Politics and Political Responsibility

Discerning What Is Best
with Dr. Rex M. Rogers

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 06 July 2026

To quote Ernest Hemingway about going broke, “How did you go bankrupt?"
Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.” That’s something worth remembering as we consider Democratic Socialism.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #269 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Zohran Mamdani winning the mayoralty in New York City put the term “Democratic Socialism” on the map. But the term and associated beliefs have been around for about a century.

During the 1880s and 1890s, some American socialists began distinguishing themselves from revolutionary Marxists by advocating gradual, democratic reform rather than violent revolution. Although the phrase "democratic socialism" was not yet widespread, the concept was emerging.

The movement became much more visible with the formation in 1901 of the Socialist Party of America. Its best-known leader was Eugene V. Debs, who ran for president five times between 1900 and 1920. Debs generally described himself as a socialist, not specifically a democratic socialist, but many historians consider his approach an early form of democratic socialism because he sought change through elections, supported constitutional government, rejected political violence, and emphasized workers' rights and public ownership of key industries.

The actual phrase "democratic socialism" began appearing more frequently in newspapers, books, and political writings during the 1910s and 1920s, often to distinguish electoral socialism from Bolshevism after the Russian Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 that brought Vladimir Lenin to power and eventually launched the Soviet Union. Norman Thomas became leader of the Socialist Party and ran for president six times (1928–1948), while openly advocating democratic socialism. Thomas consistently argued that socialism should always be democratic and rejected Soviet communism.

The modern organization most associated with the term is the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) founded in 1982. The DSA advocates achieving socialist policies through democratic institutions rather than revolution.

The term entered mainstream American political discourse during 2015–2016, in Senator Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign. Although Sanders is an Independent, he repeatedly identifies himself as a Democratic Socialist, bringing the term into widespread public discussion. Since then, figures such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and other DSA-supported candidates have further increased its visibility. This visibility went to the stratosphere when Zohran Mamdani became Mayor of New York City.

In 2026, “the DSA has endorsed about 150 candidates this cycle, according to an analysis by the Washington Examiner, with 35 either winning primaries or advancing without opposition, in races stretching across Oregon, California, Georgia, Pennsylvania and New York.”

“CNN data analyst Harry Enten pointed to a poll from Marquette Law School that found the DSA now holds higher favorability than sitting congressional Democrats. In his segment, Enten summarized it by saying: ‘Simply put, they’re more popular than the Democrats currently in charge.’”

“Former New York governor David Paterson warned on 77 WABC radio that the (Democrat) party risked something more fundamental than an electoral setback. ‘We’d better get that message and turn it around before we become extinct,’ he said.”

Democratic Socialists differ, at times incrementally but often dramatically, from the views held by Democrats. Longtime Democrat political guru James Carville said of one of the NYC DSA candidates, "I don't think that the congressional Democrats should seat her as a member of the Democratic Party. She actually describes herself as a democratic socialist. I don't have anything in common with someone that says that they're against interracial dating or doesn't want to have any incarceration for convicted felons."

One NYC DSA primary victor, “Avila Chevalier, a pro-Hamas Marxist convert to Islam who wants to abolish ICE and the police, and has so much contempt for the United States of America that she has boasted about using the American flag as a napkin.”

James Carville said, “This is a bridge too far. That's the only way I can put it —and a bridge I don't want to cross. I think a lot of Democrats feel the same way that I do." And he also responded with his usual crude commentary, “I actually do think it’s time for Democrats to talk the S-word: schism.” He added that some DSA-aligned candidates ‘have no place in the Democratic party’ and, of the broader coalition: ‘I’m not in that blankety-blank political party.’”

The new and now Democratic Socialists are not Democrats. They simply use this phrase, as Bernie Sanders has done, to make their Marxist views somehow more palatable, a kind of soft socialism in their propaganda. They are not traditional Liberals like Bill Clinton. They are something more, what scholars and what they call themselves, Leftists.

Leftists are typically anti-God, anti-religion, anti-Israel, and antisemitic. They assume a victim posture and talk incessantly about the oppressor—usually America, Christians, conservatives, Israel, or Republicans and often Democrats.

They want to abolish ICE, defund the police, abolish prisons, and change the US Constitution—that’s right, fundamentally overhaul and change the American political system in a manner that gives them more centralized power. They are pro-Hamas, pro-open borders, wish to curtail freedom of speech, and are pro-identity politics, and pro-sexual progressivism. Their economics is based on Marxism, they are anti-nationalist and pro-globalist, and they are pro-climate change. Many Leftists consider America racist, xenophobic, violent, and imperialistic, and they frequently speak, as former President Barack Obama did recently, about America’s presumed birth in slavery, which, though America fought a Civil War wherein 750,000 died to end slavery, is for them America’s unforgiveable sin. Leftists are anti-American, suspicious if not against the 250^th anniversary celebration, and they offer a sour, nihilistic outlook on life.

