. We wouldn't even need the gut. We wouldn't even need

Bernie Sanders to tell us to share our stuff because we are all working cooperatively for the good of another. The problem is for as long as these ideas of socialism and communism have been around, as long as they have been implemented and they have been implemented, this dream has never been realized. That's because collectivism, socialism, communism, fascism even, concentrates power and resources in the hands of the state, which always leads to tyranny, not freedom. That's because all of these collectivist ideas have this human nature problem, that humans actually are innately wired to provide for ourselves to want to protect our property. And we'll get into this more later, but you can see this reflected in two of the

Ten Commandments, thou shall not steal, thou shall not covet. That's how much God cared about private property and ownership and the right of property that you not only were not allowed to take something that was not yours. So the underlying assumption is there that something is yours and that it shouldn't be taken from you. But also, you shouldn't even want what someone else has. You shouldn't want someone's wife. You shouldn't want someone's donkey. You shouldn't want someone's property. Jealousness, this idea of that person has more than me and I deserve that. I want that is sinful, of course, in the Christian worldview, but it is also degrading to the soul.

And anything that is degrading to the soul is then decaying to a society. And so socialism and progressivism in general has this misunderstanding of human nature. Actually, they don't really believe in human nature. They believe in nurture. They believe that we are basically a blank slate, not hardwired toward anything, that we can be nurtured and educated and pressured toward a particular worldview or a particular state of being, and eventually we'll get used to it, and it'll be fine. It's the same thing that they do with gender. That we're not biologically hardwired to be male or

female. Women aren't hardwired to want certain things. Men aren't either. Everything is fluid. Everything is decided by self-decloration and self-identity. That's because they deny Genesis. It all goes back to the very beginning. That is, why I say that socialism is really a theology, and it is a competing theology with the Christian world view. And that essentially is why it never works. When you get down to the fundamentals, that's why it doesn't work because it denies the creator who knows us better than anyone, and it gets the human nature that he created wrong. So if you don't believe me, let's just look at the practical ramifications of socialism over the years. The reason the socialism

never works on a practical level has to do with how it views and treats private property and what socialists are always willing to do to take it. They are willing to steal and kill and destroy in the name of compassion and equality. So here are just a few examples of what happens when the government seizes or abolishes private property in the name of communism and socialism. We can look at the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin forced farmers into collective farms, which helped cause the famine of the early 1930s. Historians estimate that the deaths from executions, camps, and famine range up to around 20 million.

So that is just because of government policy. They said you can't own your private farms anymore. We're going to own farms. We'll call it collectivism. We'll make sure that everything is distributed to everyone equally. So you've got bread lines. You are rationed certain amount of food. You can't just make as much food as your community needs or as your family needs.

We are going to force you to give it to us to then redistribute to other people. And there wasn't enough food. The government didn't do it efficiently. And so people died. And when people refused, when people defected, when people didn't want to go along with this, when they resisted their farm being taken from them, they were executed. And socialists are always very, very, very sensitive when it comes to pushing back against their ideology.

Because if you are going to have a completely collectivist society, everyone has to comply. And in order for everyone to comply, you have to agree. So any thought crime, any word crime, any attempt to try to convince someone of something else has to face imprisonment. You have to face execution, which is, of course, exactly what happened in the Soviet Union, as well as these work camps that tried to, you know, work it out of the defectors and those who disagreed with socialism. So this led to tens of millions of people dying. You guys know how much I love Adela used their products every day, both their cosmetic line and their skincare line is just top notch. I use their essential cleanser, their essential moisturizing spray, which works for all kinds

of things, by the way. It works for like body spray, room fragrance. And I love that it's not synthetic, that I don't have to worry about it messing with my endocrine system, messing with my health, causing allergic reactions because it is all completely holistic. And this is also true of their makeup. I love their bronzing cream. It goes on so smoothly and it gives really good coverage stays for a long time. But again, it's totally moisturizing and all natural. I love that they're unapologetic about their faith in Christ, unapologetic about being pro life. Their tagline, beauty comes from the heart is inspired by 1st Peter 3, 3 through 4. And I just love that they wear that as, their brand and as their identity. Go to Adele Natural Cosmetics.com.

Enter promo code Alley for 25% off your first time purchase. That's Adel Natural Cosmetics.com code Alley. And then if we look at China, this is actually the death toll when it comes to what happened under Chinese communism is higher than the Holocaust by orders of magnitude is higher than really any human atrocity that has ever existed. So let me tell you what happened in China. not very long ago, not even 100 years ago. There were people alive today here in America that suffered under this leader, Mao Zedong. He set out to build a classless communist society.

