Bouie: But, you know, in the 1950s, the Soviet Union existed. It didn’t just exist, it was a rival superpower. It wasn’t just a rival superpower, it was, in the moment, a viable alternative to American-style capitalism and liberal democracy, right? In the United States at the time, there was — not huge, but significant — an actual Communist Party that was active in American politics.

There is still a Socialist Party in America, in American politics. Not as active, but still there. And the American left was not quite at the high-water mark of its power, but still quite influential. And so, in the 1950s, when the Soviet Union detonated a hydrogen bomb and the nuclear arms race took off; when, again, Soviet Communism was spreading as a geopolitical force and a viable alternative — then warning about the Red Menace makes a bunch of sense, right?

And actually, there are plenty of Americans who will hear about the Red Menace and be like, “Yeah, I’m worried about that. That’s scary to me.” Hollywood is always a great barometer of these sorts of things, and there are plenty of movies in the ’40s and ’50s about Communist infiltrators. I mean, quite famous ones, like “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.” So that’s very much a part of pop culture and a very salient fear.

In 2026, there’s no Soviet Union. China is nominally Communist. I mean, there’s the Chinese Communist Party, obviously an authoritarian formation, but in terms of its economy — that’s capitalism, baby. Or at least state capitalism, right?

So, what are we warning about? It’s not really a threat. What I think it’s supposed to do is take the success of candidates associated with the Democratic Socialists of America and say, “Look: socialist, Communist — it’s the same thing really.” But I think this misses two things: The first is that the American public, which has not become pro-socialism, I think like 39 percent of Americans have a favorable view, right? The second thing is that in an interesting way, D.S.A. seems to connote anti-establishment, not socialism, right? For the public, for voters, it seems to say, “Oh, this is a person who isn’t an ordinary Democrat,” and doesn’t seem to have the same ideological veil. It’s interesting. It’s interesting, the way D.S.A. functions for voters.