Democratic Socialists affirm most of these views. Democratic socialism generally holds that: Capitalism creates persistent inequalities and concentrations of economic power. Democratic institutions should be used to achieve a more socialist economy. Workers and the public should have greater control over economic life. Essential services such as healthcare and education should be publicly guaranteed. Some sectors of the economy may be publicly owned or organized through cooperatives. Many democratic socialists are also leftists because they favor redistributive economic policies. Mayor Mamdani is proceeding with plans to seize property, control rents, and increase the taxes on the wealthy to the point many wealthy families have already left or are signaling their intention to move their residences from NYC to other states.

At the moment, many traditional Democrats, like Carville, are reeling. Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) has emerged as one of the Democratic Party's most vocal critics of the Democratic Socialists of America and the progressive Left, particularly following DSA-backed victories in New York City primaries."

“‘Big night for the dirtbag left,’ Fetterman said, referring to New York’s recent primaries, where two members of the Democratic Socialists of America won primaries. ‘I’ve said the party is becoming an orgy of socialism. Clearly anti-America, anti-Western Civilization.’” He also “criticizes the Democratic Party, claiming it's being taken over by socialists with extreme views. He highlights NYC Mayor Mamdani's defiance of a Supreme Court ruling on immigration and a Denver DSA congressional candidate's refusal to condemn antisemitism.”

Whether you like Carville or Fetterman’s salty approach to calling out the DSA, they are correct in their assessment the DSA does not represent fundamental American values. Mayor Mamdani is Exhibit A.

Mayor Mamdani last fall and these recently elected DSA candidates were victorious because most registered New Yorkers, and thus most registered Democrats, did not vote. The vote totals for all these DSA candidates were in the mere single-digit percentiles of all eligible voters. Democratic Socialists qua Leftists hold views antithetical to the founding ideals of the American constitutional republic and to its future well-being. They work with a faulty view of human nature, are motivated by power, and envision a utopia of their own making. But truth be told—remember that word? Reality—remember that word? Socialism has never worked anywhere in any country it has been tried, and worse, millions have suffered and died as a result. Do not be fooled by Democratic Socialism. It’s fool’s gold.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best.

If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. For more Christian commentary, see my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com, or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 23 March 2026

In our increasingly polarized political landscape, meaning divided with little hope of consensus, is it obvious to you that one end of the political spectrum does not espouse Christian viewpoints?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #254 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

In January 1993, when I was privileged to serve as Cornerstone University’s president and with the encouragement of the WCSG radio Vice President for Broadcasting, my good friend the late Lee Geysbeek, I launched a 2-minute radio commentary. We called it “Making a Difference.” That program ran weekly, sometimes daily, through June 2008.

The idea was to comment on all manner of subjects, applying, the best I could, a biblically Christian worldview. Early on, I thought long and hard whether I wanted to be openly partisan and decided that while I’d speak from my Christian and conservative values, I’d not position myself as Republican, let alone any other party. I did this because I believed the political parties should be critiqued, that no party or “Ism” for that matter, including “conservativism,” should escape the review of a biblically Christian worldview. I wanted to integrate my faith with life and culture.

Now this means that if I wanted to represent myself as a person basing analysis of issues and events upon a Christian faith perspective, I needed to know whereof I spoke. I am not a theologian, but I thought I could develop, like the Men of Issachar referenced in the Old Testament, an “understanding of the times, to know what Israel (or in my case the U.S.) ought to do,” (1 Chron. 12:32). So that is what I did in more than 550 “Making a Difference” pieces, and that is what I’m still trying to do in what to-date is more than 250 “Discerning What Is Best” podcasts.

I’ve shared this history because I want to shift gears, at least in this podcast, and talk about political parties, political philosophy, or what I called an “Ism.” I’m sure there are listeners who will remember a time, not that long ago, when people could say, and I was one of them, that Christians could affiliate with either political party, Republican or Democrat. But even back when, I always thought what mattered more was whether people positioned themselves as conservative or liberal, for this was where their real values emerged.

I have friends and family members who affiliate with the Democrat party, and many more who affiliate with the Republican party. I want to respect them all, even as I may disagree with positions a given party takes. But here again, I must be careful, for both parties from time to time assume political positions that do not deserve support. Neither party is always consistent, much less holy.

This is why I still fall back on my view that what matters more than party affiliation is ideology, the “Ism.” Do you feel most comfortable with conservativism, liberalism, or in this new century, leftism?

When I was in high school and college in the 1960s–1970s, political developments like the Civil Rights Movement, Vietnam War protests, feminism and student activism pushed radical critiques of capitalism, war, and American institutions.

This is the genesis of the modern American Left, influencing culture, academia, and activism—though not yet fully controlling government.

In the 1980s–2000s, conservatives enjoyed a resurgence under Ronald Reagan. However, leftist ideas persisted in universities, media, and advocacy groups.

Now, from the 2010s to the present, the Left is surging. After the 2008 financial crisis, dissatisfaction with inequality grew. Politicians like Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and now NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani brought explicitly leftist ideas, including Democratic Socialism, into mainstream debate.