Land reform came first. Private land was seized from landlords and redistributed to peasants. Landlords were publicly humiliated, tortured, many were executed. We see this echoed in the language that we hear today by many socialists in America that landlords are these evil guys,

you know, setting out to make people impoverish, and homeless. And this, of course, comes from this communist mentality. Then came the Great Leap Fort in China, 1958 to 1962. This was an attempt to turn China from an agricultural society into an industrial society. So the government took all the farms. People were executed when they resisted or if they were just a landlord. Already, because of the confiscation of farms, you were dealing with a famine.

you were dealing with starvation, mass starvation, which led to millions of deaths. But then private farming was ended altogether. Millions of peasants were forced to leave agriculture to go into mining, construction, and steel production. The government took too much food for the cities, even as agricultural production declined. These policies contributed directly to what is referred to as the Great Chinese Famine, which cost 40 million deaths, making it the deadliest famine on record. total deaths from all of Mao's communist policies range from 70 to 80 million.

China also had these struggle sessions where if you were, especially if you were a professor, if you were in the intelligentsia, or if you were just a person and someone's neighbor who was found out to be questioning the socialist communist communist regime, you would be taken out, you'd be flogged, you'd be shamed out in the public square. People would walk by and to try to prove their own allegiance to the regime and their own virtue, they would call you names, they would say horrible things about you. And those struggle sessions, it's a communist form of sanctification. It's a very ugly satanic form of sanctification, whereas, of course, we know that God is making us holier through the trials that we go through

for our own good. Like, this is the satanic inversion of that, that through shame and through cruelty and through torture, we are going to try to make you a good socialist, uh, socialist regime supporter. Total deaths from all of Mao's communist policies range from 70 to 80 million when it comes to the work camps, when it comes to dying in prison, when it comes to the massive famine. Then later in 1979, the government of China enforced the one child policy that said, you could only have one child. Things were so catastrophic there. They were still reeling from the effects of this famine. They weren't willing, they still aren't willing to relent all of the government control. And so instead of going back to, okay, we need the individuals, we need the private

industrialization, the private ownership of these farms in order to get back on track, they said, no, no, no, it's because there's too many people. And so we need a one-child policy that led to thousands and thousands and thousands of abortions, infanticide. That was 1979 to 2015, y'all. That's not very long ago. That is 11 years ago that the one-child policy, stopped in China. And I watched a documentary a few years ago of this woman who now is in America but talked about the one child policy and how horrible it was. There would literally be piles of dead babies in certain outside of like the city limits. This is so similar to the exposure hills in ancient Rome. It's just all the same thing. Paganism, secularism, getting out of God's

ordering of things, children and vulnerable people always pay the price. And so socialism claims to be helping the least of these, claims to be helping the vulnerable. It's actually the vulnerable that these socialist policies always hurt the most. Then we have Cambodia from 1975 to 1979. Paul Potts communist regime abolished private property, emptied the cities, shut down markets, abolished money, trade, forced people into rural communes to grow rice. The goal was Marxist's goal, classless society with no inequality and no oppression. its leaders wanted something called a year zero, a total reset. Remember us talking recently about the great reset in which they would start over

and build an entirely new oppressionless society? When it comes to Camar Rouge and Cambodia, like there is so much history there. There is a book about the killing fields and how children were recruited to fight in Paul Potts army and the death and destruction and the star of, and the torture and the imprisonment to try to get back to year zero. I mean, it is some of the most brutal stuff to read. And it was all started in the name of compassion and trying to help the poor. It's estimated that Cambodia lost 1.5 to 2 million people up to a quarter of the population. Again, they died from starvation, from disease, from overwork because the communal farms failed.

The communal farms failed. And these mass graves, as I said, were known as killing fields. A saying attributed to the regime went keeping you as no gain, losing you is no laws. Because when the collective is the goal, the individual no longer matters. This is not a belief that individuals matter because they are made in God's image. And so we need to make sure that they are dignified. It is the belief in the collective. So if you have to lose one or two million people in order to,

to get to this oppressionless society, then no big deal. That is again, why progressives and conservatives have a very different view of the value of human life from conception onward. We could go on and on. There have been so many countries that have tried the same thing even more recently. If we'd look at a place like Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe and Africa used to be called the breadbasket of Africa. It was thriving. There was a lot of trade that went on there. There were farms that were very successful. And then you had Robert Mugabe. He took over. 1970s, 80s was when he was coming to power. And he said, no, we've got these white oppressors because the most successful farms,

for the most part, were owned by these white Zimbabweans who had been there for generations. But he said, no, these are colonizers. These are oppressors. We're going to confiscate these farms. We're going to give them to the more indigenous Zimbabweans, the black Zimbabweans. We are going to take their farms over. This, of course, led to deaths to executions to arson of these farms because okay, if you won't let us have them, then you can't have them either. The white farmers fled,

the government took over and then redistributed these farms and all the farms failed because none of these people who were given these farms knew how to farm. They didn't know anything about trade. They didn't care about serving the community and selling and making a profit, both for themselves and for their communities. And so it's spiraled. The country spiraled in to poverty, which of course led to millions of deaths, it still has not recovered. It's still a very corrupt nation. The health care system, there's almost nothing to speak of. And it is all because Robert Mugabe came in and he said, I'm going to end oppression and I'm going to end inequality. And to do that, there's going to be some pain, but we'll figure it out. And they still have not

recovered after 40 plus years. Okay, so that's just a taste of what has happened throughout history. when socialism is implemented. It doesn't work. It's never worked. You don't have a single positive example of socialism taking over and people becoming better off. Everything always gets worse. So what would actually happen in the United States? Is there a distinction between what we've seen in history and what the Democratic

