Sunkara, Bhaskar
▶ Watch on YouTubeCore ideas
Sunkara defines socialism, at minimum, as guaranteeing life's core necessities (food, housing, education) to everyone regardless of birth, and defines his own "democratic socialism" more ambitiously as extending democratic principles from the political sphere into economic and workplace life. He reframes the classic Hayekian description of socialism as trading freedom for equality, arguing instead that it's a trade-off between the freedom of employers and the freedom of workers — illustrated through a hypothetical minimum-wage and maximum-hours regulation that constrains an employer's contractual freedom while expanding workers' practical freedom. He distinguishes his vision from Soviet-style central planning: he does not favor total state ownership or a fully planned economy, but rather worker-owned cooperative firms competing in markets, sectoral (rather than firm-level) union wage-bargaining modeled loosely on mid-20th-century Scandinavian "pattern bargaining" (where wages are benchmarked to a mid-tier competitor, pushing weaker firms to adapt or fail while allowing more efficient firms to reinvest surplus), combined with publicly-owned banks allocating investment on ordinary risk-and-return criteria, alongside centrally planned sectors he considers natural monopolies (healthcare, transit). He argues firm failure and the ability to fire underperforming workers remain necessary even in a socialist system, provided a strong welfare state prevents job loss from causing destitution.
Asked directly why 20th-century communist states became authoritarian, Sunkara attributes this primarily to specific historical conditions — Russia lacked any prior tradition of political democracy, and the ruling Bolshevik party never developed institutional separation from the state, so the party's turn toward authoritarianism (which he says began under Lenin's "holding action" and intensified sharply under Stalin's forced collectivization and rapid industrialization, which he states caused millions of deaths) became total state control — rather than treating this as an inevitable consequence of socialist ideology itself. He argues the same critique applies to any ideology invoking collective destiny (citing 20th-century nationalisms, including Swedish social democracy's largely benign "people's home" rhetoric versus fascist Germany, Italy, and Japan's, as evidence outcome depends on whether the surrounding system has real democratic checks), and contrasts this with Western European social-democratic parties (Sweden, Germany) that built political democracy and workers' rights simultaneously and voluntarily relinquished power after election losses. On China, he separates what he calls the Chinese Communist Party's genuine achievements (near-universal literacy, expanded healthcare, improved status for women) from the human costs of collectivized agriculture and the Great Leap Forward, and states plainly that he considers the current Chinese Communist Party's governance model — a nationalist, authoritarian, developmental state — to have no substantive connection to socialism as he defines it, arguing for multi-party elections and an end to press censorship as prerequisites for any system he would endorse.
On present-day policy, Sunkara advocates most strongly for universal, government-run healthcare (citing the UK's National Health Service and "Medicare for All" as two possible models), reduced working hours, and stronger sectoral unions, while ranking free college tuition as a lower priority than K-12 investment and healthcare, on the grounds that free college without parallel investment in vocational training privileges the already college-bound segment of the labor market. He argues concentrated economic power inevitably influences political democracy (citing the repeated failure of a "public option" in U.S. healthcare reform as evidence of organized industry opposition) and defends "billionaire" as a legitimate — if imprecise — shorthand for concentrated economic power, while explicitly agreeing with a pushback from Lex that individual billionaires (he cites LeBron James and, more qualifiedly, Elon Musk) can be admired as skilled or innovative people distinct from criticism of concentrated wealth as a systemic issue.
On contemporary politics, Sunkara praises Bernie Sanders for reducing socialist ideas to plain, consistent, morally direct language rooted in a pre-academic, labor-movement-era left (citing Martin Luther King Jr.'s late-career turn toward economic and anti-war organizing, and figures like Bayard Rustin and A. Philip Randolph, as socialists or socialist-adjacent figures within the civil rights movement), and states his view that mainstream media coverage was substantively dismissive of Sanders's 2016 campaign in ways he considers structurally similar to hostile coverage of other outsider candidates. He offers a more qualified, critical assessment of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, arguing she has been less effective than Sanders at translating a national profile into broadly persuasive communication, attributing this partly to her being shaped by "academic-left" rhetorical habits (particularly around identity and intersectionality) rather than Sanders's plainer economic framing, while noting she also faces gendered hostility unrelated to her rhetoric. He is candid in criticizing what he calls an unproductive turn within parts of the center-left toward "excessively racialized rhetoric," arguing this both morally undercuts and practically undermines the universalist aims of the civil-rights-era anti-racist tradition he identifies with.
Philosophically, Sunkara describes himself as a Marxist in the sense that he finds historical materialism analytically useful for explaining how economic systems and class conflict have shaped history, while explicitly rejecting the idea that Marxist theory can or should explain everything (invoking the failed Soviet application of dialectical materialism to fields like genetics as a cautionary example), and describes his commitment to socialism as fundamentally a normative belief in human equality rather than a scientific prediction. He rejects the classical Marxist vision of a final, stateless "full communism," arguing some form of democratic state will always be necessary to mediate disputes and administer complex projects, and states he is "not a utopian thinker," preferring incremental, historically-grounded change over speculative leaps. He closes by locating his own political formation in his family background — the U.S.-born youngest of five children of a Trinidadian immigrant family, where he alone had consistent access to strong public schools — and frames the broader case for socialism as ultimately resting on a belief in the intrinsic value of every person, arguing that inequality of opportunity, not unequal talent, is the injustice he is chiefly concerned with correcting.
Excerpts
On how he reframes the standard "freedom vs. equality" framing of socialism:
“Socialists are proposing a trade-off, but it's really a trade-off between freedom and freedom... it's really a question of whose freedom and autonomy are you going to prioritize — the freedom and autonomy of the entrepreneur, or the capitalist... or the freedom and autonomy of ordinary workers.”
On what he sees as the root cause of Soviet authoritarianism, distinct from socialist ideology itself:
“Russia... was never a democratic country, it was ruled by a party, and the party itself was very easy to shift from a somewhat democratic party in Lenin's day to an authoritarian one... there was no distinction then between the party and the state, so your authoritarian party then became authoritarian total control over the entirety of the state.”
On his critique of "excessively racialized rhetoric" on parts of the left:
“The whole point of anti-racist politics is we want to live in a world where... we're just two guys in America getting a beer, we're not... people of two different races getting a beer... now we seem to be kind of reifying it in the media and in culture and in politics, and that's one issue where I've been banging the drum on.”