Movements like Occupy Wall Street increased pressure on traditional liberals. This period marks the strongest mainstream political influence of the Left in modern U.S. history, especially within the Democratic Party.

Though there is overlap and media use the terms interchangeably, the Left is not the same as Liberals. The Left is far more pernicious.

Liberals want to reform and improve the existing system (capitalism + democracy). The Left often wants to transform or replace major parts of the system (especially capitalism).

Liberals support capitalism with regulation. They believe markets work but need safeguards (e.g., minimum wage, antitrust laws). The Left is much more critical of capitalism and support alternatives like socialism.

Liberals believe government should fix problems (healthcare, education, inequality) and they prefer incremental policy changes. The Left believes government should play a much larger role in sweeping changes (e.g., universal systems, wealth redistribution).

Liberals focus on reducing inequality (tax credits, social programs) and accept some level of wealth disparity, while the Left focuses on something they call “equity,” meaning fairness in their terms.

Where the divide is even more pronounced today is on cultural issues. It’s not conservatives, but most liberals and all the Left affirm these views:

- “Trans for everyone, including kids who are too young to spell ID.

- Pornographic material in your kid’s school library.

- Trillions in ‘reparations’ for people who were never slaves from people who never owned slaves.

- An open border for all to enter the U.S. and receive benefits that you paid for…

- More DEI in the military, college, and the workplace.”

Faith in general seems to be something the Left is more at war with than nearly any other entity…the single biggest difference between modern progressive leftism and common-sense centrism (i.e., the old Liberals) and center right folks is the acknowledgement of God. That he has a purpose for humanity and that our lives are best lived when we acknowledge him and his plan. The Left believes that God does not exist, or that if he does, he is relatively unburdened by our plight and is unbothered to intervene.

This difference is how we arrive today wherein one political party believes it’s fine for boys to be in your daughter’s locker room, and the rest of the nation believes it’s dangerous.

What else do conservatives believe? That killing an unborn child is murder. That taking all of one’s earnings through taxes is theft. That our morality is not created in a vacuum.

Who consistently supports Hamas and now Iran? The Left.

Who proclaims some version of LGBTQ+ and then says they support Islam where their version of sexuality is violently condemned? The Left.

Who claims to be pro-women all the while nonsensically supporting radical Islam? The Left.

Antisemitism is showing its ugly face on the Left, but sadly, also periodically among the liberals and even so-called conservatives.

“Believing in Darwin, leftists do not believe in human equality; they believe that some humans have ‘evolved’ to a superior, higher status than others. Hence, their racism…Socialism, with its government economic control, is the Left’s economic system. Capitalism, with its freedom and uncontrollable markets, is rejected. Since the Left has no absolute morality except what will lead them to power, anything goes—lying, stealing, murder—it’s all in their history. Thus…nothing is forbidden if it leads to dominance.”

“The Left has been waging the most successful war against free speech in American history. As a result, almost half of America's young people say they believe in free speech but not in ‘hate speech,’ which, of course, means they do not believe in free speech.”

“The Left has essentially destroyed mainstream journalism. Mainstream media no longer hold truth as an ideal…They continue to promote the lie that having to present an ID when voting is ‘racist.’"

America-bashing has become the favorite pastime of the Left. So-called Progressives excoriate America as a nation founded by white men for white men.

They even reject the Declaration of Independence, labeling it a racist document.

This only scratches the surface of how radically different, morally relativistic, given to disorder and revolution, anti-God, anti-family, and anti-American the Left now is. As they like to call themselves, these “Progressives” are in near control of the Democrat party and sometimes influence establishment Republicans. Their worldview is anti-Christian.

I still don’t want to position my commentary as partisan, but it’s harder to near impossible now not to lean right instead of left.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 01 December 2025

European nations have embraced socialism long ago, but did you ever think this failed ideology would take root in the USA?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #236 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

During the COVID pandemic I wrote about things I saw in American government, politics, and culture that I never thought I’d see in my own country. Perhaps I was naïve but I was certainly shocked, then discouraged and concerned at the power grab and overreach of American governors, mayors, and some federal officials. And more so, I was nonplussed by not simply the willingness or acquiescence of American citizens at these constitutional violations and attacks on liberty but the public outcry asking for these things. Apparently, even today, there are millions of Americans who now want what Christian philosopher Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer predicted: people would trade liberty for perceived security and what they wanted most of all was just “personal peace and affluence.”

Now I am seeing it all over again, this time in Americans’ foolish, ahistorical, and dangerous enthusiasm for socialism, or what current politicians like to soften calling it “Democratic socialism.” Someone once said that a jerk for Jesus is still a jerk. I’d apply that logic here. A democratic socialist is still a socialist.

Of course, I am referring first to New York City electing Zohran Mamdani as its next mayor, a man who is unapologetically a Democratic Socialist. Several other candidates who called themselves democratic socialists were also elected in Seattle, Denver, Minneapolis, New York City, Austin County Texas, Portland.