Socialists of America are proposing today? According to the DSA website, we must replace capitalism with democratic socialism. Our vision pushes further than historic social democracy and leaves behind authoritarian visions of socialism in the dustbin of history. The measures they're proposing from the taking of private property to the elimination of important checks and balances in the Senate, the three equal branches of government and the electoral college do not discourage authoritarianism. They actually create the conditions that make it possible, probable, I would say inevitable.

A man named Christian Niemeets, a political economist and editorial director at the Institute of Economic Affairs. He wrote in his 2019 book, Socialism. the failed idea that never dies, when contemporary socialist talk about extending democracy to the economy and democratizing every aspect of society, they're not being dishonest. That is the aspiration.

But the point he says they miss is that this has always been the aspiration and the promise of socialism. When contemporary socialist talk about a non-autocratic, non-authoritarian participatory and humanitarian version of socialism, they are not as original as they think they are. That was always the idea. This is what socialists have always said. It is not for a lack of trying that has never turned out this way.

And so you'll hear socialists to say, oh, no, like we don't want what Joseph Stalin did. Well, this guy, Nemeet's rights, that's actually what Joseph Stalin set out to do too. Like he also wanted a peaceful socialist society. He also envisioned a world. Karl Marx envisioned a world. Mao Zedong envisioned a world when everyone would voluntarily give up their private property and everyone would work together. That's what Paul Pot said that he wanted to.

And I don't disbelieve that they said that they wanted that. But again, when you come up against human nature, when you realize that people actually like their property, they like having the freedom to take care of their own family, to be as industrious as they want to be, that something in us is hardwired for that kind of thing. They meet resistance. Then they say, okay, it's for the greater good. It's for the greater good. You face the wall. You face the wall. You are now recruited into our regime. Like, that's just, that's, that's what happens. And that is why it always becomes forceful. You cannot have social. Socialism and peace at the same time. You just can't because it bugs against human nature.

All right, y'all, you know what I'm tired of? I am tired of spending money on products that promise to be really high quality from even luxurious brands and they fall apart and they don't last. They're made overseas and they're just low quality and still top dollar. You don't have to worry about that with range leather. They make these leather products that not only look great, not only are super durable, they last forever. So if you want to give a really good gift, maybe you're in the market yourself for a leather hat or a leather belt or leather jewelry or a leather bag. I love my tote bags from range leather. Travel with them all the time. Or if you are looking for a gift for someone in your life, then you need to check out range leather. They're Christian owned and operated. They are family

owned. Every product is handmade in Laramie, Wyoming. So you are supporting a Christian company. You're supporting an American company. And you are actually spending your money wisely because you are going to get a leather product that lasts that is really high quality. This is a great gift. If you are buying, say, a product for your employees or for people within an organization or business, you can even personalize it, which is really cool. They've made hats for us, for share the arrows, for example. Everything is so. high quality and I love Kyle and Bailey. They're just awesome people that you want to support. Go to range leather.com slash alley. You'll get 10% off all range leather products. Go to range leather.

com slash alley. This idea that private property is inherently oppressive. It doesn't just go against human nature, which we'll get into more, but it also goes against what our founding fathers knew. For example, John Adams wrote in 1787, property is surely a right of mankind as really as liberty. the moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commenced. And so he knew long before Karl Marx had written the communist manifesto, he knew that one hallmark of tyranny is devaluing the right to private property and that private property and liberty go hand in hand. You really can't have one without the other. This is why guys,

people say that America is a Christian nation. People try to say, oh, no, it's not. It's completely secular. No, secularism looks like Karl Marx. Secularism looks like Mao Zedong. Secularism says that the government is God, that we can actually reach heaven here on earth, that the future, our future hope doesn't have to be in Christ, in a new heaven and a new earth where there truly will be only justice and no oppression. We can create that here on earth, but the government has to do it. And we have to forced collectivism to eliminate all oppression. Like that is the secular, progressive worldview that has run many other countries that stands in direct contrast to what someone like John Adams is saying. And he's not just drawing that from his personal opinion. He is drawing that from the precepts

of the Bible, which again, two of the big ten go right against socialism. Thou shall not covet, thou shalt not steal. Thomas Jefferson said in his first inaugural address in 1801, a lies and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take for the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. Okay, so he's not an anarchist here. He says that there is a role for the government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another,

but shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement. And shall not take from the mouth of labor. the bread it has earned. Like if I want to define socialism, that's what I would say. It takes from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned and gives it to someone that has not labored for it and has not earned it. The founders argued that a major part of the government's job is to protect private property, not to transfer it into the hands of the government. Okay, so how does this look today? These democratic socialists, you don't hear them overtly calling for violence. You don't hear Zoran Mamdani saying that we are going to seize all of the means of production and if you

resist, we're going to execute you. Of course, they're better strategist than that. As I said, Lenin was a better strategist than that. Marx was a better strategist than that. The Communist Manifesto does not prescribe executing people. It is just the natural consequence of the pushing of these kinds of policies. So let's take a look at what this sounds like and what this looks like today. Here is Zoran Mamdani talking about billionaires. Stop for. I don't think that we should have billionaires because, frankly, it is so much money in a moment of such inequality. And ultimately, what we need more of is equality across our city and across our state and across our country. And I look forward to work with everyone, including

billionaires, to make a city that is fairer for all of them. Okay, so that's what it sounds like today. And it sounds good. You're like, that doesn't sound like Carl Marx. He's got a point. should someone have a billion dollars and someone not have a billion dollars? Well, why should someone have $100,000 and someone have $3,000? So you see how it will never stop at billionaires, because of the underlying principle there is that some people shouldn't have a lot while other people don't have a lot, then you, person who has worked really hard to make $100,000 a year, it is also inherently unjust for you to have that while the homeless person has nothing. Okay? We start with billionaires because we know that that is what is going to solicit the

most sympathy and understanding and agreement because the vast, vast, vast majority of us are not billionaires will never be billionaires. But if the underlying principle applies that inequality is always evil, then it doesn't stop at Elon Musk. It doesn't stop at Mark Zuckerberg. It goes to millionaires, which extends to someone who has, you know, $900 million and someone who just made $1 million at maybe 45 years old. And then if the principle is still going to apply, then why shouldn't it applied to someone who makes $500,000? Why shouldn't it apply to someone who makes $50,000 while someone else can barely make ends meet making $25,000 at McDonald's? So this is how it starts. It always ends up trickling down because if inequality is always wrong, then making $50,000 while someone else makes $25,000

is also unjust. So he's convincing people here that rich people don't deserve the wealth they create automatically, just their existence is what is unjust. And so this is how people start to come around because you see this and you're like, yeah, that really is oppression. But I'm telling you, Elon Musk, let me just tell you right now. Elon Musk is not why someone is poor. Elon Musk having a lot of money has nothing to do with how much money I have. I'm never going to have as much money as Elon Musk. And that's not because Elon Musk is oppressing me. That's not because the system is oppressing me. That's because I don't know. I don't have the same brain, the same innovation, the same resources, the same upbringing, the same environment, the same IQ as Elon Musk,

and that is simply true. That's true of everyone. We are all different. That's another thing that socialists consistently get wrong. And I really encourage you to read Thomas Soul. Quest for Cosmic Justice is a great one to start with. Discrimination and disparities. Those are like my main two that I would recommend to you by Thomas Soul.

And he talks about this. There are two, there are siblings from the same family. If you got two siblings from the same family, they can end up in totally different places in life. One can be extremely successful. One can be extremely unsuccessful. They were raised in the same environment with the same resources, given the same opportunities. And yet one did one thing. One went another direction.

That doesn't mean that one of them was oppressed and didn't get the same as the other person that's inherently unjust. People make choices. They make decisions. And yes, some people are born richer than other people. That is life. That's just life that has always been. that will always will be.

And that fact, the differentiation between someone who is born in one station and someone who is born another station is not inherently unjust. Okay, you're going to have to tell me why that's unjust. Why is it inherently unjust for some people to be born in a certain situation and others not to? Inequality is not inherently unjust. Democratic socialists like Mandami, Mamdani insists that their brain of socialism is different. But again, it's the same.

defunding of the Department of Defense, public ownership of corporations and essential industries. He's also tried to take over grocery stores in New York City. They want to abolish the Senate. They want to abolish the Electoral College, all the things that bring the checks and balances into our nation that actually make it a republic and actually make it a free place where we do have a say. They want to get rid of all of those things because they want to concentrate power at the top and force their worldview on everyone else. There are currently 250 sitting politicians who are part of the DSA across 40 states. Many hold local offices and state legislature seats. 90% of them were elected in the last six years. We've already talked about AOC, Rashida Taleb, some of their

policy positions include for abolishing ICE, taxpayer-funded Medicare for all, increased gun control measures, access to transgender surgeries, hormones for minors, and expanded abortion access. And of course, they consider themselves as democratic socialists. And so government controlled health care, all the different things that Mom Dani also advocates for. But what you're going to find is that these are never just isolated economic positions. They also have far left progressive, secular positions on everything else, gender, abortion, et cetera. These things always go hand in hand because when the government becomes your God, then your morality changes. So many companies today are happy to take your money while supporting causes that don't align with your Christian values.