Now it’s one thing for these people to affirm their allegiance to democratic socialism, but it’s another thing to note that they attracted enough electoral support to get elected.

Now, how is this possible in a pluralistic democratic republic like the USA?

Well, for one, much of American public education has been systematically educating one if not two generations in leftist, illiberal pathology like, the USA is not to be trusted, it was founded on slavery not liberty, the US is a colonizing, settler state, capitalism is suspect if not bad, socialism is about the oppressed, free speech should be controlled, objective good, objective evil, or objective truth do not exist, nothing can really be known because everyone has their own truth.

Leftists, or specifically Democratic Socialists, “view the world not through the Judeo-Christian lens of right versus wrong, but through the lens of power.”

“Train a child to hate, and that is what he will do. Lenin understood this very well: ‘Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.’ The Left knows this. And they took over our educational system and still control it. And the seeds they have been sowing in America are now sprouting. They will be difficult to uproot.” “Two-thirds of Americans ages 18-29 (now) hold a ‘favorable view’ of (socialism).”

But “socialism is built on conceit. It is assumed that a society’s problems are a matter of poor management, and once the right people are in charge, utopia will be in reach.” “(The Socialist) agenda is almost exclusively designed to make more people dependent on government to empower themselves.”

Orwell ostensibly once said, “Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.” Socialism is one of those ideas.

“The seeds of modern leftism were planted in the French Enlightenment of the 18th century (and perhaps even a little earlier) and sprouted in the French Revolution and the guillotine. The ideology gained momentum under German rationalism, Darwinism, and especially Marxism/Leninism, and bloomed fully in the 20th century communist movements.”

“Today, (many politicians on the left are) trying to morph America into the very thing that we spent countless billions of dollars to defeat, and that so many great, wonderful American men and women gave their lives to keep from infesting our shores. The leftism we fought so mightily to destroy is now, like a horrible cancer, spreading through America—rapidly, with determination, and often violently.”

Charles Cooke, the editor of NationalReview.com, bluntly says socialism is not and never can be “democratic.” “(He) writes that voters should not be fooled by the left’s attempt at rebranding. “‘There is no sense in which socialism can be made compatible with democracy as it is understood in the West.’

At worst, says Cooke, ‘socialism eats democracy, and is swiftly transmuted into tyranny.’

“At best, socialism ‘stamps out individual agency, places civil society into a straitjacket of uniform size, and turns representative government into a chimera.’”

Cooke notes that “6,000 years of civilization” (have taught us) “never relinquish the right to free speech, the right to free conscience, the right to freedom of religion, the right to bear arms, or the right to a jury trial. Whatever you do…don’t be seduced by socialists bearing promises. But if you are seduced, ‘get out before it’s too late. You have nothing to lose but your chains.’”

The irony of all this—think back to Orwell’s comment about stupid ideas—is that history is replete with mountains of evidence that socialism, like leftism, destroys everything it touches. Look at Venezuela, the nation with more proven oil reserves than any other in the world, yet “Venezuela’s economic catastrophe dwarfs any in the history of the U.S., Western Europe or the rest of Latin America.”

“Under Chavez-Maduro socialism, the child mortality rate has increased 140%. Ninety percent of Venezuelans now live in poverty. This year inflation will hit an unbelievable 10 million percent.” Yes, 10 million percent.

Lenin and Stalin’s mass socialist terror in Russia killed tens of millions, as did Mao Zedong’s reign in China, Pol Pot in Cambodia.

“Economist Jeffrey Tucker (makes a) damning comment: ‘Among the most conspicuous of socialism’s failings is its capacity to generate vast shortages of things essential for life.’”

“The subtitle of F.A. Hayek’s last work ‘The Fatal Conceit’ is ‘The Errors of Socialism.’”

Socialism, yes Democratic Socialism, is a time bomb in a pretty package. The pretty package is all marketing and messaging, not historic reality.

The reality of socialism is known all too well for those who care to look: low growth, mass unemployment, social strife, and a general mood of pessimism, people selling heirlooms or themselves for food, the sick untreated, unburied dead in the streets, trash piling up, contaminated drinking water, rampant deforestation, and frequent oil spills.

After years of leftist socialist nationalized economic controls that brought the UK to its knees, “Margaret Thatcher walked into 10 Downing Street and proceeded to denationalize coal, steel, and utilities; bring down inflation; spur economic growth; and refuse to give into organized labor’s draconian demands. Thatcher’s message: ‘The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.’”

“Free everything — except your independence. But in the real world, nothing is free.” Socialism “destroys competition and consequently destroys innovation.”

“Socialism is not compatible with the Constitution.
Socialism, the idea that millions killed for, is a mirage.
Socialism is very good at generating vast shortages of the essential things in life.
Socialism can never know enough to plan all our lives every day.
Socialism tries to make all of us equal to one another.
Socialism is very good at promising all the benefits we’ll never see.
Socialism in Great Britain had one outstanding success—Margaret Thatcher.
Socialism was responsible for making Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union the most polluted and degraded places on earth.
Socialized medicine as practiced in Great Britain and Canada is bad for people’s health.
American socialism is on the rise because of widespread social and cultural poverty in America.”

Winston Churchill said, "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

Young Americans voting for utopian socialism—this is a generation motivated by values that will destroy them and their country.

God forbid.

God grant we develop young adults who know truth and work to make it known.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. For more Christian commentary, see my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com, or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 04 August 2025

What makes voters chase the latest shiny object, in this case, a new kid on the block named Zohran, who unabashedly calls himself a Democratic Socialist?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #218 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

New York City voters have elected Zohran Mamdani as the NYC Democratic nominee for the fall mayoral election. Mamdani has served since 2021 as a member of the New York State Assembly from the 36th district, based in Queens.

This gives him a total of four years’ experience in politics. He has never served as an executive at any level for any organization. Mamdani calls himself a Democratic Socialist, but he overtly espouses communist principles and policies.

So why would NYC Democrat primary voters opt for Mamdani over current Mayor Eric Adams or former NY Governor Andrew Cuomo? Well, seemingly because Mamdani checks all the progressive chic hot buttons:

Mamdani is youthful, only 33.
Mamdani is foreign born in Kampala, Uganda.
He is from a well-to-do family.
Mamdani has composed and produced rap music.
He is, according to many women, handsome and attractive.
He is charismatic and articulate.
He is Shia Muslim.
Mamdani positions himself as caring and fighting for the poor, minorities, and marginalized.
He is or has been anti-police and anti-prisons.
Mamdani promises a lot of “free stuff.”

So, hey, what’s not to like?

Well, one is that Mamdani is anti-Israel and antisemitic. He claims not to be now, but he’s on record numerous times making negative comments about Israel or Jews, including refusing to condemn the phrase, “Globalize the Intifada.” He is also on record saying Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should be arrested for war crimes.

Mamdani is anti-capitalist, calling for the abolition of private property. He has said that “one of his goals is ‘seizing the means of production.’”

Mamdani is anti-prisons, and he has called for defunding, or at least dismantling the police in favor of social workers. In a tweet on X, Mamdani said, “We don’t need an investigation to know that the NYPD is racist, anti-queer & a major threat to public safety. What we need is to #DefundTheNYPD.” Yet following a mass shooter in Manhattan killing four including a police officer, Mamdani tweeted “I am holding the victims, their families, and the NYPD officer in critical condition in my thoughts. Grateful for all of our first responders on the ground.” It's not clear how calls for defunding the police align with being grateful for first responders on the ground, nor what it amounts to for him to hold victims “in his thoughts.”

Mamdani argues for protecting gender-affirming care, is pro-LGTBQ+, is pro-sanctuary city and has said ICE will be resisted. Of course he is all in on climate change. Mamdani’s proposals include “rent freezes, free bus fare, and city-owned grocery stores.”

Mamdani is a self-described Democratic Socialist. “In (a) resurfaced clip — from a 2021 Young Democratic Socialists of America conference — Mamdani argues that the ‘purpose’ of ‘this entire project’ is ‘not simply to raise class consciousness, but to win socialism’ and elect leaders who are ‘unapologetic about our socialism.’”

Meanwhile, New Yorkers who have lived under socialist regimes have other ideas. “Brooklyn Councilwoman Inna Vernikov, a native of former Soviet-controlled Ukraine, argued that Mamdani was being deceptive about his true politics. (She says,) ‘This is exactly why Zohran’s whole song and dance about ‘Democratic socialism’ somehow being different from communism is pure deception,’ Vernikov argued, when asked about the resurfaced clip. ‘Those of us who grew up under communism know this all too well. Our home countries were destroyed by ideas that came dressed in pleasant, persuasive packaging…’ New Yorkers,” she said, ‘need to wake up before it’s too late.”

Mamdani denies he is a communist and defends the term Democratic Socialist, saying Sen. Bernie Sanders use of the term in the 2016 presidential election first attracted his attention.

The term “democratic socialist” originated in the mid to late 19th century, emerging out of the broader European socialist movement. In the U.S. especially, Democratic Socialist has at times been used as a surrogate for Communist. This does not mean that every politician who identifies as a democratic socialist is indeed a communist, but in U.S. political rhetoric the terms have often been blurred or equated. The popularity of politicians like Senator Bernie Sanders and the Democratic Socialists of America reignited the term. Critics, particularly from the political right, have at times labeled democratic socialism as “communism in disguise,” although the platforms in philosophically purist terms are different.

Broadly, a democratic socialist supports:

Democratic political systems (elections, civil liberties)
Social ownership or regulation of key industries
Strong welfare states and worker protections

Universal health care, free tuition at public colleges and higher taxes on the wealthy. Mr. Sanders has pushed for such measures for decades.
Theoretically, democratic socialists reject authoritarianism and one-party rule.