But there's really good news. You don't have to keep giving those companies your money. We have a choice about where our money goes. And when there's an alternative that's actually fighting for the values and freedoms we care about, why wouldn't you make the switch? Especially when a company like Patriot Mobile makes it so easy. They offer higher priority nationwide 5G coverage with access to any of the three major U.S. networks. You get unlimited data plans, free international calling to more than 200 countries, 100% U.S.-based customer support. With Patriot Mobile, you don't have to choose between reliable coverage and your values. You get both. Their mission goes beyond wireless. Every year, Patriot Mobile contributes millions to organizations defending religious liberty, free speech, sanctity of life, and the Second Amendment while supporting our military, veterans, and first responders.

All these companies are taking your dollars and sending them somewhere. You might as well partner with a company that is sending your dollars to you. to really good places that are fighting for you. Go to patriotmobile.com slash alley. Make the switch today. When you do and use my code alley, you will get your first month free. Patriotmobile.com slash alley code alley.

We've got another rising star, Abdul el-Said. Yes, that is an American politician in the battleground state of Michigan. He is running as a Democrat against Republican Mike Rogers. You got Mike Rogers and Abdul El-Said. Okay. running for the Senate seat there, like AOC and Mamdani before they got into their elected positions. He's never held public office. He did run unsuccessfully for governor in 2018, but he's back and he seems to

actually have the potential of winning. He's never officially joined the DSA, but he appears with AOC, Bernie Sanders, other DSA affiliated figures. He spoke at six events held by DSA chapters between 2017 and 2020. The media has been somewhat critical of his DSA ties. He had very radical left-wing stances online before his race. He has ties to the Soros family that go back several years before the Senate campaign. He received the Paul and Daisy Soros fellowship for New Americans in 2012. If you don't know, George Soros, very, very old billionaire. It's okay for George Soros to be a billionaire, by the way. It's okay for him to be a billionaire. He's one of the good ones because He funds all of these progressive causes, open borders organizations.

He has fought very hard with his money for the destruction of the United States, for the destruction of the influence of Christianity and conservatism. And so he is always funding these far left politicians. Of course, El-Said seems to be in bed with the Soros family. Democracy PAC funded by the Soros family has given $9 million to Senate Majority Pack, which is pledged $30 million to help elect El-Said. It's very interesting how these people, like AOC, like Mamdani, like El-Said, even like the woman that I debated recently for the free press,

like they all have a particular look, they all have a particular story, and they all seem to have a ton of money that is funding them. Obviously, Democrats are very good at recruiting these particular candidates with a certain aura that they are confident have the potential to win, and they all have radical left socialist policy positions. El-Said has been very careful not to publicly associate with DSA while he has been running. So something in him understands that socialism, just blatant socialism, saying that I'm a Democratic socialist, the way that Bernie Sanders did, is still not popular enough. They think they can sell the ideas without selling the packaging of socialism.

They might be right about that. The truth is the DSA doesn't care. Whatever, whatever works. As of July, 2006, DSA officials said that they were mobilizing organizers, volunteers, and resources to support El Said's campaign. So he might not openly say I'm a socialist. The socialists are saying we openly support El Saeed. And that tells you what you need to know.

Of course, he's a radical in every other progressive sense as well. But the fact that he is so closely associated with the Soros family, so closely associated with the DSA tells you a lot about how radical he is. So if you are in the state of Michigan, you need to ensure that you are getting out to vote. And then we have another candidate who was up for re-election. That is AOC. She is also kind of doing the same thing here. And she is on the one hand a couple years ago talking about the means of production using socialist terminology.

And now she is still espousing a lot of the same ideas. But while she's writing for office, she won't call herself a socialist. Here's top three. It's too extreme for working people to own the means of production. Why is it okay for? private billionaires to own the means of production. Okay, so this is kind of the same thing that Karl Marx did, say things like, oh, you need the people,

the working people to own the means of production without actually talking about how state confiscation, state compulsion, how do things get into the hands of working people, and how has that actually looked throughout history? It's looked like a lot of violence. Now, you can say, well, I still don't like the oligarchy that we have of these, you know, these companies, BlackRock, these huge billionaires.

owning so much of what we have. Okay, well, the government doesn't solve that problem by taking over the means of production. And then you have AOC now. She says, she's talking just like a socialist in that last clip. I don't know why she's whispering, but she is. And then now she's saying, oh, I actually disagree with the Democratic Socialists on some things, not too. But do you see, I mean, are those positions you support? No, but I think that this is a free country. Everyone can have all sorts of beliefs and they can organize around them and you're free to do what you like and, you know, have conversations with your neighbors. But my job as an elected official is to guarantee health care in America. Okay.