Communism supports:

A classless society where all property is communally owned, and there is no private ownership of the means of production.
Redistributed wealth, abolished class divisions entirely, creating a society where there is no private property, no money, and no social hierarchy.
Highly centralized, authoritarian, one-party-rule governments that control the economy and the distribution of goods.
Atheism, believing the State creates the new man and woman and a utopia in the future.

Most European countries do not practice full socialism but have democratic socialist roots, especially in welfare, while maintaining market economies and have done so for the past 100 years.

So, while there are differences between democratic socialism and communism, with respect to Mamdani, this may be what ABC’s Ted Koppel used to call “a distinction without a difference.” Either way, Mamdani’s proposals do not comport with American ideals like free enterprise, individual initiative, limited government, law and order, personal responsibility, and paying one’s debts.

“Democratic Socialism” is still socialism. The democratic modifier works to make socialism more palatable but doesn’t make it wise or moral. Everywhere socialism has been tried, it has failed. It envisions utopia but ends in ugliness. Ask the people of Venezuela, Cuba, or the former USSR.

Socialism removes individual responsibility and incentive, which defies human nature and common sense. It is a form of legalized theft that takes wealth from those who have earned and redistributes (their favorite social justice word) to those who did not earn. It makes everyone poor.

Socialism is built upon ignorance. This is what elected Mamdani, voters with little understanding of history or economics, ones who are duped by the promises of a perfect world.

Democratic socialism offers euphoria based on euphemism. They want to increase government, so they speak of investing in the future. They want to increase the minimum wage, so they talk about social justice.

But democratic socialism is the politics of envy. They want more, but they do not want to work to produce more. They speak of class conflict, victims, the oppressor oppressing the oppressed, and argue it is morally justifiable to take from the rich and give to the poor, all this in the name of equality.

Socialism always leads to collapse because it is built upon a faulty understanding of human nature. Whether Bernie Sanders, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), or Zohran Mamdani, Democratic Socialism is a time bomb in a pretty package, a snake in the grass that will bite and when it does, it will hurt.

Let’s pray the mayoralty voters of New York City have the common sense to choose character and principle over charisma and promises.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://x.com/RexMRogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 14 July 2025

If you’re older, you remember a time when something called polite society existed—decorum, manners, self-restraint, civility mattered—but it may be gone forever.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #215 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

It does not take much to illustrate Western civilization is on the edge. This thing we called organized society is not so organized. People of all ages, but perhaps more so the young, seem to believe they can do anything anytime to anyone any way they wish.

Language is crude and lewd. I began watching a movie recently on a cable channel and was not 30 minutes into it before I realized the producers were enamored with the F-word. Not just the thugs but the cops, not just men but women, not just the antagonists but the protagonist, everybody dropped F-bombs as an all-purpose means of conveying their toughness or frustration or anger. What this said to me is that the writers were not very good. They did not possess the creativity or intellectual depth to write dialogue or access a vocabulary capable of sharing wide ranging emotions without falling back on a vulgar term. Apparently, they think this level of crudeness is how the American populace talks. Maybe it is, but thankfully not folks around me. And by the way, I switched the channel.

On another front, the Left, or so-called progressive politicians, many Democrats to be frank about it, are recording short videos in which they use profanity, supposedly to reach the young American male, but which actually makes them sound juvenile and coarse.

National politicians are getting more aggressive not only in their language but at times behavior, showing up unannounced and challenging security like California Sen. Alex Padilla recently did at a Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem press conference, or like New Jersey Rep. LaMonica McIver did at an ICE detention facility. House minority leader NY Rep Hakeem Jeffries posed with a baseball bat supposedly to demonstrate his tough approach to legislation. Others scream and otherwise disrupt congressional sessions.

"At town halls in their districts and in one-on-one meetings with constituents and activists," (even) more moderate Democratic House colleagues are "facing a growing thrum of demands to break the rules, fight dirty – and not be afraid to get hurt." Another lawmaker told Axios that constituents say, "civility isn't working" and to get ready for "violence ... to fight to protect our democracy." And another said, "It's like ... the Roman Coliseum. People just want more and more of this spectacle."

“Some Democrats are calling on their elected representatives to engage in violence against policies of the Trump Administration. Militant allies of the progressive Democratic movement are resorting to violence in an effort to obstruct the president's enforcement of federal immigration law.”

Political protest is no longer “mostly peaceful,” nor is it apparently about a controversy. It’s planned, prolonged violence. It’s an excuse to run amok, to throw rocks, or worse, Molotov cocktails. Protest is now more performance outrage, a sampling of anarchy, than it is intelligent expressions of disagreement offering other points of view.

We know this because media sometimes interviews protesters in the streets, asking them what they hope to achieve and they offer no response or an obscene response like flipping the finger, or they just parrot talking points they cannot explain. Then they go back to their feral behavior, damaging or looting businesses in their own communities, destroying cars, or shouting slogans at law enforcement.