So the positions that he was asking about, public ownership of corporations and industries abolishing the police in prisons, granting amnesty for all immigrants abolishing the Senate. I don't think that there's anything on that list that she doesn't actually agree with or that she has any. kind of contention with. She has talked about abolishing the police in prisons. She talked about amnesty for all illegal aliens. She's, I don't know if she's ever talked about abolishing the Senate, but she is just going to say no there because she wants to win. She's a politician, just like anyone else. Some of these socialist politicians sound like they're more genuine than others, but they're not. The truth is, is that the Democrats are playing it well. Socialism scares a lot of people off, just the word itself, but the ideas are kind of popular. Forty-three percent of

Americans now hold a positive view of socialist ideas. According to a 2026 Gallup poll, that's the highest level recorded since Gallup started tracking the question since 2010. So this idea that I think a lot of us had that socialism has died in popularity is just not true. As you'd probably expect, it's highest for Democrats and for Gen C. 65% of Democrats rated socialism positively compared to only 14% of Republicans. 57% of those aged 18 to 34 viewed socialism positively. Now, this to me is just not surprising when you have a generation that has been raised on the idea that doing what you want to do and doing what makes you happy and leisure

and relaxing are the most important things in life, that they would not see dignity, that they would not see inherent goodness and necessity and simply working hard and earning something for yourself. I'm not saying all ginsie or lazy. I know that from firsthand experience that that is not true. I have Gen Z women who work for me who are amazing hard workers, very thoughtful people. I'm very thankful for that.

But in general, there's a technology addiction problem. There is an outsourcing of critical thinking and hard work to AI problem amongst a lot of young people. So it shouldn't be that surprising that you can easily sell them the idea. Well, yeah, you shouldn't have to work. Like you shouldn't have to work very hard. The government should just give you what you need. and then you can go to brunch and get your iced coffee at the bodega and be happy.

I think that's the dream that's sold, of course, as we know, that's not how socialism actually ends up. So we've got some work to do. We've got some work to do when it comes to the ballot box. Make sure you know who is on your ballot if you are in the state of Texas. Look, you got Tala Rico versus Paxton. I understand. You don't like Paxton.

A lot of you don't out there. And honestly, I don't even know what has. campaign has been doing. It hasn't been strong. It's been largely absent. He's got some moral issues in his past that we do not have to justify. And you don't even have to overlook. You just have to look at the simple fact that you have two centers on the ballot. One who represents policies that are better, one who represents policies that are worse. We've talked about James Telerico a lot. We can link those episodes in the description so you can go see policy for policy statement for statement what he actually supports. He would be a disaster. Okay. He also has his

own moral issues. It's not like he has been above reproach in his own moral personal life, plus his wackadoodle theology, plus his terrible policy positions, especially on things that are unquestionable for the Christian, like abortion, like gender, like parental rights. I mean, he is absolutely radical and atrocious when it comes to those things. You do not have to like the person that you vote for. You don't have to agree with them on everything. You don't have to want to be their friend. They're not your pastor. They're not your Valentine. You're not voting based on vibes. you are voting based on policy. And at the end of the day,

Paxton policies are better than Talariko's policies. Every election for all of history has been the decision between two sinners. You can choose to opt out, but you can't opt out and then complain for yourself or for your kids. Politics matter because policy matters because people matter.

Politics affects policy. Policy affects people. People matter. People matter to God. And therefore they matter to us. so I do encourage you to go out and vote. And I do encourage, I'm just going to tell you, like, vote Republican down the ballot. I'm not going to be shy about that.

I'm not going to tell you that, oh, there are some Democrats that are better. There's not. There's not because of what the Democratic Party represents. There might be some individual Democrats on the ballot who might be less pro-abortion than others, less radical on gender, not out-and-out socialist. I'm sure that is true. I'm sure there might be some personally moderate Democrats out there, but once they get to Congress, everything changes.

Once they get to Congress, they will vote in lockstep with Hakeem Jeffries. They will vote in lock step with the Democrats in the House and the Senate. Okay. They're not going to go in there and try to shake things up and moderate. That's not what happens when they get to D.C. What happens with the Republicans, unfortunately, is that they run a very conservative campaign and then they end up moderating once they get in office. What happens with progressives is that they run a moderate campaign and they end up going

to the left once they get in office. So just to understand that, that if you're voting, you think you're voting for a moderate Democrat, you're actually voting for a radical progressive. If you think that you're voting in many cases for a hardline conservative Republican, you're probably voting for ultimately a moderate Republican. Not always, but a lot of times. Quick pause to tell you guys about one of my favorite sponsors, and that is seven weeks coffee. They are America's pro-life coffee company. they're on a mission to fund the pro-life movement one cup of coffee at a time. I love seven weeks coffee. I love how they love how it tastes. I love that it's aesthetically raised. I love that it's