Deliberative discussion, and disagreement, have gone out the window. Now, anyone who opposes an open border is called a racist. Support the idea of voter ID or photo identification for national elections or even holding national elections on one day with limited mail-in privileges, and you’re a bigot, you’re anti-minorities, or you’re destroying democracy.

Wish for better science regarding vaccines and you’re a purveyor of misinformation. Support efforts to stop waste, fraud, and abuse in government spending and programs and you’re called cruel, a person who does not care about the poor or needy.

Say you are against abortions, and you’re anti-women, anti-reproductive health care. “Reproductive health care” is an illogical oxymoron anyway because abortions stop reproduction entirely.

Lawlessness is no longer limited and infrequent. Portland struggles with Antifa and other extremist groups. Chicago is once again the nation’s murder capital.

Lawfare, the strategic use of law to damage, delegitimize, or hinder an opponent—often under the guise of a semblance of legality or justice, is now commonplace.

Leftist politicians encouraging or specifically calling for violence against those whose politics they oppose, including law enforcement officials, is now a weekly occurrence.

New York City recently elected a self-professed Democratic Socialist with clear Communist principles as the Democrat candidate for city mayor. He has the audacity to call for the arrest of U.S. ICE agents and Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, and he’s repeatedly on record affirming the slogan, “Globalize the Intifada.” He’s antisemitic, anti-capitalism and free enterprise, and anti-American. This is the best New York City can do?

The Pride movement seems to be in some retreat with corporations announcing they will no longer support or promote Pride events. Finally. But Pride parades are still taking place around the country, as are Drag Queen story hours featuring dissolute, decadent behavior and depraved presentations for kids.

The parades are intentionally structured to be loud and proud, meaning they go for shock value, naked or nearly naked prurient participants, sexually exploitative and erotic accoutrements, debased and debauched dances, men with men and women with women doing things that should not be done at all, let alone in public. No better or I should say worse example of the phrase feral human exists than these Sodom and Gomorrah parades.

Thanks to Riley Gaines and the Trump Administration, men claiming to be trans women dominating girls’ and women’s athletics is now in retreat. Decisions by the University of Pennsylvania and the NCAA evidence a grudging drawback on trans-insanity. I say “grudging” because I think this is being done because the entities believe they will lose money, not because they have found their moral compass.

The University of Pennsylvania says it will apologize to female athletes and is rescinding athletic medals from trans individuals who got them in women’s events. At long last, common sense has returned with the NCAA stating student-athletes assigned male at birth may not compete on NCAA women's teams.

But this trans movement has not gone away, one, because universities still retain their local authority to decide these matters as they wish, two, because thousands of people have been ideologically brainwashed into this social delusion, and three, because hundreds more individuals possess some vested economic interest in maintaining a pro-trans posture.

Add to this, in the US, younger adults are significantly more likely to identify as transgender, or nonbinary compared to older adults. No surprise there. Approximately 5.1% of adults under 30 identify as transgender or nonbinary.

This compares to 1.6% of 30–49-year-olds and 0.3% of those 50 and older. A large percentage of the transgender population, 43%, is between the ages of 13 and 24. For now, Gen Z and Gen Alpha are coming of age in an era when biological reality is set aside for social preference. This big lie is not going away.

We’ve pursued identity politics and licentiousness, creating a spiritual and cultural vacuum at the profound expense of e pluribus unum. We are threatening Western Civilization.

We are a people “harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36).

The West and America need to restore a sense of transcendent purpose. America needs a revival of the moral ideals that once made this country flourish: belief in the Sovereign God, truth, liberty, individual responsibility, virtue, family. God grant that we may see this renewal.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://x.com/RexMRogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 30 June 2025

When we witness chaos in our streets and public squares, what really are we seeing?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #213 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

American society is polarized. We are daily beset with incidents in which one group, whatever the name or identity, faces another across a public square, on campuses, in the middle of highways or street intersections. These groups decry some perceived great injustice that is happening to them – or often, some other victim-group du-jour.

It seems no one is content. Certainly no one is pleased or even just optimistic.

But seemingly everyone in the street or online are unhappy and convinced they are the victim of some great if often manufactured wrong or inequity. We see this regarding social class, the Have Nots vs the Haves, regarding race, sex or gender, climate change, or just anti-Trump.

What we need to understand is that what we are seeing is the manifestation of a deeper problem. What I mean is, the issues or the cause about which American society is fighting, at least for the Progressive Left, are not really the issues or the cause at all.

An “SDS radical once wrote, ‘The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.’ In other words, the cause — whether inner city blacks or women — is never the real cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause which is the accumulation of power to make the revolution.”

So, what we’re saying is that the issue we see in the streets is only a means to an end, and the end is chaos, which the Progressive Left believes will lead to their power.

Now this all sounds like political or philosophic mumbo jumbo. But I assure you it is not. This is as real as it gets.

Before I proceed, there’s another thing we need to understand – that some of our old and still-used political vocabulary is out of date.

Please note there is a difference between Liberals and the New Left or Progressives of the 2020s.

Classical Liberals believe in big government, which means taxes, regulations. Liberals believe the color of a person’s skin is insignificant. Does not matter.

They are committed to racial integration, they are often pro-capitalism, and they favor free enterprise as the best way to lift people from poverty. They are usually patriotic and believe in America. Now I know so-called Liberals have been featured on media in recent days questioning all these values, but historically at least, this characterization is accurate.

Now, more often, we hear on media from the New Left, the loud and proud, people like Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Jasmine Crockett (TX), Ilan Omar (MN), and Rashida Tlaib (MI). There are many more than this, including former VP Kamala Harris or Gov Gavin Newsom (CA). These individuals call themselves Progressives, are sometimes called Liberals but are not.

The New Left is now dominant in the Democrat Party, is the chief opposition not simply to Republicans but also to much that is historically American, and in many ways are anti-American. They focus on cultural or social issues like sexuality, climate change, and social justice. “Their focus is on means rather than ends, and therefore they are not bound by organizational orthodoxies in the way their admired Marxist forebears were. Within the framework of their revolutionary agenda, they are flexible and opportunistic and will say anything (and pretend to be anything) to get what they want, which is resources and power.”

The New Left or Progressives is what conservatives and Christians need to learn more about. They are quite literally everywhere, at every level of government and society, and their plan to integrate and destroy from within has been enormously successful, including in education, Kindergarten to graduate school. “Propagandists, posing as teachers and professors, are brainwashing legions of hapless kids looking for purpose. Millions of kids enroll in colleges and universities looking for an education but end up with an indoctrination.”

The New Left or Progressives consider “(incidents or issues) nothing more than a convenient reason to destroy, and, more importantly, to further their goal — the destruction of Western civilization — and to fuel the incipient rise of communism in the United States.

That also means that the Progressive apparatchiks don't care about black, gay, and/or trans people. Nor do they care about ‘due process’ for illegal immigrants.”

The intellectual North Star of the New Left is a late radical political activist named Saul Alinsky who argued for “the strategy of deception he devised to promote social change.” He recommended “Don’t sell it as socialism; sell it as ‘progressivism,’ ‘economic democracy’ and ‘social justice,’ the strategy of working within the system until you can accumulate enough power to destroy it.”

“What this amounts to in practice is a political nihilism - a destructive assault on the established order.” Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Bernie Sanders are a few of Alinsky’s leading adherents. Since they are older than AOC, these pols send off a mix of old Liberalism and attempts at New Left posturing.

Radicals now work in a kind of Fifth Column infiltration, incrementalism, slow but sure revolution. “Radicals camouflage their agendas by calling themselves at different times Communists, socialists, new leftists, liberals, social justice activists and most consistently progressives.” They are willing to use any means, unethical, illegal, and immoral, even violent behavior, to accomplish their goal and the goal is always power, always the revolution. That’s why the issue we see protested in the streets is not really the issue. It’s just a means to an end – chaos – which leads to power for the revolution. The issue is the revolution.

Former radical and author David Horowitz said this about Alinsky: “Recall how Satan tempted Adam and Eve to destroy their paradise: If you will rebel against God’s command then “You shall be as gods.” This is the radical hubris: We can create a new world. Through our political power we can make a new race of men and women who will live in harmony and peace and according to the principles of social justice.” Karl Marx thought that. Progressives think that today.

No matter that the history of socialist totalitarianism in the 20^th and now 21^st Century is a record of hundreds of millions of deaths in the Soviet Union, China, and elsewhere in the world. People do not matter. Power matters. The issue is the revolution, because in creating it, the radical becomes a god.

“Conservatives think of war as a metaphor when applied to politics. For radicals, the war is real. That is why when partisans of the left go into battle, they set out to destroy their opponents by stigmatizing them as ‘racists,’ ‘sexists,’ ‘homophobes’ and ‘Islamophobes.’

It is also why they so often pretend to be what they are not (‘liberals’ for example) and rarely say what they mean. Deception for them is a military tactic in a war that is designed to eliminate the enemy.”

For radical New Left Progressives, “politics is a zero-sum exercise, because it is war. No matter what (these) radicals say publicly or how moderate they appear, they are at war. They’ve been taught to be so.

So, as we watch the chaos in our polarized streets, we should remember that what we are seeing, the issue, is not the Left’s goal. The issue is not the issue. They do not often admit it, but they are at war and in war, there is no compromise, no quarter. “One side is fighting with a no holds-barred, take-no-prisoners battle plan against the system, while the other is trying to enforce its rules of fairness and pluralism.”

Remember Dostoevsky? He famously wrote that “if God does not exist then everything is permitted.” What he meant was that if human beings do not have a conception of the good that is outside themselves, then they will act as gods with nothing to restrain them.”

Conservatives and Christians who believe in rules must awaken to the fact their opposition knows no rules. For New Left Progressives, the issue is not the issue. The revolution is the issue.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://x.com/RexMRogers.