ethically raised, all of that good stuff, that it's mold-free, pesticide-free. But of course, my favorite part is their mission. They donate 10% of every sale to pregnancy centers across the country. They have now raised over $2.3 million. They've saved thousands of lives because of the money that you have allowed them to donate to these pregnancy centers by allowing your coffee to serve a higher purpose. If you're going to get caffeinated anyway, you might as well save babies while you're at it at seven weeks gestation. That baby is the size of a coffee bean yet fully made in God's image, totally worthy of life. And that really is the mission and the heart behind seven weeks coffee. If you subscribe to seven weeks, so you get that box of coffee to your front door every month,

you save 15% plus the new free starter kit. which includes a premium electric frother, pro-life sticker pack, coffee guide. That's more than $65 in free gifts included with your first subscription order. Plus, when you use My Code Alley, you save an extra 10%. Sevenweekscoffee.com code Alley. Sevenweeks Coffee.com code Alley. Let's look into why socialism is biblically wrong. There's this tweet or there's this post on X that says,

I find it astounding that Christians believe heaven is this beautiful place with breathtaking natural landscapes where all your needs are met. There's no war or hunger and everyone lives in harmony. Yet here on earth, they call it socialism and say it's evil. Oh, I'm so glad you brought this up, a big Timmy on X because this is actually a perfect way to be able to explain the difference. You see socialism where people are forced into collective ownership, where you don't actually actually own anything and so-called equality is foisted upon us by the government. It is the state that is in control. In heaven, it's Jesus that's in control.

See, Jesus is perfect. And everyone who is in heaven has believed the same thing. And we also are without sin. So we don't have jealousy. We don't have covetousness. We don't have selfishness. That hasn't been forced out of us. That has been sanctified out of us because of Jesus Christ and His.

his Holy Spirit. And it is because of his rule. It is because of his leadership. It is because of his presence there in heaven that all will be made right and all will be perfect. Okay. You're trying to accomplish that here on earth through socialism, through force, through a government. And in so doing, you are trying to create heaven on earth where it cannot actually exist. God knew that earth is not heaven. That is why God invented the government. That's why he invented laws. That's why he invented judges and justice and due process. We see this all throughout the law giving books in the Old Testament. That's why he says that the government's job in Romans 13 is to wield the sword, to punish the evil doer, and to reward those who do good. He understands human nature. He understands the fallenness

of man. He understands the need for order. He understands the need for private property. As we've already said multiple times, that is why two of the Ten Commandments, that's a lot. Two of the Ten Commandments have to do with private property. Don't steal something that's not yours. Do not want something that's not yours. So right there, we say, don't do this thing with your hands that has to do with other people's stuff. Don't do this thing with your heart that has to do with other people's stuff. That's how much God cares about us being content with what we have. It was Winston Churchill who talked about this gospel of greed and this gospel of grievance that is socialism. It really is founded on the idea that someone has more than me and I deserve that.

You know, I tell this story because I think of this as socialism. There was one time I was spending the night at a neighbor's house, at a friend's house when I was little. And I wanted two pillows because I was left on two pillows. and she only wanted one pillow. Okay, she only wanted one pillow. But I wanted, I wanted another pillow. I only had one pillow. And I wanted to go get another pillow.

And she wouldn't tell me where the other pillows were because she said, that's not fair. I only have one pillow. And I said, well, you can have two pillows. She said, I don't want two pillows. And so then we were stuck in this bind where I wanted two pillows, but I couldn't have it because she only had one pillow and she didn't want to go get another pillow for herself, but I did.

Okay, that's the stupidity of socialism. it is like you also could, not every single person is like physically mentally capable of doing this, but most people are capable of earning something for themselves. Most people are capable in the United States of America of making something for themselves, of providing for themselves. And most people are where they are through the choices of someone. It's very often from our own choices. It could be in some cases from the choices of parents or choices of other people. but progressives continually degrade the significance of people's autonomy and people's choices and see all of us as some kind of product of our circumstances that we didn't control. And that's what they see

as unfair. When most people have made choices that have led them to where they are and have contributed to the kind of provision that they are able to have for themselves and their families, that does not mean that everyone who is rich has made better choices and everyone who is poor has made bad choices. I'm not saying that being rich or being poor is inherently good or bad. It's just true that people make their decisions and someone having more money than you is not inherently wrong. It's not inherently wrong. Scripture encourages believers to be diligent and to work. I've heard even on Theo Vaughan Zoran Mamdani talk about socialism is about dignity, making sure that people have what they need to take a big breath and to be or, you know, take a,

relieving breath, sigh of relief, and be dignified. But it's really hard work that gives us dignity. We're dignified because we're all made in the image of God. But to manifest the dignity that God has given us, to live out, us being made in the Amago day, we work. God worked for six days. He didn't have to, but I think that was an example for us that he worked for six days. He created the heavens and the earth and then he rested on the seventh day.

He didn't need that rest. He didn't need the relief from exertion, but he showed us what that should look like. And even before the fall, before the fall, we see in Genesis 2.15, the Lord, God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and to keep it. Work is not inherently evil. Work is good. Work is part of being made in God's image. That is also a part of the reason why socialism just fails so drastically is because when people don't have the dignity of being able to earn something for themselves to be able to eat the bread that comes from their labor, then you rob them of dignity.

You rob them of autonomy. I read this book called Nothing to Envy, and it's about life in North Korea. I really encourage you to read it. It was a compelling book. It was easy to read, and it was really quick. And it talked about how in North Korea, of course, it's communist. The government controls everything. you don't have any private property, any autonomy.

There's obviously no such thing as trade, but how these black markets would exist and how people would smuggle things over from China. They would trade for more food, for their family. And this capitalist sub-economy in North Korea exists illegally that depends upon the principles of capitalism. Now, these people raised in North Korea have no idea what capitalism is. They don't really know what supply and,

demand is. They've never been to the West. They don't know what our economic system is like. And yet it's innate in them that this should cost this much. This is how much this is valued. I will trade you this for this. That is like kind of the basis of capitalism and economic freedom. And even in these tyrannical communist places, humans, because of human nature, understand private property. They understand earning things. They understand paying for things. And that's why socialism fails so often because of bucks against that. Proverbs 10, 4 says, a slack hand causes poverty,

but the hand of the diligent makes rich. That's all throughout Proverbs. Second Thessalonians 310, for even when we were with you, we would give you this command. If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. Don't be lazy.

Don't be lazy. People say that the early church in Acts as an example of socialism, Acts 24 through 45, and all who believed were together and had all things in common, and they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all as any had need. Again, they were doing this voluntarily. They were doing this because they were compelled by the Holy Spirit. They were doing this under the leadership of Christ.

They weren't doing this because it was compulsory. They weren't doing this because the government told them to. In fact, we are warned in 2 Corinthians against compulsory giving. Second Corinthians 9-7 through 8. Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion for God loves a cheerful giver. And God is able to make all grace abound to you so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work. Paying your taxes is not cheerful giving. Okay. That is not paying what you have decided in your own heart. That is paying what the IRS tells you or sometimes doesn't even tell you what you owe. We are not cheerfully giving to the government. We are giving to the government and they are saying, we'll put you in jail if you don't.

okay that's not a cheerful that's not charity that's not cheerful giving democrats have a different view of this versus republicans that's why republicans on average give far and away more to charity than democrats do because democrats have replaced in so many cases socialism and government with god and christianity or the opposite actually they've replaced god in christianity with the government and socialism christians understand that we will not live in a perfect world until jesus returns and this entire idea of total equality, I just wonder how you square that with Jesus saying, the first will be last and the last will be first, even in heaven.

Like there is some, we don't know exactly what that means, but there's some kind of ordering, even maybe some kind of hierarchy in heaven. And so this idea that everyone has to be the same in order for things to be just, we don't see that anywhere in scripture. Nowhere in scripture. This idea that the government should become church,

that the government should become mom and dad, that the government should become your nanny, that the government should become your caretaker, that the government should become your grocer, you're just not going to see that founded in scripture. You're just not going to. And there's going to be people like Ms. Rachel, like AOC, like Tala Rico, who tell you that, of course, it is just compassionate to give more and more to people through the government. It's not. You won't find a basis for that definition of compassion in scripture. giving people what they want or even always what they say they need without getting them to earn that thing is not necessarily compassionate. Sometimes it's mercy and we should have the freedom to be

able to do that when we want to. But when we are compelled to do so by the government, it's no longer charity and it doesn't glorify God. There's a role for the government, but it's not to be your caretaker. It's certainly not to be your moral arbiter. And when that happens, when it's just because it's idolatry, when we replace God with government, when we replace his system with socialism, scripture with socialism, death and decay occur. Satan loves socialism. He does. That's why he steals and kills and destroys every time it takes power. And that's why voting is also a theological issue. That is why you being involved in politics is so important because remember, the progressive does not compartmentalize his or her worldview before going

into the voting booth. They convince you to do so, call you a Christian nationalist, call you a cry so fascist when you try to bring your worldview into the voting booth, but they're not checking it at the door. They're bringing the fullness of their theology into everything they do in the public. And Christians should do, may the best idea win. So go out there and vote, realize that socialism has not ended. It's still a theological issue. It's still an issue of people rejecting God. And so you as a Christian being an agent of goodness, an agent of order, an agent of wisdom, an agent of the gospel need to infuse salt and light wherever you go. One way to do that is by voting. So make sure that you vote on election day. All right, that's all we got time for. We'll be back

here next time.